New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism:

reply to post by anon72


So because this contradicts the more alarming computer climate models that somehow means people get to jump to the conclusion that ALL climate science is bunk? Really? Cause that seems to be the attitude of some people around here.



The data shows that some computer models were wrong about the severity of the greenhouse effect, that doesn't change the fact that it is getting warmer, though it may buy us the extra time we need to do something about it.

reply to post by SaturnFX


Yes, the Global Warming Alarmism of recent years was proven to have been falsified and/or manipulated to show results that were not true and/or correct.

Just Google: Global Warming data faked: (I'll save you the finger energy):
www.google.com...:en-us&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1

Pick from there.

This story/information further supports the B.S. exposed in 2009/2010.

How easily we forget....

reply to post by ShogunAssassinsAgain? You unfortunately, may never get it. So your telling me the same people who can't tell whether it's gonna' rain TOMORROW, are projecting what's gonna' happen years from now! The point you are missing is this: Krakatoa's eruption in the 1880's changed the weather around the world, yet you believe man can prevent an unseen catastrophe. We are not as powerful as you think. Worry about what you can control, and quit telling me what's good for me.

reply to post by anon72


So the issue may be delayed for a few generations then, but that doesn't mean forget about it...

I was never a fan of the cap/trade thing overall, it seems like its just the proverbial finger stuck in the dam solution when what we need is a totally different dam...

Technology developed is the answer...a super tree of sorts and overall climate stablization technology being seriously invested in...not just slowing down one of the factors, but reversing it.

The best line the right can have on this is not to deny its even happening...it is, get over it, but to instead try to solve the issue verses just slow it down...the left is saying slowing it down will somehow solve it, and that is flawed also.

Originally posted by dillweed
reply to post by ShogunAssassinsAgain? You unfortunately, may never get it. So your telling me the same people who can't tell whether it's gonna' rain TOMORROW, are projecting what's gonna' happen years from now! The point you are missing is this: Krakatoa's eruption in the 1880's changed the weather around the world, yet you believe man can prevent an unseen catastrophe. We are not as powerful as you think. Worry about what you can control, and quit telling me what's good for me.

 

I dont think i said man could or could not prevent or start anything did i? And you are talking about the weather?

Are you going to get all "God" on me, because we dont need that in a scientific thread. Also, i dont think i told you what was good for you or anyone else, i do think you said what would be best for Al Gore in a low class, slightly violent way.

Originally posted by SaturnFX
reply to post by anon72

 

So the issue may be delayed for a few generations then, but that doesn't mean forget about it...

I was never a fan of the cap/trade thing overall, it seems like its just the proverbial finger stuck in the dam solution when what we need is a totally different dam...

Technology developed is the answer...a super tree of sorts and overall climate stablization technology being seriously invested in...not just slowing down one of the factors, but reversing it.

The best line the right can have on this is not to deny its even happening...it is, get over it, but to instead try to solve the issue verses just slow it down...the left is saying slowing it down will somehow solve it, and that is flawed also.

Its that CONTROL mentality that keeps getting in the way here. Are you aware that the climate on Earth changed many times in the past before humans were here?

Humans play a part just like bacteria and kangaroos. Its just nothing at all like you think.

Humans are less then 7% of less than 30% of the supposed problem with C02.

Of course no one talks about the abnormal sun cycle or wildfires or volcanoes because that would kill the regulations and control measures over people that governments so desperately want.

Not man made, stop clowning yourself.

Yep and don't forget this article from the 18th of July.

CERN Orders 'Blackout' of "The Cloud" Cosmic-Ray Project

CERN Director General Rolf-Dieter Heuer told Welt Online that the scientists should refrain from drawing conclusions from the latest experiment. "I have asked the colleagues to present the results clearly, but not to interpret them," Heuer told veteran science editor Nigel Calder. "That would go immediately into the highly political arena of the climate change debate. One has to make clear that cosmic radiation is only one of many parameters." The unusual "gagging order" could have been issued because the results of CLOUD are really, really boring, speculates Calder. Another conclusion is that that the experiment invites a politically unacceptable hypothesis on climate.

And the magnetosphere problem observed since 08
2nd article

reply to post by ShogunAssassins
If you think I'm attacking you, you are mistaken. What I am attacking is your line of reasoning, because it is the weather we are talking about. You know, cold and hot. People such as you are telling me that I need to change my way of living because it's affecting the climate, and I say mind your own business. If you think that's harsh then life hasn't caught up with you yet, but it will. And where does God fit in this discussion? P.S. Putting AlGore to 'sleep' is far too humane.

reply to post by dillweed


Wow, you are an angry one huh..

So global warming is the "weather" to you? That might explain a lot.. Also, i could care less how you want to live but i have to live on this planet also.. Trash your own house and sit in garbage all day. Leave the world out of it.

reply to post by ShogunAssassinsAngry? How about fed the f up with activists trying to save the world on my dime. Good luck with your crusade, but you can expect me to not sit back and let the tree huggers ruin what's left of a free country.

reply to post by dillweed


Oh yeah, I really see people out for you're freedom.. Do me a favor, lose these sites and join the real world again.. That or maybe visit inland China then come back here and let me know how good you have it.

www.google.com...,or.r_gc.r_pw.&biw=1208&bih=934&wrapid=tlif131187472343910&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch& source=og&sa=N&tab=wi

If thats the world you want, go for it.

Originally posted by MasterGemini
Its that CONTROL mentality that keeps getting in the way here. Are you aware that the climate on Earth changed many times in the past before humans were here?

Humans play a part just like bacteria and kangaroos. Its just nothing at all like you think.

Humans are less then 7% of less than 30% of the supposed problem with C02.

Of course no one talks about the abnormal sun cycle or wildfires or volcanoes because that would kill the regulations and control measures over people that governments so desperately want.

Not man made, stop clowning yourself.

1) yes, the earth has went through many cycles before...so? We are currently used to..existing. If the earth was averaging 150 degrees a hundred million years ago, that matters not, if we are entering into another near extinction level event for mammals, I think we need to stop that. just because its natural doesn't mean its good.

2) less than 7% of less than 30%...why not simply state less than 2%...I won't challenge or ask for a source, I will simply go under the blind assumption your speaking accurately...since thats not the overall issue.

3) not "clowning" myself, nor am I saying it is strictly a manmade issue...please point to where I said that.
I said its happening, and we need to control it and turn it..no doubt man is contributing to it, but to what degree is debatable...
and you know, something to consider, how much poison kills you? how much of a percent does your blood need to be arsenic before you simply keel over and die...100%? 50%? or perhaps 7% of 30%
But again, thats not the discussion I am going for...I am saying, lets work on stablization technology, as that is the long term solution to any future issues, and frankly, its also a sign of an emerging type 1 civilization. We need to control our ball

Originally posted by dillweed
reply to post by ShogunAssassinsAngry? How about fed the f up with activists trying to save the world on my dime. Good luck with your crusade, but you can expect me to not sit back and let the tree huggers ruin what's left of a free country.

 

That always confused me..."tree huggers".

What...you don't like tree's? who the ---- doesn't like trees?

You are operating under the false assumption that there is or has ever been a "stable controlled" climate.
It is always changing and trying to "control" the weather is counter evolutionary for the species of this planet (especially non-humans).

Like I mentioned earlier there is this obsession with control from those who push this man made global warming.

Better we adapt and follow a path of least resistance than even contemplate about controlling the atmosphere and climate activity of an entire planet when we can hardly control ourselves.

No doubt we need better energy sources that are renewable and sustainable as that is just the logical way to proceed. And yes Big oil gets in the way big time.

Its this ridiculous need to control everything around us that will be our un-doing.

Live and let live. Not you only live if I approve and control of what you do big government commie-fascist movement.

reply to post by MasterGemini


I think God put us on this earth to stablize the environment and have domain over all things.

See, bam, its now totally intuitive of our species.

The path of least resistance is death in this case...just do nothing and voila, problem solved.
Path of least resistance would also have been to simply sit in a cave and do nothing different ever...luckily we tend to go against the wind,

We need to stablize and control the environment for our ideal settings, that is simply our destination...we do it locally through air conditioning, and even a umbrella in the rain..we must expand the control to the entire globe..we have the starting techs to seriously put a dent in this, and for the areas we are lacking, we need to fuel research for complete global weather control...no more hurricanes, no more tornados wiping out towns, etc...may not happen overnight, but we need to start now, if only to stablize this rickety raft we are on before another wave knocks us over again.

reply to post by SaturnFX
You say we need to'stabilize and control', and I say we need to adapt. It's no more complicated than that. Your way affects every man , woman and child whether they agree with you or not. My way allows for individuals to react as they see fit. Yours is a dream world, in which man thinks he has power over everything. I just don't believe that's true. We'll both be dust before any of the doomsday scenarios you propose come to pass, so in the meantime I'll just try to treat my fellow man the way I would expect to be treated. When someone says they want to control nature, I get very, very skeptical.

Whether this is enough evidence or not, that isn't the point: the point is that faulty, inconsistent data is being used [or attempting to be used] to formulate public policy.

You want to believe in global warming? Great. Don't? Great. Just stay out of my business. The Earth was here before us and the Earth can govern herself without being told how to or that somehow homo sapiens know nature's laws better than nature herself.

reply to post by imherejusttoread


We are part of nature and we have a very hard time governing ourselves so much so that we're damaging the Earth and affecting the climate. I'm not a fan of the politics however I'm also not a fan of people pretending that six billion human beings aren't capable of damaging the climate enough to cause serious problems. The politics may be debatable and the scientists may get things wrong from time to time but that doesn't change the fact that we are negatively impacting the environment. It doesn't take a scientist to see that several centuries of heavy industry and a massive population boom (we're up to almost 7 billion people last I checked) can affect the climate and regardless of the politics we need to do everything we can to treat the planet better if we hope to be sustained by it.

Time for Aim to submit before the pack of raving monkeys his plan to end the global warming issue:

It's really quite simple - and the technology to make it happen has been around for quite some time, with recent advances making it far easier and more practical than ever.

Rather than attempting to engineer an entire planet - we -build- a habitat that favors our physiology in space and design it to be 100% self-sufficient once built. Missions to retrieve asteroids and place them in a closer orbit would provide ample materials for the project, and many organics could be taken from our own planet or derived from the available carbon, hydrogen, etc in asteroids and comets.

It would not be a two-year project - but we could be building the orbital manufacturing facilities while we're waiting for our rockets to nudge asteroids and comets around (or vasmir rockets... whatever we end up using).

The climate change issue suddenly becomes less catastrophic - and we've actually managed to accomplish something out of the hooplah.

Who gives a flip about climate change? What about having a healthy, clean environment?

I mean, seriously. Does the world HAVE to be coming to an end in order for you to actually care about the things we all do that seriously affect our environment in a negative way?

Fertilizers and household chemicals are dumped into our water.

Pollution and toxins are pumped into our air.

Chemicals from landfills seep into our soil and into our water supply.

But let's just keep bickering about whether or not the world is going to end so you can try very hard to not have to be accountable for how your activities affect the environment WE ALL have to survive in.

Poisoning the environment actually results in people's illness and deaths. WE ALL contribute to that. But I guess we only have a reason to change if it means that the world will end because of what we do.