Everything You Know About Global Warming is Wrong!!!!

First off, I think that Global Warming (if we are causing it) is one of the bottom end-of-the-world scenarios on the list of ever growing scenarios. The first one I believe would be peak oil mixed with a fragile economy. But that's for another thread.

****When I talk about Global Warming I am referring to Man-Made Global Warming. Climate Change is different than Global Warming

When talking about this subject recently I first linked to this article. And how major scientists ARE starting to re-look at all the data surrounding the Global Warming Alarmist hype. www.theregister.co.uk...

Everything You Know About Global Warming is Wrong

One-Sided Research: I wonder why seemingly "open-minded" liberal scientists have such a conservative view point of the topic of Man-Made Global Warming. We went into this with a one sided mind. "Global Warming is caused by humans and this is why". The scientists weren't given the funding to look at the other data that suggested otherwise. Shouldn't they be open to all theories and study everything that comes out of different scientific studies?

Funding: TPTB don't want people to think that people aren't causing Global Warming because if they knew that the sun was causing it, well then. There would be no way to tax people or make a profit off it. Scientists don't want to go against TPTB because, well we all know what happens when you do. I wouldn't be surprised if that CERN project will be shut down in a number of months!

Fear Mongering and Scare Tactics: When you hear about Global Warming you usually hear that the world will be destroyed in 50 years or so. Animals-- Polar Bears are dying (when they are not) and plants cannot grow. Now, people are getting so desperate as to link the 2010 snow storm (East Coast US) and any dangerous weather (Hurricane Irene) and even a possible alien attack? To man-made Global Warming! Most of these are just dead wrong. And its a natural climate change. No matter what humanity does it will NEVER destroy life on Earth completely. If an asteroid couldn't do it, we won't do it!!!

Human Ego: I am well aware of the resources that we are stripping away from this planet. And this way of life is extremely unsustainable. It is quite likely that without Humans in the equation, the world would be a tropical paradise. But we are not doing much about the Global Warming thing (if happening) even though we are lead to believe that we are with the charities and electric cars and saving some animals and whatnot. Truth is, this is all being done for profit and to save our own skins! If we truly cared about the planet we would invest trillions in nanotechnology replication devices, 1000 MPG cars, mass produce solar panels- make it illegal to use anything else, and declare oil illegal (to be destroyed!)

The Carbon Dioxide Myth:

C02 Emissions and Business- Businesses like GE didn't pay any taxes this year because of their energy tax breaks. Then, they use that money to produce more material goods and use up more resources and hence burn more fossil fuels. But they can now say with gov't approval that they dropped 20% of their emissions.

Natural Climate Change: It is well documented that there was a lot more C02 in the air and that the the environment was a lush tropical paradise before the asteroid hit and the ice age emerged. These high levels C02 allowed animals and plants to grow to massive size! Not seen since. C02 levels were at the 8000 PPM level while C02 levels today are decreasing and only at 400 PPM



C02 Misinformation- I don't know how or why C02 ever became a "dangerous" pollutant, but here are some Facts I found about C02 from a quick Google Search and Wikipedia Page:

It is a gas at standard temperature and pressure and exists in Earth's atmosphere in this state, as a trace gas at a concentration of 0.039% by volume.

So this is why 400 PPM is only .04% which is relatively nothing! (man-made C02 in atmosphere)

CO2 is toxic in higher concentrations: 1% (10,000 ppm) will make some people feel drowsy. Concentrations of 7% to 10% cause dizziness, headache, visual and hearing dysfunction, and unconsciousness within a few minutes to an hour.

So .04% nothing to worry about!

Five hundred million years ago carbon dioxide was 20 times more prevalent than today, decreasing to 4–5 times during the Jurassic period and then slowly declining with a particularly swift reduction occurring 49 million years ago.

Life can survive quite comfortably with 20 times higher C02 in the air than today!!!

You can find all this information here: en.wikipedia.org...

This is why Global Warming is a complete scam created by TPTB so they can tax us all, and keep the oil companies powerful!

reply to post by jjf3rd77

As a person who have read up on both science and history of climate I knew this years ago.
I really hope people wake up to this scam before it is too late.
Here in Norway we are already getting taxed to hell by all kinds of co2 taxes.

More co2 is actually good for life and our planet. It would make agriculture easier and in general would lead to a more green planet since co2 is basically food for vegetation and trees.

reply to post by juleol


I heard about Norway's great leap in eco-stuff. Good luck lolz.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
C02 Misinformation- I don't know how or why C02 ever became a "dangerous" pollutant, but here are some Facts I found about C02 from a quick Google Search and Wikipedia Page:

It is a gas at standard temperature and pressure and exists in Earth's atmosphere in this state, as a trace gas at a concentration of 0.039% by volume.

So this is why 400 PPM is only .04% which is relatively nothing! (man-made C02 in atmosphere)

CO2 is toxic in higher concentrations: 1% (10,000 ppm) will make some people feel drowsy. Concentrations of 7% to 10% cause dizziness, headache, visual and hearing dysfunction, and unconsciousness within a few minutes to an hour.

So .04% nothing to worry about!

LOL. You think people are worried about atmospheric carbon dioxide because they don't want to breath it in?

If I were you, I'd do a bit more research before you start telling anyone that what they know is wrong.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by juleol

 

I heard about Norway's great leap in eco-stuff. Good luck lolz.

Which already looks like it failed badly.

Originally posted by OnceReturned

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
C02 Misinformation- I don't know how or why C02 ever became a "dangerous" pollutant, but here are some Facts I found about C02 from a quick Google Search and Wikipedia Page:

It is a gas at standard temperature and pressure and exists in Earth's atmosphere in this state, as a trace gas at a concentration of 0.039% by volume.

So this is why 400 PPM is only .04% which is relatively nothing! (man-made C02 in atmosphere)

CO2 is toxic in higher concentrations: 1% (10,000 ppm) will make some people feel drowsy. Concentrations of 7% to 10% cause dizziness, headache, visual and hearing dysfunction, and unconsciousness within a few minutes to an hour.

So .04% nothing to worry about!

LOL. You think people are worried about atmospheric carbon dioxide because they don't want to breath it in?

If I were you, I'd do a bit more research before you start telling anyone that what they know is wrong.

So what exactly are you supposed to worry about then?? It has not significant effect on temperatures, as history shows that co2 has been many times higher without any increase in temperatures.
Nearly all data shows that temperature increased before co2 and you could even have ice ages hitting with co2 in THOUSANDS of ppm range.

Even when the Earth was warmer average it wasn't actually hotter when it came to maximum temperatures. The difference was that temperature was more uniform all across globe with even sub tropical climate in arctic regions. Higher global temps also means a wetter planet, less deserts and much less seasonal difference in high altitude regions.
Equator regions seems to have been same or even COLDER than today.
Why would this be bad for humanity?

The only disadvantage would be rising sea level, which is something that we could prepare for anyways.
Either way co2 has such an insignificant effect that it wont even stop us from entering the next glacial period.

Well there is certainly a connection between global temperature and Co2 that's pretty hard to debate. Whether Co2 is bad or not or caused by humans is probably something that could be debated.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2223c41657bb.gif[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a3eb19ead6cb.gif[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/cbfd95552964.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by juleol


Consider the

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
lush tropical paradise before the asteroid hit

that the OP used as an example.

This is known as the Cretateous Thermal Maximum:

Cretaceous Thermal Maximum also known as Cretaceous Thermal Optimum was a period during Earth's history notable for its dramatic increase in global temperatures.

Carbon dioxide levels reached astounding heights and the sea levels elevated. Plants such as plankton became "glassy" and temperatures increased. Scientists predicted that the Cretaceous Thermal Maximum occurred during the Cenomanian/Turonian transition based from the fact that there was a major downfall in global climate. It was also shown to be the most extreme carbon cycle recorded in the past 100 million years.

Although there was clearly an impact, the results of the Cretaceous Thermal Maximum are a little unclear. However, we do know that the average temperature was between 27 degrees Celsius and 29 degrees Celsius. Even worse, locations bordering the Atlantic Ocean rose to about 35 degrees Celsius to 36 degrees Celsius. In fact, it was extremely rare for the temperature to drop 4 degrees Celsius even in winter. The constant peak of high temperature was mostly because there were high carbon dioxide formulations. All of this implies that the mid-Cretaceous "super-greenhouse" climate was more unstable than we had thought before.


Sea levels would rise drastically.

Originally posted by juleol
The only disadvantage would be rising sea level, which is something that we could prepare for anyways.

Oh? Just move all the people and major cities away from the ocean? How many countries in the world do you think could just go ahead and do that? How much do you suppose it would cost? New York, Miami, Boston...Just abandon them?

Millions would die, and the global economic consequences would dwarf the housing bubble by orders of magnitude. I'm not saying CO2 produced by humans is the only factor in this scenario, but you're making it sound as though there's obviously nothing to be concerned about related to atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. That's not true; it is something that is important for us to figure out.

This blog post has a lot of information about this very issue:

The real battle is not about climate at all. It is a battle of Reason against Hysteria, it is a battle for the scientific method against malicious scams, in a word it a battle for the Truth, for Veracity against Mendacity.

Very simple and to the point.

Originally posted by OnceReturned

LOL. You think people are worried about atmospheric carbon dioxide because they don't want to breath it in?

If I were you, I'd do a bit more research before you start telling anyone that what they know is wrong.

When did I ever say this, "I think people are worried about atmospheric carbon dioxide because they don't want to breath it in?" I think you need to read my post a little more clearly. Maybe that's why your worried about it!

Um a little bit more research? Did you even read my post?

reply to post by OnceReturned


I've heard that excuse before! But the FACT is during that time period plants and animals were at humongous sizes. It doesn't matter that the C02 levels were so high or that the Earth was a little violent. Life was there--in abundance, might I add.

I think that we will run out of main resources WAY before we have to worry about .04% of C02 in the atmosphere.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
When did I ever say this, "I think people are worried about atmospheric carbon dioxide because they don't want to breath it in?"

You cited the effects of breathing it at higher concentrations, and then said that because it's far from that concentration in the atmosphere today, there's nothing to worry about:

Originally posted by jjf3rd77

CO2 is toxic in higher concentrations: 1% (10,000 ppm) will make some people feel drowsy. Concentrations of 7% to 10% cause dizziness, headache, visual and hearing dysfunction, and unconsciousness within a few minutes to an hour.

So .04% nothing to worry about!

...as though the reason people are worried about carbon dioxide is that they fear breathing it in toxic concentrations.

The statistics you provide are completely irrelevant to the argument you're trying to make. People aren't worried about CO2 being toxic, they're worried about its effect on the climate.

I've heard that excuse before! But the FACT is during that time period plants and animals were at humongous sizes. It doesn't matter that the C02 levels were so high or that the Earth was a little violent. Life was there--in abundance, might I add.

Life is here, in abundance. The reason to be concerned about climate change or global warming most immediately is sea level rise, which would cause a lot of real problems for a lot of real humans. Just because some animals would be bigger if the climate were a lot different doesn't mean it's a good thing. Most of us humans would rather avoid cataclysm, which is why it's important that we understand what's going on with our climate.

Saying that we shouldn't worry about it because the atmospheric CO2 concentration isn't so high that we would pass out from breathing it is a profoundly shortsighted and uninformed position.