" Climate Change Is Not A Hoax", says Obama!!??

“This thread is only one issue and that issue involves climate change.”
MamaJ

EVERY scientific organization in the world says that humans are directly responsible for the world getting warmer. Then why do they prefer “climate change” to “global warming”? Scientists are exact and love precise terms. Actually they are very en.wikipedia.org...
Here is an explanation!
abcnews.go.com...

At this point it isn't worth debating with those who deny global warming or humanities large contribution.

At least Obama sees the reality, and recognizes we need to start somewhere.

That being said, the global carbon tax idea is a really bad idea. We need an effort like NASA's race to the moon. We need to make major changes to our infrastructure, and the way we do business as a society, a great deal more effort needs to be made to create change models so that we can take some pre-action.

If we don't do it sooner, than we will be forced under extremely bad conditions to make these changes later, under extreme conditions.

That Obama recognizes that this change is happening, while Romney is a denier, should convince anyone still among the undecided, who recognizes that Global Warming is a fact, to vote for Obama. By the next POTUS election, this will probably be the biggest issue we face. The good thing is that there will be no shortage of work.

Originally posted by dayve
It doesn't really take a genius to know that climates change over time.... Caused by 'global warming'..? doubt it... If their was no life on earth, the climates would still change...

Grrrrrr!

Tell me something I don't know.

Why do people jump in without reading, assumptions don't get us anywere except confused.

THERE IS LOTS OF LIFE ON EARTH!! OVER SEVEN BILLION HUMANS!

If you want to stay dumbed down.... Be my guest. It does sadden me though there are so many people who don't get what their/ our role is in this Universe.

Originally posted by poet1b
At this point it isn't worth debating with those who deny global warming or humanities large contribution.

At least Obama see the reality, and recognizes we need to start somewhere.

That being said, the global carbon tax idea is a really bad idea. We need and effort like NASA's race to the moon. We need toake major changes to our infrastructure, and the way we do business as a society. A heat deal more effort needs to be made to create create change models so that we can take some pre-action.

If we don't do it sooner, than we will be forced under extremely bad conditions to make these changes sooner.

That Obama recognizes that this change is happening, while Romney is a denier, should convince anyone still among the undecided, who recognizes that Global Warming is a fact, to vote for Obama. By the next POTUS election, this will probably be the biggest issue we face. The good thing is that there will be no shortage of work.

So true, so true.

IF I had my way, I would vote for someone who is radical that's willing to fight the fight and take down the fed, implement a new strategy from top to bottom.

Ron Paul, however will not be elected and no president that wants REAL change will be allowed " in" so when I heard the POTUS say climate change is not a hoax, it took me off guard. Lol

Romney scooted around it and damn.... I'm sick of war and sick of innocent lives being taken away from this planet over MONEY.

I'm just disgusted with the whole shabang.

“It doesn't really take a genius to know that climates change over time.... Caused by 'global warming'..? doubt it... If their was no life on earth, the climates would still change...”
dayve

OK. You are claiming that you know more about science then EVERY scientific organization in the world of national and international reputation. Please offer evidence that you are correct and that they are all wrong!

Originally posted by wittgenstein
“This thread is only one issue and that issue involves climate change.”
MamaJ

EVERY scientific organization in the world says that humans are directly responsible for the world getting warmer. Then why do they prefer “climate change” to “global warming”? Scientists are exact and love precise terms. Actually they are very en.wikipedia.org...
Here is an explanation!
abcnews.go.com...

Lol, that was funny! The first link that is.

The second link is as real as it gets.

No doubt both sides of the coin have truth.

The truth to the other side of the coin is tptb have taken something, ran with it, and applied their own money making agenda to it. The other side of this climate coin is its real, man is helping, but it may be a little too late to even correct what's already been going on for probably the last fifty to hundred years.

Humans are more than mere bodies of flesh, we have power.....

Tptb dumb us down in every way possible so they can continue getting rich off of our dumb a$$es.

There is a lot at play here, a lot of issues working against us in the fight to save our species.

If its not war, the sun, it's our climate.

Things have got to change and I have no idea how, but my hope is it will. The good will prevail and the wars will cease, the climate will ease up, the fed will crumble, the leaders of the nations will stop bickering and warring and for once in the last hundred years we can all see light again. The true light that gives us life.

Originally posted by MamaJ

Originally posted by dayve
It doesn't really take a genius to know that climates change over time.... Caused by 'global warming'..? doubt it... If their was no life on earth, the climates would still change...

Grrrrrr!

Tell me something I don't know.

Why do people jump in without reading, assumptions don't get us anywere except confused.

THERE IS LOTS OF LIFE ON EARTH!! OVER SEVEN BILLION HUMANS!

If you want to stay dumbed down.... Be my guest. It does sadden me though there are so many people who don't get what their/ our role is in this Universe.

After reading it i agree with the energy thing he is trying to do. I dont think it will happen tho he's just tryin to keep his job.

reply to post by dayve


Well thanks for reading and contributing and I agree with you, he's probably trying to say whatever.... I'm just glad he said it.

“No doubt both sides of the coin have truth.”
MamaJ

Actually no! The climate science skeptics (convinced by Koch bro’s propaganda) have neither science nor rationality on their side. I find it amusing that so-called “conservatives” (they are not conservative. They want international corporations, ala Koch bros, to have all the say so and ridicule individual freedom) have become en.wikipedia.org... ! Since the science is ALL against them, they claim that it is all opinion anyway! Considering that postmodernism was a liberal movement, that shows how the Romney “conservatives” are hypocrites!

There is an objective reality!! No matter how much Romney denies it!

Romney reminds me of Mr. Burns!
www.youtube.com...

Of course Romney will support the Koch bro’s lies!
go.bloomberg.com...
And Romney’s other evil friends!
www.huffingtonpost.com...

One more global warming problem ( I am not saying that this one is as significant as ALL the others! It is significant tho!) It is the most recently detected tho. Anyone with even a minor understanding of ecology can see that it will have drastic effects. The house of cards is falling!
weather.aol.com...

I guess it will only be a matter of time when Romney takes office, that he will declare mother nature a terrorist?

Nuke those damn hurricanes! Nuke the atmosphere and maybe the terrorist-CO² will go away?

/lame sarcasm off

I fear that in order to really fix this, one has to either change the global mindset within a year, or you need to drastically downsize the main-cause for pollution, humanity. I know the ladder is a sick way of thinking, but if we just continue as we have done so far, we will still end up in a WW3 scenario, when water and food will become scarce.

That's why I lurk around in these climate-threads, because i have a naive believe in changing the global mindset, realise the problem, and do something about it.

One solution is to take the non-believers argument about "climate change is due to the sun's cycles".

Lets see how much power we get from the sun

How Much Solar Energy Hits Earth?
Posted on 14 June 2006.

If solar power is the purest form of renewable energy known, then how much solar power have we got? The answer to this question, when considered alongside how efficiently we can convert raw sunshine into usable power, helps determine whether or not it is realistic to consider solar energy as a viable alternative to conventional energy sources.

In full sun, you can safely assume about 100 watts of solar energy per square foot. If you assume 12 hours of sun per day, this equates to 438,000 watt-hours per square foot per year. Based on 27,878,400 square feet per square mile, sunlight bestows a whopping 12.2 trillion watt-hours per square mile per year.

The Sun

With these assumptions, figuring out how much solar energy hits the entire planet is relatively simple. 12.2 trillion watt-hours converts to 12,211 gigawatt-hours, and based on 8,760 hours per year, and 197 million square miles of earth’s surface (including the oceans), the earth receives about 274 million gigawatt-years of solar energy, which translates to an astonishing 8.2 million “quads” of Btu energy per year.

In case you haven’t heard, a “quad Btu” refers to one quadrillion British Thermal Units of energy, a common term used by energy economists. The entire human race currently uses about 400 quads of energy (in all forms) per year. Put another way, the solar energy hitting the earth exceeds the total energy consumed by humanity by a factor of over 20,000 times.

Clearly there is enough solar energy available to fulfill all the human race’s energy requirements now, and for all practical purposes, forever. The key is developing technologies that efficiently convert solar power into usable energy in a cost-effective manner.

source

Originally posted by wittgenstein
“No doubt both sides of the coin have truth.”
MamaJ

Actually no! The climate science skeptics (convinced by Koch bro’s propaganda) have neither science nor rationality on their side. I find it amusing that so-called “conservatives” (they are not conservative. They want international corporations, ala Koch bros, to have all the say so and ridicule individual freedom) have become en.wikipedia.org... ! Since the science is ALL against them, they claim that it is all opinion anyway! Considering that postmodernism was a liberal movement, that shows how the Romney “conservatives” are hypocrites!

There is an objective reality!! No matter how much Romney denies it!

Can you handle the truth? I think maybe but you're still stuck in wanting to believe agenda driven data that has people bringing it to the table who have been caught red handed fudging data to make a point.

epw.senate.gov...

drtimball.com...

www.drroyspencer.com...

www.friendsofscience.org...

Can you handle the truth? I think maybe but you're still stuck in wanting to believe agenda driven data that has people bringing it to the table who have been caught red handed fudging data to make a point.
Justoneman
Are you talking about climategate? That turned out to be nothing as I proved and official investigations proved. It was discovered that the climate scientists use of the phrase “neat trick” was an dishonest as saying, “I found a neat trick to solve this calculus problem in half the time.” Oh yeah, In their PERSONAL emails (that were illegally hacked into) the scientists called skeptics names! I would too, considering the lies etc being told!Of course you will say that myself and EVERY scientific organization in the world is part of the conspiracy! RUBBISH! For God’s sake man, if you don’t believe in science at least believe in your own senses. The weather is drastically different!

Justoneman,
I will only deal with your first site as the others are just right wing blogs without any substance. For example, your www.friendsofscience.org... has a picture of a crying child that is claimed has been abused by environmentalists!!! According to the site the child is living in terror of global warming. How can you take a site like that seriously?
My response to your first site,
First of all Happer is not a climate specialist. His opinion is as valuable as an accountants regarding climate change. Furthermore, he is part of a miniscule minority.
And his ethics are VERY questionable.

“Among the leading lights of the clueless crew is William Happer, a Princton physicist, who as Chairman of the George Marshall institute, presides over one of America’s leading cheerleaders for Tobacco and oil addiction.”
FROM
climatecrocks.com...
" lobbied politically to create a false public perception of scientific uncertainty over the negative effects of second-hand smoke, the carcinogenic nature of tobacco smoking, the existence of acid rain, and on the evidence between CFCs and ozone depletion.”
FROM
en.wikipedia.org...
Good grief! He even believes that smoking isn’t bad for you! Or at least he says that he believes that if you pay him enough cash!

reply to post by Justoneman


I spent most of the night reading their article and looking up papers they have offered.


I pulled pretty much an all-nighter reading article from the sight you posted I misses a few I will admit. It was hard finding article they have writing on climate change and many have not written any. Most what they wrote was based off a 2007 increase in ice and snow which they said would be the new norm and calling for a global cooling period but there predictions have not held true.



ARCTIC ICE

Following the new record low recorded on August 26, Arctic sea ice extent continued to drop and is now below 4.00 million square kilometers (1.54 million square miles). Compared to September conditions in the 1980s and 1990s, this represents a 45% reduction in the area of the Arctic covered by sea ice. At least one more week likely remains in the melt season.

2008-2009 polar ice?
en.wikipedia.org...
www.nasa.gov...
www.guardian.co.uk...
In isolated areas ice increased but overall ( and that is what matters) the ice continued to decline even in 2008 and 2009.

“September 2007 currently holds the record for the lowest extent of Arctic sea ice, at least since satellite records began in 1979, and probably before. The melt made headlines that year, as it opened the fabled Northwest Passage - which runs north of Canada and Alaska.”
2007 has become the benchmark for low Arctic ice cover, until now. Ice extent is currently smaller than it was in late August 2007. Based on the latest data from the US National Snow & Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado, it could shrink below the 2007 minimum within days. There's another few weeks to go before the annual summer minimum is reached and cooling autumn temperatures allow the ice cap to grow back for the winter.
FROM
www.newscientist.com...

Of course the ice increases in the winter!. It is amazing that such a ridiculous argument ( that that increase in ice proves global warming wrong) from the global warming conspiracy enthusiasts is taken seriously.
www.youtube.com...
Of course ice decreases in the summer and increases in the winter! Because ice increases in the winter is not an argument against global warming. DUH! To claim that scientists are claiming that global warming means that there is no longer any winter is the logical fallacy called en.wikipedia.org...
www.nasa.gov...
Whoops! I forgot! NASA is part of the conspiracy and is taking its orders directly from Bigfoot!