Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released...

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
because a skeptic hired by the koch brothers to debunk global warming for tax reasons had to testify in front of congress and part of the data was from 1997 - of course

funny thing happened

Is that the correct link?

It doesn't seem to be relevant to what you have written about a climate change skeptic being turned to the other side and testifying in front of Congress.

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
he corroborated the consensus that not only is it getting warmer, it's closely tied to human activity and volcanic activity. solar activity is examined, and is deemed to be not a factor

Solar activity is not a factor?

Global Warming on Mars, Pluto, Triton and Jupiter

It is also interesting that your source notes that volcanic activity is at least partially responsible for alleged global warming.

reply to post by ollncasino

Apparently China is building 2 coal power stations a week. While that sounds like an exaggeration, the damage they are doing to the planet is enormous.

And? The USA used to be just as polluted as China before the creation of the EPA and other rregulations. Are you trying to insinuate that since China is destroying their environment we should just go ahead and destroy ours too?

reply to post by ollncasino


The articles does not state that GW has stopped.

So let’s be clear. Yes: global warming is real, and some of it at least has been caused by the CO2 emitted by fossil fuels. But the evidence is beginning to suggest that it may be happening much slower than the catastrophists have claimed – a conclusion with enormous policy implications.

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... html#ixzz29HOXPbGk
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

It is happening, just slower.

Given that we are in an extended solar minimum I would say the fact that warming has puased and the planet has not cooled should tell us something.

Imagine when the sun goes into the cycle towards maximum?

This ‘plateau’ in rising temperatures does not mean that global warming won’t at some point resume.

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... html#ixzz29HQVwYCs
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

reply to post by Renegade2283

you might want to be more specific cause you did in the post just prior ...

Whats really funny is that you people having such a hard time seeing this increase in Antarctic ice as a sign of global warming

i agree that they are two separate things but it's not a popular view for many.
too many ppl view them as the same thing.

I love how every right winger in this thread is a climate scientist and knows 100% for a fact that AGW is a hoax

Even though the whole scientific community says they are wrong, but ya know it's just one big conspiracy.

The Koch brothers REALLY care about you, they do. You should believe what they have to say.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
because a skeptic hired by the koch brothers to debunk global warming for tax reasons had to testify in front of congress and part of the data was from 1997 - of course

funny thing happened

Is that the correct link?

It doesn't seem to be relevant to what you have written about a climate change skeptic being turned to the other side and testifying in front of Congress.

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
he corroborated the consensus that not only is it getting warmer, it's closely tied to human activity and volcanic activity. solar activity is examined, and is deemed to be not a factor

Solar activity is not a factor?

Global Warming on Mars, Pluto, Triton and Jupiter

It is also interesting that your source notes that volcanic activity is at least partially responsible for alleged global warming.

I'll let you do the research if you are truly interested. you can start by googling the lead scientists name, congress and koch bros for example

solar activity on earth can be measured (believe it or not) and when you match the two sets of data, there is no correlation between the solar activity and global temps. I don't know how much simpler it can be

why is it intersting that I included volcanic activity ? well, I guess if you filter out all data that doesn't support your conclusion, you might assume other people do as well

oh, and do you have a comment on the "has global warming stopped" part of the post ????????????????

Originally posted by jdub297


If you dig deeply, you will see that there is no consensus on which proxies mean what or even which are the most accurate. To the extent that AGW theory thus relies upon proxies, there can be no real "consensus;" everyone sees what they want to, and then go from there as if it were fact, when it is not.

Deny ignorance.

Yeah, because global glacial ice melts are proxies that people can't agree on.


Um, yeah. Sure.
www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by RealSpoke
I love how every right winger in this thread is a climate scientist and knows 100% for a fact that AGW is a hoax

Even though the whole scientific community says they are wrong, but ya know it's just one big conspiracy.

Clearly you have not read the thread nor much about what the scientific has actually said about climate change.

Since 1998, more than 31,000 American scientists from diverse climate-related disciplines have signed a petition announcing that there is no convincing scientific evidence that mankind's activity will cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.

That Scientific Global Warming Consensus...Not!

Originally posted by atlasastro
reply to post by ollncasino

 

The articles does not state that GW has stopped.

So let’s be clear. Yes: global warming is real, and some of it at least has been caused by the CO2 emitted by fossil fuels. But the evidence is beginning to suggest that it may be happening much slower than the catastrophists have claimed – a conclusion with enormous policy implications.

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... html#ixzz29HOXPbGk
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

It is happening, just slower.

Given that we are in an extended solar minimum I would say the fact that warming has puased and the planet has not cooled should tell us something.

Imagine when the sun goes into the cycle towards maximum?

This ‘plateau’ in rising temperatures does not mean that global warming won’t at some point resume.

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... html#ixzz29HQVwYCs
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

a solar minimum ???? who is feeding you such nonsense ??

www.auroraborealispage.net...
Just as earth has cycles which we call seasons, the sun's energy output also changes on
a roughly 11-year basis. We call these changes the solar cycle.
[color=amber]We are now four years into a new solar maximum period. During the last solar minimum, there were few magnetic storms on the sun, sunspots were rare, and geomagnetic disturbances here on earth
were nearly nonexistent. Aurora watchers had to travel to the polar regions to see
the Northern Lights. However, change is here. We are now in solar maximum.

for the record, in the 70s and 80s, we watched the Northern Lights dance in the backyards of Western PA ... not Nova Scotia
(yes, i'm sure they saw them there as well ... NS)

Originally posted by ollncasino


Clearly you have not read the thread nor much about what the scientific has actually said about climate change.

Since 1998, more than 31,000 American scientists from diverse climate-related disciplines have signed a petition announcing that there is no convincing scientific evidence that mankind's activity will cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.

That Scientific Global Warming Consensus...Not!

In other words, the OISM signatories represent a small fraction (~0.3%) of all science graduates, even when we use the OISM’s own definition of a scientist.

www.skepticalscience.com...

reply to post by atlasastro

In other words, the OISM signatories represent a small fraction (~0.3%) of all science graduates, even when we use the OISM’s own definition of a scientist.
www.skepticalscience.com...

oh come on ... just how many of those science graduates go on to study climatology specifically ???

would it be too straight-forward to ask for any rebuttal that represents the climatology science community ONLY ??

Hey folks, tonight I wanna talk about global warming. Now, The World is Hot and Flat Society is growing increasingly hysterical and that indeed is causing me to sweat a little. In the last month or so, I've heard suggestions that those skeptical of Al Gore's spiritual crisis are deniers and one good way to serve the planet would be to have one less kid and I've also read that mankind is 'a virus' and human beings are 'the AIDS of the earth.' Global warming is officially becoming creepy and I can't tell yet if it's facisitc or fetishistic but it's kinda like piercing or tattoos, I don't even wanna get one, because I see how hooked people are and it spooks me. I just find it odd that we've come to a point in history where if I don't concede that if Manhattan will be completely submerged in 2057 I'm thought to be a delusional contrarian by some of my more zealous fellow citizens. I'm sorry Angst Squad, but if we commissioned a public works project (let's call it 'The Manhattan Project') and tried our hardest to submerge Manhattan in the next 50 years, we couldn't pull it off, mainly because it wouldn't be environmentally sound and you guys would hang it up in the permitting process. Simply put, I can't worry about the earth right now because I'm too worried about the world. Why can't I take terrorism as seriously as Al Gore takes global warming? There are times that you think that liberals only fear car bombs if they have leaky exhaust systems. And why am I constantly beaten over the head with 'the delicate balance of nature'? Am I the only one who watches Animal Planet? Every time I turn it on, I see some demented harp seal chucking penguins down his gullet like they were maitre d'Tic-Tacs. To me, nature always appears more unbalanced than Gary Busey with a clogged eustachian tube. Listen, the weather is just like Hilary's explanation for her war vote: we just don't know, do we? We're here to miss our next Tuesday's weather much less the year 2057. Relax, we'll replace oil when we need to. American ingenuity will kick in and the next great fortune will be made. It's not pretty, but it is historically accurate. We need to run out of oil first. That's why I drive an SUV: so we run out of it more quickly. I consider myself at the vanguard of the environmental movement and I think the individuals who insist on driving hybrids are just prolonging our dillemma and I think that's just selfish. Come on, don't you care about our Mother Earth? Don'tcha
Dennis Miller

reply to post by Honor93


And its slow. We have not reached maximum, ITS A CYCLE not a SWITCH.

Please, just do a little bit of study for yourself rather than quote mining material for arguments sake.
solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov...

Look at the graph, the last maximim was in 2001, the last minimum was 2005. We had an extended min and we are not even close to Max yet.

reply to post by Honor93


So do you go to a dentist for a second opinion on what your G.P. has told you? Or do you go to your Auto Mechanic to confirmwhat your Electrician explains to you?

I mean, come on, why not ask anyone for an opionion in order to get someone to tell you what you want to hear.

I bet if all those people stated they supported AGW you would be debasing them left right and centre.

Originally posted by RealSpoke

Are you trying to insinuate that since China is destroying their environment we should just go ahead and destroy ours too?

It wouldn't matter if green taxes didn't put a significant financial burden on US industry and US industry didn't have to compete with China.

Still, industry relocating to China to escape green taxes is certainly one way to clean up the US environment, but I'm not sure it would be a terribly popular one.

Carbon tax proposal will hobble our already challenged economy, stall growth

The hardest hit sectors of the U.S. economy from a carbon tax would be energy-intensive industries, particularly chemicals, automobile manufacturing, iron and steel, aluminum, cement, and mining and oil refining.

These large industries would be at a serious disadvantage in the world marketplace, and many companies would move production to countries without such a tax. The cost in dollars, as well as in lost jobs, from a carbon-tax would be staggering.

And the cost would ultimately fall on American consumers — without necessarily generating any environmental benefits if China, India and other countries with fast-growing economies continue to pollute.

US industry will go out of business and China, India and other fast growing economies will continue to pollute.

Originally posted by atlasastro
reply to post by Honor93

 

And its slow. We have not reached maximum, ITS A CYCLE not a SWITCH.

Please, just do a little bit of study for yourself rather than quote mining material for arguments sake.
solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov...

Look at the graph, the last maximim was in 2001, the last minimum was 2005. We had an extended min and we are not even close to Max yet.

yes, it's a cycle ... 11 yrs worth and we are 4 yrs into a maximum ... (second quarter if you will ) ... hence, change is here.

please, take your own advice ...

Please, just do a little bit of study for yourself

if you believe 2001 - 2005 is even close to an 11yr cycle, maybe you should start with math

ETA - psssst ... just in case it escapes you ... you said "the last max was in 2001" ... +11 = 2012

Originally posted by atlasastro
reply to post by Honor93

 

So do you go to a dentist for a second opinion on what your G.P. has told you? Or do you go to your Auto Mechanic to confirmwhat your Electrician explains to you?

I mean, come on, why not ask anyone for an opionion in order to get someone to tell you what you want to hear.

I bet if all those people stated they supported AGW you would be debasing them left right and centre.

can't you stay on topic ??
surprisingly, i do most of that diagnostic work myself

reply to post by ollncasino


Global warming is very real. Stop listening to the propaganda of the oil companies and the Us government. One and the same entity..

A carbon tax should be implemented on imported goods to the U.S. from countries like China. Not a carbon tax on U.S. produced products. The products produced in China pollute 50 times more than the same product produced in the U.S. Common sense dictates that bringing manufacturing back to America would reduce carbon emissions. China has no EPA and could not care less if they pollute the Earth. Hit them with a tax based on the level of pollution they produce and they will get started on cleaning up their emissions while America will get jobs back.

reply to post by Renegade2283

I cant believe people still believe global warming isn't happening. Anything to get that oil under the Arctic I guess.

There you have it.

Anything to get that oil under the Arctic...