After 30 years of data global warming alarmism is proven false

Discussion in 'Environment' started by MindWars, Jun 22, 2018.

  1. MindWars
    Offline

    MindWars Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    26,749
    Thanks Received:
    6,012
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +27,179
    While there has been a modest increase in world temperature, the alarmist predictions have failed.

    It has been 30 years since the specter of global warming began to loom before the world. It was 1988 when James Hansen, a scientist at NASA, first testified before Congress about the supposed link between the greenhouse effect and observed global warming. Al Gore was late to the party when he released his Oscar-winning movie, “An Inconvenient Truth,” in 2006. With three decades of predictions about warming to look back on, we can now assess the accuracy of those early claims about global warming.
    After 30 Years Of Data, Global Warming Alarmism Is Proven False - TheResurgent.com
    ----------------------------------------

    This one was a tought one to get through the heads of morons who fell victim of this global warming scam if idiots knew more about agenda 21 and were dumb enough ot fall for the " It's a conspiracy" well then we would have os many victims of stupidity.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. JBond
    Offline

    JBond Winning Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2016
    Messages:
    5,586
    Thanks Received:
    1,025
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Kansas
    Ratings:
    +5,191
    Interesting. The experts were wrong. Shocking.

    Thirty Years On, How Well Do Global Warming Predictions Stand Up?

    "Thirty years of data have been collected since Mr. Hansen outlined his scenarios—enough to determine which was closest to reality. And the winner is Scenario C. Global surface temperature has not increased significantly since 2000, discounting the larger-than-usual El Niño of 2015-16. Assessed by Mr. Hansen’s model, surface temperatures are behaving as if we had capped 18 years ago the carbon-dioxide emissions responsible for the enhanced greenhouse effect. But we didn’t. And it isn’t just Mr. Hansen who got it wrong. Models devised by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have, on average, predicted about twice as much warming as has been observed since global satellite temperature monitoring began 40 years ago.

    What about Mr. Hansen’s other claims? Outside the warming models, his only explicit claim in the testimony was that the late ’80s and ’90s would see “greater than average warming in the southeast U.S. and the Midwest.” No such spike has been measured in these regions.

    As observed temperatures diverged over the years from his predictions, Mr. Hansen doubled down. In a 2007 case on auto emissions, he stated in his deposition that most of Greenland’s ice would soon melt, raising sea levels 23 feet over the course of 100 years. Subsequent research published in Nature magazine on the history of Greenland’s ice cap demonstrated this to be impossible. Much of Greenland’s surface melts every summer, meaning rapid melting might reasonably be expected to occur in a dramatically warming world. But not in the one we live in. The Nature study found only modest ice loss after 6,000 years of much warmer temperatures than human activity could ever sustain.

    Several more of Mr. Hansen’s predictions can now be judged by history. Have hurricanes gotten stronger, as Mr. Hansen predicted in a 2016 study? No. Satellite data from 1970 onward shows no evidence of this in relation to global surface temperature. Have storms caused increasing amounts of damage in the U.S.? Data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show no such increase in damage, measured as a percentage of gross domestic product. How about stronger tornadoes? The opposite may be true, as NOAA data offers some evidence of a decline. The list of what didn’t happen is long and tedious.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. BlindBoo
    Online

    BlindBoo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2010
    Messages:
    24,729
    Thanks Received:
    2,820
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +7,277
    Interesting use of alarmist. The author conflate the alarmist, like Gore, who often use the worst case scenarios from an experts report, with the expert analysis itself. Fact of the matter is the consensus of most scientist is that extreme events caused by global warming will not take place till the end of this century and beyond. they urge us to do something now while it can make a difference.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. BluesLegend
    Online

    BluesLegend Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    Messages:
    32,201
    Thanks Received:
    5,624
    Trophy Points:
    1,510
    Location:
    Trump's Army
    Ratings:
    +35,763
    These climate change liars also claimed the increase in forest and wild fire intensity and size was caused by climate change. Scientists have already proven that's not true, it was caused by human interference.

    Nature frequently burns off layers of dry dead debris, the fires are low intensity and healthy for the environment. It burns off the debris, kills off pest infestations, leaves the trees and environment alive and healthy.

    Then humans got the bright idea to run around stamping out all of natures fires. Decades of this practice resulted in FEET of dry dead debris building up that would normally have been burned off. Now when a fire starts there's so much dry fuel it burns so hot that it kills the trees and everything in its path, burns fast and over a larger area. Human stupidity caused this not climate change.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. Grampa Murked U
    Offline

    Grampa Murked U Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2011
    Messages:
    66,902
    Thanks Received:
    12,142
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Ratings:
    +46,807
    Just looking at readily available historical data shows the moonbats to be out to lunch. No need for a study.
     
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. MindWars
    Offline

    MindWars Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    26,749
    Thanks Received:
    6,012
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +27,179
    Guess yah never heard the term RIGGED TO FK YOU OVER.
     
  7. MindWars
    Offline

    MindWars Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    26,749
    Thanks Received:
    6,012
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +27,179
    • Winner Winner x 2
  8. JBond
    Offline

    JBond Winning Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2016
    Messages:
    5,586
    Thanks Received:
    1,025
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Kansas
    Ratings:
    +5,191
    He testified in front of Congress as an expert and policy was created based on his testimony. Too bad he was a shitty scientist.
     
  9. bear513
    Online

    bear513 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2012
    Messages:
    42,050
    Thanks Received:
    5,388
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +27,024
    • Funny Funny x 1
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2018
  10. MindWars
    Offline

    MindWars Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    26,749
    Thanks Received:
    6,012
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +27,179

Share This Page