Americans' Global Warming Concerns Continue to Drop

[saveliberty]

You don't have to say you believe it is caused by man. It is completely obvious that you do, as you are focused on CO2 which your scientists claim is produced by man. Frankly, you are either very uneducated, mentally challenged and/or just one more hack on this board.

Well, here's a question.

What if your hunch that Scientists all around the world are part of some giant conspiracy to rip you off is wrong?

I mean, sure, the chances of such a sound conspiracy theory as yours (*cough* *cough* *Bullshit*) being wrong are [/sarcasm] extraordinarily small [/], but what if you're wrong and all those crazy-assed science-types have something there?

That means you and your anti-science buddies will literally be responsible for murdering tens of millions of individuals (due to the effects Global Warming is bound to produce), by continuing to defend current pollution levels.

So, if say 20 years down the line, it turns out that you were in fact wrong in your conspiracy theories, would that mean that you should all be rounded up and shot?

Vast I have been over this with others several times. I have never suggested a conspiracy theory. What seems to be the case is, most if not all scientists are using the same manipulated data to draw conclusions. Since this data all comes from the same source, your conspiracy would be from that place.

 

[Avatar4321]

You don't have to say you believe it is caused by man. It is completely obvious that you do, as you are focused on CO2 which your scientists claim is produced by man. Frankly, you are either very uneducated, mentally challenged and/or just one more hack on this board.

Well, here's a question.

What if your hunch that Scientists all around the world are part of some giant conspiracy to rip you off is wrong?

I mean, sure, the chances of such a sound conspiracy theory as yours (*cough* *cough* *Bullshit*) being wrong are [/sarcasm] extraordinarily small [/], but what if you're wrong and all those crazy-assed science-types have something there?

That means you and your anti-science buddies will literally be responsible for murdering tens of millions of individuals (due to the effects Global Warming is bound to produce), by continuing to defend current pollution levels.

So, if say 20 years down the line, it turns out that you were in fact wrong in your conspiracy theories, would that mean that you should all be rounded up and shot?

Let's stop pretending here. You know the only reason to stop CO2 output is to eliminate humanity. That's what makes your junk science so dangerous.

In reality, absolutely no one will die because of global warming. It's not a real problem. In fact, if the tempature became warmer, we'd have more land to grow food on and we would be able to sustain higher populations.

You're whole premise is flawed from the first place because you have no idea what the tempature of the earth is supposed to be. Its been going up and down for millions of years. But suddenly now it's all our fault that nature is doing the same exact thing its been doing for the entire life of the earth and the tempatures are going up and down.

And the only solution: More government regulation. Oh wow! How convenient for all the socialists who couldnt persuade people that their ideas had any merit! I suppose it's just a coincidence that the so called solutions to the problem are the same policies theyve been advocating for over a century. Or that it's a coincidence that now that the earth is cooling that global warming can cause cold temptures?

It's almost like no matter what the data shows, you are going to find some evidence of global warming. We've had one of the coldest winters on record, (which isnt saying much since we dont have a large record yet). And yet we are supposed to believe scientists who tell us its been the hottest winter ever. We are supposed to ignore our senses and the obvious data, because someone who claims to be so smart lies to us. Funny that.

You guys are downright scary. And when you need to start killing off those "less enlightened" people to protect the planet from the CO2 they breath out, we are supposed to just be grateful that you are ending our lives, right?

And you wonder why totalitarians get power. It's because people are willing to overlook the obvious to make themselves feel special.

 

[Vast LWC]

You do realize the tempature has been going down since 1998. That is why the envir. wackos are trying to change the name of global warming to "climate change" and why they are arguing that global warming is going to make us colder.

Shock of it all. Ice melting in the Summer. You do realize that it ices back up in the winter right?

Of course, which is why they are manufacturing data in that department.

The tempature has gone up and down multiple times in the past 200 years. Before then, no one knows for sure because they weren't taking tempatures. However, there is significant evidence that things were much warmer 500 years ago than today.

Except the actual tempatures show it's getting colder.

Wow, there is so much blatantly false information in that post.

Let me just answer your last point, as it's the most glaring.. The "actual temperatures show it's getting colder" is a complete fallacy.

Of course there are cyclic trends in warm and cold periods on earth, but the general trend is warmer, not colder.

In addition, and more importantly, instead of a slow gradual climactic change, as would occur in a normal cooling or warming period, the current amount of warming is much more dramatic and taking place during a relatively short period.

 

[boedicca]

You can keep saying that the earth is getting warmer over and over and over again - but you still haven't offered up any reliable proof (especially proof that CO2 causes Global Warming).

 

[Vast LWC]

Vast I have been over this with others several times. I have never suggested a conspiracy theory. What seems to be the case is, most if not all scientists are using the same manipulated data to draw conclusions. Since this data all comes from the same source, your conspiracy would be from that place.

Most of the data all comes from the same source???

What source would that be?

 

[saveliberty]

Vast,

More and more of the collection sites for temperature are in metro areas. These are notorious heat sinks. Is that data all rounded down? Over 80% are in areas that don't meet NOAA's standards for collection sites. Most are due to heat sources being too close.

 

[saveliberty]

Vast I have been over this with others several times. I have never suggested a conspiracy theory. What seems to be the case is, most if not all scientists are using the same manipulated data to draw conclusions. Since this data all comes from the same source, your conspiracy would be from that place.

Most of the data all comes from the same source???

What source would that be?

Can you do a little of your own homework please?

 

[boedicca]

The AGW Shysters also disregarded readings from censors in large rural areas, such as Siberia, that caused the average temps to be lower than they wanted. They cherry picked urban ones.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Global warming - Americans don't feel like its real, so it must not be.

 

[Vast LWC]

Let's stop pretending here. You know the only reason to stop CO2 output is to eliminate humanity. That's what makes your junk science so dangerous.

In reality, absolutely no one will die because of global warming. It's not a real problem. In fact, if the tempature became warmer, we'd have more land to grow food on and we would be able to sustain higher populations.

You're whole premise is flawed from the first place because you have no idea what the tempature of the earth is supposed to be. Its been going up and down for millions of years. But suddenly now it's all our fault that nature is doing the same exact thing its been doing for the entire life of the earth and the tempatures are going up and down.

And the only solution: More government regulation. Oh wow! How convenient for all the socialists who couldnt persuade people that their ideas had any merit! I suppose it's just a coincidence that the so called solutions to the problem are the same policies theyve been advocating for over a century. Or that it's a coincidence that now that the earth is cooling that global warming can cause cold temptures?

It's almost like no matter what the data shows, you are going to find some evidence of global warming. We've had one of the coldest winters on record, (which isnt saying much since we dont have a large record yet). And yet we are supposed to believe scientists who tell us its been the hottest winter ever. We are supposed to ignore our senses and the obvious data, because someone who claims to be so smart lies to us. Funny that.

You guys are downright scary. And when you need to start killing off those "less enlightened" people to protect the planet from the CO2 they breath out, we are supposed to just be grateful that you are ending our lives, right?

And you wonder why totalitarians get power. It's because people are willing to overlook the obvious to make themselves feel special.

What the HELL are you talking about????

At first I thought you were being sarcastic, and then I slowly came to the horrifying revelation that you were serious.

"the only reason to stop CO2 output is to eliminate humanity"???

Seriously?

"In fact, if the tempature became warmer, we'd have more land to grow food on and we would be able to sustain higher populations. "???

Except that there will be less land area due to rising sea levels, more drought, less fresh water relative to salt water, etc, etc...

"It's almost like no matter what the data shows, you are going to find some evidence of global warming." ???

What data? If you show me the people who put out this data, I can guarantee I can show you exactly where their funding comes from, and I can tell you right now, it ain't the Pope.

"You're whole premise is flawed from the first place because you have no idea what the tempature of the earth is supposed to be."???

The point is IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE TEMPERATURE OF THE EARTH IS SUPPOSED TO BE.

Whether we are in a gradual cooling or warming period, we KNOW the temperature is not supposed to be rising so FAST. That is the POINT.

 

[Dr Gregg]

The AGW Shysters also disregarded readings from censors in large rural areas, such as Siberia, that caused the average temps to be lower than they wanted. They cherry picked urban ones.

Ythe "global" temps comes from the entire globe, even the cold areas. holy shit

 

[Vast LWC]

Vast,

More and more of the collection sites for temperature are in metro areas. These are notorious heat sinks. Is that data all rounded down? Over 80% are in areas that don't meet NOAA's standards for collection sites. Most are due to heat sources being too close.

Really? What right-wing site did you find this talking point on?

Perhaps you would be so kind as to illustrate your point by providing us with a chart listing locations for various temperature readings?

Otherwise you are speaking from your posterior region.

 

[Vast LWC]

You can keep saying that the earth is getting warmer over and over and over again - but you still haven't offered up any reliable proof (especially proof that CO2 causes Global Warming).

From National Geographic:

Global Warming Fast Facts

Earth is already showing many signs of worldwide climate change.

• Average temperatures have climbed 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 degree Celsius) around the world since 1880, much of this in recent decades, according to NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

• The rate of warming is increasing. The 20th century's last two decades were the hottest in 400 years and possibly the warmest for several millennia, according to a number of climate studies. And the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports that 11 of the past 12 years are among the dozen warmest since 1850.

• The Arctic is feeling the effects the most. Average temperatures in Alaska, western Canada, and eastern Russia have risen at twice the global average, according to the multinational Arctic Climate Impact Assessment report compiled between 2000 and 2004.

• Arctic ice is rapidly disappearing, and the region may have its first completely ice-free summer by 2040 or earlier. Polar bears and indigenous cultures are already suffering from the sea-ice loss.

• Glaciers and mountain snows are rapidly melting—for example, Montana's Glacier National Park now has only 27 glaciers, versus 150 in 1910. In the Northern Hemisphere, thaws also come a week earlier in spring and freezes begin a week later.

• Coral reefs, which are highly sensitive to small changes in water temperature, suffered the worst bleaching—or die-off in response to stress—ever recorded in 1998, with some areas seeing bleach rates of 70 percent. Experts expect these sorts of events to increase in frequency and intensity in the next 50 years as sea temperatures rise.

• An upsurge in the amount of extreme weather events, such as wildfires, heat waves, and strong tropical storms, is also attributed in part to climate change by some experts.

SOURCES:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
U.S. Global Change Research System

 

[Vast LWC]

Here is a site with excellent information on the causes of Global Warming:

Global Warming Facts and Our Future - Causes of Change - The Natural Climate Cycle

And here are some of their sources:

Climate models – National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL), Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research

Glacial topography – W. Richard Peltier, University of Toronto

Global CO2 emission rates – Energy Information Administration

Sea level rise vulnerability data – James Titus, Environmental Protection Agency

20th-century temperature – NOAA National Climatic Data Center and University of East Anglia

1000-year Northern Hemisphere temperature – Michael Mann, University of Virginia

350,000-year Antarctic temperature and CO2– Kurt Cuffey, University of California, Berkeley

 

[Vast LWC]

Here is the data spelled out by the folks at the Pew Center from a variety of publications and reports:

Science Publications and Reports | Pew Center on Global Climate Change: The Pew Center on Global Climate Change

 

[saveliberty]

Vast,

More and more of the collection sites for temperature are in metro areas. These are notorious heat sinks. Is that data all rounded down? Over 80% are in areas that don't meet NOAA's standards for collection sites. Most are due to heat sources being too close.

Really? What right-wing site did you find this talking point on?

Perhaps you would be so kind as to illustrate your point by providing us with a chart listing locations for various temperature readings?

Otherwise you are speaking from your posterior region.

"According to the U.S. government, a surface station must be at least 100 feet away from a heat source/sink to be considered reliable. Using the goverment's own standards for properly locating temperature sensors, Watts graded each site on a scale from 1 to 5. A grade of 1 or 2 indicates reliable placement. A grade of 3 to 5 can result in temperature errors of several degrees, according to the governments own studies.

To date, the investigation has noted that only 3 percent of the stations surveyed were grade 1. Roughly 8 percent were grade 2, meaning only 11 percent of the stations are located in a manner that results in reliable temperature data.

Some 20 percent of stations were grade 3, the majority were grade 4 (58 percent), and 11 percent were graded as 5."

"The adjustments also help to 'fix' the gaps in the missing data, there is an adjustment for the new MMTS instrumentation, an adjustment for station moves, and time of observation.
These adjustments amount to a net 'warming' that is applied to the 'raw' data."

Is The U.S. Temperature Record Reliable? - wbztv.com

I thank you for having me look up some old sources. I ran across this new one:
Global Warming Science and Public Policy - U.S. Temperature Rankings Rearranged, Problems and Concerns with Temperature data sets

"But last week (week of August 16,2007), a problem popped up. Researchers Steve McIntyre (A New Leaderboard at the U.S. Open Climate Audit) and Anthony Watts (Watts Up With That?: 1998 no longer the hottest year on record in USA) noticed that there seemed to be an unusual discontinuity—a step upwards—in the temperature records from many of the individual stations that went into the GISS U.S. national aggregate.

Upon carefully documenting this apparent discontinuity and inquiring to the record keepers at GISS about it, it was determined that GISS had accidentally incorporated a data error in their routines aimed at updating and compiling individual station histories as well as the U.S. national temperatures.

After adjusting their procedure to account for this problem, NASA GISS has now made available a new and improved temperature history of the United States. In this more accurate record, the year 2006 now drops to the 4th warmest year of all-time, a full 0.12ºC behind the new sole record-holder, 1934. In the new dataset, only three of the past 10 years are included among the top-10 warmest years of all-time in the United States."

It would be appreciated if you would keep the discourse civil VastLWC. Also, I tire of doing your homework. You will have to refute my statements with your own sources in the future.

 

[Oddball]

Vast I have been over this with others several times. I have never suggested a conspiracy theory. What seems to be the case is, most if not all scientists are using the same manipulated data to draw conclusions. Since this data all comes from the same source, your conspiracy would be from that place.

Most of the data all comes from the same source???

What source would that be?

Most of the data comes from the same echo chamber.

That's how exclusive country clubs and other "old boy networks" work.

 

[Xenophon]

Most of the data comes from the same echo chamber.

That's how exclusive country clubs and other "old boy networks" work.

They know that, do you believe they give a fuck though?

True zealots never let facts get in the way of crusades.

 

[Old Rocks]

I am begining to question scientists in general. We are told mamograms are important, then not so important. This study refutes that study. Makes you wonder how good the research is today.

The basic data on temperatures over the last 40 years has been lost for the most part. So how are scientists able to believe in warming with no raw data to work from? How can they look past empirical evidence without investigating more?

The biggest threat from a global warming world would be flooding of coastal areas. Not happening to date. Very hard to believe a science that can't make accurate predictions.

And this is the whole thrust of the campaign to delegitimize science. And it is working. Your children and grandchildren will get to enjoy the results of it.

 

[Old Rocks]

Most of the data comes from the same echo chamber.

That's how exclusive country clubs and other "old boy networks" work.

They know that, do you believe they give a fuck though?

True zealots never let facts get in the way of crusades.

When are you two dumb fucks going to present anything but yap-yap? How about some satellite data showing the cooling? How about some data from real scientists, not like Watts, that show that CO2 is not a GHG?