CO2 is used to keep things COLD

[Old Rocks]

Ok Boss. This is the point where you have nothing else to add to support your silly claims, and realize you are just embarrassing yourself, so you are supposed to mumble something about summarily noting something or the other, and run away.

What silly claims did I make? What other support do I need? The question is about global warming and I presented the average temperatures since 1979. You've not show where my data is in error or incorrect. The people being embarassed are those who continue to cling to this debunked myth of man-made global climate change. As more and more data is compiled we find this is simply not a phenomenon which is happening.

Now let me just add this... I am an environmentalist. I love the environment and think we should be proactive in doing things to clean up the environment. I don't want corporations dumping mercury and other toxins into our rivers and estuaries. I think we should shut that down completely. In 1993, I led a petition drive on behalf of Friends of the Chattahoochee to stop Atlanta from dumping raw sewage in the river, so I am also an activist.

From MY perspective, what you Warmer Nuts are doing is single-handedly destroying the environmental movement in America. It's sad for me to watch people immerse themselves in their own ignorance this way. And it all seems to be politically-centered, not really a matter of what the facts are.

Well, no. It's a financial centered discussion. Virtually all the dissenting voices, and there are pathetically few, are funded and directed by the oil companies, and since the oil companies own a large part of the republican party, they use politics as another tool to prevent any profit loss due to having to clean up their mess. Again, all you have to do is convince the experts you are right, and I'm sure you will have all the support you need.

What you are saying is just not the truth. Global temperatures are not manipulated by the oil companies, we can use thermometers and measure temps with science. I have shown you the graph with the avg. temps since '79, and it indicates there is no substantial warming happening for the past 18 years. I'm not being paid by anyone, I have voted for Republicans but I am not a member of any political party.

The sidebar financial discussion is because you fuckwit fanatics believe that punishing capitalists will stop this man-made thing from happening that isn't really happening. No, the capitalists certainly don't like that idea at all. And I think it actually reveals the true intention here. You don't really care that man isn't causing global warming, it's about sticking it to capitalists, to the oil companies, to the billionaires and the Koch brothers. It's a political thing for you.

Mr. Psychologist, you had better see a collegue for some professional courtesy, because your grip on reality is tenuous at best. Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science in the world, and every major University states that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. So what you are stating is that there is a grand international conspiracy across national and cultural divids to fool the whole world concerng GHGs and global warming. Need more tinfoil for your hats?

What you are claiming is simply not true. Every scientific entity has certainly not said AGW is real and/or a clear and present danger. Even if they did, we do not operate on decree of science entities as our masters. In science, things are proven through observation and testing. Not by popular decree upon high. So... produce the science or shut the fuck up.

There is no problem whatsoever on my grip of reality, except for my inexplicable urge to try and educate moronic pinheads like yourself on an internet message board, in the hopes it will do some good. I think I maybe need to "get real" on that one and admit it's a pipe dream at best.

The data is there, all you need to do is look at the graph I posted earlier. The discussion (and argument) is very simple... Is man causing global warming to happen? The data shows no warming of significance for 18 years. It also shows a warming event unrelated to man in 1998, which has caused a slight increase in average temperature but has stabilized at about 0.2% above what it was before the event. No further warming has happened for 18 years.

So even IF man is causing it, the environment is mitigating it through nature. End of argument.

Office of Planning and Research - List of Organizations

List of scientific organizations, worldwide, that state that the global warming we are experiancing is human caused.

 

[Old Rocks]

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect, from the American Institute of Physics, a Scientific Society composed of Scientific Societies.

 

[Old Rocks]

What silly claims did I make? What other support do I need? The question is about global warming and I presented the average temperatures since 1979. You've not show where my data is in error or incorrect. The people being embarassed are those who continue to cling to this debunked myth of man-made global climate change. As more and more data is compiled we find this is simply not a phenomenon which is happening.

Now let me just add this... I am an environmentalist. I love the environment and think we should be proactive in doing things to clean up the environment. I don't want corporations dumping mercury and other toxins into our rivers and estuaries. I think we should shut that down completely. In 1993, I led a petition drive on behalf of Friends of the Chattahoochee to stop Atlanta from dumping raw sewage in the river, so I am also an activist.

From MY perspective, what you Warmer Nuts are doing is single-handedly destroying the environmental movement in America. It's sad for me to watch people immerse themselves in their own ignorance this way. And it all seems to be politically-centered, not really a matter of what the facts are.

Well, no. It's a financial centered discussion. Virtually all the dissenting voices, and there are pathetically few, are funded and directed by the oil companies, and since the oil companies own a large part of the republican party, they use politics as another tool to prevent any profit loss due to having to clean up their mess. Again, all you have to do is convince the experts you are right, and I'm sure you will have all the support you need.

What you are saying is just not the truth. Global temperatures are not manipulated by the oil companies, we can use thermometers and measure temps with science. I have shown you the graph with the avg. temps since '79, and it indicates there is no substantial warming happening for the past 18 years. I'm not being paid by anyone, I have voted for Republicans but I am not a member of any political party.

The sidebar financial discussion is because you fuckwit fanatics believe that punishing capitalists will stop this man-made thing from happening that isn't really happening. No, the capitalists certainly don't like that idea at all. And I think it actually reveals the true intention here. You don't really care that man isn't causing global warming, it's about sticking it to capitalists, to the oil companies, to the billionaires and the Koch brothers. It's a political thing for you.

Mr. Psychologist, you had better see a collegue for some professional courtesy, because your grip on reality is tenuous at best. Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science in the world, and every major University states that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. So what you are stating is that there is a grand international conspiracy across national and cultural divids to fool the whole world concerng GHGs and global warming. Need more tinfoil for your hats?

What you are claiming is simply not true. Every scientific entity has certainly not said AGW is real and/or a clear and present danger. Even if they did, we do not operate on decree of science entities as our masters. In science, things are proven through observation and testing. Not by popular decree upon high. So... produce the science or shut the fuck up.

There is no problem whatsoever on my grip of reality, except for my inexplicable urge to try and educate moronic pinheads like yourself on an internet message board, in the hopes it will do some good. I think I maybe need to "get real" on that one and admit it's a pipe dream at best.

The data is there, all you need to do is look at the graph I posted earlier. The discussion (and argument) is very simple... Is man causing global warming to happen? The data shows no warming of significance for 18 years. It also shows a warming event unrelated to man in 1998, which has caused a slight increase in average temperature but has stabilized at about 0.2% above what it was before the event. No further warming has happened for 18 years.

So even IF man is causing it, the environment is mitigating it through nature. End of argument.

you are wasting your time trying to get Old Rocks off his talking points. a few years ago, before the 'Pause' was statistically significant or even named, Old Rocks was still declaring that the warming was accelerating!

I agree with you about the satellite record. it seems to show a baseline before 1998 with variation around the mean, the 1998 event, then a slightly raised baseline afterwards with the same type of variations.

Latest Global Average Tropospheric Temperatures
Latest Global Temps Roy Spencer PhD.

Really, Ian? The same type of variations after 1998 as before 1998? I do not see that at all. In fact, I see not one instance of plateuing prior to 1998. Point is, that no matter whose graph you use, you see a very significant rise after 1998, and, when we see the next inevitable strong El Nino, I think that we will see another upward step like we have seen since 1998.

So, for all of us, the next decade will be most interesting, and we will definately see who has their science together.

 

[Boss]

Office of Planning and Research - List of Organizations

List of scientific organizations, worldwide, that state that the global warming we are experiancing is human caused.

Again, science is not a popularity contest. If it were, the sun would be orbiting around the flat earth.

I will state it again.... IF MAN IS CAUSING IT, mother nature is mitigating it.

 

[Boss]

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect, from the American Institute of Physics, a Scientific Society composed of Scientific Societies.

No one has denied the greenhouse effect exists, idiot.

 

[mamooth]

You can stamp your feet and "state" things all you want, but the laws of physics are not obligated to agree with your quasi-religious belief system.

At some point, you won't be able to sustain your conspiracy any longer. When it finally collapses totally, how will you manage? Will your sanity crack outright, or will you quietly slink away and pretend you were never a denier?

 

[Boss]

Latest Global Average Tropospheric Temperatures
Latest Global Temps Roy Spencer PhD.

Really, Ian? The same type of variations after 1998 as before 1998? I do not see that at all. In fact, I see not one instance of plateuing prior to 1998. Point is, that no matter whose graph you use, you see a very significant rise after 1998, and, when we see the next inevitable strong El Nino, I think that we will see another upward step like we have seen since 1998.

So, for all of us, the next decade will be most interesting, and we will definately see who has their science together.

Yes, if mother nature gives us another warming event we can expect the overall average temperature of the planet to increase. Just as, if she gives us a cooling event, we can expect the average to decrease. Over the course of the past century, we are +1 degree. We don't know what mother nature is going to do, we may get several cooling events in a row. We may even get a major event which causes mass extinction, as has happened several times before.

There has been no increased warming for 18 years.

 

[Boss]

You can stamp your feet and "state" things all you want, but the laws of physics are not obligated to agree with your quasi-religious belief system.

At some point, you won't be able to sustain your conspiracy any longer. When it finally collapses totally, how will you manage? Will your sanity crack outright, or will you quietly slink away and pretend you were never a denier?

The laws of physics don't say man is causing catastrophic global warming. That is YOUR statement, and one you can't back up with facts. In the future you will be likened to Chicken Little.

 

[Crick]

The laws of physics DO say man is causing warming.

 

[BULLDOG]

The laws of physics DO say man is causing warming.

Give it up. There is nothing you can say to make him understand. His mind is made up and facts only serve to confuse him. If there is any truth to his claim, the majority of climate scientists will be convinced..........That is, unless you believe his theory of a world wide conspiracy of scientists. Either way, come back in six months, and he will probably be waving that same silly chart and saying the same silly things.

 

[Andylusion]

The laws of physics DO say man is causing warming.

You have the right to be wrong.

 

[Andylusion]

The laws of physics DO say man is causing warming.

Give it up. There is nothing you can say to make him understand. His mind is made up and facts only serve to confuse him. If there is any truth to his claim, the majority of climate scientists will be convinced..........That is, unless you believe his theory of a world wide conspiracy of scientists. Either way, come back in six months, and he will probably be waving that same silly chart and saying the same silly things.

Yes, because we actually look at the science, instead of stating a political opinion, and cherry-picking the information to support it.

Again, science is not a popularity contest. If 50 Million scientists say it's true in a poll, that doesn't mean that's what the scientific evidence shows.

 

[BULLDOG]

The laws of physics DO say man is causing warming.

Give it up. There is nothing you can say to make him understand. His mind is made up and facts only serve to confuse him. If there is any truth to his claim, the majority of climate scientists will be convinced..........That is, unless you believe his theory of a world wide conspiracy of scientists. Either way, come back in six months, and he will probably be waving that same silly chart and saying the same silly things.

Yes, because we actually look at the science, instead of stating a political opinion, and cherry-picking the information to support it.

Again, science is not a popularity contest. If 50 Million scientists say it's true in a poll, that doesn't mean that's what the scientific evidence shows.

Got you......You don't trust scientists. I'll bet you're real popular with the other teabaggers.

 

[Boss]

I've not made any claim that isn't supported by facts. I posted the graph which simply shows us there is no warming happening and it hasn't been happening for 18 years. I don't see anything "silly" about the graph, it's legitimate satellite readings of the average temps since 1979. If we are discussing whether or not there is global warming, I should think a graph showing the actual temps would be a perfectly reasonable and important bit of information.

Now... all of you fuck-goof liberals can line up one after another to hurl insults at me, to denigrate my argument, to throw your little tantrums and spew your hate-filled retorts until your little hearts are content. I really don't give two shits. You haven't made your case, you're not going to make your case, because the facts show what you are claiming is just not happening.

 

[Boss]

The laws of physics DO say man is causing warming.

No, I assure you, they do not.

 

[Old Rocks]

And the whole of the American Institute of Physics says otherwise. Now who to believer, a psychologist with basically little science education, or physicists concerning the laws of physics.

 

[Boss]

And the whole of the American Institute of Physics says otherwise. Now who to believer, a psychologist with basically little science education, or physicists concerning the laws of physics.

Nonsense.

And again, you don't have to believe me or anyone else, you can look at the graph which shows the actual temperatures. Yes, I know you think that it's silly and ridiculous to look at average temps over the past 35 years and see there is no warming.... it's much better to listen to activists with an agenda and presume they know what they are talking about.

Now.... JUST for the sake of entertaining your train(wreck) of thought on this matter... 97% of the experts on UFOs believe they are real and we have been visited by aliens. So this must be true because the experts say so, and they are smarter than the rest of us.

 

[Old Rocks]

Now that is about the most goofball arguement I have ever heard. The AGU has more people dealing with climatic effects than any other Scientific Society. And their statement is unequivical concerning AGW. Not only that, the experts span disciplines from atmospheric physics to glacialogy. Boss, you have lost any credibilty you might have had with such a redicoulous arguement.

 

[Boss]

Now that is about the most goofball arguement I have ever heard. The AGU has more people dealing with climatic effects than any other Scientific Society. And their statement is unequivical concerning AGW. Not only that, the experts span disciplines from atmospheric physics to glacialogy. Boss, you have lost any credibilty you might have had with such a redicoulous arguement.

Well my argument is, the data showing average temperature over the past 35 years, indicates there is no catastrophic global warming happening. I posted the graph to support that statement, and you somehow think I'm making a ridiculous argument with silly charts. The ONLY counter you've had for my argument is a barrage of outrageous claims regarding what "the experts" have said.

 

[Boss]

97% of the experts in the field of paranormal activity, believe ghosts and spirits are real.
Hey... MUST BE TRUE, right? The experts ALL agree!