EPA May Have Suppressed Report Skeptical Of Global Warming

[elvis]

The Flat Earthers strike back!

Next target.............EVOLUTION!!!

you weren't around for that either.

 

[Navy1960]

Now I will address your other points. You predicted that within five years global warming will be a joke. Very simply, if, within five years we see major records set by high temperatures and other effects caused by warming, then you have been proven absolutely wrong. If, on the other hand, we see an increased cooling, with tempertures declining to the point of the '50s, then I am absolutely wrong. For I predict that within 3 years we will see far higher temperatures than we saw in 1998. The only caveat would be a Tambora sized eruption.

Meteorologist Augie Auer made the statement that 5 years this science will be a joke. and so far within the scientific community the cracks are starting to show. When the 2nd IPCC report came out we heard words like " the debate is over" and " it's a known fact" byt by the time the 4th IPCC report came out we have large chunks of Dr. Mann's report missing from the first one and large groups upwards of 30,000 scientists in all fields calling into question the science behind this whole theory. It is but one theory of "global warming" among several and the "debate is not over" as long as science exists.

As to to your temp. claims shall we start with last year? because if we do then your off to a bad start my friend, because last year was actually cooler? Ah yes 1998 would be the magic year for the "Global Warming" believers wouldn't it.

THE STARK headline appeared just over a year ago. "2007 to be 'warmest on record,' " BBC News reported on Jan. 4, 2007. Citing experts in the British government's Meteorological Office, the story announced that "the world is likely to experience the warmest year on record in 2007," surpassing the all-time high reached in 1998.
But a funny thing happened on the way to the planetary hot flash: Much of the planet grew bitterly cold.
Br-r-r! Where did global warming go? - The Boston Globe

Britain’s Hadley Centre, NASA, and the University of Alabama/Huntsville say the temperature drop since January of 2007 was measured between 0.59 and 0.75 degree C. This includes an unusually cold winter in the Southern Hemisphere, and the harshest Chinese winter in a century. Part is due to a regional cooling in the Pacific called La Nina which appears every 4-5 years, but the strength and global scope of this cooling has been startling.

Additionally, the Arctic ice that seemed to disappear last summer is back this spring, and thicker, apparently affected last year more by wind currents than melting. The Antarctic ice is still record-large.

Does this mean a new Ice Age? Probably not, though one will appear eventually. We’re more likely to have a moderate decline in temperatures over the coming decades like the cooling that occurred from 1940 to 1975.

For the longer term, we’re still controlled by the moderate, natural 1,500-year climate cycle that we discovered in the Greenland ice cores in 1984. It has since been confirmed in seabed and lake sediments, fossil pollen, cave stalagmites and ancient records around the world. The 1,500-year cycle raises temperatures in Washington and Paris by 1–2 degrees C for centuries at a time, and then drops them abruptly into “little ice ages” that also last for centuries
Global Temperatures Have Dropped: Did Sunspots Predict It? | Center for Global Food Issues

Now I want you Rocks and others to fully understand my position here, there is no doubt that the earth is going through a cyclic warming trend and I rather doubt you would find any qualified scientist that would dispute that. However quite a number of them of which I happen to agree, believe that the earth has gone through several periods of warming and cooling and has had period in which there have been high concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere. Where I part company with the "Global Warming" crowd is that it's man made which it clearly is not! Further I tend to agree with the Professor Spencer of UA and his findings .. more so than those of Professor Mann. As Professor Mann just happened to omit data from his findings that may have changed it which make it less than credible. Secondly, I also agree with the recently quashed EPA findings that man made high concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere are not the cause of the current marketing scheme known as "Global Warming". The other thing that makes the whole climate change bill a complete farce is this, should this bill happen to pass, and should this nation implement ALL the changes in it. The bill itself is contengent on the fact that EVERY nation on the earth follow these strict guidelines to meet a stated goal of a change in the earth temp of +- .050 degree's that is if high concentrations of CO2 caused by man are the issue in the first place. Now given these facts, and given the fact that countries like China and India, and others operate coal fired plants and expell the gases at a rate that now exceeds ours and they have no intentions of following any protocols set down by the IPCC or any environmental group this bill will do nothing but economic harm to the United States. While changing our nations energy needs to more domestic forms of energy is a good thing and I support that completely, this bill has no intentions of doing that except to pay token repsonse to needed technologies that end our dependance on foreign oil , technologies like wind, solar, nuclear, bio-mass, and others. It would seem to me that anyone who really supported a clean environment and clean jobs would be less interested in enriching carbon traders and more interested in supporting technologies that bring clean cheap energy to this nation.

 

[concept]

Coldest beginning of July ON RECORD this year. We've had two very cold winters with tons of snow.

It's still cold out ffs.