Streisand Declares "Global Warming Emergency"

[KarlMarx]

She's right.... there IS a global warming emergency......

especially when her mouth is open!!!!!! :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

 

[KarlMarx]

Look up the word cyclical.

Fuck Barbara Streisand, she's a dyke.

and while you're at it.....look up the words "stupid", "big mouth" and "like who gives a flying f*** what a washed up JAP singer thinks?"

 

[Abbey Normal]

But I always liked her ode to liberals:

"Sheeple, sheeple who need sheeple,
Are the luckiest sheeple, in the world."

 

[KarlMarx]

But I always liked her ode to liberals:

"Sheeple, sheeple who need sheeple,
Are the luckiest sheeple, in the world."

oh... that was baa-aaa-aaa-aaa-d!

 

[fuzzykitten99]

Unfortunately for you guys and the world, she's right.

really? you got proof that the earth is warmer now than say, 30 years ago?

 

[Hagbard Celine]

According to the science I am aware of, global air temperatures have warmed by approximately two degrees over the last 50 to 100 years. And the icecaps really are melting at faster and faster rates.

So something's going on, but like someone said earlier, global environmentalism is a relatively new science and with systems as large as the ones in question, it could take 100 years before anyone can actually show documentation of a real trend.

Better safe than sorry though huh? I mean even if we aren't the cause of global warming, wouldn't it still be worth phasing out fossil fuels and cleaning the air to lessen the amount of carcinogens we breathe in everyday? Plus, mastering the knowledge of global weather systems could lead to something incredible like controlling the weather!

Has anyone read Michael Crichton's book "State of Fear" or any of his other stuff? He's always a pretty good read. I recommend them all except for "A Case of Need," that one wasn't very good.

 

[fuzzykitten99]

HEY Nuc!

thought you would like this. it is from the official National Hurricane Center...

notice the total average numbers of cat 4 & 5 storms are both less than 2?
global warming huh? storms worse than even last century huh? ok, yeah, sure.
ignore facts and make up your own shit.
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pastdec.shtml

 

[Abbey Normal]

oh... that was baa-aaa-aaa-aaa-d!

:fifty:

 

[sitarro]

HEY Nuc!

thought you would like this. it is from the official National Hurricane Center...

notice the total average numbers of cat 4 & 5 storms are both less than 2?
global warming huh? storms worse than even last century huh? ok, yeah, sure.
ignore facts and make up your own shit.
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pastdec.shtml[/QUOTE

Wow Fuzzy,
Quite an eye opener! Kind of makes the global warming arguement look a bit weak. . . then again do we really believe in "scientist" with obvious political agendas and hands held out wide for government grants to continue their faulty research.
Funny how little the media reported the 2003 study by Harvard researchers below. . .

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200304\CUL20030408a.html

A new scientific review of climate history contends that the earth was warmer during the Middle Ages than it is today, supplying ammunition to one critic of the environmental movement who claims concern over "global warming" has been "sheer folly."

A team of Harvard University scientists examined 1,000 years of global temperatures and reviewed more than 240 scientific journals from the past 40 years and concluded that despite man's influence on our environment, current temperatures are not as warm as during the Middle Ages.

"This new study merely affirms the obvious: climate alarmism based on a few years' or even a century's data is sheer folly, reminding us again that geological cycles spanning millennia do not share the rush of agenda-driven scientists or activists," Chris Horner, a senior fellow at the free-market environmental think tank Competitive Enterprise Institute, told CNSNews.com.

The Harvard study is set to be published this spring in the journal Energy and Environment. According to the study, a global medieval warming period lasting from about 800 to 1300 A.D. was followed by a Little Ice Age between the years 1300 to 1900. The study also states that the earth has been warming slightly since 1900.

 

[KarlMarx]

Seriously..... why does any believe that a singer/movie star suddenly become an expert on anything other than entertainment, just because she was the Mother-In-Law in "Meet the Fokkers"?

This reminds me of when Meryl Streep testified before Congress about the dangers of the pesticide Allar..... WTF?

I dare say that there are people on this board that have more of an understanding of these issues that either Babbs or Ms Streep. In fact, industry and academia is full of people who are, as well..... so why does anyone put any stock in what they say?

Advertising!!!!!! Yep, a well known face on TV sells toothpaste, cars and ideas about global warming ("I'm not a climatologist, but I play one on TV!")... that's what this is all about....

(Behind the camera)

Director: "OK, Ms Striesand.... be prepared to say your lines!"

BS: "Greenhouse gasses are posing an environmental risk! Why, emissions of ...... uh, how do you say that word?......"

Director: "Tri-chloro-ethylene"

BS: ".... you expect me to say that?....."

Director: "Well... yes, it's part of the script...."

BS: "Couldn't I just say 'we have to save our children' instead? That worked so well for Meryl!"

Director: "It's not in the script, please Ms. Streisand, just try to say the word."

BS: "Tri-chlor..... say, who is that person? I had an Aunt Ethyl.."

Director: "It's not a person, it's a chemical...!!!!!"

BS: "Can you get high on it?"

Director: "ummmmm... no..... please, Ms. Streisand, could we we please try to get back to saying your lines?"

BS: "OK.... um.... Tri-color-...."

Director: "No, it's Tri-CHLORO-ethylene"

BS: "Oh, OK.... tri-clorox-...., no wait.... tri-chloris-methyl.... um.... bi-coloro-methyl.... oooh... all those syllables make me dizzy!.....How about if I sing it?........ "

Director: "Cut! Could we get the diction coach, please?"

BS: I need a drink!.....

 

[fuzzykitten99]

Wow Fuzzy,
Quite an eye opener! Kind of makes the global warming arguement look a bit weak. . . then again do we really believe in "scientist" with obvious political agendas and hands held out wide for government grants to continue their faulty research.
Funny how little the media reported the 2003 study by Harvard researchers below. . .

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200304\CUL20030408a.html

A new scientific review of climate history contends that the earth was warmer during the Middle Ages than it is today, supplying ammunition to one critic of the environmental movement who claims concern over "global warming" has been "sheer folly."

A team of Harvard University scientists examined 1,000 years of global temperatures and reviewed more than 240 scientific journals from the past 40 years and concluded that despite man's influence on our environment, current temperatures are not as warm as during the Middle Ages.

"This new study merely affirms the obvious: climate alarmism based on a few years' or even a century's data is sheer folly, reminding us again that geological cycles spanning millennia do not share the rush of agenda-driven scientists or activists," Chris Horner, a senior fellow at the free-market environmental think tank Competitive Enterprise Institute, told CNSNews.com.

The Harvard study is set to be published this spring in the journal Energy and Environment. According to the study, a global medieval warming period lasting from about 800 to 1300 A.D. was followed by a Little Ice Age between the years 1300 to 1900. The study also states that the earth has been warming slightly since 1900.

thanks. good article find. tried to rep you, but it won't let me. grrr.

also, the more i look at the numbers, the more i see that we actually have had fewer hurricanes in the last 23 years (1981-2004) than we did in the span of 1901-1920, which was 20 years. Granted it is only a difference of 2, but we are not up in numbers.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

While I agree with the conclusion, it should be noted that basing your opinion only on the # of storms that hit the United States is hardly proof for or against global warming.

 

[manu1959]

While I agree with the conclusion, it should be noted that basing your opinion only on the # of storms that hit the United States is hardly proof for or against global warming.

why is that? 20% fewere storms have hit the united states post 1950s than pre 1950s......hurricans are fed by warm water....warm water is a byproduct of global warming....the use of fossile fuels has exploded post WWII .....why then is not the number of storms up by 20% rather than down?

 

[The ClayTaurus]

why is that? 20% fewere storms have hit the united states post 1950s than pre 1950s......hurricans are fed by warm water....warm water is a byproduct of global warming....the use of fossile fuels has exploded post WWII .....why then is not the number of storms up by 20% rather than down?

Simply because global warming is exactly that, global. It's not gulf of mexico warming. I don't have the statistics on world storms to see what the trend is, but just because the gulf is warmer or colder does not imply the same is true for the rest of the world. Relax, I'm not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that the evidence is weak.

 

[manu1959]

Simply because global warming is exactly that, global. It's not gulf of mexico warming. I don't have the statistics on world storms to see what the trend is, but just because the gulf is warmer or colder does not imply the same is true for the rest of the world. Relax, I'm not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that the evidence is weak.

it was clear that you were not disagreeing...i am relaxed....and come on...america is the center of the universe...if the US is hit by two storms in two weeks there must be global warming....

 

[The ClayTaurus]

it was clear that you were not disagreeing...i am relaxed....and come on...america is the center of the universe...if the US is hit by two storms in two weeks there must be global warming....

Would you agree that claiming there is or is not global warming based solely on the number of storms that hit the United States is rather silly?

 

[manu1959]

Would you agree that claiming there is or is not global warming based solely on the number of storms that hit the United States is rather silly?

for either side to only consider the US in their argument and base the whole thing on storm frequency is absurd (listen to hannity yesterday, both sides are morons)......I simply enjoy the symmetry or the argument.....for me mother nature will take care of it.....fuck with her long enough and she will simply drown you

 

[sitarro]

Simply because global warming is exactly that, global. It's not gulf of mexico warming. I don't have the statistics on world storms to see what the trend is, but just because the gulf is warmer or colder does not imply the same is true for the rest of the world. Relax, I'm not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that the evidence is weak.

Did you read the Harvard study that I posted. Do you understand that just because a person has scientist on their business card it doesn't mean that they can't be bought off(I believe the tobacco industry can find plenty of "scientist" to show research that cigarettes cause no damage at all). It is in the world community's interest, especially China and India, that the U.S. economy gets screwed by signing that bullshit Kyoto treaty. How fair is a treaty that omits the 2 largest growing populations/economies that also have abhorent environmental and human rights records?
I know Euros love to cite that the U.S. has blah, blah population and uses blah, blah amounts of energy and produces blah, blah amounts of pollution. Should we in the U.S., knowing the jealousy and hatred directed at us, believe some Belgian or French psuedo scientist that could be bribed with a croissant? I don't believe most of what is regergetated by the French, my ancestors fled that mold eating country for a reason.
Europe hates the U.S., a cowboy culture of unwashed, arrogant, uneducated throwaways that took less than 200 years to become the country that not only feeds the world but also leads the world in technology and compassion for the needy. We are the first on the scene of any disaster even if it takes place in an enemy's country(Iran after the earthquake, Indonesia after the Tsunami). Only 200 years to become The country that the rest of the world flocks to. It must suck to have so much history and culture and let your arrogance allow you to become a second rate country.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Did you read the Harvard study that I posted. Do you understand that just because a person has scientist on their business card it doesn't mean that they can't be bought off(I believe the tobacco industry can find plenty of "scientist" to show research that cigarettes cause no damage at all). It is in the world community's interest, especially China and India, that the U.S. economy gets screwed by signing that bullshit Kyoto treaty. How fair is a treaty that omits the 2 largest growing populations/economies that also have abhorent environmental and human rights records?
I know Euros love to cite that the U.S. has blah, blah population and uses blah, blah amounts of energy and produces blah, blah amounts of pollution. Should we in the U.S., knowing the jealousy and hatred directed at us, believe some Belgian or French psuedo scientist that could be bribed with a croissant? I don't believe most of what is regergetated by the French, my ancestors fled that mold eating country for a reason.
Europe hates the U.S., a cowboy culture of unwashed, arrogant, uneducated throwaways that took less than 200 years to become the country that not only feeds the world but also leads the world in technology and compassion for the needy. We are the first on the scene of any disaster even if it takes place in an enemy's country(Iran after the earthquake, Indonesia after the Tsunami). Only 200 years to become The country that the rest of the world flocks to. It must suck to have so much history and culture and let your arrogance allow you to become a second rate country.

And my post had exactly what to do with any of that?

 

[Said1]

The oceans and the atmosphere are intertwined components of Earth’s climate system. Cold and warm ocean circulation systems transport cold an warm air all over the globe. Warmer/colder tempertures and run off from melting glaciers inturrupt this natural process. The temperature of the ocean is crucial to gloable weather conditions/patterns.