no, i would say that was you, but i dont believe you are actually trying to be stupid, it just comes to you naturally
hurry now and chris will cover your back
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Summer 2009 Colder Than Average
- Thread starter Sinatra
- Start date
hurry now and chris will cover your back
- Sep 15, 2008
- 25,881
- 4,471
- 0
- Banned
- #22
no, i would say that was you, but i dont believe you are actually trying to be stupid, it just comes to you naturallyah, so 200 years of data can cover 4.5 BILLION years?
only in your idiotic mind
Are you trying to be stupid? If so, success is yours.
hurry now and chris will cover your back
and other parts of his anatomy.
Old Rocks
Diamond Member
As usual, nothing but vapid scatological mutterings from the shallow end of the IQ pool.
- Thread starter
- #24
And the fact remains the US temp data is the most accurate.
When Global warmers start pulling in "global" data, those temp records are subject to an alarming amount of speculative data that is prone to "interpretation". The best global temp data is that of satellite - available since the late 1970's - and more specific satelite data available since the early
1990's. The post 1979 satellite data shows marginal warming that is very uneven over the globe - primarily warmer temps in the Arctic and cooler temps in the Antarctic. Warming temps peaked around 1998 during an abnormally warm El Nino event - and in more recent years, a cooling trend is taking place...
This data shows a far more complex and self-directed climate system than the arrogant belief man can have more than a minimal impact on the global climate - and here we have an interesting article detailing the likelihood of an extended cooling phase - one that we have already been engaged in during this new century...
___
SATELLITE INDICATES 23-YEAR GLOBAL COOLING
May 5, 2008
BY DENNIS T. AVERY
CHURCHVILLE VA—Now it’s not just the sunspots that predict a 23-year global cooling. The new Jason oceanographic satellite shows that 2007 was a “cool” La Nina year—but Jason also says something more important is at work: The much larger and more persistent Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) has turned into its cool phase, telling us to expect moderately lower global temperatures until 2030 or so.
For the past century at least, global temperatures have tended to mirror the 20-to 30-year warmings and coolings of the north-central Pacific Ocean. We don’t know just why, but the pattern of the last century is clear: the earth warmed from about 1915 to1940, while the PDO was also warming (1925 to 46). The earth cooled from 1940 to 1975, while the PDO was cooling (1946 to 1977). The strong global warming from 1976 to 1998 was accompanied by a strong and almost-constant warming of the north-central Pacific. Ancient tree rings in Baja California and Mexico show there have been 11 such PDO shifts since 1650, averaging 23 years on length.
Researchers discovered the PDO only recently—in 1996—while searching for the reason salmon numbers had declined sharply in the Columbia River after 1977. The salmon catch record for the past 100 years gave the answer—shifting Pacific Ocean currents. The PDO favors the salmon from the Columbia for about 25 years at a time, and then the salmon from the Gulf of Alaska, but the two fisheries never thrive at the same time. Something in the PDO favors the early development of the salmon smolts from one region or the other. Other fish, such as halibut, sardines, and anchovies follow similar shifts in line with the PDO.
The PDO seems to be driven by the huge Aleutian Low in the Arctic—but we don’t know what controls the Aleutian Low. Nonetheless, 22.5-year “double sunspot cycles” have been identified in South African rainfall, Indian monsoons, Australian droughts, and rains in the United States’ far southwest as well. These cycles argue that the sun, not CO2, controls the earth’s temperatures.
Dr. Henrik Svensmark’s recent experiments at the Danish Space Research Institute seem to show that the earth’s temperatures are importantly affected by the low, wet clouds that deflect more or less solar heat back into space. The number of such clouds is affected, in turn, by more or fewer cosmic rays hitting the earth. The number of earthbound cosmic rays depends on the extent of the giant magnetic wind thrown out by the sun.
All of this defies the “consensus” that human-emitted carbon dioxide has been responsible for our global warming. But the evidence for man-made warming has never been as strong as its Green advocates maintained. The earth’s warming from 1915 to 1940 was just about as strong as the “scary” 1975 to 1998 warming in both scope and duration—and occurred too early to be blamed on human-emitted CO2. The cooling from 1940 to 1975 defied the Greenhouse Theory, occurring during the first big surge of man-made greenhouse emissions. Most recently, the climate has stubbornly refused to warm since 1998, even though human CO2 emissions have continued to rise strongly.
The Jason satellite is an updated and more-accurate version of the Poseidon satellite that has been monitoring the oceans since 1992, picking up ocean wind speeds, wave heights, and sea level changes. Jason is run by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory and a French team.
How many years of declining world temperature would it take now—in the wake of the ten-year non-warming since 1998—to break up Al Gore’s “climate change consensus”?
When Global warmers start pulling in "global" data, those temp records are subject to an alarming amount of speculative data that is prone to "interpretation". The best global temp data is that of satellite - available since the late 1970's - and more specific satelite data available since the early
1990's. The post 1979 satellite data shows marginal warming that is very uneven over the globe - primarily warmer temps in the Arctic and cooler temps in the Antarctic. Warming temps peaked around 1998 during an abnormally warm El Nino event - and in more recent years, a cooling trend is taking place...
This data shows a far more complex and self-directed climate system than the arrogant belief man can have more than a minimal impact on the global climate - and here we have an interesting article detailing the likelihood of an extended cooling phase - one that we have already been engaged in during this new century...
___
SATELLITE INDICATES 23-YEAR GLOBAL COOLING
May 5, 2008
BY DENNIS T. AVERY
CHURCHVILLE VA—Now it’s not just the sunspots that predict a 23-year global cooling. The new Jason oceanographic satellite shows that 2007 was a “cool” La Nina year—but Jason also says something more important is at work: The much larger and more persistent Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) has turned into its cool phase, telling us to expect moderately lower global temperatures until 2030 or so.
For the past century at least, global temperatures have tended to mirror the 20-to 30-year warmings and coolings of the north-central Pacific Ocean. We don’t know just why, but the pattern of the last century is clear: the earth warmed from about 1915 to1940, while the PDO was also warming (1925 to 46). The earth cooled from 1940 to 1975, while the PDO was cooling (1946 to 1977). The strong global warming from 1976 to 1998 was accompanied by a strong and almost-constant warming of the north-central Pacific. Ancient tree rings in Baja California and Mexico show there have been 11 such PDO shifts since 1650, averaging 23 years on length.
Researchers discovered the PDO only recently—in 1996—while searching for the reason salmon numbers had declined sharply in the Columbia River after 1977. The salmon catch record for the past 100 years gave the answer—shifting Pacific Ocean currents. The PDO favors the salmon from the Columbia for about 25 years at a time, and then the salmon from the Gulf of Alaska, but the two fisheries never thrive at the same time. Something in the PDO favors the early development of the salmon smolts from one region or the other. Other fish, such as halibut, sardines, and anchovies follow similar shifts in line with the PDO.
The PDO seems to be driven by the huge Aleutian Low in the Arctic—but we don’t know what controls the Aleutian Low. Nonetheless, 22.5-year “double sunspot cycles” have been identified in South African rainfall, Indian monsoons, Australian droughts, and rains in the United States’ far southwest as well. These cycles argue that the sun, not CO2, controls the earth’s temperatures.
Dr. Henrik Svensmark’s recent experiments at the Danish Space Research Institute seem to show that the earth’s temperatures are importantly affected by the low, wet clouds that deflect more or less solar heat back into space. The number of such clouds is affected, in turn, by more or fewer cosmic rays hitting the earth. The number of earthbound cosmic rays depends on the extent of the giant magnetic wind thrown out by the sun.
All of this defies the “consensus” that human-emitted carbon dioxide has been responsible for our global warming. But the evidence for man-made warming has never been as strong as its Green advocates maintained. The earth’s warming from 1915 to 1940 was just about as strong as the “scary” 1975 to 1998 warming in both scope and duration—and occurred too early to be blamed on human-emitted CO2. The cooling from 1940 to 1975 defied the Greenhouse Theory, occurring during the first big surge of man-made greenhouse emissions. Most recently, the climate has stubbornly refused to warm since 1998, even though human CO2 emissions have continued to rise strongly.
The Jason satellite is an updated and more-accurate version of the Poseidon satellite that has been monitoring the oceans since 1992, picking up ocean wind speeds, wave heights, and sea level changes. Jason is run by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory and a French team.
How many years of declining world temperature would it take now—in the wake of the ten-year non-warming since 1998—to break up Al Gore’s “climate change consensus”?
- Thread starter
- #25
And the fact remains the US temp data is the most accurate.
When Global warmers start pulling in "global" data, those temp records are subject to an alarming amount of speculative data that is prone to "interpretation". The best global temp data is that of satellite - available since the late 1970's - and more specific satelite data available since the early
1990's. The post 1979 satellite data shows marginal warming that is very uneven over the globe - primarily warmer temps in the Arctic and cooler temps in the Antarctic. Warming temps peaked around 1998 during an abnormally warm El Nino event - and in more recent years, a cooling trend is taking place...
This data shows a far more complex and self-directed climate system than the arrogant belief man can have more than a minimal impact on the global climate - and here we have an interesting article detailing the likelihood of an extended cooling phase - one that we have already been engaged in during this new century...
___
SATELLITE INDICATES 23-YEAR GLOBAL COOLING
May 5, 2008
BY DENNIS T. AVERY
CHURCHVILLE VANow its not just the sunspots that predict a 23-year global cooling. The new Jason oceanographic satellite shows that 2007 was a cool La Nina yearbut Jason also says something more important is at work: The much larger and more persistent Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) has turned into its cool phase, telling us to expect moderately lower global temperatures until 2030 or so.
For the past century at least, global temperatures have tended to mirror the 20-to 30-year warmings and coolings of the north-central Pacific Ocean. We dont know just why, but the pattern of the last century is clear: the earth warmed from about 1915 to1940, while the PDO was also warming (1925 to 46). The earth cooled from 1940 to 1975, while the PDO was cooling (1946 to 1977). The strong global warming from 1976 to 1998 was accompanied by a strong and almost-constant warming of the north-central Pacific. Ancient tree rings in Baja California and Mexico show there have been 11 such PDO shifts since 1650, averaging 23 years on length.
Researchers discovered the PDO only recentlyin 1996while searching for the reason salmon numbers had declined sharply in the Columbia River after 1977. The salmon catch record for the past 100 years gave the answershifting Pacific Ocean currents. The PDO favors the salmon from the Columbia for about 25 years at a time, and then the salmon from the Gulf of Alaska, but the two fisheries never thrive at the same time. Something in the PDO favors the early development of the salmon smolts from one region or the other. Other fish, such as halibut, sardines, and anchovies follow similar shifts in line with the PDO.
The PDO seems to be driven by the huge Aleutian Low in the Arcticbut we dont know what controls the Aleutian Low. Nonetheless, 22.5-year double sunspot cycles have been identified in South African rainfall, Indian monsoons, Australian droughts, and rains in the United States far southwest as well. These cycles argue that the sun, not CO2, controls the earths temperatures.
Dr. Henrik Svensmarks recent experiments at the Danish Space Research Institute seem to show that the earths temperatures are importantly affected by the low, wet clouds that deflect more or less solar heat back into space. The number of such clouds is affected, in turn, by more or fewer cosmic rays hitting the earth. The number of earthbound cosmic rays depends on the extent of the giant magnetic wind thrown out by the sun.
All of this defies the consensus that human-emitted carbon dioxide has been responsible for our global warming. But the evidence for man-made warming has never been as strong as its Green advocates maintained. The earths warming from 1915 to 1940 was just about as strong as the scary 1975 to 1998 warming in both scope and durationand occurred too early to be blamed on human-emitted CO2. The cooling from 1940 to 1975 defied the Greenhouse Theory, occurring during the first big surge of man-made greenhouse emissions. Most recently, the climate has stubbornly refused to warm since 1998, even though human CO2 emissions have continued to rise strongly.
The Jason satellite is an updated and more-accurate version of the Poseidon satellite that has been monitoring the oceans since 1992, picking up ocean wind speeds, wave heights, and sea level changes. Jason is run by NASAs Jet Propulsion Laboratory and a French team.
How many years of declining world temperature would it take nowin the wake of the ten-year non-warming since 1998to break up Al Gores climate change consensus?
SATELLITE INDICATES 23-YEAR GLOBAL COOLING | Center for Global Food Issues
KittenKoder
Senior Member
Sorry Rocks, but Sinatra has shown some real research and not just guess work. You however are using spoon fed American Idol numbers and figures.
I would trust Sinatra's findings long before Rock's American Idol scientists any day.
I would trust Sinatra's findings long before Rock's American Idol scientists any day.
- Thread starter
- #27
Sorry Rocks, but Sinatra has shown some real research and not just guess work. You however are using spoon fed American Idol numbers and figures.
I would trust Sinatra's findings long before Rock's American Idol scientists any day.
You are very wise!
that IS all you bring, just more BULLSHITAs usual, nothing but vapid scatological mutterings from the shallow end of the IQ pool.
- Thread starter
- #29
that IS all you bring, just more BULLSHITAs usual, nothing but vapid scatological mutterings from the shallow end of the IQ pool.
Go easy on Old Rocks - he's.......old.
As for Chris - he's just stupid.
Old Rocks
Diamond Member
And the fact remains the US temp data is the most accurate.
When Global warmers start pulling in "global" data, those temp records are subject to an alarming amount of speculative data that is prone to "interpretation". The best global temp data is that of satellite - available since the late 1970's - and more specific satelite data available since the early
1990's. The post 1979 satellite data shows marginal warming that is very uneven over the globe - primarily warmer temps in the Arctic and cooler temps in the Antarctic. Warming temps peaked around 1998 during an abnormally warm El Nino event - and in more recent years, a cooling trend is taking place...
................................................................................................................................
Now look carefully at that graph. Note that the cooling, natural variation, from 91 to 93 was far steeper than the present variation. In spite of a solar minimum and a strong La Nina.
When we have the full data on 2009, I think we will see that curve going the other way. In fact, I am willing to bet that 2010 will come close to eclipsing 1998 and 2005.
When Global warmers start pulling in "global" data, those temp records are subject to an alarming amount of speculative data that is prone to "interpretation". The best global temp data is that of satellite - available since the late 1970's - and more specific satelite data available since the early
1990's. The post 1979 satellite data shows marginal warming that is very uneven over the globe - primarily warmer temps in the Arctic and cooler temps in the Antarctic. Warming temps peaked around 1998 during an abnormally warm El Nino event - and in more recent years, a cooling trend is taking place...
................................................................................................................................
Now look carefully at that graph. Note that the cooling, natural variation, from 91 to 93 was far steeper than the present variation. In spite of a solar minimum and a strong La Nina.
When we have the full data on 2009, I think we will see that curve going the other way. In fact, I am willing to bet that 2010 will come close to eclipsing 1998 and 2005.
KittenKoder
Senior Member
And the fact remains the US temp data is the most accurate.
When Global warmers start pulling in "global" data, those temp records are subject to an alarming amount of speculative data that is prone to "interpretation". The best global temp data is that of satellite - available since the late 1970's - and more specific satelite data available since the early
1990's. The post 1979 satellite data shows marginal warming that is very uneven over the globe - primarily warmer temps in the Arctic and cooler temps in the Antarctic. Warming temps peaked around 1998 during an abnormally warm El Nino event - and in more recent years, a cooling trend is taking place...
................................................................................................................................
Now look carefully at that graph. Note that the cooling, natural variation, from 91 to 93 was far steeper than the present variation. In spite of a solar minimum and a strong La Nina.
When we have the full data on 2009, I think we will see that curve going the other way. In fact, I am willing to bet that 2010 will come close to eclipsing 1998 and 2005.
Yet ... the raw data in the US shows a cooling trend ...
- Thread starter
- #32
And the fact remains the US temp data is the most accurate.
When Global warmers start pulling in "global" data, those temp records are subject to an alarming amount of speculative data that is prone to "interpretation". The best global temp data is that of satellite - available since the late 1970's - and more specific satelite data available since the early
1990's. The post 1979 satellite data shows marginal warming that is very uneven over the globe - primarily warmer temps in the Arctic and cooler temps in the Antarctic. Warming temps peaked around 1998 during an abnormally warm El Nino event - and in more recent years, a cooling trend is taking place...
................................................................................................................................
Now look carefully at that graph. Note that the cooling, natural variation, from 91 to 93 was far steeper than the present variation. In spite of a solar minimum and a strong La Nina.
When we have the full data on 2009, I think we will see that curve going the other way. In fact, I am willing to bet that 2010 will come close to eclipsing 1998 and 2005.
___
I'm not gonna insult you OR - but the fact remains there is a cooling trend, and much of what you just said is speculative.
And I would caution you to stay away from global "projections" as those are too easily distorted, and simply stick with the US satellite data as that appears to be the most consistent and less prone to manipulations.
I agree with those who state the Arctic is warming - but the Antarctic, which is a larger ice coverage area, is actually cooling, and frankly, I have seen no consensus on why that is. What I have seen are more and more scientists openly questioning the belief that the debate was over - it clearly is not, nor has it ever been. Now we have long time global warmer proponents coming out and stating we could see several years of possible cooling - a clear indications that so much behind this climate data is uncertain projections...
___
Mojib Latif, a prize-winning climate and ocean scientist from the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences at the University of Kiel, in Germany, wrote a paper last year positing that cyclical shifts in the oceans were aligning in a way that could keep temperatures over the next decade or so relatively stable, even as the heat-trapping gases linked to global warming continued to increase.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/science/earth/23cool.html?_r=1&hp
Old Rocks
Diamond Member
What is being said is that the temps plateaud after the 1998 high. Plateaud to the extant that we have had a series of years that all ranked in the top ten warmest recorded. Even this year will make that list. There are feedbacks right now that may well cause the next few years to have some that are warmer than 1998. You can see that prediction further down in the article. The natural variation should have us much colder now than we are, we should not be continueing to have years at the very top of the rankings.
The world leaders who met at the United Nations to discuss climate change on Tuesday are faced with an intricate challenge: building momentum for an international climate treaty at a time when global temperatures have been relatively stable for a decade and may even drop in the next few years.
No Climate Change Leader as Nations Meet (September 20, 2009) The plateau in temperatures has been seized upon by skeptics as evidence that the threat of global warming is overblown. And some climate experts worry that it could hamper treaty negotiations and slow the progress of legislation to curb carbon dioxide emissions in the United States.
Scientists say the pattern of the last decade — after a precipitous rise in average global temperatures in the 1990s — is a result of cyclical variations in ocean conditions and has no bearing on the long-term warming effects of greenhouse gases building up in the atmosphere.
But trying to communicate such scientific nuances to the public — and to policy makers — can be frustrating, they say.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/science/earth/23cool.html?_r=2&hp
The world leaders who met at the United Nations to discuss climate change on Tuesday are faced with an intricate challenge: building momentum for an international climate treaty at a time when global temperatures have been relatively stable for a decade and may even drop in the next few years.
No Climate Change Leader as Nations Meet (September 20, 2009) The plateau in temperatures has been seized upon by skeptics as evidence that the threat of global warming is overblown. And some climate experts worry that it could hamper treaty negotiations and slow the progress of legislation to curb carbon dioxide emissions in the United States.
Scientists say the pattern of the last decade — after a precipitous rise in average global temperatures in the 1990s — is a result of cyclical variations in ocean conditions and has no bearing on the long-term warming effects of greenhouse gases building up in the atmosphere.
But trying to communicate such scientific nuances to the public — and to policy makers — can be frustrating, they say.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/science/earth/23cool.html?_r=2&hp
Sorry Rocks, but Sinatra has shown some real research and not just guess work. You however are using spoon fed American Idol numbers and figures.
I would trust Sinatra's findings long before Rock's American Idol scientists any day.
You are very wise!
this warrants five of these guys:
ah, yeah, and tomorrow it will be a summer day here. as was the whole oktoberfest season. proof of global warming.
Old Rocks
Diamond Member
There seems to be quite some disagreement as to whether the major portion of the continent is slightly cooling or slightly warming. However, both sites agree that the warming of the edges and the sea around the continent will result in sea level rise.
BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | New evidence on Antarctic warming
Antarctica - Global warming
BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | New evidence on Antarctic warming
Antarctica - Global warming
Old Rocks
Diamond Member
ah, yeah, and tomorrow it will be a summer day here. as was the whole oktoberfest season. proof of global warming.
We are having a conversation here. Now if you chose to be a braindead troll as so many of the others in this thread, that is your choice. But you have branded yourself as to the worth of your opinion.
R
rdean
Guest
What is being said is that the temps plateaud after the 1998 high. Plateaud to the extant that we have had a series of years that all ranked in the top ten warmest recorded. Even this year will make that list. There are feedbacks right now that may well cause the next few years to have some that are warmer than 1998. You can see that prediction further down in the article. The natural variation should have us much colder now than we are, we should not be continueing to have years at the very top of the rankings.
The world leaders who met at the United Nations to discuss climate change on Tuesday are faced with an intricate challenge: building momentum for an international climate treaty at a time when global temperatures have been relatively stable for a decade and may even drop in the next few years.
No Climate Change Leader as Nations Meet (September 20, 2009) The plateau in temperatures has been seized upon by skeptics as evidence that the threat of global warming is overblown. And some climate experts worry that it could hamper treaty negotiations and slow the progress of legislation to curb carbon dioxide emissions in the United States.
Scientists say the pattern of the last decade after a precipitous rise in average global temperatures in the 1990s is a result of cyclical variations in ocean conditions and has no bearing on the long-term warming effects of greenhouse gases building up in the atmosphere.
But trying to communicate such scientific nuances to the public and to policy makers can be frustrating, they say.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/science/earth/23cool.html?_r=2&hp
It's a waste of time trying to explain such things to the current Republican Party. Remember, less than 6% of scientists are Republicans. They believe that a half degree rise in temperture in global warming, means a half degree rise everywhere evenly.
The only time they will believe a scientist is when they want to. Evolution, astronomy, geology, if they don't support Republican beliefs, they must be lies. Republicans will even use the fact that millions of Americans "believe" in something as "proof" that it's true.
- Thread starter
- #39
What is being said is that the temps plateaud after the 1998 high. Plateaud to the extant that we have had a series of years that all ranked in the top ten warmest recorded. Even this year will make that list. There are feedbacks right now that may well cause the next few years to have some that are warmer than 1998. You can see that prediction further down in the article. The natural variation should have us much colder now than we are, we should not be continueing to have years at the very top of the rankings.
The world leaders who met at the United Nations to discuss climate change on Tuesday are faced with an intricate challenge: building momentum for an international climate treaty at a time when global temperatures have been relatively stable for a decade and may even drop in the next few years.
No Climate Change Leader as Nations Meet (September 20, 2009) The plateau in temperatures has been seized upon by skeptics as evidence that the threat of global warming is overblown. And some climate experts worry that it could hamper treaty negotiations and slow the progress of legislation to curb carbon dioxide emissions in the United States.
Scientists say the pattern of the last decade after a precipitous rise in average global temperatures in the 1990s is a result of cyclical variations in ocean conditions and has no bearing on the long-term warming effects of greenhouse gases building up in the atmosphere.
But trying to communicate such scientific nuances to the public and to policy makers can be frustrating, they say.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/science/earth/23cool.html?_r=2&hp
It's a waste of time trying to explain such things to the current Republican Party. Remember, less than 6% of scientists are Republicans. They believe that a half degree rise in temperture in global warming, means a half degree rise everywhere evenly.
The only time they will believe a scientist is when they want to. Evolution, astronomy, geology, if they don't support Republican beliefs, they must be lies. Republicans will even use the fact that millions of Americans "believe" in something as "proof" that it's true.
Ah - now you just turned a nice discussion into a divisive partisan one.
By doing so you have done a disservice to Old Rocks, myself, and others.
I apologize Old Rocks - and thank you for your links. I will go through them and see what they have to say...
ah, so 200 years of data can cover 4.5 BILLION years?About 4.53 billion years old.
Accurate enough to see that we warming in a major way.
You use the proxy methods worked out by geophysicists. And you go to sites such as this;
NOAA Paleoclimatology Program - NCDC Paleoclimatology Branch
only in your idiotic mind
Are you trying to be stupid? If so, success is yours.
What is sad is watching liberals, from the conspiracy forums to global warming, absolutely bastardize science in attempt to prove their point.
No real scientist is going to claim that some 200 years worth of data relative to earth history is evidence of much of anything in terms of proving man made global warming.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 174
- Views
- 4K
- Replies
- 22
- Views
- 649
- Replies
- 305
- Views
- 5K
- Replies
- 432
- Views
- 8K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 7
- Views
- 28
- Replies
- 366
- Views
- 2K
- Replies
- 2K
- Views
- 18K
- Replies
- 43
- Views
- 211
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8110
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 471
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-