The history of global "warming": Has Al Gore seen this chart?

As I said, the climate has been changing, ever since Earth has had a climate.

And man has had nothing to do with it.

Maybe we should tell the dinosaurs who roamed the earth in 320,000 BC to quit driving their gas-guzzling SUVs, and turn down their thermostats?

And the ones in 130,000 BC were nearly as bad.

Yet the liberal fanatics are convinced that man is the one who has messed up our climate.....


vostoktemp0-420000-bp-siberian-ice-core-temperature-record-shows-short-warm-periods-each-100000-years-with-ice-ages-in-between.gif
And your bona fides are? You really think that your ability to analyze the data exceeds that of scientists that have spent decades studying their discipline? You guys are a hoot.

Oldrocks,

These people are as insane and have the same mindset as the church of the 14th and 15th century towards science. IT is a scary time in history.
 
That settles it. paullitely says global warming isn't real.

NASA and every other major international scientific agency that has studies climate change are wrong.

Time to pack up and go home folks, no more to see here. Paullitely.com has spoken.


climate change is real. The OP proved that. Man made climate change is a hoax, the OP proved that as well.

the climate of planet earth has been changing for hundreds of millions of years and will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now. Man has never had anything to do with it.


And ignoring it means we are not preparing our coastal areas for high water, nor our interiors for wildfires, or violent storms. You guys say screw the infrastructure, and you HAVE.


Wrong, we should prepare as best we can for acts of nature. But to think we can control them is fantasy. To think that we can stop the earth from warming or cooling is the height of ignorance.

My problem with the libs on this is that they have created a false connection between pollution (a real problem) and climate. Why not attack the real problem?
The height of ignorance is the willingness to ignore evidence in favor of some political alternative universe. When every single Scientific Society, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities are stating that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger, and you have an entirely opposite opinion, then perhaps you should rethink your opinion.
 
Absolutely. Paullitely.com is obviously the top authority on the topic. NASA is dead wrong on this.
Couldn't agree more.

TRANSLATION: I still can't find any proof at all, from NASA or anyone else, that man had anything to do with Global Whatever.
Then you are one blind son-of-a-bitch. The absorption spectra of the GHGs, first mapped in 1859 by John Tyndall.
 
That settles it. paullitely says global warming isn't real.

NASA and every other major international scientific agency that has studies climate change are wrong.

Time to pack up and go home folks, no more to see here. Paullitely.com has spoken.


climate change is real. The OP proved that. Man made climate change is a hoax, the OP proved that as well.

the climate of planet earth has been changing for hundreds of millions of years and will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now. Man has never had anything to do with it.

Absolutely. Paullitely.com is obviously the top authority on the topic. NASA is dead wrong on this.

Couldn't agree more.

Actually, if you're following along with the science news. MOST of that paulitely piece is correct. The part about dropping into a new Solar Minimum seems to be real and panning out. IN FACT -- NASA and other govt agencies can't rule it out. Maybe you should read a bit about the NATURAL variation that the Earth may soon demonstrate.

Doesn't mean the GW debate is over. But the propaganda will be much harder to push when the Thames and the Potomac are both frozen solid.. .
TSI has been going down for the last two solar cycles. And we have had increasing heat the whole time. Last three years warmest on record. Sea Ice at both poles at record low levels right now. I don't see the TSI going down far enough to negate the effect of the additional GHGs that we are pumping into the atmosphere.
 
That settles it. paullitely says global warming isn't real.

NASA and every other major international scientific agency that has studies climate change are wrong.

Time to pack up and go home folks, no more to see here. Paullitely.com has spoken.

climate change is real. The OP proved that. Man made climate change is a hoax, the OP proved that as well.

the climate of planet earth has been changing for hundreds of millions of years and will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now. Man has never had anything to do with it.

The majority of Repubtards believe your ("earth has been changing for hundreds of millions of years") BS is a hoax, because they believe the Universe is only 6.000 yeas old.
 
This chart is made from data taken by scientists studying deep ice in Antarctica. It starts a little more than 400 million years ago. It shows estimated global temperatures, based on the best available data, compared to the temperatures we have nowadays.

Note the pattern.

Temperatures started around where they are today. Then they dropped rapidly, not the few tenths of a degree the present hysterics are telling us about, but going down 4 to 8 degrees C. And they stayed there for more than 60,000 years.

Then they rose suddenly, as much as 10 degrees C, but quickly dropped back down to the lower levels, and stayed low for another 80,000 years.

Then they rose again for a short time, but dropped back down and mostly stayed low for another 100,000 years.

Then they rose again briefly, but dropped back down and stayed low yet again for another 100,000 years.

Then they rose again, and have stayed for a brief period... which brings us to the present day.

Note that this repeated cycle, has happened over and over, without the hand of man going anywhere near the planet in any significant way. Would anyone like to support the idea that those greedy, wasteful humans were burning too much oil, a hundred thousand years ago when the previous peak occured? Maybe driving too many SUVs two hundred thousand years ago? Maybe a jurassic Al Gore was chartering huge jets all over the world 300,000 years ago, warning his fellow humans back then about the dangers of THAT period of "global warming"?

Al Gore and the rest of his junk-science salesmen want us to believe that we will see temperatures getting warmer from where they are, with no end in sight. And he proposes massive government expenditures, massive programs, and huge government restrictions and regulations on everything we do, to try to stop temperatures from warming in the future.

But based on previous patterns, where do YOU expect temperatures to go from here?

Has Al Gore seen this chart?
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

globalwarmchart400k.jpg
Al gore is full of shit...

Why? Because he agrees with 97% of scientist on this planet.
Because according to him Florida should be underwater over again… Fact
 
This chart is made from data taken by scientists studying deep ice in Antarctica. It starts a little more than 400 million years ago. It shows estimated global temperatures, based on the best available data, compared to the temperatures we have nowadays.

Note the pattern.

Temperatures started around where they are today. Then they dropped rapidly, not the few tenths of a degree the present hysterics are telling us about, but going down 4 to 8 degrees C. And they stayed there for more than 60,000 years.

Then they rose suddenly, as much as 10 degrees C, but quickly dropped back down to the lower levels, and stayed low for another 80,000 years.

Then they rose again for a short time, but dropped back down and mostly stayed low for another 100,000 years.

Then they rose again briefly, but dropped back down and stayed low yet again for another 100,000 years.

Then they rose again, and have stayed for a brief period... which brings us to the present day.

Note that this repeated cycle, has happened over and over, without the hand of man going anywhere near the planet in any significant way. Would anyone like to support the idea that those greedy, wasteful humans were burning too much oil, a hundred thousand years ago when the previous peak occured? Maybe driving too many SUVs two hundred thousand years ago? Maybe a jurassic Al Gore was chartering huge jets all over the world 300,000 years ago, warning his fellow humans back then about the dangers of THAT period of "global warming"?

Al Gore and the rest of his junk-science salesmen want us to believe that we will see temperatures getting warmer from where they are, with no end in sight. And he proposes massive government expenditures, massive programs, and huge government restrictions and regulations on everything we do, to try to stop temperatures from warming in the future.

But based on previous patterns, where do YOU expect temperatures to go from here?

Has Al Gore seen this chart?
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

globalwarmchart400k.jpg

Suppose the sun absorbed the mass of a small black hole which increased its fusion rate dramatically. Temperatures would rise. Would that rise have to align with the pattern you've so cleverly spotted? No.

Suppose some wicked aliens showed up and put shading material into orbit around the sun between it and the Earth, reducing the amount of sunlight reaching us by 50%. Temperatures would fall. Would that fall have to align with the pattern you've so cleverly spotted? No.

Supposed some great catastrophe coated the entire planet with black carbon soot. Temperatures would rise. Would that have to align with the pattern you've so cleverly spotted? No.

Suppose the sun swallowed a huge iron meteorite which slowed the rate of fusion and reduced it's output by 50%. Temperatures would fall. Would that have to align with the pattern you've so cleverly spotted? No.

Do you see the point? Novel events and processes can take place that have no precedence in the past. Thus, the cycles and relationships of the past do not tell us what must happen, particularly if we're so stupid as to think what's novel is not. Humans have not contributed gigatonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere every year for a century and a half at any time in the Earth's past. Ever. You cannot assume that what is happening now is the same thing that happened before when there were no humans.

That I have to explain this to you - to anyone on this planet - is a testament to the flaws in our educational system. It's blatant ignorance like this that leads people to believe Donald Trump would be a good president.
 
That settles it. paullitely says global warming isn't real.

NASA and every other major international scientific agency that has studies climate change are wrong.

Time to pack up and go home folks, no more to see here. Paullitely.com has spoken.


climate change is real. The OP proved that. Man made climate change is a hoax, the OP proved that as well.

the climate of planet earth has been changing for hundreds of millions of years and will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now. Man has never had anything to do with it.


And ignoring it means we are not preparing our coastal areas for high water, nor our interiors for wildfires, or violent storms. You guys say screw the infrastructure, and you HAVE.


Wrong, we should prepare as best we can for acts of nature. But to think we can control them is fantasy. To think that we can stop the earth from warming or cooling is the height of ignorance.

My problem with the libs on this is that they have created a false connection between pollution (a real problem) and climate. Why not attack the real problem?
The height of ignorance is the willingness to ignore evidence in favor of some political alternative universe. When every single Scientific Society, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities are stating that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger, and you have an entirely opposite opinion, then perhaps you should rethink your opinion.


Pollution is real, AGW is a hoax. There is no proven link between that acts of man and climate. There is a clear indisputable link between pollution and dirty unsafe air and water. Why do you need to make up a link to climate in order to attack pollution?
 
That settles it. paullitely says global warming isn't real.

NASA and every other major international scientific agency that has studies climate change are wrong.

Time to pack up and go home folks, no more to see here. Paullitely.com has spoken.

climate change is real. The OP proved that. Man made climate change is a hoax, the OP proved that as well.

the climate of planet earth has been changing for hundreds of millions of years and will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now. Man has never had anything to do with it.

The majority of Repubtards believe your ("earth has been changing for hundreds of millions of years") BS is a hoax, because they believe the Universe is only 6.000 yeas old.


No they don't. and by the way, your juvenile attempt at humor fails.
 
That settles it. paullitely says global warming isn't real.

NASA and every other major international scientific agency that has studies climate change are wrong.

Time to pack up and go home folks, no more to see here. Paullitely.com has spoken.


climate change is real. The OP proved that. Man made climate change is a hoax, the OP proved that as well.

the climate of planet earth has been changing for hundreds of millions of years and will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now. Man has never had anything to do with it.


And ignoring it means we are not preparing our coastal areas for high water, nor our interiors for wildfires, or violent storms. You guys say screw the infrastructure, and you HAVE.


Wrong, we should prepare as best we can for acts of nature. But to think we can control them is fantasy. To think that we can stop the earth from warming or cooling is the height of ignorance.

My problem with the libs on this is that they have created a false connection between pollution (a real problem) and climate. Why not attack the real problem?
The height of ignorance is the willingness to ignore evidence in favor of some political alternative universe. When every single Scientific Society, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities are stating that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger, and you have an entirely opposite opinion, then perhaps you should rethink your opinion.


Pollution is real, AGW is a hoax. There is no proven link between that acts of man and climate. There is a clear indisputable link between pollution and dirty unsafe air and water. Why do you need to make up a link to climate in order to attack pollution?

Dear Repubtard Idiot! Man can & does change the earth & climate. Just look at aerial images & plat maps from the early 1900s & compare them to Google Earth. We can create a Nuclear Winter in a matter of minutes.
 
This chart is made from data taken by scientists studying deep ice in Antarctica. It starts a little more than 400 million years ago. It shows estimated global temperatures, based on the best available data, compared to the temperatures we have nowadays.

Note the pattern.

Temperatures started around where they are today. Then they dropped rapidly, not the few tenths of a degree the present hysterics are telling us about, but going down 4 to 8 degrees C. And they stayed there for more than 60,000 years.

Then they rose suddenly, as much as 10 degrees C, but quickly dropped back down to the lower levels, and stayed low for another 80,000 years.

Then they rose again for a short time, but dropped back down and mostly stayed low for another 100,000 years.

Then they rose again briefly, but dropped back down and stayed low yet again for another 100,000 years.

Then they rose again, and have stayed for a brief period... which brings us to the present day.

Note that this repeated cycle, has happened over and over, without the hand of man going anywhere near the planet in any significant way. Would anyone like to support the idea that those greedy, wasteful humans were burning too much oil, a hundred thousand years ago when the previous peak occured? Maybe driving too many SUVs two hundred thousand years ago? Maybe a jurassic Al Gore was chartering huge jets all over the world 300,000 years ago, warning his fellow humans back then about the dangers of THAT period of "global warming"?

Al Gore and the rest of his junk-science salesmen want us to believe that we will see temperatures getting warmer from where they are, with no end in sight. And he proposes massive government expenditures, massive programs, and huge government restrictions and regulations on everything we do, to try to stop temperatures from warming in the future.

But based on previous patterns, where do YOU expect temperatures to go from here?

Has Al Gore seen this chart?
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

globalwarmchart400k.jpg

Suppose the sun absorbed the mass of a small black hole which increased its fusion rate dramatically. Temperatures would rise. Would that rise have to align with the pattern you've so cleverly spotted? No.

Suppose some wicked aliens showed up and put shading material into orbit around the sun between it and the Earth, reducing the amount of sunlight reaching us by 50%. Temperatures would fall. Would that fall have to align with the pattern you've so cleverly spotted? No.

Supposed some great catastrophe coated the entire planet with black carbon soot. Temperatures would rise. Would that have to align with the pattern you've so cleverly spotted? No.

Suppose the sun swallowed a huge iron meteorite which slowed the rate of fusion and reduced it's output by 50%. Temperatures would fall. Would that have to align with the pattern you've so cleverly spotted? No.

Do you see the point? Novel events and processes can take place that have no precedence in the past. Thus, the cycles and relationships of the past do not tell us what must happen, particularly if we're so stupid as to think what's novel is not. Humans have not contributed gigatonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere every year for a century and a half at any time in the Earth's past. Ever. You cannot assume that what is happening now is the same thing that happened before when there were no humans.

That I have to explain this to you - to anyone on this planet - is a testament to the flaws in our educational system. It's blatant ignorance like this that leads people to believe Donald Trump would be a good president.


the temperature cycles make a point. That point is that the climate of our planet has been cycling up and down for hundreds of millions of years. The far left claim that man is causing what may or may not be a current rising cycle is the height of ignorance.

Sure, some random event like you suggest could change the cycle. Although I have serious doubts about aliens putting up a heat shield.

As to Trump, he has already proven to be a better president than obozo or bushie. and he is not yet sworn in.
 
climate change is real. The OP proved that. Man made climate change is a hoax, the OP proved that as well.

the climate of planet earth has been changing for hundreds of millions of years and will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now. Man has never had anything to do with it.


And ignoring it means we are not preparing our coastal areas for high water, nor our interiors for wildfires, or violent storms. You guys say screw the infrastructure, and you HAVE.


Wrong, we should prepare as best we can for acts of nature. But to think we can control them is fantasy. To think that we can stop the earth from warming or cooling is the height of ignorance.

My problem with the libs on this is that they have created a false connection between pollution (a real problem) and climate. Why not attack the real problem?
The height of ignorance is the willingness to ignore evidence in favor of some political alternative universe. When every single Scientific Society, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities are stating that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger, and you have an entirely opposite opinion, then perhaps you should rethink your opinion.


Pollution is real, AGW is a hoax. There is no proven link between that acts of man and climate. There is a clear indisputable link between pollution and dirty unsafe air and water. Why do you need to make up a link to climate in order to attack pollution?

Dear Repubtard Idiot! Man can & does change the earth & climate. Just look at aerial images from the early 1900s & compare them to Google Earth. We can create a Nuclear Winter in a matter of minutes.


the left always tries to create a link between pollution i.e. the acts of man, and climate. That link cannot be proven. So, why not take on the real problem, pollution. Why do you need to make up the link to climate?

Sure, all out nuclear war would TEMPORARILY destroy our planet and most life on it. But it would be temporary. The nuclear waste and dust clouds would settle and dissipate and life would return. It might take hundreds of thousands of years, but that's nothing in the life of the planet.
 
the temperature cycles make a point. That point is that the climate of our planet has been cycling up and down for hundreds of millions of years. The far left claim that man is causing what may or may not be a current rising cycle is the height of ignorance.

Wrong. It is the unavoidable conclusion to which the evidence points. The evidence tells us that it is NOT Milankovitch Cycle warming. The evidence tells us that it is NOT increased solar irradiation.

Sure, some random event like you suggest could change the cycle. Although I have serious doubts about aliens putting up a heat shield.

You missed my point entirely. The point is that human GHG emissions are unprecedented. You cannot conclude that because human GHG emissions have never warmed the planet before, they are not warming it now. THAT is "the height of ignorance.

As to Trump, he has already proven to be a better president than obozo or bushie. and he is not yet sworn in.

Trump, despite having yet to be sworn in, has shown us all that he is the most ignorant fool to have ever been elected. A good case could be made that this nation has just committed suicide.
 
You're right, if the earth warms up, nothing will happen, it has happened before, like after the ice age when a lot of the coastlines were flooded.

The earth will still be around, major catastrophes only affect human populations, so it's no big deal.

Here's a more important graph:
MXDPYxpuT4enunHCqlmw_Trumppoop7.jpg

The Opinion Pages | Op-Ed Columnist
Trump and Pruitt Will Make America Gasp Again



Paul Krugman DEC. 9, 2016


:spinner::spinner:http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/o...make-america-gasp-again.html?ref=opinion&_r=0:spinner::spinner:
 
That settles it. paullitely says global warming isn't real.

NASA and every other major international scientific agency that has studies climate change are wrong.

Time to pack up and go home folks, no more to see here. Paullitely.com has spoken.
Natural cyclical temp variation is real. Global warming, defined as a natural cyclical cycle of warming, is real. Global Warming, defined as caused by man is a myth and no empirical evidence exists to support it at this time..

So which definition is the one were talking about?
 
Last edited:
This chart is made from data taken by scientists studying deep ice in Antarctica. It starts a little more than 400 million years ago. It shows estimated global temperatures, based on the best available data, compared to the temperatures we have nowadays.

Note the pattern.

Temperatures started around where they are today. Then they dropped rapidly, not the few tenths of a degree the present hysterics are telling us about, but going down 4 to 8 degrees C. And they stayed there for more than 60,000 years.

Then they rose suddenly, as much as 10 degrees C, but quickly dropped back down to the lower levels, and stayed low for another 80,000 years.

Then they rose again for a short time, but dropped back down and mostly stayed low for another 100,000 years.

Then they rose again briefly, but dropped back down and stayed low yet again for another 100,000 years.

Then they rose again, and have stayed for a brief period... which brings us to the present day.

Note that this repeated cycle, has happened over and over, without the hand of man going anywhere near the planet in any significant way. Would anyone like to support the idea that those greedy, wasteful humans were burning too much oil, a hundred thousand years ago when the previous peak occured? Maybe driving too many SUVs two hundred thousand years ago? Maybe a jurassic Al Gore was chartering huge jets all over the world 300,000 years ago, warning his fellow humans back then about the dangers of THAT period of "global warming"?

Al Gore and the rest of his junk-science salesmen want us to believe that we will see temperatures getting warmer from where they are, with no end in sight. And he proposes massive government expenditures, massive programs, and huge government restrictions and regulations on everything we do, to try to stop temperatures from warming in the future.

But based on previous patterns, where do YOU expect temperatures to go from here?

Has Al Gore seen this chart?
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

globalwarmchart400k.jpg

Suppose the sun absorbed the mass of a small black hole which increased its fusion rate dramatically. Temperatures would rise. Would that rise have to align with the pattern you've so cleverly spotted? No.

Suppose some wicked aliens showed up and put shading material into orbit around the sun between it and the Earth, reducing the amount of sunlight reaching us by 50%. Temperatures would fall. Would that fall have to align with the pattern you've so cleverly spotted? No.

Supposed some great catastrophe coated the entire planet with black carbon soot. Temperatures would rise. Would that have to align with the pattern you've so cleverly spotted? No.

Suppose the sun swallowed a huge iron meteorite which slowed the rate of fusion and reduced it's output by 50%. Temperatures would fall. Would that have to align with the pattern you've so cleverly spotted? No.

Do you see the point? Novel events and processes can take place that have no precedence in the past. Thus, the cycles and relationships of the past do not tell us what must happen, particularly if we're so stupid as to think what's novel is not. Humans have not contributed gigatonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere every year for a century and a half at any time in the Earth's past. Ever. You cannot assume that what is happening now is the same thing that happened before when there were no humans.

That I have to explain this to you - to anyone on this planet - is a testament to the flaws in our educational system. It's blatant ignorance like this that leads people to believe Donald Trump would be a good president.

You have no evidence that the earth is acting differently than it has in the past. You have nothing to gauge today against in the past that can be seen in the same spatial resolution.

Your pulling a hypothetical out of your ass and have nothing to back it up with.. No empirical evidence to support your hypothesis..
 

Forum List

Back
Top