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.
What is true here? That we are introducing carbon that was dormant and now is participating in the biosphere is a fact! The long term affect of this is not known but is believed. Should one worry? An interesting question.
Are we going to get(or are getting)a new religion?
SHHHHH!!!!...It was taking a nap!!
What is true here? That we are introducing carbon that was dormant and now is participating in the biosphere is a fact! The long term affect of this is not known but is believed. Should one worry? An interesting question.
Are we going to get(or are getting)a new religion?
"Dormant carbon"? WTF?
What is true here? That we are introducing carbon that was dormant and now is participating in the biosphere is a fact! The long term affect of this is not known but is believed. Should one worry? An interesting question.
Are we going to get(or are getting)a new religion?
"Dormant carbon"? WTF?
And IF worms had machine guns, birds wouldn't fuck with them.no one can explain the reason we're warming this rapidly, but "IF" CO2 is playing a part...
ya thousands of years ago CO2 lagged hundreds of years behind warming, which is backwards of what's happening, global weather weirding...
You know nothing about me, jibber.dude, you never, ever believed in agw, don't try to kid yourself, lame debate angle
Scientists using FUNDAMENTAL science, data, observation, logic, etc., come to a startlingly OBVIOUS and actually non-debatable conclusion.
Carbon dioxide in the air has historically had no observable correlation with global warming.
The basic premise of the AGW alarmists is revealed rapidly, starkly and irrefutably to be nothing more than dishonest propaganda. The very foundational premise of their quasi-religion is absolutely false.
Real, real stupid. Since that is exactly opposite to what scientists state. You are either a liar or damned stupid.
The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect
And IF worms had machine guns, birds wouldn't fuck with them.no one can explain the reason we're warming this rapidly, but "IF" CO2 is playing a part...
ya thousands of years ago CO2 lagged hundreds of years behind warming, which is backwards of what's happening, global weather weirding...
If CO2 levels didn't cause the warming over all those centuries, then it's safe to say that they're not the cause today.
You know nothing about me, jibber.dude, you never, ever believed in agw, don't try to kid yourself, lame debate angle
And IF worms had machine guns, birds wouldn't fuck with them.no one can explain the reason we're warming this rapidly, but "IF" CO2 is playing a part...
ya thousands of years ago CO2 lagged hundreds of years behind warming, which is backwards of what's happening, global weather weirding...
If CO2 levels didn't cause the warming over all those centuries, then it's safe to say that they're not the cause today.
You know nothing about me, jibber.dude, you never, ever believed in agw, don't try to kid yourself, lame debate angle
Putting some one elses picture in your avatar says enough.
What is true here? That we are introducing carbon that was dormant and now is participating in the biosphere is a fact! The long term affect of this is not known but is believed. Should one worry? An interesting question.
Are we going to get(or are getting)a new religion?
"Dormant carbon"? WTF?
displacing would be a better term, displacing it from miles beneath the surface of the earth to our atmosphere
no one can explain the reason we're warming this rapidly, but "IF" CO2 is playing a part...
ya thousands of years ago CO2 lagged hundreds of years behind warming, which is backwards of what's happening, global weather weirding...
common sense and sustainability...
dude, you never, ever believed in agw, don't try to kid yourself, lame debate angle
My, my, another infestation by the ignorant and stupid. Just because every Scientific Society, every Academy of Science, and every major University in the world states that global warming is happening, the primary cause is the burning of fossil fuels, and that there is a clear and present danger, is nothing to worry about, right? Dang, you fools get denser every day!
Please get off the partisan soapbox.
Tens of thousands of scientists claim that global warming is man made while tens of thousand of scientists claim that man has no bearing on the global climate change.
Would you like a link to a list of 30,000 scientists, with images of the petitions they signed, who do not believe that it is man made?
Global Warming Petition Project
Its very arrogant for any of us to claim to know what the difinitive truth is. If you are a climatologist then I will give you credit for your position, if your not then you shouldn't be claiming to know whats what. I dont claim to know if its real or not, i just say we should reduce pollution because it sucks and reduce using oil because we buy it from foreign nations exporting our wealth.
Geez, are you really this ignorant? Here is the source of that worthless peice of shit;
Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine - SourceWatch
In addition to the bulk mailing, OISM's website enables people to add their names to the petition over the Internet, and by June 2000 it claimed to have recruited more than 19,000 scientists. The institute is so lax about screening names, however, that virtually anyone can sign, including for example Al Caruba, a pesticide-industry PR man and conservative ideologue who runs his own website called the "National Anxiety Center." Caruba has no scientific credentials whatsoever, but in addition to signing the Oregon Petition he has editorialized on his own website against the science of global warming, calling it the "biggest hoax of the decade," a "genocidal" campaign by environmentalists who believe that "humanity must be destroyed to 'Save the Earth.' . . . There is no global warming, but there is a global political agenda, comparable to the failed Soviet Union experiment with Communism, being orchestrated by the United Nations, supported by its many Green NGOs, to impose international treaties of every description that would turn the institution into a global government, superceding the sovereignty of every nation in the world."
When questioned in 1998, OISM's Arthur Robinson admitted that only 2,100 signers of the Oregon Petition had identified themselves as physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, or meteorologists, "and of those the greatest number are physicists." This grouping of fields concealed the fact that only a few dozen, at most, of the signatories were drawn from the core disciplines of climate science - such as meteorology, oceanography, and glaciology - and almost none were climate specialists. The names of the signers are available on the OISM's website, but without listing any institutional affiliations or even city of residence, making it very difficult to determine their credentials or even whether they exist at all. When the Oregon Petition first circulated, in fact, environmental activists successfully added the names of several fictional characters and celebrities to the list, including John Grisham, Michael J. Fox, Drs. Frank Burns, B. J. Honeycutt, and Benjamin Pierce (from the TV show M*A*S*H), an individual by the name of "Dr. Red Wine," and Geraldine Halliwell, formerly known as pop singer Ginger Spice of the Spice Girls. Halliwell's field of scientific specialization was listed as "biology." Even in 2003, the list was loaded with misspellings, duplications, name and title fragments, and names of non-persons, such as company names. The current web page of the petition itself states "31,478 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs."[15]
OISM has refused to release info on the number of mailings it made. From comments in Nature:
"Virtually every scientist in every field got it," says Robert Park, a professor of physics at the University of Maryland at College Park and spokesman for the American Physical Society. "That's a big mailing." According to the National Science Foundation, there are more than half a million science or engineering PhDs in the United States, and ten million individuals with first degrees in science or engineering.
Arthur Robinson, president of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, the small, privately funded institute that circulated the petition, declines to say how many copies were sent out. "We're not willing to have our opponents attack us with that number, and say that the rest of the recipients are against us," he says, adding that the response was "outstanding" for a direct mail shot. [16]
Please get off the partisan soapbox.
Tens of thousands of scientists claim that global warming is man made while tens of thousand of scientists claim that man has no bearing on the global climate change.
Would you like a link to a list of 30,000 scientists, with images of the petitions they signed, who do not believe that it is man made?
Global Warming Petition Project
Its very arrogant for any of us to claim to know what the difinitive truth is. If you are a climatologist then I will give you credit for your position, if your not then you shouldn't be claiming to know whats what. I dont claim to know if its real or not, i just say we should reduce pollution because it sucks and reduce using oil because we buy it from foreign nations exporting our wealth.
Geez, are you really this ignorant? Here is the source of that worthless peice of shit;
Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine - SourceWatch
In addition to the bulk mailing, OISM's website enables people to add their names to the petition over the Internet, and by June 2000 it claimed to have recruited more than 19,000 scientists. The institute is so lax about screening names, however, that virtually anyone can sign, including for example Al Caruba, a pesticide-industry PR man and conservative ideologue who runs his own website called the "National Anxiety Center." Caruba has no scientific credentials whatsoever, but in addition to signing the Oregon Petition he has editorialized on his own website against the science of global warming, calling it the "biggest hoax of the decade," a "genocidal" campaign by environmentalists who believe that "humanity must be destroyed to 'Save the Earth.' . . . There is no global warming, but there is a global political agenda, comparable to the failed Soviet Union experiment with Communism, being orchestrated by the United Nations, supported by its many Green NGOs, to impose international treaties of every description that would turn the institution into a global government, superceding the sovereignty of every nation in the world."
When questioned in 1998, OISM's Arthur Robinson admitted that only 2,100 signers of the Oregon Petition had identified themselves as physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, or meteorologists, "and of those the greatest number are physicists." This grouping of fields concealed the fact that only a few dozen, at most, of the signatories were drawn from the core disciplines of climate science - such as meteorology, oceanography, and glaciology - and almost none were climate specialists. The names of the signers are available on the OISM's website, but without listing any institutional affiliations or even city of residence, making it very difficult to determine their credentials or even whether they exist at all. When the Oregon Petition first circulated, in fact, environmental activists successfully added the names of several fictional characters and celebrities to the list, including John Grisham, Michael J. Fox, Drs. Frank Burns, B. J. Honeycutt, and Benjamin Pierce (from the TV show M*A*S*H), an individual by the name of "Dr. Red Wine," and Geraldine Halliwell, formerly known as pop singer Ginger Spice of the Spice Girls. Halliwell's field of scientific specialization was listed as "biology." Even in 2003, the list was loaded with misspellings, duplications, name and title fragments, and names of non-persons, such as company names. The current web page of the petition itself states "31,478 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs."[15]
OISM has refused to release info on the number of mailings it made. From comments in Nature:
"Virtually every scientist in every field got it," says Robert Park, a professor of physics at the University of Maryland at College Park and spokesman for the American Physical Society. "That's a big mailing." According to the National Science Foundation, there are more than half a million science or engineering PhDs in the United States, and ten million individuals with first degrees in science or engineering.
Arthur Robinson, president of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, the small, privately funded institute that circulated the petition, declines to say how many copies were sent out. "We're not willing to have our opponents attack us with that number, and say that the rest of the recipients are against us," he says, adding that the response was "outstanding" for a direct mail shot. [16]
Seriously we dont have difinitive proof either way so, like I said, why dont we try and reduce pollution/emissions anyway for other reasons such as a clean environment and national security.
If you think you have difinitive proof then re-read where i turned my previous post to red print.
Scientists and even some Government employees suffer a penalty for speaking out against the science of Global-Warmng.
I remember back in 2004, a fellow named James Hansen spoke before a House or Senate Committee(s) (probably both) and even though at that moment in time he had made 1,400 speeches on the subject, warning of its imminent consequences, he took the time to charge the Bush Administration with trying to censor him and his free speech. He said The Administration was fiddling with the science. He was making these public appearances on government time while working for NASA. To accomplish his amazing record of speech giving he had to have made multiple speeches daily; all this while working for President Bush, and then claiming censorship. You will probably remember the Democrats in Congress had a lot of fun with this at the time.
The administration was pushed back with the help of the MSM, giving the Democrats a talking point, one the Obama team later picked up. So the Obama Administration, soon after taking office sent out a memo to agencies demanding a new transparence in government and science The EPA policy would be to ensure EPA's efforts to address the environmental crises of today are rooted in three fundamental values: science-based policies and program, adherence to the rule of law, and overwhelming transparency." If you didnt notice Obama took another over the shoulder shot at Bush, saying the days of science taking a backseat to ideology are over
So now comes a 35 year veteran of the EPAs National Center for Environmental Economics, speaking up when the EPA prepared to approach the global warming in a new way, by finding that carbon is a pollutant, and thereby claiming the authority to regulate it,
This veteran, a physicist and economist named Alan Carlin and a colleague presented an analysis arguing the agency should take another look, saying that the science behind man-made global warming is inconclusive at best. Their analysis noted that global temperatures were on a downward trend, pointing out some problems with climate models. In their analysis they referred to new research that contradicts the worse scenarios. They said in their report that Our concerns and reservations are sufficiently important to warrant a serious review of the science by EPA".
He soon got an email from his boss, telling him not to have "any direct communication" with anyone outside of his office with regard to his analysis. When he tried again to disseminate it, his boss informed him: "The administrator and the administration have decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision. . . . I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office." In another email he said "With the endangerment finding nearly final, you need to move on to other issues and subjects. I don't want you to spend any additional EPA time on climate change. No papers, no research etc, at least until we see what EPA is going to do with Climate."
The EPA is required to make public agency documents that pertain too the decision to allow public comment. Past Court rulings say rulemaking records must include both the evidence relied on, and the evidence discarded By refusing to allow Mr. Carlins study to be circulated, the EPA hid it from the record and from public view.
So much for the administrations highly touted standards of science-based policies and program, adherence to the rule of law, and overwhelming transparency
Geez, are you really this ignorant? Here is the source of that worthless peice of shit;
Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine - SourceWatch
In addition to the bulk mailing, OISM's website enables people to add their names to the petition over the Internet, and by June 2000 it claimed to have recruited more than 19,000 scientists. The institute is so lax about screening names, however, that virtually anyone can sign, including for example Al Caruba, a pesticide-industry PR man and conservative ideologue who runs his own website called the "National Anxiety Center." Caruba has no scientific credentials whatsoever, but in addition to signing the Oregon Petition he has editorialized on his own website against the science of global warming, calling it the "biggest hoax of the decade," a "genocidal" campaign by environmentalists who believe that "humanity must be destroyed to 'Save the Earth.' . . . There is no global warming, but there is a global political agenda, comparable to the failed Soviet Union experiment with Communism, being orchestrated by the United Nations, supported by its many Green NGOs, to impose international treaties of every description that would turn the institution into a global government, superceding the sovereignty of every nation in the world."
When questioned in 1998, OISM's Arthur Robinson admitted that only 2,100 signers of the Oregon Petition had identified themselves as physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, or meteorologists, "and of those the greatest number are physicists." This grouping of fields concealed the fact that only a few dozen, at most, of the signatories were drawn from the core disciplines of climate science - such as meteorology, oceanography, and glaciology - and almost none were climate specialists. The names of the signers are available on the OISM's website, but without listing any institutional affiliations or even city of residence, making it very difficult to determine their credentials or even whether they exist at all. When the Oregon Petition first circulated, in fact, environmental activists successfully added the names of several fictional characters and celebrities to the list, including John Grisham, Michael J. Fox, Drs. Frank Burns, B. J. Honeycutt, and Benjamin Pierce (from the TV show M*A*S*H), an individual by the name of "Dr. Red Wine," and Geraldine Halliwell, formerly known as pop singer Ginger Spice of the Spice Girls. Halliwell's field of scientific specialization was listed as "biology." Even in 2003, the list was loaded with misspellings, duplications, name and title fragments, and names of non-persons, such as company names. The current web page of the petition itself states "31,478 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs."[15]
OISM has refused to release info on the number of mailings it made. From comments in Nature:
"Virtually every scientist in every field got it," says Robert Park, a professor of physics at the University of Maryland at College Park and spokesman for the American Physical Society. "That's a big mailing." According to the National Science Foundation, there are more than half a million science or engineering PhDs in the United States, and ten million individuals with first degrees in science or engineering.
Arthur Robinson, president of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, the small, privately funded institute that circulated the petition, declines to say how many copies were sent out. "We're not willing to have our opponents attack us with that number, and say that the rest of the recipients are against us," he says, adding that the response was "outstanding" for a direct mail shot. [16]
Seriously we dont have difinitive proof either way so, like I said, why dont we try and reduce pollution/emissions anyway for other reasons such as a clean environment and national security.
If you think you have difinitive proof then re-read where i turned my previous post to red print.
Or ... we could use the money wasted on something we can't change and instead spend it on ... oh I don't know ... fixing the problems we CAN fix to keep our species alive in spite of the obvious changes nature has decided to go through? .... just a thought ...
Scientists and even some Government employees suffer a penalty for speaking out against the science of Global-Warmng.
I remember back in 2004, a fellow named James Hansen spoke before a House or Senate Committee(s) (probably both) and even though at that moment in time he had made 1,400 speeches on the subject, warning of its imminent consequences, he took the time to charge the Bush Administration with trying to censor him and his free speech. He said The Administration was fiddling with the science. He was making these public appearances on government time while working for NASA. To accomplish his amazing record of speech giving he had to have made multiple speeches daily; all this while working for President Bush, and then claiming censorship. You will probably remember the Democrats in Congress had a lot of fun with this at the time.
The administration was pushed back with the help of the MSM, giving the Democrats a talking point, one the Obama team later picked up. So the Obama Administration, soon after taking office sent out a memo to agencies demanding a new transparence in government and science The EPA policy would be to ensure EPA's efforts to address the environmental crises of today are rooted in three fundamental values: science-based policies and program, adherence to the rule of law, and overwhelming transparency." If you didnt notice Obama took another over the shoulder shot at Bush, saying the days of science taking a backseat to ideology are over
So now comes a 35 year veteran of the EPAs National Center for Environmental Economics, speaking up when the EPA prepared to approach the global warming in a new way, by finding that carbon is a pollutant, and thereby claiming the authority to regulate it,
This veteran, a physicist and economist named Alan Carlin and a colleague presented an analysis arguing the agency should take another look, saying that the science behind man-made global warming is inconclusive at best. Their analysis noted that global temperatures were on a downward trend, pointing out some problems with climate models. In their analysis they referred to new research that contradicts the worse scenarios. They said in their report that Our concerns and reservations are sufficiently important to warrant a serious review of the science by EPA".
He soon got an email from his boss, telling him not to have "any direct communication" with anyone outside of his office with regard to his analysis. When he tried again to disseminate it, his boss informed him: "The administrator and the administration have decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision. . . . I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office." In another email he said "With the endangerment finding nearly final, you need to move on to other issues and subjects. I don't want you to spend any additional EPA time on climate change. No papers, no research etc, at least until we see what EPA is going to do with Climate."
The EPA is required to make public agency documents that pertain too the decision to allow public comment. Past Court rulings say rulemaking records must include both the evidence relied on, and the evidence discarded By refusing to allow Mr. Carlins study to be circulated, the EPA hid it from the record and from public view.
So much for the administrations highly touted standards of science-based policies and program, adherence to the rule of law, and overwhelming transparency
, are all a-twitter over an apparently “suppressed” document that supposedly undermines the EPA Endangerment finding about human emissions of carbon dioxide and a basket of other greenhouse gases. Well a draft of this “suppressed” document has been released and we can now all read this allegedly devastating critique of the EPA science. Let’s take a look…
Wow, the man wrote books.The man has a lot of books behind him, so he must know what he's talking about!
Australians and climate change. This is not what the wingnuts are saying;
Australiaâs Real Climate on Climate Change
