Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Indeed.
there's going to be normal fluxusations in temperatures whether the climate is getting warmer, getting colder or staying the same.
That is undoubtably true.
Now who here among us is going to try to tell us that on the EAST COAST the summers haven't been getting warmer and the winters milder even taking into account those normal random deviations from the mean?
Anybody want to tell me that is NOT true in the last 50 years?
My father, having lived in the same hourse for the last 55 years, noted recently that the heat wave in July, something that is normal in July, but that used to be something that typically lasted a week, is now into their 22 day of 90 + temps.
That is a very large deviation from the norm, folks.
Admittedly, it might be normal in the LONG RUN, but human being do not live in the LONG RUN, we live in a very short run.
Our society has based how it works on that SHORT run too.
So regardless of what is causing these changes, it take a special kind of willingness to believe bullshit to deny what is plainly evident to all of us.
It's getting hotter, folks.
Denial doesn't change reality.
BBC: Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming?
Phil "AGW" Jones: Yes
LOL!!! This is typical of the dishonesty so prevelant in the denier camp. They trashed this guy for months and now they're hingeing their position on his answer to a narrowly crafted question and touting him! Here's a clue. AGW and the answer he gave could very well both be true. Natural fluctuations will, of course, still occur, but long range trends would still be up. That's why sometimes you have to use "tricks" of the statistical trade to "hide the decline" from other sources and winnow out the contribution of man. The deniers will say those words prove fraud, but the real fraud is that they're trying to change the intent of those words to further their own agenda.
What preytell is our agenda? The GW alarmists agenda is to get rich on the backs of the poor. This is verifiable if you just look at all the highpowered investment companies who are heavily invested in the passage of carbon control laws that they get to profit from. They are allready pre positioned, they just need to get the politicians to pass the laws for them.
I can tell you my agenda, it is quite simply to educate the uninformed so that they can make logical choices not based on emotion so as to not bankrupt the western nations in a ridiculous attempt to control the uncontrolable.
Frankly we are pretty damn fortunate to be occupying the earth at this particular geological time.
...and we'd like to keep it that way.
Frankly we are pretty damn fortunate to be occupying the earth at this particular geological time.
...and we'd like to keep it that way.
Frankly we are pretty damn fortunate to be occupying the earth at this particular geological time.
...and we'd like to keep it that way.
What right do you have to alter the course of a naturally occurring climate change?
Frankly we are pretty damn fortunate to be occupying the earth at this particular geological time.
...and we'd like to keep it that way.
LOL!!! This is typical of the dishonesty so prevelant in the denier camp. They trashed this guy for months and now they're hingeing their position on his answer to a narrowly crafted question and touting him! Here's a clue. AGW and the answer he gave could very well both be true. Natural fluctuations will, of course, still occur, but long range trends would still be up. That's why sometimes you have to use "tricks" of the statistical trade to "hide the decline" from other sources and winnow out the contribution of man. The deniers will say those words prove fraud, but the real fraud is that they're trying to change the intent of those words to further their own agenda.
What preytell is our agenda? The GW alarmists agenda is to get rich on the backs of the poor. This is verifiable if you just look at all the highpowered investment companies who are heavily invested in the passage of carbon control laws that they get to profit from. They are allready pre positioned, they just need to get the politicians to pass the laws for them.
I can tell you my agenda, it is quite simply to educate the uninformed so that they can make logical choices not based on emotion so as to not bankrupt the western nations in a ridiculous attempt to control the uncontrolable.
Maintaining the status quo can also be an agenda. Those who would lose out financially due a switch from fossil fuels to other sources of energy are trying damnedest to make sure it doesn't happpen any time soon, regardless of the consequences.
Frankly we are pretty damn fortunate to be occupying the earth at this particular geological time.
...and we'd like to keep it that way.
What right do you have to alter the course of a naturally occurring climate change?
Because we're saying it's not natural. If CO2 is 25-30% above historical averages and rising, how can you expect anything but warming? Since man emits more in a few days than all the volcanoes on earth do in a year, where do YOU think it's coming from? You can't get away from the Laws of Chemistry and Physics. More CO2 would trap more photons. Given the principle of Conservation of Energy and the fact that statistically only half would be re-emitted into space, what do you think the rest is doing?
What right do you have to alter the course of a naturally occurring climate change?
Because we're saying it's not natural. If CO2 is 25-30% above historical averages and rising, how can you expect anything but warming? Since man emits more in a few days than all the volcanoes on earth do in a year, where do YOU think it's coming from? You can't get away from the Laws of Chemistry and Physics. More CO2 would trap more photons. Given the principle of Conservation of Energy and the fact that statistically only half would be re-emitted into space, what do you think the rest is doing?
And yet when the CO2 content of the atmosphere was 20 times what is now life was good. The largest creatures ever to have lived on the planet were romping around, plants were everywhere and biological evolution was proceeding at an extraordinary rate. Please answer that little conundrum. Throughout mans history when it's been warm life has been good. When it has been cold there has been war, pestilence, and plague.
And as far as the science goes, please explain to me how you can put energy into a system and have it generate more energy? The second Law of Thermodynamics says greenhouse gas theory won't work. It is creating in essence a perpetual motion machine.
You've got a real problem there old boy.
Frankly we are pretty damn fortunate to be occupying the earth at this particular geological time.
...and we'd like to keep it that way.
What right do you have to alter the course of a naturally occurring climate change?
Because we're saying it's not natural. If CO2 is 25-30% above historical averages and rising, how can you expect anything but warming? Since man emits more in a few days than all the volcanoes on earth do in a year, where do YOU think it's coming from? You can't get away from the Laws of Chemistry and Physics. More CO2 would trap more photons. Given the principle of Conservation of Energy and the fact that statistically only half would be re-emitted into space, what do you think the rest is doing?
Because we're saying it's not natural. If CO2 is 25-30% above historical averages and rising, how can you expect anything but warming? Since man emits more in a few days than all the volcanoes on earth do in a year, where do YOU think it's coming from? You can't get away from the Laws of Chemistry and Physics. More CO2 would trap more photons. Given the principle of Conservation of Energy and the fact that statistically only half would be re-emitted into space, what do you think the rest is doing?
And yet when the CO2 content of the atmosphere was 20 times what is now life was good. The largest creatures ever to have lived on the planet were romping around, plants were everywhere and biological evolution was proceeding at an extraordinary rate. Please answer that little conundrum. Throughout mans history when it's been warm life has been good. When it has been cold there has been war, pestilence, and plague.
And as far as the science goes, please explain to me how you can put energy into a system and have it generate more energy? The second Law of Thermodynamics says greenhouse gas theory won't work. It is creating in essence a perpetual motion machine.
You've got a real problem there old boy.
' when the CO2 content of the atmosphere was 20 times what is now life was good'
For WHOM??? Human beings?
Because we're saying it's not natural. If CO2 is 25-30% above historical averages and rising, how can you expect anything but warming? Since man emits more in a few days than all the volcanoes on earth do in a year, where do YOU think it's coming from? You can't get away from the Laws of Chemistry and Physics. More CO2 would trap more photons. Given the principle of Conservation of Energy and the fact that statistically only half would be re-emitted into space, what do you think the rest is doing?
And yet when the CO2 content of the atmosphere was 20 times what is now life was good. The largest creatures ever to have lived on the planet were romping around, plants were everywhere and biological evolution was proceeding at an extraordinary rate. Please answer that little conundrum. Throughout mans history when it's been warm life has been good. When it has been cold there has been war, pestilence, and plague.
And as far as the science goes, please explain to me how you can put energy into a system and have it generate more energy? The second Law of Thermodynamics says greenhouse gas theory won't work. It is creating in essence a perpetual motion machine.
You've got a real problem there old boy.
' when the CO2 content of the atmosphere was 20 times what is now life was good'
For WHOM??? Human beings?
The summers are undoutably warmer on the East coast than they were when I was a kid.
The heat waves are getting longer, and their temps higher than any time I can remember in my lifetime.
Whether this is merely a normal deviation from the norm, or the result of global warming I truly cannot say.
But to deny the blantently obvious seems foolish to me.
Whatever the reason, the summers have been getting warmer and the winters milder.
The REASON for this is debateable.
The FACT is undeniable.
What right do you have to alter the course of a naturally occurring climate change?
Because we're saying it's not natural. If CO2 is 25-30% above historical averages and rising, how can you expect anything but warming? Since man emits more in a few days than all the volcanoes on earth do in a year, where do YOU think it's coming from? You can't get away from the Laws of Chemistry and Physics. More CO2 would trap more photons. Given the principle of Conservation of Energy and the fact that statistically only half would be re-emitted into space, what do you think the rest is doing?
Again perspective. If CO2 were 25-30% of our atmosphere as opposed to not only a trace gas, but a trace greenhouse gas as well, I might be concerned. On top of that man's contribution to said gas being miniscule when all sources of it are considered that would have to be one powerful gas to have such a dramatic impact on climate. We should expect to see an increase in CO2 to be magnified in temperature increases. Yet we don't see that. Have you ever noticed that there is an awful lot of talk about increasing temps, but comparitively little data is presented when it comes to CO2 levels in the atmosphere?