Climate Change: The Reality

skookerasbil

Platinum Member
Aug 6, 2009
37,955
6,359
1,140
Not the middle of nowhere
% Truths about Climate Change.................

Awesome........makes the 5 exact points I have made on here over the past year at one time or another in my posts. Each time.......the k00ks do a meltdown. But it is what it is.........

Behold..............From RealclearScience..........

OCTOBER 6, 2011.

Five Truths About Climate Change
During the decade that Al Gore dominated the environmental debate, global carbon-dioxide emissions rose by 28.5%. .

By ROBERT BRYCE
Over the past two months, environmental activists have held protests at the White House and elsewhere hoping to convince the Obama administration to deny a permit for the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada to the Gulf Coast. Some of those same activists have launched a series of demonstrations called "Moving Planet" to move "the planet away from fossil fuels towards a safer climate future." And next month, leaders from dozens of countries will meet at the 17th United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Durban, South Africa.

But for all of the sturm und drang about climate change, what has actually happened? It's time to acknowledge five obvious truths about the climate-change issue:

1) The carbon taxers/limiters have lost. Carbon-dioxide emissions have been the environmental issue of the past decade. Over that time period, Al Gore became a world-renowned figure for his documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth," for which he won an Oscar. In 2007, he, along with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), collected a Nobel Peace Prize for "informing the world of the dangers posed by climate change." That same year, the IPCC released its fourth assessment report, which declared that "most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions." (Emphasis in original.)

Two years later, Copenhagen became the epicenter of a world-wide media frenzy as some 5,000 journalists, along with some 100 world leaders and scores of celebrities, descended on the Danish capital to witness what was billed as the best opportunity to impose a global tax or limit on carbon dioxide.

The result? Nothing, aside from promises by various countries to get serious—really serious—about carbon emissions sometime soon.

Here's a reality check: During the same decade that Mr. Gore and the IPCC dominated the environmental debate, global carbon-dioxide emissions rose by 28.5%.

Those increases reflect soaring demand for electricity, up by 36%, which in turn fostered a 47% increase in coal consumption. (Natural-gas use increased by 29% while oil use grew by 13%.) Carbon-dioxide emissions are growing because people around the world understand the essentiality of electricity to modernity. And for many countries, the cheapest way to produce electrons is by burning coal.

2) Regardless of whether it's getting hotter or colder—or both—we are going to need to produce a lot more energy in order to remain productive and comfortable.


Robert Bryce: Five Truths About Climate Change - WSJ.com





Oh..........but we deniers are not winning!!!!!!!!!!:boobies::boobies::boobies::boobies::fu:


Knock yourselves out debating temperatures and ice expansion s0ns..........

Guess what?

Nobody fcukking cares!!!!:2up:
 
But, Obama is putting billions of dollars into green crap...So they kind of are winning.



It's looking pretty likely that the game will change right around january 20, 2013. Then the vast national insanity that started with the Big 0 getting elected will end.

With any luck whatsoever, the next crew will understand that they are temporary residents in Washington and perhaps they will act like they owe the people a little more than excuses for theft and lies.
 
And so we get a knownothing anti-science leader. What a fucking wonderful prospect.

Best not to count unhatched chickens.



If the leader you're talking about is any leader not named Obama, it would be a step up.

Did you notice that the Global Climate warmed under Clinton and cooled under Bush?

The Big 0 hasn't created a directional change in the climate. He has just continued everything that Bush started but has somehow managed to destroy the economy, too.

Out of curiosity, what has the leader who ended the space program done for science as you read the situation?
 
Over the past two months, environmental activists have held protests at the White House and elsewhere hoping to convince the Obama administration to deny a permit for the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada to ...
 
THE GLOBAL WARMING HOAX

The official position of the World Natural Health Organization in regards to global warming is that there is NO GLOBAL WARMING! Global warming is nothing more than just another hoax, just like Y2K and the global freezing claims in the 1960's and 70's were. Global warming is being used to generate fear and panic. Those behind this movement are using it to control people's lives and for financial gain.
 
Good God, is this the fruitcake site for the day? You honestly believe these people have the slightest inkling of any kind of science, period? Twisted, you have chosen you moniker well.
 
By the way, the scientists were not claiming global cooling in the 60's and 70's. In fact, most were predicting warming due to the burning of fossil fuels.

What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?

The fact is that around 1970 there were 6 times as many scientists predicting a warming rather than a cooling planet. Today, with 30+years more data to analyse, we've reached a clear scientific consensus: 97% of working climate scientists agree with the view that human beings are causing global warming.
 
Really, financial gain? The scientists have so many more trillions than the international energy corperations. Twisted, have you ever bothered to actually think in the whole of your life?
 
Really, financial gain? The scientists have so many more trillions than the international energy corperations. Twisted, have you ever bothered to actually think in the whole of your life?

Yes I think while you are listing to MSNBC.

Articles: The Global Warming Hoax: How Soon We Forget

The truth is that CO2 is a beneficial trace gas that exists in such small quantities in our atmosphere, that the idea of it playing any significant role in determining our climate is simply silly. CO2 comprises less than half of 0.1% of our atmosphere, and only 4% of it comes from human activity. That's 16ppm, or 1 part in every 62,500 parts of our atmosphere. CO2 is plant food, and a key component in all life on earth. Plants need CO2 to grow and produce oxygen. They feed animals (including ourselves). Animals in turn consume oxygen and plant-based foods, and exhale CO2. Without CO2, nothing could be green! This brief video showing the effect on plants of increasing atmospheric CO2 is quite striking.

Ironically, the audacity of their lies about CO2 are overshadowed by the most obvious part of the Hoax. The fact is that warming is good! Throughout history, man, as well as all other living creatures, has thrived during the earth's warm periods, and suffered and starved during the cold ones, a lesson that we're about to be reminded of in the coming years.
 
LOL. A 'Conservative' political site. About as good as that obese druggie on the radio.

Rapid warming is good? Ever hear of the Permian-Triassic extinction?

For God's sake, do a bit of research in real science, not fruitcake 'Conservative' sites.
 
By the way, the scientists were not claiming global cooling in the 60's and 70's. In fact, most were predicting warming due to the burning of fossil fuels.

What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?

The fact is that around 1970 there were 6 times as many scientists predicting a warming rather than a cooling planet. Today, with 30+years more data to analyse, we've reached a clear scientific consensus: 97% of working climate scientists agree with the view that human beings are causing global warming.



And yet it's been cooling globally for 10 years.

Do the 97% agree that human beings are causing this also?
 
This is a pretty interesting article I read:

Is the Green Movement Failing?


A hundred and thirty years of campaigning between them. A combined annual income of just over $1 billion. Nearly 10 million supporters around the world.

What do three of the world’s biggest environmental campaigning groups have to show for their efforts?

Failure.

Currently, the environmental movement is no more likely to save the world than Superman, or mass prayer.

This fall the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) marks its 50th birthday. Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth will both be 40 years old. The BBC recently brought all three organizations together and asked them to consider climate change.

According to Kumi Naidoo, executive director of Greenpeace, climate change presents the biggest challenge to the green movement, above all else. Nnimmo Bassey, chair of Friends of the Earth, agrees it is “cross-cutting, because it impacts everything.”
Eco Tweets Day & Night With TakePart Enviro

Yet, over the course of 2011, the largest amount of carbon dioxide on record is going to be released into the Earth’s atmosphere. By this measurement alone the world’s three biggest environmental campaigning groups have failed.

Naidoo admits, “We are winning very significant battles, but we are losing the planet.”

The problem is, as Bassey would have it, “profit.”

Doing right by the environment—whether you run a nation state, a multibillion-dollar oil company, or your own household—costs money. Environmental organizations and individuals have singularly failed to persuade politicians and corporations to adopt the necessary green policies because they are expensive. And when it comes to our own homes?

The sad fact is, rather than become part and parcel of everyone’s lives, going green is a lifestyle choice for the privileged few. Environmentally conscious options are only available to a tiny percentage of the world’s population—the well-educated and well-off. They wear their green credentials like a badge of honor, to assuage the guilt they feel about our insanely and obviously unsustainable lifestyles.

To paraphrase the British comedian Sean Lock, all our good intentions amount to no more than “turning up at the aftermath of an earthquake with a dustpan and brush.”

On the BBC broadcast, the leaders of Greenpeace, WWF, and Friends of the Earth talked a fine game, but together sounded like battle-weary generals contemplating an inevitable, comprehensive defeat. Their conversation almost turned into a eulogy.

The grim realisation for Greenpeace, WWF, and Friends of the Earth, is that making any serious difference to the global situation right now requires structural change, and the time to make it is running out.

"The green argument is lost. Saving the planet is not a priority—jobs and living standards are."

Yolanda Kakabadse, president of the WWF, calls for the election of politicians with “new mentalities, new leaders with a different mind, who are taking decisions in this world, who are fully aware that this is just one planet.”

Nnimmo Bassey wants to wrest the democratic process from the grip of big business, so “regaining sovereignty over political structures.”

Kumi Naidoo believes our leaders need to attain a “higher level of sensitivity and consciousness.”

The rhetoric fails to acknowledge that you get the politicians you elect, and the message from the voters is loud and clear. The green argument is lost. Saving the planet is not a priority—jobs and living standards are. Goodbye. Sorry. Not interested.

You can’t help but wonder if it is going to take some awful tragedy, some mass extinction or cataclysmic event before politicians and the majority of voters realise what is going on.

That, in itself, would be another failure. If anything seriously awful does happen, there will be no delight in the WWF, Friends of the Earth, and Greenpeace being able to say “I told you so.”

There is hope, of course. Where there’s life, there’s hope. But if the only thing to show for 130 years of campaigning is an exhausted, dirty and overcrowded planet, it doesn’t bode well.

Happy Birthday, guys. Here’s to the future.


--TakePart
 
Everything you have said is correct. We are going to do the grand experiment. And those that are now screaming fraud at the scientists that have been warning about what this future will bring, will then be screaming that they weren't warned.

The people that are in denial now will not have the slightest change of heart as the conditions worsen. They will blame it on everything but the increase in GHGs. Hell, they are already denying that the recent weather events are increasing, in spite of the fact that the insurers, like Swiss Re and Munich Re have shown the increase to all.

Now, as both the Re-insurers state, what is left is for businesses and individuals to assess what is required in preparation for the inevitable changes. As for those still in denial that will not make any effort to prepare, write them off.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top