Global warming fail

[Muhammed]

What you see in this video is the global warming zealots' BS going down in flames.

 

[Old Rocks]

What I see in your post is an idiot hoorahing a multi-million dollar mechanical failure.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Conservatives have some kind of sick masochistic mentality where they love to see America fail. I don't get it

 

[jc456]

What you see in this video is the global warming zealots' BS going down in flames.

I didn't see a crash.

 

[Tom Sweetnam]

What I see is the result of affirmative action hires at NASA and its aerospace subcontractors, who are incapable of observing proportionately correct amalgams of baking soda and water.

 

[Crick]

What I see is the result of affirmative action hires at NASA and its aerospace subcontractors, who are incapable of observing proportionately correct amalgams of baking soda and water.

A racist comment. Lovely.

 

[mamooth]

Shit-for-brains in the OP posted a 6-year-old video of the original OCO satellite failing to launch. In the meantime, the OCO-2 satellite was succesfully launched and put into operation.

Naturally, Tom here joyfully jumped on to that stupid train along with the OP.

Plus, the failed launch was by a private company (Orbital Sciences Corporation) that NASA had hired out, thus making Tom's rants of government failure look especially stupid. They literally don't come any dumber than ol' Tom here.

 

[Old Rocks]

Be fun to see what a DNA test would show on ol' Sweetie Pie.

 

[skookerasbil]

No vid needed.........that occurs daily in this forum!!!

 

[GreenBean]

What you see in this video is the global warming zealots' BS going down in flames.

And That s the Way It Was In 1972 Cronkite Warned of New Ice Age

 

[Old Rocks]

Cronkite was a journalist. The scientists of that time were stating, by a 6 to 1 margin, that they thought the danger was warming from the additional CO2. There was, at that time, a good deal of global dimming by the amount of industrial pollution in the atmosphere. The US and Europe cleaned up their act, and it began to warm rapidly. Now we have the same effect from China and India. But the warming is still going on.

In 1981, Dr. James Hansen of NASA, published his paper on CO2 and the coming warming. His predictions were spot on.

Pubs.GISS Hansen et al. 1981 Climate impact of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide

Hansen et al. 1981
Hansen, J., D. Johnson, A. Lacis, S. Lebedeff, P. Lee, D. Rind, and G. Russell, 1981: Climate impact of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide. Science, 213, 957-966, doi:10.1126/science.213.4511.957.

The global temperature rose 0.2°C between the middle 1960s and 1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is consistent with the calculated effect due to measured increases of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980s. Potential effects on climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the fabled Northwest Passage.

Pretty accurate predictions.

 

[jc456]

Cronkite was a journalist. The scientists of that time were stating, by a 6 to 1 margin, that they thought the danger was warming from the additional CO2. There was, at that time, a good deal of global dimming by the amount of industrial pollution in the atmosphere. The US and Europe cleaned up their act, and it began to warm rapidly. Now we have the same effect from China and India. But the warming is still going on.

In 1981, Dr. James Hansen of NASA, published his paper on CO2 and the coming warming. His predictions were spot on.

Pubs.GISS Hansen et al. 1981 Climate impact of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide

Hansen et al. 1981
Hansen, J., D. Johnson, A. Lacis, S. Lebedeff, P. Lee, D. Rind, and G. Russell, 1981: Climate impact of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide. Science, 213, 957-966, doi:10.1126/science.213.4511.957.

The global temperature rose 0.2°C between the middle 1960s and 1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is consistent with the calculated effect due to measured increases of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980s. Potential effects on climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the fabled Northwest Passage.

Pretty accurate predictions.

just where are these newly created drought prone regions of NA?

 

[Old Rocks]

U.S. Drought Monitor


http://www.drought.gov/drought/cont...t-and-monitoring-drought-indicators/us-drough

Exactly where predicted by that paper and others.

 

[jc456]

U.S. Drought Monitor


http://www.drought.gov/drought/cont...t-and-monitoring-drought-indicators/us-drough

Exactly where predicted by that paper and others.

and what region is different in that graph from 1960? See each of those regions was a drought region. It stated creation. Where is one created?

 

[Muhammed]

What I see in your post is an idiot hoorahing a multi-million dollar mechanical failure.

What you see is a total waste of very limited taxpayer's money, ostensibly to research a problem that doesn't exist. That money should have been spent on something worthwhile, like medical research or helping the poor.

You anti-science zealots are pathetic brainwashed idiots with your collective noses super-glued to Al Gore's ass.

 

[mamooth]

Gore rule invoked. First one to bring up Gore forfeits the thread for their side.

Those who can talk about the facts, do. Those who can't, they deflect with talk of politicians.