New Study Contradicts Man-made warming

[LiveUninhibited]

Now the question is how has warming slowed and how much influence does human activity have?

"But if we don't understand what is natural, I don't think we can say much about what the humans are doing. So our interest is to understand -- first the natural variability of climate -- and then take it from there. So we were very excited when we realized a lot of changes in the past century from warmer to cooler and then back to warmer were all natural," Tsonis said.

(OP source)

I’d say the OP is exaggerating what the study says. The guy isn’t claiming all changes are natural, he’s saying we’d need to understand natural patterns before assessing human impact.

Climate is indeed complex. While global warming may imply an average temperature increase, that doesn’t mean it would increase uniformly in all areas. The standard deviation would be expected to increase as well, i.e. more temperature extremes and stormy weather depending upon the area. How do we control for natural cycles when we don’t even understand them? We can’t. Perhaps a manmade process is being temporarily offset by a natural process.

It does, however, seem quite reasonable that releasing the CO2 locked in fossil fuels being released would increase the temperature. After all, the world was a lot warmer during the time when that carbon was in the atmosphere. Of course there were many factors involved in that.

For policy purposes, though, it’s somewhat moot. We want to get off of foreign oil. We want cleaner air. So either way alternative energy (including nuclear) should be aggressively pursued. If coal really can be clean, then sure we can do that too. We don’t need to wait for a verdict on global warming to act prophylactically as it has other purposes.

I think it will be a moot point anyway the way the world's pressure cooker is heating up. Say man made global warming is true....

what would a mushroom cloud do to global warming? seriously.

You're far too pessimistic. I don't think the world is in that bad shape.

You're talking about my grandkids.....which is about 30 years away, roughly.

the world is a lot more screwed up than it was in 1979.

How do you figure? Yesterday the Commies were supposed to blow us away, now it's supposed to be the Islamofascists. Same shit, different assholes. Time to focus on countermeasures to nukes.

 

[FactFinder]

For the purpose of energy independence I would agree with you. BUT....PLEASE do not wreck the economy in the process. The polar bears are much more robust than our economy. That should be placed on the endangered species list. As for energy I am with the "all of the above" crowd.

Man's impact on global warming is minuscule. Don't hype it. Sound policies led by realism is the answer not alarmist hysteria.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

CO2 causes the earth to retain heat.

We have increased CO2 by 40% in the last 200 years.

We continue to pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year.

None of this has been disproven.

It is assumed mankind's combustion fetish is responsible for increased C02 levels. This is assumed by those who have an agenda to promote anthropogenic global warming. The problem of course is, the AGW church cherry-picks its data, and ignores natural sources of C02 completely.

When it became clear the earth wasn't warming as predicted, they changed their terminology to "climate change" and just kept right on going with their science fiction.

And the lemmings, mindless dolts such as yourself, follow without question.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

99 percent of Climatologist do NOT support man made global warming, that is a bald faced lie. In fact less then 50 percent of all scientists support man made global warming. I believe the number is around 42 percent as I recall from a report one of you idiots posted a while back.

 

[FactFinder]

99 percent of Climatologist do NOT support man made global warming, that is a bald faced lie. In fact less then 50 percent of all scientists support man made global warming. I believe the number is around 42 percent as I recall from a report one of you idiots posted a while back.

All the ole' gunnys I have known proclaim the idiocy of humankind with only the warmth of comraderie and the knowledge of being all in the same set of foxholes.

Gunny, enjoy your day.

 

[Old Rocks]

For the purpose of energy independence I would agree with you. BUT....PLEASE do not wreck the economy in the process. The polar bears are much more robust than our economy. That should be placed on the endangered species list. As for energy I am with the "all of the above" crowd.

Man's impact on global warming is minuscule. Don't hype it. Sound policies led by realism is the answer not alarmist hysteria.

Don't wreck the economy by being energy independent? The amount of money that we have spent on oil would have easily revived this economy had we spent it at home. Where do you think the terrorists are getting their funding?

Let's see, we have increased the primary greenhouse gas in the atmosphere by nearly 40%, we are acidifying the oceans, destroying the rain forests, our actions are causing a major extinction era, but our impact is miniscule?

Sound policies led by realism is exactly what I am advocating.

 

[Old Rocks]

CO2 causes the earth to retain heat.

We have increased CO2 by 40% in the last 200 years.

We continue to pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year.

None of this has been disproven.

It is assumed mankind's combustion fetish is responsible for increased C02 levels. This is assumed by those who have an agenda to promote anthropogenic global warming. The problem of course is, the AGW church cherry-picks its data, and ignores natural sources of C02 completely.

When it became clear the earth wasn't warming as predicted, they changed their terminology to "climate change" and just kept right on going with their science fiction.

And the lemmings, mindless dolts such as yourself, follow without question.

It is known, by isotopal studies, that the combustion of fossil fuels is the source of the increase in atmospheric CO2.

No, the natural sources of CO2 are not ignored. We put out 130 to 150 times the CO2 that the volcanoes do, USGS figures. The oceans absorb more CO2 than they emit. And we are very aware of the other, thus far, latent sources of CO2 and CH4.

Now as for your crock of shit concerning the earth not warming as predicted, you are correct. It is warming faster than predicted. And 'climate change' is the result of global warming.

Mindless dolts is people like yourself that blather on with no real facts or research to back their statements. Had you bothered to do the slightest research, you would know better than to make the statements that you do.

 

[Old Rocks]

99 percent of Climatologist do NOT support man made global warming, that is a bald faced lie. In fact less then 50 percent of all scientists support man made global warming. I believe the number is around 42 percent as I recall from a report one of you idiots posted a while back.

So that is why ever single scientific society in the world states that AGW is a fact and that it is also a clear and present danger. Only 42% supporting, yet all their organizations state this? And then there are all the National Academies of Science that state the same. And all the major universities in the world also. But only 42% accept the evidence? Must be a pretty influential 42%.

No, the vast majority of scientists have read the evidence and accept that we have really screwed up our environment.

 

[Old Rocks]

The "glaring" reminder of man's rather insignificant part on the planet comes from no sunspots for about a year and a half and the fact that the planet has been cooling since 2001 disregarding man's CO2 output.

Yesterday there was teenie active spot on the sun that they thought would devleop into a spot, but the sun was just toying with them.

Here is the sun's current state:

Yesterday's proto-sunspot failed to materialize. The sun is blank. Credit: SOHO/MDI

and?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

For the purpose of energy independence I would agree with you. BUT....PLEASE do not wreck the economy in the process. The polar bears are much more robust than our economy. That should be placed on the endangered species list. As for energy I am with the "all of the above" crowd.

Man's impact on global warming is minuscule. Don't hype it. Sound policies led by realism is the answer not alarmist hysteria.

Don't wreck the economy by being energy independent? The amount of money that we have spent on oil would have easily revived this economy had we spent it at home. Where do you think the terrorists are getting their funding?

Let's see, we have increased the primary greenhouse gas in the atmosphere by nearly 40%, we are acidifying the oceans, destroying the rain forests, our actions are causing a major extinction era, but our impact is miniscule?

Sound policies led by realism is exactly what I am advocating.

You mean like destroying the coal fired power industry that provides 60 percent of our electrical power with NO replacement for it? Like destroying the natural gas and gasoline or diesel powered facilities by raising taxes on them till no one but the rich or the Government can afford them, again with NO replacements?

Hope you enjoy living in the 1800's.

Exactly what do you think will happen when we are all forced to burn wood to heat our houses cause people like you shut off the electricity? Talk about greenhouse effects and air pollution and the destruction of forests. Try millions burning wood to stay warm.

And that is EXACTLY what Obama has in mind for us. he said it last year in an interview the press never shows anymore. No nuclear, shut down oil, coal and natural gas plants while his buddies oppose all wind and solar options cause they don't want them in THEIR neighborhood.

 

[Old Rocks]

For the purpose of energy independence I would agree with you. BUT....PLEASE do not wreck the economy in the process. The polar bears are much more robust than our economy. That should be placed on the endangered species list. As for energy I am with the "all of the above" crowd.

Man's impact on global warming is minuscule. Don't hype it. Sound policies led by realism is the answer not alarmist hysteria.

Don't wreck the economy by being energy independent? The amount of money that we have spent on oil would have easily revived this economy had we spent it at home. Where do you think the terrorists are getting their funding?

Let's see, we have increased the primary greenhouse gas in the atmosphere by nearly 40%, we are acidifying the oceans, destroying the rain forests, our actions are causing a major extinction era, but our impact is miniscule?

Sound policies led by realism is exactly what I am advocating.

You mean like destroying the coal fired power industry that provides 60 percent of our electrical power with NO replacement for it? Like destroying the natural gas and gasoline or diesel powered facilities by raising taxes on them till no one but the rich or the Government can afford them, again with NO replacements?

Hope you enjoy living in the 1800's.

Exactly what do you think will happen when we are all forced to burn wood to heat our houses cause people like you shut off the electricity? Talk about greenhouse effects and air pollution and the destruction of forests. Try millions burning wood to stay warm.

And that is EXACTLY what Obama has in mind for us. he said it last year in an interview the press never shows anymore. No nuclear, shut down oil, coal and natural gas plants while his buddies oppose all wind and solar options cause they don't want them in THEIR neighborhood.

Total bullshit. Obama has stated that he is all for the alternative energy, be it safe nuclear, wind, solar, geothermal, wave, or ocean current. We should be spending money on installing a grid to pick up these energies where they can be harvested. The wheat farmers in Oregon and Washington love the sight of windmills on their property. About $5000 a year in royalties for each and every one. Were we to put these in the areas in southeastern oregon that are rich in wind energy, we, as the owners of the BLM land, could be getting the same. That would do much to enhance the budgets of our National Parks. In fact, that area, one of the emptiest in the US, has vast potential in wind, solar, and geothermal.

Solar should be in every neighborhood. On every south facing roof. But in order to do that we are going to have to rebuild our national grid. And it is time to do exactly that. We are dependent on a grid that is controled by technology more at home in the 50s than in this century. This should be a national priority. Paid for, like our Interstates, by the people that ship energy over the grid. And of course, their custemers, you, I, and the businesses that use the power.

We put a man on the moon in a decade. We threw railroads across an untamed continent in about the same amount of time. Should we chose to create a modern grid and non-polluting power system in the same amount of time, we are capable of doing just that. All it takes is the will and determination of the American People, and we can do it. We have the technology already.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You are as ignorant as a concrete brick. Obama has STATED for the record he is opposed to nuclear energy and that he intends to tax coal, oil and natural gas plants out of existance. All with NO replacements. Meanwhile no one in Congress wants any solar or Wind power anywhere near their neck of the woods. Kennedy and Feinstein ring a fucking bell?

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Let's see, we have increased the primary greenhouse gas in the atmosphere by nearly 40%, we are acidifying the oceans, destroying the rain forests, our actions are causing a major extinction era, but our impact is miniscule?

Sound policies led by realism is exactly what I am advocating.

Fear mongering and oxymoron alert!

 

[Midnight Marauder]

CO2 causes the earth to retain heat.

We have increased CO2 by 40% in the last 200 years.

We continue to pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year.

None of this has been disproven.

It is assumed mankind's combustion fetish is responsible for increased C02 levels. This is assumed by those who have an agenda to promote anthropogenic global warming. The problem of course is, the AGW church cherry-picks its data, and ignores natural sources of C02 completely.

When it became clear the earth wasn't warming as predicted, they changed their terminology to "climate change" and just kept right on going with their science fiction.

And the lemmings, mindless dolts such as yourself, follow without question.

It is known, by isotopal studies, that the combustion of fossil fuels is the source of the increase in atmospheric CO2.

No, the natural sources of CO2 are not ignored. We put out 130 to 150 times the CO2 that the volcanoes do, USGS figures. The oceans absorb more CO2 than they emit. And we are very aware of the other, thus far, latent sources of CO2 and CH4.

Now as for your crock of shit concerning the earth not warming as predicted, you are correct. It is warming faster than predicted. And 'climate change' is the result of global warming.

Mindless dolts is people like yourself that blather on with no real facts or research to back their statements. Had you bothered to do the slightest research, you would know better than to make the statements that you do.

We have a scientific paper right here, that says the earth isn't warming. We have the ARGO buoys, that say the earth isn't warming. We have more and more of the scientific community stepping forward and saying, the earth isn't warming. We have members of the IPCC saying it now too.

Try to keep up. You're still about two years behind with your spoon fed bullshit talking points.

 

[PoliticalChic]

CO2 causes the earth to retain heat.

We have increased CO2 by 40% in the last 200 years.

We continue to pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year.

None of this has been disproven.

European Tribune - Community, Politics & Progress.
Professor Delgado Domingos, one of the leading Portuguese environment scientists, gave a long interview to the Sábado Notícias [Saturday News] magazine, a supplement of the centenary Jornal de Notícias.
–“ There are measurable climate changes but there is also an enormous manipulation in reducing everything to CO2 and equivalents. The main gas producing the green house effect is water vapour. The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.”

 

[PoliticalChic]

Solar should be in every neighborhood. On every south facing roof. But in order to do that we are going to have to rebuild our national grid. And it is time to do exactly that. We are dependent on a grid that is controled by technology more at home in the 50s than in this century. This should be a national priority. Paid for, like our Interstates, by the people that ship energy over the grid. And of course, their custemers, you, I, and the businesses that use the power.

We put a man on the moon in a decade. We threw railroads across an untamed continent in about the same amount of time. Should we chose to create a modern grid and non-polluting power system in the same amount of time, we are capable of doing just that. All it takes is the will and determination of the American People, and we can do it. We have the technology already.

The green subsidies are considerable. The U.S. Energy Information Administration reported in early 2008 that the government subsidizes solar energy at $24.34 per megawatt-hour (MWh) and wind power at $23.37. Yet even with decades of these massive handouts, as well as numerous state-level mandates for utilities to use green power, wind and solar energy contribute less than one-half of 1 percent of our nation’s electricity. Compare the green energy subsidies to the energy sources reviled by environmentalists, such as natural gas (25 cents per MWh in subsidies), coal (44 cents), hydroelectricity (67 cents), and nuclear power ($1.59). With relatively little government largesse, these sources (along with oil, which undergirds transportation) do the heavy lifting in our energy economy.
The alternative technologies at the heart of Obama’s plan, relying on more such government handouts and mandates, will inevitably raise energy prices—and high power prices are job killers. Industries that make physical products, whether cars or chemicals or paper cups, are energy-intensive and will gravitate to low-energy-cost locales—which is why California and New York, with some of the highest electricity prices in the country, have lost manufacturing jobs in droves. But it’s not just manufacturers that need cheap electricity: Google, the poster child of California’s information-technology economy, houses its massive server farms not in the Golden State but in places with lower electricity costs, like North Carolina and Oregon. Policies that drive up energy costs across the nation, as Obama intends, will drive many of these jobs not elsewhere in the country but overseas.
The Green-Jobs Engine That Can’t by Max Schulz, City Journal Winter 2009

 

[raceright]

Fascinating study from the University of Milwaukee which appears to heavily contradict man as a significant factor in determining the earth's climate - in fact, the study points to a shift from warming to cooling starting around the year 2000. This should have been far bigger news - but so far, the attention has been minimal by the mainstream media. Go figure...

Link to news articles on the study, dubbed "synchronized chaos" :

Climate Change - Who's Fault? Or No-Fault? - Digital Journal: Your News Network


UW-Milwaukee Study Could Realign Climate Change Theory - Milwaukee Weather News Story - WISN Milwaukee

I watched a documentery on glaciers a couple of nights ago and they did time lapse photo studies on several major ice shelves and glaciers. You are missinformed, ignorant or a blatant liar.

Was on TV has to be correct,was mickey on also

 

[raceright]

CO2 causes the earth to retain heat.

We have increased CO2 by 40% in the last 200 years.

We continue to pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year.

None of this has been disproven.

European Tribune - Community, Politics & Progress.
Professor Delgado Domingos, one of the leading Portuguese environment scientists, gave a long interview to the Sábado Notícias [Saturday News] magazine, a supplement of the centenary Jornal de Notícias.
–“ There are measurable climate changes but there is also an enormous manipulation in reducing everything to CO2 and equivalents. The main gas producing the green house effect is water vapour. The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.”

Money green green Money when are you people going to understand it all about money management your's not theres

 

[HUGGY]

Fascinating study from the University of Milwaukee which appears to heavily contradict man as a significant factor in determining the earth's climate - in fact, the study points to a shift from warming to cooling starting around the year 2000. This should have been far bigger news - but so far, the attention has been minimal by the mainstream media. Go figure...

Link to news articles on the study, dubbed "synchronized chaos" :

Climate Change - Who's Fault? Or No-Fault? - Digital Journal: Your News Network


UW-Milwaukee Study Could Realign Climate Change Theory - Milwaukee Weather News Story - WISN Milwaukee

I watched a documentery on glaciers a couple of nights ago and they did time lapse photo studies on several major ice shelves and glaciers. You are missinformed, ignorant or a blatant liar.

Was on TV has to be correct,was mickey on also

Jane you are an ignorant slut.

What is your point anyway? Your death grip on stupidity is breath taking.

 

[Chris]

CO2 causes the earth to retain heat.

We have increased CO2 by 40% in the last 200 years.

We continue to pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year.

None of this has been disproven.

European Tribune - Community, Politics & Progress.
Professor Delgado Domingos, one of the leading Portuguese environment scientists, gave a long interview to the Sábado Notícias [Saturday News] magazine, a supplement of the centenary Jornal de Notícias.
–“ There are measurable climate changes but there is also an enormous manipulation in reducing everything to CO2 and equivalents. The main gas producing the green house effect is water vapour. The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.”

Money green green Money when are you people going to understand it all about money management your's not theres

Have you been drinking?