This global warming is killing us!!

0.04% really 0.0004 without the percent...

They avoid trying to dispute what EMH posts because they cannot refute, they know it. Ice dictates Earth's climate

temperature
atmospheric thickness/surface air pressure
ocean levels
ocean temps/hurricanes
humidity (really a function of temperature, but ice controls temperature)


Think of it this way. Earth is a room with 2 air(and water) conditioning units, Arctic and Antarctic, each with settings 0=off and 10= maxCOOL.

Right now the AA AC is set at 9 and the Arctic AC is set at 1. Just configure land differently and you "change the setting of the AC unit."

No land near the poles = no ice = Earth warm parameter = Jurassic = warmer, wetter, higher SAP

A big continent on each pole = "two Antarcticas" = colder, drier, lower ocean level, lower SAP, little to no cane activity

R.9de336d08f1b19004ec8bfea19287822





Mp
Cold is the absence of heat.
 
Cold is the absence of heat.



Cold is also ADDING COLD.

That's what happens when Earth gets a (continent specific) ice age, water turns to ice, and it cools.


Air over Antarctica is 50F colder than air over Arctic.

Reason = MORE ICE


and that has a planetary effect on temps.


If you moved Antarctica to the middle of the Pacific and melted all of its ice, ocean temps would go up 10-15F globally, and we'd have Cat 10 canes.
 
Cold is also ADDING COLD.

That's what happens when Earth gets a (continent specific) ice age, water turns to ice, and it cools.


Air over Antarctica is 50F colder than air over Arctic.

Reason = MORE ICE


and that has a planetary effect on temps.


If you moved Antarctica to the middle of the Pacific and melted all of its ice, ocean temps would go up 10-15F globally, and we'd have Cat 10 canes.
All that confirms my statement that cold is the absence of heat.
 
Did you say you prefer real science?

All the carbon you emit is carbon your body has captured. You, all of us, and life in general, are carbon neutral. The issue with carbon is that when fossil fuels are burned they release sequestered carbon into the atmosphere from millions of years ago.

I'm not sure if the alarmists or the deniers are worse. It is not likely to kill us off.
Current level of CO2 at 400 ppm (parts per million) equals one part of CO2 for every 2,500 parts of the atmosphere. Mostly nitrogen and oxygen.

I've yet to see convincing proof from laboratory experiments showing how one molecule a few degrees warmer than the other 2,499 molecules will raise the temperature of all of them by any measurable degree.
 
All that confirms my statement that cold is the absence of heat.


OK, but if you want to cool Earth from what it is today given same sun and orbit, you need more land in Arctic Circle to increase the amount of ice on the planet, and that cools Earth.

Cold is the absence of heat.

Cooling can be

removing heat
adding cold

take your pick
 
OK, but if you want to cool Earth from what it is today given same sun and orbit, you need more land in Arctic Circle to increase the amount of ice on the planet, and that cools Earth.

Cold is the absence of heat.

Cooling can be

removing heat
adding cold

take your pick
Professor of climate Richard Lindzen says it different. The tropics control the earth climate per the professor.
 
Professor of climate Richard Lindzen says it different. The tropics control the earth climate per the professor.


You can parrot that faux skeptic all you want.

Dick Lindzen is a big liar paid by CO2 FRAUd.

He won't even answer these basic questions, because he doesn't want CO2 FRAUD busted...


 
My side? How about every scientist who isn't on the MAGA payroll?

Every weatherman

It's getting harder and harder for you liars to continue. Let's ask AI

Yes, there is an overwhelming scientific consensus that man-made climate change is real. Multiple studies indicate that between 97% and 99.9% of climate scientists and peer-reviewed research agree that human activities are the primary driver of global warming observed since the mid-20th century

And I love it how you right wingers say man can't affect the climate but then Elon says this

Elon Musk has frequently proposed nuking the polar ice caps of Mars as a method for rapid terraforming. His goal is to make the planet habitable for humans by creating an artificial greenhouse effect.

How stupid are you bro?
He's crazy but not stupid.

You're stupid.
 
Listen to Dr. Richard Lindzen. He is the ultimate authority.





except he can't/won't answer basic climate questions already given.

Worship a CO2 FRAUd faux skeptic, you won't get any truth....
 
The one published by the United Nations ... a profoundly political organization ... and the report was written for policy makers and other politicians ... not scientists ...

Like encyclopedias ... the report references scientific literature, but the report itself isn't scientific ... anymore than an encyclopedia is ...
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - IPCC
Currently working on their 7th Pravda, er 'Assessment Report'.
Reports go back to 1990;
...
I'll leave to all the bright and intelligent ones here who couldn't find the IIPC website, or scroll through to find reports and content to back their pravda, and present links to such; to see if they can find documentation and citation to back their lies.
:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Right, because scientists dedicating their lives to science dont need a report written for laypeople.

Ignorant policymakers and the ignorant public do.

And it most definitely presents the consensus of the evidence, in layman's terms.

And it is compiled and written by leaders in their fields, which you intentionally left out to bolster your narrative.

It's a good read.
Yet you are incapable of providing excerpts and/or details to back your claims.

Guess we shouldn't expect much from a phony & poser.
 
When the evidence is overwhelming, there is consensus. And there are a number of things in science where the evidence is overwhelming. Such as evolution, AGW, how GHG's work, and the fact that MAGA people are not only willfully ignorant, but stupid to boot. LOL
Present some
 
Have been and will be a bit busy with life, so just a moment to repost some sites that counter the scams of human-caused, anthropogenic climate change/global warming.

Quick note, all too often see what I'm presenting labeled as "denier", i.e. "climate change deniers" or "global warming deniers".
FACT: neither process is being "denied". NATURAL Climate Change/Global Warming is accepted by all, though there is much debate as to amount, range, extent, etc.
The main point is that it's the unproven case for "human caused"~ Anthropogenic being a major to main cause of climate change/global warming which is disputed and/or denied.

The fact that the proponents of ACC/AGW constantly fail to make the qualifier distinction shows how much they and what they claim/present is phony. Flim-flam hucksterism.
....

Watts Up With That?

The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change

CO2 Coalition


Providing the Facts About CO2 and Climate Change​


I've another source/link to present, but it/he rates a post of it's/his own.
The above two sites provide a wealth of articles on real science underscoring Nature's dominate role and human's irrelevant one. In future I will present some of those.
 
15th post
We live in the same Fourth Corner part of the planet and while I've met him a couple of times, I can't claim a close association. However he has done impressive work and presents an excellent case for his positions.
......
Dr. Easterbrook received his PhD in geology from the University of Washington and taught for 40 years at Western Washington University where he has conducted research on global climate change in western North America, New Zealand, Argentina, and various other parts of the world.
...

Don Easterbrook - Wikipedia

......
Dr. Don Easterbrook – a climate scientist and glacier expert from Washington State who correctly predicted back in 2000 that the Earth was entering a cooling phase – says to expect colder temperatures for at least the next two decades.

Easterbrook’s predictions were “right on the money” seven years before Al Gore and the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for warning that the Earth was facing catastrophic warming caused by rising levels of carbon dioxide, which Gore called a “planetary emergency.”

“When we check their projections against what actually happened in that time interval, they’re not even close. They’re off by a full degree in one decade, which is huge. That’s more than the entire amount of warming we’ve had in the past century. So their models have failed just miserably, nowhere near close. And maybe it’s luck, who knows, but mine have been right on the button,” Easterbrook told CNSNews.com.
...
...

Geologist Dr. Don Easterbrook’s new book on solar climate link is out: ‘It is unequivocally clear that climate changes, large & small, are driven by fluctuations of the sun’s magnetic field’​

...
Note from Dr. Easterbrook:

“I just competed a study of all warm and cold periods over the post 800,000 years and stumbled upon what must be the cause of the Ice Age and other climate changes. I looked at oxygen isotope temperatures, deuterium temperatures, CET temperatures, sunspot numbers, total solar irradiance, production rates of beryllium-10 and radiocarbon, and cosmic ray intensity for every warm and cold period in the past 800,000 years.

The data is truly remarkable˗˗every cool period was characterized by low sunspot numbers, indicating low strength of the sun’s magnetic field, and high production rates of beryllium˗10 and radiocarbon, indicating high intensity of cosmic rays. Every warm period was coincident with high sunspot numbers and low production rates of beryllium˗10 and radiocarbon.

Thus, it is unequivocally clear that climate changes, large and small, are driven by fluctuations of the sun’s magnetic field.

A book with full documentation is now available on Amazon. The age old riddle of the cause of Ice Ages is finally resolved!”
...

THE SOLAR MAGNETIC CAUSE OF CLIMATE CHANGES AND ORIGIN OF THE ICE AGES​

Paperback – September 13, 2019​

by Dr. Don J Easterbrook (Author)​

...​

This book demonstrates that the cause of Ice Ages and smaller climate changes is fluctuation of the sun's magnetic field, which controls the intensity of cosmic rays entering the Earth's atmosphere. Condensation on particles produced by cosmic rays results in formation of clouds that control atmospheric temperatures.​

THE SOLAR MAGNETIC CAUSE OF CLIMATE CHANGES AND ORIGIN OF THE ICE AGES: Easterbrook, Dr. Don J: 9781691061631: Amazon.com: Books

 
Cont'd;

Evidence-Based Climate Science​

Data Opposing CO2 Emissions as the Primary Source of Global Warming

Edited by: Don J. Easterbrook
...

About the book​

Key Features​

  • Provides scientific evidence for issues related to global climate change that is not readily available elsewhere
  • Offers detailed analysis of temperature measurements with the goal of helping readers to understand conflicting claims about global warming heard every day in the news media
  • Presents real-time data on polar ice
  • Presents the real-time effect of CO2 on global warming, rather than forecasts based on computer models

Description​

Evidence-Based Climate Science: Data Opposing CO2 Emissions as the Primary Source of Global Warming, Second Edition, includes updated data related to the causes of global climate change from experts in meteorology, geology, atmospheric physics, solar physics, geophysics, climatology, and computer modeling. This book objectively gathers and analyzes scientific data concerning patterns of past climate changes, influences of changes in ocean temperatures, the effect of solar variation on global climate, and the effect of CO2 on global climate. This analysis is then presented as counter-evidence to the theory that CO2 is the primary cause behind global warming.

Increasingly, scientists are pointing to data which suggests that climate changes are a result of natural cycles, which have been occurring for thousands of years. Unfortunately, global warming has moved into the political realm without enough peer-reviewed research to fully validate and exclude other, more natural, causes of climate change. For example, there is an absence of any physical evidence that CO2 causes global warming, so the only argument for CO2 as the cause of warming rests entirely in computer modeling.Thus, the question becomes, how accurate are the computer models in predicting climate? What other variables could be missing from the models?

In order to understand modern climate changes, we need to look at the past history of climate changes. Vast amounts of physical evidence of climate change over the past centuries and millennia have been gathered by scientists. Significant climate changes have clearly been going on for many thousands of years, long before the recent rise in atmospheric CO2 Evidence-Based Climate Science, Data Opposing CO2 Emissions as the Primary Source of Global Warming, Second Edition, documents past climate changes and presents physical evidence for possible causes.
...
...
ALSO;
Evidence-Based Climate Science: Data Opposing CO2 Emissions as the Primary Source of Global Warming, Second Edition, includes updated data related to the causes of global climate change from experts in meteorology, geology, atmospheric physics, solar physics, geophysics, climatology, and computer modeling. This book objectively gathers and analyzes scientific data concerning patterns of past climate changes, influences of changes in ocean temperatures, the effect of solar variation on global climate, and the effect of CO2 on global climate.

This analysis is then presented as counter-evidence to the theory that CO2 is the primary cause behind global warming. Increasingly, scientists are pointing to data which suggests that climate changes are a result of natural cycles, which have been occurring for thousands of years. Unfortunately, global warming has moved into the political realm without enough peer-reviewed research to fully validate and exclude other, more natural, causes of climate change. For example, there is an absence of any physical evidence that CO2 causes global warming, so the only argument for CO2 as the cause of warming rests entirely in computer modeling. Thus, the question becomes, how accurate are the computer models in predicting climate? What other variables could be missing from the models?

In order to understand modern climate changes, we need to look at the past history of climate changes. Vast amounts of physical evidence of climate change over the past centuries and millennia have been gathered by scientists. Significant climate changes have clearly been going on for many thousands of years, long before the recent rise in atmospheric CO2 Evidence-Based Climate Science, Data Opposing CO2 Emissions as the Primary Source of Global Warming, Second Edition, documents past climate changes and presents physical evidence for possible causes. - Provides scientific evidence for issues related to global climate change that is not readily available elsewhere - Offers detailed analysis of temperature measurements with the goal of helping readers to understand conflicting claims about global warming heard every day in the news media - Presents real-time data on polar ice - Presents the real-time effect of CO2 on global warming, rather than forecasts based on computer models.

Be sure to check the sample pages at this link for many assorted charts, etc.
 
AND;

Natural Climate Cycles: Dr. Don Easterbrook & Gregg Easterbrook (2025 Update)​

by Lewis Loflin – December 2025
...
Two sober, data-driven voices — geologist Dr. Don J. Easterbrook and science writer Gregg Easterbrook — have long argued that Earth’s climate has always changed dramatically, and always will, driven primarily by natural cycles, not human CO₂.
...

2025 Reality Check​


  • No statistically significant global warming in 27+ years (1998–2025) despite record CO₂ emissions
  • Arctic ice extent in 2025 is higher than predicted by most alarmist models
  • Sea-level rise continues at a steady ~2–3 mm/year — unchanged for a century
  • Crop yields and global greening at all-time highs thanks to CO₂ fertilization


 
0.04% really 0.0004 without the percent...

They avoid trying to dispute what EMH posts because they cannot refute, they know it. Ice dictates Earth's climate

temperature
atmospheric thickness/surface air pressure
ocean levels
ocean temps/hurricanes
humidity (really a function of temperature, but ice controls temperature)


Think of it this way. Earth is a room with 2 air(and water) conditioning units, Arctic and Antarctic, each with settings 0=off and 10= maxCOOL.

Right now the AA AC is set at 9 and the Arctic AC is set at 1. Just configure land differently and you "change the setting of the AC unit."

No land near the poles = no ice = Earth warm parameter = Jurassic = warmer, wetter, higher SAP

A big continent on each pole = "two Antarcticas" = colder, drier, lower ocean level, lower SAP, little to no cane activity

R.9de336d08f1b19004ec8bfea19287822





Mp
Add the Methane, another GHG tweaking the nickers of the alarmists, which is expressed in ppb (parts per billion)
to this;
0.04% really 0.0004 without the percent...
We add methane for 0.0004004 regarding those dangerous GHGs.
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom