Would love to see how the Global Warming idiots explain this one...

[Chris]

There are no links, this is all from watching documentaries, and reading different magazines, and news papers.Please, why don't you just google,
"Earths oceans releasing Greenhouse methane", and Volcanoes releasing CO2,how it relates to "Earth cyclical climate change", also "How Sun Spot activity" has affected the Earth's overall temperature.You must also Google,
"Methane being released from melting Ice in the the North and south Poles",
how this has affected"Earth cyclical climate change". This, will provide you with all the "unbiased scientific information, that you require".
Get back to me on what you have found Chris.

Truly,
52ndStreet.

You can't provide decent links because there are none.

 

[52ndStreet]

You can't provide decent links because there are none.

You will see, some links if you do the google search, and research the items that I mentioned.

The links are there,Google them and you will see them!
My comments are based on Scientific facts.Do I have to spoon feed you all
of these facts?Don't be lazy, I am ready to debate you on this "Human global warming Scam", it is all false. As I said "Earth cyclical climate change", is
real, and is what we here on the Earth are experiecing.

 

[Vintij]

You will see, some links if you do the google search, and research the items that I mentioned.

The links are there,Google them and you will see them!
My comments are based on Scientific facts.Do I have to spoon feed you all
of these facts?Don't be lazy, I am ready to debate you on this "Human global warming Scam", it is all false. As I said "Earth cyclical climate change", is
real, and is what we here on the Earth are experiecing.

?

Okay, well considering that we can not see into the future.....how can you be certain that the correlation between sky rocketing c02 levels and tempurature will now (after 400 thousand years of seamless paralelled trends) all of the sudden break apart?


I dont understand why anyone takes your credulous claims seriously, I linked several times the data showing the clear correlation between c02 and tempurature over the last 400 thousand years, I stoped short of even posting the keeling curve data because I thought what I posted was enough to prove to you the connection. Now to all of the sudden say that tempurature will break from the correlation with atmospheric C02 fluctuations is a complete wild guess. Thats why I dont understand why people STILL to this day choose a wild guess over scientific data showing clear cyclical trends that have only recently (last hundred years or so) broken away from the effects of the milankovitch cycle with sky rocketing c02 concentrations. Now since climate change is a very long and complex ordeal, why should we believe tempurature reading based on what happend this year? Obviously there is a correlation between tempurature and c02 but just because the tempurature is not sky rocketing in the same fashion of c02 concentrations, does not mean it is not rising an an unatrual level. Infact it IS rising at an unatural level of almost half a degree per year.

Do you know the implications of even a half a degree per year rise in tempurature? Do you care?

Seriously if you want to debate someone, debate me. Tell me exactly why you think anthropogenic rising levels of c02 in the atmosphere will not effect the natural climate cycle? Please I am dying to know exactly where you are getting this data from because c02 levels have not been this high in a million years so obviously you dont have another event to compare this to.

 

[52ndStreet]

?

Okay, well considering that we can not see into the future.....how can you be certain that the correlation between sky rocketing c02 levels and tempurature will now (after 400 thousand years of seamless paralelled trends) all of the sudden break apart?


I dont understand why anyone takes your credulous claims seriously, I linked several times the data showing the clear correlation between c02 and tempurature over the last 400 thousand years, I stoped short of even posting the keeling curve data because I thought what I posted was enough to prove to you the connection. Now to all of the sudden say that tempurature will break from the correlation with atmospheric C02 fluctuations is a complete wild guess. Thats why I dont understand why people STILL to this day choose a wild guess over scientific data showing clear cyclical trends that have only recently (last hundred years or so) broken away from the effects of the milankovitch cycle with sky rocketing c02 concentrations. Now since climate change is a very long and complex ordeal, why should we believe tempurature reading based on what happend this year? Obviously there is a correlation between tempurature and c02 but just because the tempurature is not sky rocketing in the same fashion of c02 concentrations, does not mean it is not rising an an unatrual level. Infact it IS rising at an unatural level of almost half a degree per year.

Do you know the implications of even a half a degree per year rise in tempurature? Do you care?

Seriously if you want to debate someone, debate me. Tell me exactly why you think anthropogenic rising levels of c02 in the atmosphere will not effect the natural climate cycle? Please I am dying to know exactly where you are getting this data from because c02 levels have not been this high in a million years so obviously you dont have another event to compare this to.

First of all, the Earth has systems in place to deal with CO2,increases.What you and the other narrow minded"Human Global warming" feinds fail to realize, is that there are many other factors that are speeding up the "Earth cyclical climate change" situation. One of the main gases that is now being released
by the Earth,NOT Humans, is Methane!.Scientists have found millions of cubic
meters of Methane gases being released in melting perma frost bogs in eastern Siberia in the Soviet Union.As I said earlier if you don't believe,do
a Google search right now on, "Methane gas being released in western Siberia."Also this Methane is being released from melting ice in the North and south Poles. And we have millions of more cubic meters of Methane being released from the depths of the worlds Oceans. Scientists have stated,Methane gas,released by these sources, will increase the Earths
temperature a lot faster than any Human CO2 output into the Earths atmospher.The Info is all there ,Do a quick Google Search, and you and the
others, please get back to me on what you have found.
"Human Global Warming"is False, "Earth cyclical Climate change" is the real deal!!Get educated with the Facts!!

 

[Vintij]

First of all, the Earth has systems in place to deal with CO2,increases.What you and the other narrow minded"Human Global warming" feinds fail to realize, is that there are many other factors that are speeding up the "Earth cyclical climate change" situation. One of the main gases that is now being released
by the Earth,NOT Humans, is Methane!.Scientists have found millions of cubic
meters of Methane gases being released in melting perma frost bogs in eastern Siberia in the Soviet Union.As I said earlier if you don't believe,do
a Google search right now on, "Methane gas being released in western Siberia."Also this Methane is being released from melting ice in the North and south Poles. And we have millions of more cubic meters of Methane being released from the depths of the worlds Oceans. Scientists have stated,Methane gas,released by these sources, will increase the Earths
temperature a lot faster than any Human CO2 output into the Earths atmospher.The Info is all there ,Do a quick Google Search, and you and the
others, please get back to me on what you have found.
"Human Global Warming"is False, "Earth cyclical Climate change" is the real deal!!Get educated with the Facts!!

lol


I can literally google anything that will tell me what I want to believe, does not mean that peer reviewed literature states this information you refuse to cite.....is actually true and if it were.....why are you taking it out of context?

You first come back with zero data, only an urge to "google" something....then you claim that these "scientists" are refering to climate change when they talk about natural methane being released into the atmosphere? Where is the sediment research, why has this information not come out with ice core studies? Why has this data not been published by a peer reviewed journal?

Ill tell you why, because you are taking something out of context thats why. The deep ocean releases sulfur and silicates at alarming rates.....this does not mean it has any correlation with climate change or global warming does it? No, but I can certainly make it SEEM as though it does right?

Second, you cant even name the cycle that earth has in place to deal with c02.....its called the CARBON CYCLE, maybe you should research on what exactly this is....maybe you will find out that there are trillions of micro-organisms in the ocean that absorb literally 48% of all the excess carbon that we have spewed out....thankfully they are keeping us from killing ourselves but what you refuse to read is that countless journals and scientific research facilities in the East coast, the Arctic, the North pole....etc all say the same thing, that this natural cycle is over extending itself and that we do not have enough species of carbon absorbing organisms on earth to maintain the exponential growth rate of C02 concentrations in the earths atmosphere and in the ocean.........The atmosphere, as you probably dont know...only holds about 20% of the earths entire concentration of c02, that is where you are stuck.

You cant say that methane in the atmosphere will cause anything when not even c02 in the atmosphere is the main cource of climate change. You actually think that climate change is a one, two, three problem? Wow, I see this all the time...people who think that climate change is not a huge complex equalibrium that involves not only the atmosphere but more importantly the OCEAN. The PH balance of the ocean, the sediemtology, the oceanography, the over extended carbon cycle, water cycle, nitrogen cycle....the dillution of fresh water in the ocean and the rise of salt water to the upper ocean which ***** up the north atlantic current, the main source of heat transport in the ocean.

How can you think that climate change is really effected by natural methane being released into the atmosphere when literally billions of C02 parts per square inch, are rising at visibly and detectable rates all over the globe.

 

[52ndStreet]

lol


I can literally google anything that will tell me what I want to believe, does not mean that peer reviewed literature states this information you refuse to cite.....is actually true and if it were.....why are you taking it out of context?

You first come back with zero data, only an urge to "google" something....then you claim that these "scientists" are refering to climate change when they talk about natural methane being released into the atmosphere? Where is the sediment research, why has this information not come out with ice core studies? Why has this data not been published by a peer reviewed journal?

Ill tell you why, because you are taking something out of context thats why. The deep ocean releases sulfur and silicates at alarming rates.....this does not mean it has any correlation with climate change or global warming does it? No, but I can certainly make it SEEM as though it does right?

Second, you cant even name the cycle that earth has in place to deal with c02.....its called the CARBON CYCLE, maybe you should research on what exactly this is....maybe you will find out that there are trillions of micro-organisms in the ocean that absorb literally 48% of all the excess carbon that we have spewed out....thankfully they are keeping us from killing ourselves but what you refuse to read is that countless journals and scientific research facilities in the East coast, the Arctic, the North pole....etc all say the same thing, that this natural cycle is over extending itself and that we do not have enough species of carbon absorbing organisms on earth to maintain the exponential growth rate of C02 concentrations in the earths atmosphere and in the ocean.........The atmosphere, as you probably dont know...only holds about 20% of the earths entire concentration of c02, that is where you are stuck.

You cant say that methane in the atmosphere will cause anything when not even c02 in the atmosphere is the main cource of climate change. You actually think that climate change is a one, two, three problem? Wow, I see this all the time...people who think that climate change is not a huge complex equalibrium that involves not only the atmosphere but more importantly the OCEAN. The PH balance of the ocean, the sediemtology, the oceanography, the over extended carbon cycle, water cycle, nitrogen cycle....the dillution of fresh water in the ocean and the rise of salt water to the upper ocean which ***** up the north atlantic current, the main source of heat transport in the ocean.

How can you think that climate change is really effected by natural methane being released into the atmosphere when literally billions of C02 parts per square inch, are rising at visibly and detectable rates all over the globe.

The information on Google with regards to methane increasing the Earth Temperature is accepted as documented scientific fact.But you seem to deny
my claims, without doing any kind of Google search or investigting any of my
cliams about methane gas, and its effect on "Earth cyclical climate Change".
You state,my info must be taken from "scientific journals only", any other
source is not reputable.This is what I call an absurdity,on your part, and to
all the other people that think like you.There are always two sides to any
Scientific debate. Pro and con. All I have to say to you is, you are not a
real intellectual.I thought you might be, but you are not.
With regard to your Bacteria consuming methane, and or CO2 in the ocean,
that still does not counter my argument about the millions of cubic meters of
methane being released from the bogs in Eastern Siberia, and in the North and South poles.Do reserach my claims

 

[glockmail]

The result of global warming is unpredictable weather patterns all over the earth.

So basically whenever the global warmists **** up their predictions, then they are proven right. Right?

 

[Chris]

So basically whenever the global warmists **** up their predictions, then they are proven right. Right?

In the general the predictions of the earth's warming have been too conservative.

 

[eots]

omg really....global warming !!!..cant the government do something ??? hey I know..
a tax...ya thats it ! ...oooo feels better already...like a cool breeze...

 

[glockmail]

In the general the predictions of the earth's warming have been too conservative.

What have you done to reduce your carbon footprint?

 

[Chris]

What have you done to reduce your carbon footprint?

I have never had children.

 

[Vintij]

The information on Google with regards to methane increasing the Earth Temperature is accepted as documented scientific fact.But you seem to deny
my claims, without doing any kind of Google search or investigting any of my
cliams about methane gas, and its effect on "Earth cyclical climate Change".
You state,my info must be taken from "scientific journals only", any other
source is not reputable.This is what I call an absurdity,on your part, and to
all the other people that think like you.There are always two sides to any
Scientific debate. Pro and con. All I have to say to you is, you are not a
real intellectual.I thought you might be, but you are not.
With regard to your Bacteria consuming methane, and or CO2 in the ocean,
that still does not counter my argument about the millions of cubic meters of
methane being released from the bogs in Eastern Siberia, and in the North and South poles.Do reserach my claims

Yes, correct. Any source of scientific evidence that has not been scrutinized is not a reputable source. Exactly right. Now you are begginging to understand the scientific community. Good job, now if only you were less of a dense, uneducated, intellectually uniterested person....you would use "Google" to research real data. I dont have to research your "methane" claim because I know for a fact that wasting any time on your claims actually validates your stupidity, making my research in climate change over the past 5 years meaningless.

Please dont come to me with claims about a subject what I have spent a third of my life researching. My thesis was based on this subject and I graduated with a degree in Marine Biology and a minor in Sedimentology. You have no idea what your talking about and whats worse is you actually think you know something that I do not. Its really funny.

 

[del]

I have never had children.

 

[Zoomie1980]

I dont see any RAW data in there. I gave you a website, that produces RAW data. Do you see the difference. I dont care how ignorant you are.....anyone can post anything without raw data but I clearly have said that anthropogenic global warming is not official but what is official as I said in my retyped post, is that man made c02 levels ARE official. Yes we are 100% causing the rise in c02 levels......your argument is that it is not effecting tempurature change, which is a valid argument. BUT, in the past........based on our RAW data, it HAS effected climate change. So, like I said we found the bloody knife, we found the dead body.....and all we need is the DNA on the killers hands. Stop making yourself sound so uneducated (which I assume you are). I have done research and worked with climate change scientists for 10 years, how are you going to tell me that what I have seen based on real nubers and real figures.....is discredited based on some op ed newspaper article?

I have seen it, you have not. I have the data......I know the correlation, you do not. Dont talk to me about what I have spent a third of my life documenting and studying.

Ok, Dr. I'll bite. What is your degree in. what school. Who was your PhD sponsor? Who do you work for and in what capacity? Independently verifiable credentials, please.....

 

[Zoomie1980]

Switching to green energy is good for the planet and good for us because it is energy produced by AMERICANS, not ARABS.

If you can't see that, you really are dense.

It's good for us, who can take advantage of it, by investing the most promising technologies. Not for any other other reason, though. I like it, because I intend to personally profit from it. which is good.....for me, anyway....

 

[Vintij]

Ok, Dr. I'll bite. What is your degree in. what school. Who was your PhD sponsor? Who do you work for and in what capacity? Independently verifiable credentials, please.....

I am not a Doctor, if you look at my age you would know that. It was a 5 chapter undergraduate research project thesis at UCI on the effects of chemical distributions and concentrations on marine life aggregation within ocean sediments. I do not get paid to work for anyone, I assist Dr. A. Kimo Morris (marine biologist and professor at UCLA) with his research on zooplankton blooms and their relation/reaction to environmental impacts both natural and anthropogenic. Which does not make me an expert at all, but I know credulous and explicit bull shit when I see it.

By the way, I dont remember talking to you in the first place. If you have something to say about climate change, why dont you say it? I can join any thread and question anyones credentials without adding to the debate but it does not make me look or feel any better.

 

[editec]

I have done the research also, and found out that Volcanoes are emitting more CO2, than humans are over a 10 year period 48% to our 39%,I have
also found out the the Earths oceans are releasing methane gas, which is a green house gas. And I also found out that Sun spot activity is having a effect on the Earths overall temperature. This is not my opinion,this info is what
the real unbiased scientist have realized.So,it not just Humans driving cars releasing CO2 gases,there are many other factors to factor into the entire
equation of "Earth cyclical climate change".
Do,more research into these items that I have just mentioned.Also,methane
is being released from melting Ice from the North and South poles.DO THE RESEARCH on these items!!!

Yes we're all aware of those things.


But based on those we do not conclude that there is not global warming.

Do you?

 

[Vintij]

Yes we're all aware of those things.


But based on those we do not conclude that there is not global warming.

Do you?

Essentially its like saying "go google gravitational effects of the moon, it will explain global warming"

 

[52ndStreet]

Yes, correct. Any source of scientific evidence that has not been scrutinized is not a reputable source. Exactly right. Now you are begginging to understand the scientific community. Good job, now if only you were less of a dense, uneducated, intellectually uniterested person....you would use "Google" to research real data. I dont have to research your "methane" claim because I know for a fact that wasting any time on your claims actually validates your stupidity, making my research in climate change over the past 5 years meaningless.

Please dont come to me with claims about a subject what I have spent a third of my life researching. My thesis was based on this subject and I graduated with a degree in Marine Biology and a minor in Sedimentology. You have no idea what your talking about and whats worse is you actually think you know something that I do not. Its really funny.

"You don't have to research my methane claime because it will waste your time",What you mean to say is that if you research my "methane gas claime",
your theory of human CO2, input ,would be incorrect. So what we have here,is what I have seen many times before. We have a Phd , or masters degreed, arrogant narrow minded elitest,Scientist type, who hates,or will not accept the fact that he is wrong with his entire thesis.
Is this what we have?.

 

[Vintij]

"You don't have to research my methane claime because it will waste your time",What you mean to say is that if you research my "methane gas claime",
your theory of human CO2, input ,would be incorrect. So what we have here,is what I have seen many times before. We have a Phd , or masters degreed, arrogant narrow minded elitest,Scientist type, who hates,or will not accept the fact that he is wrong with his entire thesis.
Is this what we have?.

It was an undergraduate thesis and yes you are wrong. I have already done the type of research your speaking of and just to make sure I looked further into it last night and just as I suspected, it is not the number one concern for climate change

Global Warming: The Causes

scroll down above and you will once again see some real data on methane gas

"While carbon dioxide is the principal greenhouse gas, methane is second most important"

While ofcourse it is a concern, I never said it was not......My point was that it was not the principal methane level that was the problem, that NATURALLY derived methane gas is not causing the concentrations to rise by 145% over the last 100 years. You were the one who said it was natural methane cycles that are out of whack naturally, I am the one who said you are wrong and that it was anthropogenic. You do realize that methane is also a byproduct of burning fossil fuels dont you?

"Methane is derived from sources such as rice paddies, bovine flatulence, bacteria in bogs and fossil fuel production" (according to US emissions inventory in 2004)

Trust me, I have seen first hand the data from concentrations of methane on the sea floor, obviously it is safe to assume that the rising levels of the concentrations of C02 and methane over the last 100 years is probably a byproduct of the same global event. While ofcourse we can not prove this, I think it is safe to assume this based on the mountains of evidence collected over the last 5 years and comparing that evidence to ice core data collected from the arctic. Clearly all the data shows that something very complex and very different from the events over the last million years is happening right now and began to happen only 100 years ago.


Look 52, I am not trying to say I am better than you or know more than you at all. I am just speaking about something I know a little bit about, that is all. There are millions of things I wish I knew more about like business economics or phsycology and social behavior or physics etc....How does looking at data make me an elitist?