How Global Warming Really Works

[Adre]

You should probably learn how to read. I said, "I think it's beyond intellectually arrogant and stupid to think we are capable of destroying the environment, or effect it in cataclysmic ways." You just misquoted me.

By the way, when I quote you directly you'll know it by the things that look like ".

 

[Whiskey1965]

Its all a scam, another way to tax people,limit growth, gain control of resource's by creating a problem and then coming up with a solution for a problem that does not now or has ever been real!
Anyone with basic science knowledge and common sense can tell the Climate Change was a HOAX and just look at who's behind it all people using faked data and computer models that have proven 100% wrong .
Global Warming has NEVER been proven in over 25 years zero proof and thats because its retarded junk science!

 

[Adre]

Its all a scam, another way to tax people,limit growth, gain control of resource's by creating a problem and then coming up with a solution for a problem that does not now or has ever been real!
Anyone with basic science knowledge and common sense can tell the Climate Change was a HOAX and just look at who's behind it all people using faked data and computer models that have proven 100% wrong .
Global Warming has NEVER been proven in over 25 years zero proof and thats because its retarded junk science!

I suggest you mention this to the commercial ship captain who motored through the Northwest Passage not too long ago.

 

[Sean]

Its all a scam, another way to tax people,limit growth, gain control of resource's by creating a problem and then coming up with a solution for a problem that does not now or has ever been real!
Anyone with basic science knowledge and common sense can tell the Climate Change was a HOAX and just look at who's behind it all people using faked data and computer models that have proven 100% wrong .
Global Warming has NEVER been proven in over 25 years zero proof and thats because its retarded junk science!

Well, now that someone of your obviously encyclopaedic knowledge of climate science has put us right, our eyes are opened!

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean Renaud]

I'm beginning to think that the real reason Republicans don't believe in Global Warming is two fold. First they are lying and do believe it and second they didn't get through fifth grade.

Yes the world has been warmer, even possibly ice free at times. When Europeans first discovered Greenland it was green, hence the name. This is common knowledge. It's also common knowledge that it was warmer during the Mesozoic Era. These are things that every child learns growing up.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

But they are not synonymous, a fact you conveniently forget. You're upset you've been fooled again, like you were when you dropped down to prostrate yourself in fealty before Obama when he dropped in and promised you a free lunch and an end to America.

Speaking of being fooled, have you talked to Karen lately?

 

[trysail]

The New Yorker has a satirical piece, excerpts:

After a report from the Yale Center on Climate Change Communication showed that the term “climate change” elicits relatively little concern from the American public, leading scientists are recommending replacing it with a new term: “You will be burnt to a crisp and die.”

Other terms under consideration by the scientists include “your cities will be ravaged by tsunamis and floods” and “earth will be a fiery hellhole incapable of supporting human life.”

Scientists were generally supportive of the suggestions, with many favoring the term “your future will involve rowing a boat down a river of rotting corpses.”

“Any of these terms would do a better job conveying the urgency of the problem,” Tracy Klugian, a spokesperson for the newly renamed Yale Center for Oh My God Wake Up You Assholes, said.

The real problem is identified by Jaime Jessop in a tweet: Oh dear, ‘climate change’ (TM) re-brand has back-fired somewhat. Back to GW? But there isn’t any. What to do?



​

 

[phrodeau]

April 2014 tied for hottest April on record.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...tory-dont-expect-climate-attitudes-to-change/

 

[BoyNextDoor]

You just need to look at the Q1 GDP to see the impact of man-caused climate change.

 

[Ishmael]

You just need to look at the Q1 GDP to see the impact of man-caused climate change.

Nominated for dumbest post of 2014.

Ishmael

 

[miles]

Nominated for dumbest post of 2014.

Ishmael

I think he needs to prove his statement.

 

[Ishmael]

I think he needs to prove his statement.

He'll just quote the government press releases. <shrug>

Ishmael

 

[miles]

Bergdahl Swap With Taliban Breaks the Law


Here’s a riddle: When is a law not a law? Answer: Whenever POTUS decides it isn’t. Well, no one said that the riddle was funny. It just happens to be true. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, 28, was released by the Taliban on Saturday after 5 years of captivity. He was exchanged for five Taliban prisoners, detained at Gitmo. The fact that Sgt. Bergdahl was finally sent home is wonderful. The means by which it occurred, however, are less so; they are flagrantly illegal. The release itself also raises a question: After being left to languish in captivity for 5 years why ram through Bergdahl’s release now?

Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), in The Washington Post denounced the deal:

“The release of five mid- to high-level Taliban is shocking…especially not coming to Congress…You now are going to have five people on the ground targeting American troops, the Afghan troops and the Afghan people…”

The terrorists were identified by The New York Times:

Mohammad Nabi Omari “one of the most significant former Taliban leaders detained” at Guantánamo.”
Mullah Norullah Noori also “considered one of the most significant former Taliban officials” at the prison…”
Mullah Mohammad Fazl…a former Taliban deputy defense minister…
Abdul Haq Wasiq, a former top Taliban intelligence official.
Khirullah Said Wali Khairkhwa…former minister of the interior and provincial governor.
Their release was secretly negotiated with the Taliban, by the administration without previous notification of Congress.

The New York Times conceded that Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel had admitted to wrongdoing: “In this case, Hagel, acknowledged in a statement that he did not notify Congress ahead of time.” The legal obligation calls for the secretary to do so 30 days beforehand. Then, in the regime’s predictable manner, it didn’t even take 24 hours for Hagel and National Security Adviser Susan Rice to reverse the “my bad” admission on the Sunday talk show circuit. FOX News reports:

“Top Obama administration officials on Sunday praised the diplomatic and military efforts to recover Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl…saying it was an ‘extraordinary’ and ‘life-saving’ mission while disagreeing with the arguments that officials negotiated with terrorists and failed to inform Congress…‘He wasn’t simply a hostage,’ Rice said. ‘He was a prisoner of war.’ Hagel told NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’: ‘We didn’t negotiate with terrorists. Sergeant Bergdahl is a prisoner of war...’”

Ah, transparency; the reasoning puts one in mind of Bill Clinton weaseling around by redefining “is” doesn’t it?

But the pronouncement from the president is truly the bucket of muck after the flood. The Times revealed details:

“When Mr. Obama signed a bill containing the latest version of the transfer restrictions into law, he issued a signing statement claiming that he could lawfully override them under his executive powers.”

He could override them? Kim Jong-un, move over. The Imperial President’s statement, released on Saturday, put on paper the law he signed and his reasoning therein:

“Today I have signed into law H.R. 3304, the National Defense Authorization Act…Since taking office, I have repeatedly called upon the Congress to work with my Administration to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba…For the past several years, the Congress has enacted unwarranted and burdensome restrictions that have impeded my ability to transfer detainees from Guantanamo. Earlier this year I again called upon the Congress to lift these restrictions…Section 1035 of this Act gives the Administration additional flexibility to transfer detainees abroad by easing rigid restrictions that have hindered negotiations with foreign countries and interfered with executive branch determinations about how and where to transfer detainees.”

Voila. In other words, “hindering negotiations” means hindering him. He don’t need no stinkin’ separation of powers.

Although liberal mouthpieces like The Washington Post and PBS preface the illegalities committed with such phrases as GOP lawmakers going “so far as to accuse President Obama of having broken the law” and “GOP lawmakers say administration broke law with prisoner swap…” the fact remains that secret negotiations are illegal. The president didn’t even do that. He negotiated the release of Sgt. Bergdahl with the Taliban. You know, terrorists? Those pesky rascals neither the U.S. nor her allies would ever negotiate with?

The question remains “why now?” Because a midterm election is coming up, that’s why. The New York Times inadvertently tips the regime’s hand:

“The Bergdahls, who have waged a tireless campaign for their son’s release, have sometimes criticized the Obama administration for lack of action. But at the impromptu Rose Garden appearance and in a statement released earlier in the day, they praised the American and Qatari governments for their help.”

A talking point, at long last, for an administration sadly lacking any.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Bergdahl's back, and that's all that matters.
Fuck you, Miles.

 

[KingOrfeo]

You should probably learn how to read. I said, "I think it's beyond intellectually arrogant and stupid to think we are capable of destroying the environment, or effect it in cataclysmic ways." You just misquoted me.

Well, of course he did, in charity, because one hesitates think any man who can operate a keyboard is so stupid as to believe that! Altering the environment is what humans do -- even very primitive humans; the American landscape Columbus (etc.) discovered was very different from the American landscape the wandering Siberians discovered -- and of course climate-change would not represent the first time humans have affected the environment in "cataclysmic ways," see the Dust Bowl.

 

[thør]

You just need to look at the Q1 GDP to see the impact of man-caused climate change.

It's good for my line of work.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Republican witness admits the expert consensus on human-caused global warming is real

The US House of Representatives Congressional Committee on Science, Space, and Technology held a hearing on the IPCC process last Thursday. The Republicans on the committee invited three witnesses to speak (Richard Tol, Daniel Botkin, and Roger Pielke Sr.), while the Democrats were allowed one witness (Michael Oppenheimer). The focus during the hearing shifted several times to the 97% expert consensus on human caused global warming; committee chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) even included some inaccurate statements denying the consensus in his opening remarks.

The witnesses generally focused on the subject at hand – the IPCC process – during their prepared testimonies, but Rep. Rohrabacher (R-CA) asked them in the question and answer session about the 97% expert consensus that humans are the main cause of global warming.

Richard Tol answered first, but his answer probably didn't satisfy Rohrabacher.

Tol admitted, "I mean it's pretty clear that most of the science agrees that climate change is real and most likely human-made"

Tol has also previously acknowledged,

"The consensus is of course in the high nineties"

However, while he admits it's real, Tol quibbles whether the consensus is precisely 97%.

LINK

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

When the Northern ice melts, the cool fresh water destroys the warm salty southern ocean current in the Atlantic by not letting the warm water sink and thus stops the rotation of warm water to Europe and North America and the planet cools and the ice reforms until it makes the water so salty that it restores the current and the cycle repeats again. When the sunspot activity is in it's low phase, you get less warm water and when the sun is active, you get more warm water.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

When the Northern ice melts, the cool fresh water destroys the warm salty southern ocean current in the Atlantic by not letting the warm water sink and thus stops the rotation of warm water to Europe and North America and the planet cools and the ice reforms until it makes the water so salty that it restores the current and the cycle repeats again. When the sunspot activity is in it's low phase, you get less warm water and when the sun is active, you get more warm water.

How many other threads are you going to cross-post that drivel into hoping someone gives you an atta-boy?

 

[KingOrfeo]

The hits keep on rollin' in:

NYT: Global Warming Happened Already, Before Humans
Earth Was 'Ice Free' Before Man

News Albert Merrick

Yes, we already knew that, including the climatologists. The Earth was "ice free" during several periods before man. But humans have lived our entire existence to date on an Earth with ice at the poles, we are not adapted to anything else.

 

[Que]

Yes, we already knew that, including the climatologists. The Earth was "ice free" during several periods before man. But humans have lived our entire existence to date on an Earth with ice at the poles, we are not adapted to anything else.

"Not adapted?" Means what? "Don't have webbed feet?"

Humans are quite adaptable. It did not require and evolutionary changes to "adapt" to the weightlessness of space.

Humans can adapt to higher temperatures much easier than low temperatures.

To even suggest that the temperature increases we are talking about would make the earth uninhabitable to humans is the kind of mindless hyperbole that makes the actual scientific portions of the study of climate get lost in the religion of global warming.

'Climate change': the first branch of "settled science" since the inquisitions.

For the sake of discussion...since humans also are not "adapted" to the last ice age...if solar cycles slow and climatologists issue prediction of a new ice age are you going to demand an INCREASE in CO2 emissions to 'save the planet?'

 

[BoyNextDoor]

"Not adapted?" Means what? "Don't have webbed feet?"

Humans are quite adaptable. It did not require and evolutionary changes to "adapt" to the weightlessness of space.

Humans can adapt to higher temperatures much easier than low temperatures.

To even suggest that the temperature increases we are talking about would make the earth uninhabitable to humans is the kind of mindless hyperbole that makes the actual scientific portions of the study of climate get lost in the religion of global warming.

'Climate change': the first branch of "settled science" since the inquisitions.

For the sake of discussion...since humans also are not "adapted" to the last ice age...if solar cycles slow and climatologists issue prediction of a new ice age are you going to demand an INCREASE in CO2 emissions to 'save the planet?'

Except for that pesky muscle atrophy and deterioration of the skeleton (spaceflight osteopenia), a slowing of cardiovascular system functions, decreased production of red blood cells, balance disorders, and a weakening of the immune system, fluid redistribution, loss of body mass, nasal congestion, sleep disturbance, and excess flatulence.

Looks like you are not a biologist either.

 

[Que]

Except for that pesky muscle atrophy and deterioration of the skeleton (spaceflight osteopenia), a slowing of cardiovascular system functions, decreased production of red blood cells, balance disorders, and a weakening of the immune system, fluid redistribution, loss of body mass, nasal congestion, sleep disturbance, and excess flatulence.

Looks like you are not a biologist either.

Fair point...that was a bit of a hyperbolic example...

Do you think Eskimos would die if we sent them to Hawaii?