Global Warming

Posted March 2nd, 2007 by hoopsnakes2004

Climate Crisis

I think this whole global warming thing is a bunch of crap. Back in the 70's we were told of gave concerns of global cooling. You can't have it both ways.

How old is this planet? You fruitcakes are using info of less than 100 years. You are being brain washed by the left wingers. All they want is funding for more research which they intern twist to get the results they want. A.K.A. more funding.

hoopsnakes2004's blog
Login or register to post comments

This "global cooling" story

On March 2nd, 2007 yabu said:

1. It's not 100 years but at least 650,000
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/11/650000-years-of-gr...
Also, did you hear about paleoclimatology and proxies?

2. About funding:

"I would say that the central flaw in the op-ed is a logical one: if you're trying to stifle dissent, then you want less funding for climate research, not more. If you're trying to stop global warming, then you want more money for carbon sequestration research, and you don't care how much is spent on climate research. On the other hand if you just love climate research as a really interesting intellectual pursuit, that's when you've got an interest in shedding doubt on the reigning view that CO2-induced climate change is a serious policy program, requiring action. Twenty-five years ago, when global warming wasn't a big public worry, one might expect climate change researchers to hype the problem. In 2006, when public opinion mostly accepts that there's a problem, scientists who want research money should be emphasizing uncertainty."
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/04/lindzen-point-by-p...

3. The "global cooling" story is carp and that you repeat this nonsense only shows your ignorance.

They Predicted Cooling in the 1970's

A very cursory comparison of then and now reveals a huge difference. Today, you have a widespread scientific consensus supported by national academies and all the major scientific institutions solidy behind the warning that the temperature is rising, anthropogenic CO2 is the cause and the warming will worsen unless we reduce emissions. In the 1970's, there was a book in the popular press, a few articles in popular magazines, and a small amount of scientific speculation based on the recently discovered glacial cycles and the recent slight cooling trend from air pollution blocking the sunlight. No daily headlines. No avalanche of scientific articles. No United Nations treaties and commissions. No G8 summits on the dangers.

There quite simply is no comparison, I'm sure you could find better evidence of a "consensus" of a coming alien invasion.
http://illconsidered.blogspot.com/2006/02/they-predicted-cooling-in-1970...

The global cooling myth
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/01/the-global-cooling...

Don't you think you are a little bit arrogant when you without any scientific training in climatology claim that you know better than thousands of trained scientists all over the world?
Gore is not a scientist, either but he does not claim he knows better than they do. He forwards their conclusion to the masses.

Don't you notice how you simply repeat a few talking points you heard from right wing sources?
Why don't you think for yourself and do your own research?
Such soundbites have no place in science.

Down Boy

On March 3rd, 2007 hoopsnakes2004 said:

See what happens when you pencil necked geeks are challenged. Consensus is not fact. Look it up.

With the left wing bias in the media there is not much hope for the others to challenge this B.S. So the planet may be warming a little. Bring it on. Short sleeve shirts for all!!!!!! I hope the temp increases more than anticipated.

Chuckles to you narrow minded, left wing ...brainwashed nut burgers. May we all burn more fossil fuels. There is plenty to go around. Open up Alaska and DIG DIG DIG!!!!
Oil for all to burn. Maybe even spill a little. Ouch that has to hurt you guys!!!!!

You agreeing with yourself

On March 3rd, 2007 yabu said:

You agreeing with yourself does not mean that you have the facts.
You don't have more credibility than thousands of scientists who actually spent years and years studying the Earth's climate system.
You could be here telling us that the Venus is cooler than the Merkur, you sure would go against the scientific consensus, and you would not more convincing just because you say that consensus is not a fact.
With your "logic" we wouldn't have any kind of fact because hey, even if 10,000 chemists say that CFCs destroy the ozone in the stratosphere it's still not a fact.
Even if 99% of doctors say that smoking can cause lung cancer it's still not a fact.

That there is a consensus is a fact itself. But the reason why there is a consensus is that without CO2 levels going up from 280 ppm to 380 ppm over the last ~150 years global mean temperature wouldn't have gone up 0.8 C is also fact. I looked it up. You apparently didn't.

You have not provided any evidence whatsoever that warming since the start of
the industrial age happened due to some different forcing.
If you are so sure about your theory try to publish it in a peer-reviewed paper. After then we can talk.

I'm not interested in incoherent pseudo-scientific blah blah and juveline soundbites.

Hmmm... a hoopsnake takes its tail in its mouth

On March 2nd, 2007 dbciii said:

and rolls down hills

so I guess I can't say what I wanted to - since you have your tail down your throat it is the opposite of what I was thinking

and telling you to bite my butt would not be appropriate either, would it, since you bite your own

as to the ludicrous rejectionist comments themselves... I guess denying the bleeding obvious is your right. I don't know why it makes you feel good to name-call about it though. And if ALL this was was a scam to perpetuate meaningless funding, wouldn't it be easier to take the big bribes offered by the big polluters to sweep the issue under the rug? They can pay a LOT more, and then the researchers would not have to do anything but shut up and take the money.

Ah well, there is a saying that someone can't see the forest for the trees. In your case its your butt blocking your view, but whatever.