Tiberius Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Well, there's that. The weather is priceless. Which it would have to be since on my salary, I'd be homeless lol What's your opinion Joe, is this a hoax and a conspiracy this Global Warming thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 What's your opinion Joe, is this a hoax and a conspiracy this Global Warming thing? I don't care. I'll be dead before it's a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 I don't care. I'll be dead before it's a problem. Good answer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg F Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Cost is only an issue in the absence of value. I have no idea of the source and accuracy of this chart but according to it the rise has leveled off over that last 8-10k years. The artwork is from Robert Rohde, founder of Global Warming Art. The scale on that graph is in meters. Were talking millimeter changes now. Here is from the more recent past at the CSIRO web site. Sea levels were still rising well before there was any significant burning of fossil fuels. You aspire to be a halfwit? Are you gatorman? Guess it would be better to be a halfwit than a nitwit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 The artwork is from Robert Rohde, founder of Global Warming Art. The scale on that graph is in meters. Were talking millimeter changes now. Here is from the more recent past at the CSIRO web site. Sea levels were still rising well before there was any significant burning of fossil fuels. Significant coal burning started before 1880. That is the argument the global warming crowd uses...and it's not wrong. The problem is that depending on the point they want to stress, they keep changing their damned baseline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Interesting: http://ocean.nationalgeographic.com/ocean/critical-issues-sea-level-rise/ Good thing we will be dead. Imagine the refugee debate in 2080? Most predictions say the warming of the planet will continue and likely will accelerate. Oceans will likely continue to rise as well, but predicting the amount is an inexact science. A recent study says we can expect the oceans to rise between 2.5 and 6.5 feet (0.8 and 2 meters) by 2100, enough to swamp many of the cities along the U.S. East Coast. More dire estimates, including a complete meltdown of the Greenland ice sheet, push sea level rise to 23 feet (7 meters), enough to submerge London. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 You aspire to be a halfwit? Are you gatorman? Nitwit. Not anymore! Not anymore what? Well, there's that. The weather is priceless. Which it would have to be since on my salary, I'd be homeless lol And we have lots of bridges for you to live under too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg F Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Significant coal burning started before 1880. That is the argument the global warming crowd uses...and it's not wrong. The problem is that depending on the point they want to stress, they keep changing their damned baseline. Based on atmospheric CO2 levels were talking around 1940 or so. It's always fun to watch them try to explain this: It's also always interesting to point out that at 150 ppm CO2 all plant life dies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Based on atmospheric CO2 levels were talking around 1940 or so. It's always fun to watch them try to explain this: It's also always interesting to point out that at 150 ppm CO2 all plant life dies. They don't explain it. They dismiss it. Because it disagrees with consensus. Which is what makes global warming a religion and not science. In reality, you can prove damn near anything you want about climate change if you choose the correct baseline. Which is why there's so much bull **** proselytizing masquerading as science within the discipline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Global Carbon Dioxide Emissions Have Now Been Flat for Two Years Running: The International Energy Agency says emissions growth has decoupled from global economic growth. That's terrible ! How can we impose new regulations if things are getting better on their own ? ? ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg F Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Interesting: http://ocean.nationalgeographic.com/ocean/critical-issues-sea-level-rise/ Good thing we will be dead. Imagine the refugee debate in 2080? It's always interesting when an article includes a scary picture and uses "a recent study" which they don't identify to promote their beliefs. We wouldn't want anybody actually reading the "recent study" now would we? Gator, your an object lesson of confirmation bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 It's always interesting when an article includes a scary picture and uses "a recent study" which they don't identify to promote their beliefs. We wouldn't want anybody actually reading the "recent study" now would we? Gator, your an object lesson of confirmation bias. He's an abject lesson in scientific ignorance. Guess who he is in this comic: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 And we have lots of bridges for you to live under too. Unlike many of your fellow San Fransiscans, I do have -some- dignity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Based on atmospheric CO2 levels were talking around 1940 or so. It's always fun to watch them try to explain this: It's also always interesting to point out that at 150 ppm CO2 all plant life dies. I think I might print up dozens of these and have them laminated and hand them out to my climate change friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 Beyond record hot, February was 'astronomical' and 'strange'Associated Press ^ pssssst -- "El Nino" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 (edited) Judge Orders White House To Stop Hiding Its Bogus Global Warming ‘Proof.’ On January 8, 2014, the White House posted a controversial video claiming that global warming causes more severe winter cold. Called “The Polar Vortex Explained in 2 Minutes,” it featured the director of the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy (OSTP), , claiming that a “growing body of evidence” showed that the “extreme cold being experienced by much of the United States” at the time was “a pattern that we can expect to see with increasing frequency as global warming continues.” This claim was questioned by many scientists and commentators. (See, e.g., Jason Samenow, Scientists: Don’t make “extreme cold” centerpiece of global warming argument, Washington Post, Feb. 20, 2014 (linking to objection by five well-known climate scientists in the Feb. 14, 2014 issue of Science magazine); Patrick J. Michaels, Hot Air About Cold Air, Jan. 16, 2014 (former state climatologist of Virginia rejected Holdren’s claim)) In April 2014, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) sent a request for correction of this statement under the federal Information Quality Act, citing peer-reviewed scientific articles debunking it. In June 2014, OSTP rejected this request, claiming that Holdren’s statement was his “personal opinion,” not the agency’s position, and that it thus did not constitute “information” subject to the Information Quality Act, which excludes “subjective opinions” from its reach. In response, CEI filed a Freedom of Information Act request seeking documents related to the video, its production at taxpayer expense, and OSTP’s rejection of its correction request. Despite having earlier claimed that the video was just Holdren’s personal opinion, not the agency’s, OSTP withheld portions of emails about it as privileged “agency records.” It also refused to produce drafts of its letter rejecting CEI’s request for correction. More at the link: Why not SHARE all that TRUTH with us ??? . Edited March 19, 2016 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Very wide right Posted March 19, 2016 Author Share Posted March 19, 2016 I have to say that I'm very proud that this thread I started is still going strong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 I have to say that I'm very proud that this thread I started is still going strong. It has nothing to do with you, nor was this the first climate change thread. It's just the newest, thus the easiest for people to post in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 (edited) I have to say that I'm very proud that this thread I started is still going strong. I wonder if there is any correlation with this thread still going strong and you staying away? Or, could it be causation? Edited March 19, 2016 by 3rdnlng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 Why is "Global Warming" the only science Liberals obsessively believe? They don't understand Economics. They're afraid of GMO's. They warn against Vaccines. They reject the concept of genders. They preach a Technology-free carbon-less lifestyle... Why is this one thing different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts