Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming?

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

>If you READ the post you see that the tittle of the post is from the article.

So you posted something you didn't mean. Fair enough. In the future, if you post stuff you don't mean, please identify it as such; will save you a lot of grief.

You mean like shipping through the Northwest Passage.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

You use the term climate change and by implication you are stating it is man made.

I use the term as it is. The "climate changes". Man has nothing or little to do with it.

I await your next twist

Personally I don't get how you could be so naive as to think that we are not having an impact on the environment once again I guess we all cant be as smart as you think you areand that things like global warming are linked to us.

How do you explain smog around big cities? different issue Is that just natural? How do you explain the hike in lung cancer in big cities? Think it has anything to do with all those cars pumping 19 pounds of cancer causing gas per gallon of fuel in the air? And how could one think that all that may not have an affect on the environment when it's happening all over the world? Sorry, you piss in a bucket enough times and soon enough it's gonna fill up.Ah, I would dump mine

So you would rather have the oil companies make a few more billion had to come to the "Big Oil" agrumentthan put some laws into place that would cut emissions and save a few hundred thousand people from cancer? Nice general statment That makes no sense, as with those laws come other jobs and new industries. It isn't going to hurt our economy. Businesses may change, but it would be no different than when the computer market started...........it's just a technology change. And it would be better for our environment. We could actually stand to make a lot of money off of it if we chose to be the industry leader in alternative energy and sold the technology around the world. The fuel economy on US vehicles has not changed in 20 years.........is that because people don't have the technology or because people want to make money? On top of that, less oil used means less dependancy on the middle east..........now see where OBL gets his money from, essentially you'd be fighting terrorism by not using as much fuel and oil. Al Queda being based out of Saudi Arabia.............guess how the country makes their money?

Wake up. You say you want a clean environment, then go for it. All things don't come in the convenience package, sometimes you have to work for them.

Once again, this elietist attitude and arogance is discusting. now wonder I can not take you seriously

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

>If you READ the post you see that the tittle of the post is from the article.

So you posted something you didn't mean. Fair enough. In the future, if you post stuff you don't mean, please identify it as such; will save you a lot of grief.

Come on baby do the twist.

Why do you mislead when you loose a point? Everybody misses something once in a while. Including you

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 1,647]

Quote

Quote

>If you READ the post you see that the tittle of the post is from the article.

So you posted something you didn't mean. Fair enough. In the future, if you post stuff you don't mean, please identify it as such; will save you a lot of grief.

Come on baby do the twist.

Why do you mislead when you loose a point? Everybody misses something once in a while. Including you

Something about your posts reminds me of the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Something about your posts reminds me of the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

Something about your's reminds me of Oceania's Ministry of Truth.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>If you READ the post you see that the tittle of the post is from the article.

So you posted something you didn't mean. Fair enough. In the future, if you post stuff you don't mean, please identify it as such; will save you a lot of grief.

Come on baby do the twist.

Why do you mislead when you loose a point? Everybody misses something once in a while. Including you

Something about your posts reminds me of the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

I only go where you and Bill want to take the conversation!

The specific post you and Bill reference is very clear if you can read. You purposely try to twist that post out of context to make a non-existing point.

You just cant easily get away with it. Sorry

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 1,647]

Quote

Quote

Something about your posts reminds me of the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

Something about your's reminds me of Oceania's Ministry of Truth.

"Where's my jet?"

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Quote

Personally I don't get how you could be so naive as to think that we are not having an impact on the environment once again I guess we all cant be as smart as you think you areand that things like global warming are linked to us.

How do you explain smog around big cities? different issue

No it isn't. That may be an indicator of why you're having trouble with some of these concepts.

Quote

Is that just natural? How do you explain the hike in lung cancer in big cities? Think it has anything to do with all those cars pumping 19 pounds of cancer causing gas per gallon of fuel in the air? And how could one think that all that may not have an affect on the environment when it's happening all over the world? Sorry, you piss in a bucket enough times and soon enough it's gonna fill up.Ah, I would dump mine

WHERE?!?!?!? Outer space? The "cup" is the Earth dude.

Quote

So you would rather have the oil companies make a few more billion had to come to the "Big Oil" agrument

Let's see, who is it that has "liberated" into the atmosphere millions of year's worth of land locked carbon? Well, ultimately we have but BO and our government are the primary enablers.

Quote

than put some laws into place that would cut emissions and save a few hundred thousand people from cancer? Nice general statment That makes no sense, as with those laws come other jobs and new industries. It isn't going to hurt our economy. Businesses may change, but it would be no different than when the computer market started...........it's just a technology change. And it would be better for our environment. We could actually stand to make a lot of money off of it if we chose to be the industry leader in alternative energy and sold the technology around the world. The fuel economy on US vehicles has not changed in 20 years.........is that because people don't have the technology or because people want to make money? On top of that, less oil used means less dependancy on the middle east..........now see where OBL gets his money from, essentially you'd be fighting terrorism by not using as much fuel and oil. Al Queda being based out of Saudi Arabia.............guess how the country makes their money?

Wake up. You say you want a clean environment, then go for it. All things don't come in the convenience package, sometimes you have to work for them.

Once again, this elietist attitude and arogance is discusting. now wonder I can not take you seriously

Instead of simply wallowing in your "disgust" at the tough questions, how about addressing them?

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Something about your posts reminds me of the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

Something about your's reminds me of Oceania's Ministry of Truth.

"Where's my jet?"

That's all you've got? An obvious joke?

How about:

Colin Powell attempted to cover up the My Lai massacre...

The New York Times was blocked by the NSC from publishing a story they wished to print.

"real revenues have NOT gone up."

opponents of a referendum to raise minimum wage in Florida claimed hundreds of thousands of jobs would lost if the effort passed.

"Well, it is a fact that in Gulf War I, 38% of British fatalities were killed by US forces. "

Ministry of Truth, indeed.

[kallend 1,647]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Something about your posts reminds me of the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

Something about your's reminds me of Oceania's Ministry of Truth.

"Where's my jet?"

That's all you've got? An obvious joke?



Apparently you can't make up your mind if it was a joke or hyperbole for the sake of emphasis.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,433]

>Come on baby do the twist.
>Why do you mislead when you loose a point?

Ah, we've reached the "I have nothing further to say, so I'll try to get some insults in" point. (The misspellings sort of blunt their edge though I must say!)

In case anyone IS interested in the original topic, a few new developments:

===============
JAKOBSHAVN GLACIER, Greenland (AFP) . . .

The Jakobshavn Glacier, on Greenland's west coast, is melting twice as fast as 10 years ago and advancing toward the sea at 12 kilometres (seven miles) per year, compared with six kilometres (three and a half miles) before.

In its 4th Assessment report issued earlier this year, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said the world's oceans could rise by 50 centimeters (20 inches), putting tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of people at risk by century's end.

But that estimate does not factor in the latest findings about the melting of glaciers in Greenland and loss of ice in Antarctica, which many experts say could eventually increase sea levels, and the rate at which they rise, by several fold.
===============
Report considers climate change impact (Australia)

Research has found climate change will place most of the major industries in north-east Victoria at risk, but it may benefit some.

The report, commissioned by the Victorian Government, was presented at a forum in Beechworth this morning.

It found the region's primary producers will generally be adversely affected by hotter temperatures and less rainfall.

John Riddiford from the North-East Catchment Management Authority says the forum also heard that adapting to climate change could have some benefits.

"There'll be a shift of particular commodities like different crops and pastures and orchards and so forth and farm areas will benefit from that regional shift and some areas will have a disbenefit where the climate's best for those particular commodities, so there are opportunities and challenges as far as climate change is concerned," he said.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Apparently you can't make up your mind if it was a joke or hyperbole for the sake of emphasis.

What are you talking about? When did I claim "hyperbole for the sake of emphasis"?

[rushmc 18]

Quote

>Come on baby do the twist.
>Why do you mislead when you loose a point?

Ah, we've reached the "I have nothing further to say, so I'll try to get some insults in" point. (The misspellings sort of blunt their edge though I must say!)

In case anyone IS interested in the original topic, a few new developments:

===============
JAKOBSHAVN GLACIER, Greenland (AFP) . . .

The Jakobshavn Glacier, on Greenland's west coast, is melting twice as fast as 10 years ago and advancing toward the sea at 12 kilometres (seven miles) per year, compared with six kilometres (three and a half miles) before.

In its 4th Assessment report issued earlier this year, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said the world's oceans could rise by 50 centimeters (20 inches), putting tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of people at risk by century's end.

But that estimate does not factor in the latest findings about the melting of glaciers in Greenland and loss of ice in Antarctica, which many experts say could eventually increase sea levels, and the rate at which they rise, by several fold.
===============
Report considers climate change impact (Australia)

Research has found climate change will place most of the major industries in north-east Victoria at risk, but it may benefit some.

The report, commissioned by the Victorian Government, was presented at a forum in Beechworth this morning.

It found the region's primary producers will generally be adversely affected by hotter temperatures and less rainfall.

John Riddiford from the North-East Catchment Management Authority says the forum also heard that adapting to climate change could have some benefits.

"There'll be a shift of particular commodities like different crops and pastures and orchards and so forth and farm areas will benefit from that regional shift and some areas will have a disbenefit where the climate's best for those particular commodities, so there are opportunities and challenges as far as climate change is concerned," he said.

Still does not mean man has anything to do with it now does it? That is your implication, correct?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[nathaniel 0]

Quote

You mean there aren't any natural processes to filter out / dissapate(sp?) pollutants?

Lungs do a reasonably good job for many pollutants.

My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

[kallend 1,647]

Quote

Quote

Apparently you can't make up your mind if it was a joke or hyperbole for the sake of emphasis.

What are you talking about? When did I claim "hyperbole for the sake of emphasis"?

The emphasis was mine, the hyperbole (or was it a joke or sarcasm, you changed your story once or twice) was yours.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,433]

>Lungs do a reasonably good job for many pollutants.

True - but not for long.

[sv3n 0]

Quote

Quote

You mean there aren't any natural processes to filter out / dissapate(sp?) pollutants?

Lungs do a reasonably good job for many pollutants.

Yup, and then after a while you get cancer. Congratulations you are a winner.

...and you're in violation of your face!

[sv3n 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Personally I don't get how you could be so naive as to think that we are not having an impact on the environment once again I guess we all cant be as smart as you think you areand that things like global warming are linked to us.

How do you explain smog around big cities? different issue

No it isn't. That may be an indicator of why you're having trouble with some of these concepts.

Quote

Is that just natural? How do you explain the hike in lung cancer in big cities? Think it has anything to do with all those cars pumping 19 pounds of cancer causing gas per gallon of fuel in the air? And how could one think that all that may not have an affect on the environment when it's happening all over the world? Sorry, you piss in a bucket enough times and soon enough it's gonna fill up.Ah, I would dump mine

WHERE?!?!?!? Outer space? The "cup" is the Earth dude.

Quote

So you would rather have the oil companies make a few more billion had to come to the "Big Oil" agrument

Let's see, who is it that has "liberated" into the atmosphere millions of year's worth of land locked carbon? Well, ultimately we have but BO and our government are the primary enablers.

Quote

than put some laws into place that would cut emissions and save a few hundred thousand people from cancer? Nice general statment That makes no sense, as with those laws come other jobs and new industries. It isn't going to hurt our economy. Businesses may change, but it would be no different than when the computer market started...........it's just a technology change. And it would be better for our environment. We could actually stand to make a lot of money off of it if we chose to be the industry leader in alternative energy and sold the technology around the world. The fuel economy on US vehicles has not changed in 20 years.........is that because people don't have the technology or because people want to make money? On top of that, less oil used means less dependancy on the middle east..........now see where OBL gets his money from, essentially you'd be fighting terrorism by not using as much fuel and oil. Al Queda being based out of Saudi Arabia.............guess how the country makes their money?

Wake up. You say you want a clean environment, then go for it. All things don't come in the convenience package, sometimes you have to work for them.

Once again, this elietist attitude and arogance is discusting. now wonder I can not take you seriously

Instead of simply wallowing in your "disgust" at the tough questions, how about addressing them?

Thanks, I couldn't have answered that array of "i have no reasonable answers to any of this, what do I do, just call it dumb....yeah that'll work" crap any better.



RushMt......you can't assume you can fill a balloon up indefinitely without it popping. And that's where your argument is coming from.........we can't just breathe elsewhere, we're in a "fishbowl" essentially. You put enough crap in there it's gonna affect everything. There's a reason why the ocean temps are going up causing fish and coral to die.

And the smog that you don't think is a GW factor keeps heat from escaping and therefore raises the climate temp. It also causes a rise in lung cancer.

Call it elitist if you want, it's just common sense. Rather than just mock what you can't comprehend maybe you should try to read it again and again til it implants itself in your brain and makes sense. Then after that happens you can make a valid response. But the inane "yeah right that's so stupid" response does nothing.

...and you're in violation of your face!

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Apparently you can't make up your mind if it was a joke or hyperbole for the sake of emphasis.

What are you talking about? When did I claim "hyperbole for the sake of emphasis"?

The emphasis was mine, the hyperbole (or was it a joke or sarcasm, you changed your story once or twice) was yours.

This brought to you by...

The Ministry of Truth


I do find your unique perceptions amusing.

[speedy 0]

Quote

There's a reason why the ocean temps are going up causing fish and coral to die.

Are the oceans temps really going up?
Are fish and coral really dying due to higher oceans temps?

Source please.

Dave

Fallschirmsport Marl

[sv3n 0]

Quote

Quote

There's a reason why the ocean temps are going up causing fish and coral to die.

Are the oceans temps really going up?
Are fish and coral really dying due to higher oceans temps?

Source please.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/22/us/22coral.html?ex=1305950400&en=3a5f024814e926e3&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/12/AR2005101202498.html

http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/2006/oceantemps.shtml



that's just a few that came up with a quick google search on......."oceans temps rising", happy reading.

...and you're in violation of your face!

[mikkey 0]

Al Gore is in Australia at the moment giving lunch speaches for $1000 a head.

An Australian columnist has a fw questions he suggests people ask Al during the lunch:

Quote

So, hoping to spread the joy, here’s fresh questions for the Sofitel lunchers to ask Gore—questions that should work like a flame to a Catherine wheel.

Question 1: Mr Gore, isn’t it true that three of the four scientific bodies, which take the globe’s temperature—including your own National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration—say there’s been no warming since 1998? That’s not what you’ve predicted, is it?

Question 2: Mr Gore, Your poster for An Inconvenient Truth starred a hurricane, presumably Hurricane Katrina, and you claimed warming would give us worse and more of them.

In fact, there have been so few hurricanes in the Atlantic since then that US hurricane insurance premiums this year fell 20 per cent.

Let me go on: Your film showed seas rising six metres to drown entire cities. In fact, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change this year conceded the seas would at worst rise 59cm this century.

You said this year, “droughts are becoming longer and more intense”. In fact, a new study by University of Wisconsin-Madison scientists says of last century’s 30 big droughts, only two occurred in the past two decades.

Now, you warn that the Arctic’s ice melt is “unprecedented”. But you ignore that down in our southern hemisphere, as the Illinois University’s Polar Research Group now reports, our “sea-ice area is close to surpassing the previous historic maximum”. Indeed, Antarctica, since 1975, has had “overall cooling”, says a Washington University study published in Geophysical Research Letters.

Mr Gore, why must you cherry-pick and exaggerate so often if global warming is really as bad as you say? Mr Gore, aren’t you just an alarmist?

Question 3: Mr Gore, aren’t you a hypocrite, too? You tell us to make “sharp reductions” to the emissions you say cause global warming because, as your film’s website says, “humanity is sitting on a ticking time bomb”.

One of the biggest sources of those gases is air travel. Mr Gore, how did you get from the US to Melbourne?

Question 4: Mr Gore, power utility records last year showed that just one of your three homes used more power in a month than the average American home uses in a year. You even have a heated pool. Shouldn’t you set a better example? Or are you telling others to make sacrifices that you’ve found are actually impossible or inconvenient?

Question 5: Mr Gore, when asked about your astonishing use of power and air travel, you say you make “carbon offsets”, so it’s OK if you go on emitting gases that have us on a “ticking time bomb”.

But aren’t many of the offsets you claim to make just investments made through Generation Investment Management, a $1 billion outfit that makes money from global warming schemes and is partly owned and chaired by ... gosh, you?

Aren’t you using your trip here to introduce Australian investors to GIM’s latest plan to make money from global warming—your Generation Global Sustainability Fund, which advertises its aim as “delivering superior long-term returns”, thanks to a team that has “understanding (of) long-term sustainability themes”?

I also note that the price of this lunch is $1000 a head—or $25,000 for a VIP package—and that the main sponsor of your appearance is Lexus, which has a hybrid car to flog.

Mr Gore, how much money do you make from global warming? What exactly are the profits of doom?

Question 6: Mr Gore, you claim “the debate in the scientific community (on global warming) is over”.

But leading climate physicist Fred Singer, Virginia University’s Professor Emeritus of environment science, has done a new study of peer-reviewed literature and says more than 500 scientists published evidence rejecting at least one element of your kind of man-made global warming scare.

He says 300 of those scientists found evidence that the world has more than a dozen global warmings like this one since the last Ice Age, and also that our recent warming is strongly linked to changes in the sun’s activity.

Mr Gore, when even Professor Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, says it’s plausible “man is not to blame”, for global warming, why do you keep telling us the science is settled?

Is it that you’ve got so much invested in keeping this scare going?

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[speedy 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

There's a reason why the ocean temps are going up causing fish and coral to die.

Are the oceans temps really going up?
Are fish and coral really dying due to higher oceans temps?

Source please.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/22/us/22coral.html?ex=1305950400&en=3a5f024814e926e3&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/12/AR2005101202498.html

http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/2006/oceantemps.shtml



that's just a few that came up with a quick google search on......."oceans temps rising", happy reading.

A bunch of newspaper articles is not what I would call "peer reviewed" sources.

Dave

Fallschirmsport Marl

[NCclimber 0]

Thanks Mikkey.

[billvon 2,433]

>A bunch of newspaper articles is not what I would call "peer reviewed" sources.

The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences is not a newspaper. Nor is NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. And there is no such thing as a peer-reviewed source, although many science journals do publish peer-reviewed papers.