OT The real reason for "global warming" Ba ha ha

Loading thread data ...

formatting link
There's an underground coal mine fire in New Straitsville, OH which has been burning for 120 years.

Reply to
-MIKE-

-MIKE- wrote in news:jv1cfj$rks$ snipped-for-privacy@speranza.aioe.org:

And Centralia, PA ...

Reply to
Han

And one that has been burning in NJ I believe Jersey City for 30 or 40 years

Reply to
tiredofspam

On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 13:23:04 -0500, Leon

Quebec French, take your pick.

Reply to
Dave

formatting link
Global Warming is caused, or at least started, by the "AIDS Quilt" project.

Reply to
HeyBub

formatting link
The "REAL" reason for global warming is the French. European French,

Nah, it's all the hot air and flatulence Congress puts out.

Reply to
Just Wondering

formatting link
>>>> The "REAL" reason for global warming is the French. European French,

I think it is caused by the flatulence from the trillions of animals on earth.

Reply to
Keith Nuttle

Leon wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:

and for another commentary:

Reply to
Han

Jeeze, is it April 1st again already?

-- It takes as much energy to wish as to plan. --Eleanor Roosevelt

Reply to
Larry Jaques

Gee, thanks. It's next week, BTW. (59)

The ThinkProgress site is suspect: liberals twisting facts once again. The hockey stick graph is a real good clue to that without research. Their "study" indicating that "NRA Members Agree: More Gun Regulation Makes Sense" is such bullshit I can't stand it. I wonder how long it took them to find that many liberals with guns who were NRA members- in-name-only. Or did they just have liberals buy memberships to support that "study"?

And if AGWK is at the high end of predictions, why has each IPCC study since the first shown -less- warming than first reported? They stairstep down. My guess is that the computer models are being updated as they find new data to make them more, or at least _somewhat_, reliable.

Have you read the Koch report on their server or Muller's report, or just this completely cooked-up page at TP? (Fitting initials. I think of toilet paper when reading their dung.) I'm off to find the real reports now. It's no wonder that TP didn't link it, and I'm surprised that they linked Muller's.

-- It takes as much energy to wish as to plan. --Eleanor Roosevelt

Reply to
Larry Jaques

Larry Jaques wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

I know. Somehow my FB tells me it is soon. Btw, you're too young to be so curmudgeonly .

While I am for gun control, I think that the NRA has driven too many people to buy guns, so that I am almost feeling forced to go and get some too. I'll let you all know when I do, so you can get body armor ...

Let me know when you find reliable reports denying the Muller paper.

Sometimes it is better to plan and act on your suspicions, than to just sit and wait.

-- Han Broekman

Reply to
Han

Gee, thanks. It's next week, BTW. (59)

The ThinkProgress site is suspect: liberals twisting facts once again. The hockey stick graph is a real good clue to that without research. Their "study" indicating that "NRA Members Agree: More Gun Regulation Makes Sense" is such bullshit I can't stand it. I wonder how long it took them to find that many liberals with guns who were NRA members- in-name-only. Or did they just have liberals buy memberships to support that "study"?

And if AGWK is at the high end of predictions, why has each IPCC study since the first shown -less- warming than first reported? They stairstep down. My guess is that the computer models are being updated as they find new data to make them more, or at least _somewhat_, reliable.

Have you read the Koch report on their server or Muller's report, or just this completely cooked-up page at TP? (Fitting initials. I think of toilet paper when reading their dung.) I'm off to find the real reports now. It's no wonder that TP didn't link it, and I'm surprised that they linked Muller's.

To wit:

formatting link

Reply to
Dave in Texas

Available for anyone who bothers to read their FAQ?

formatting link
look no further than their own words to understand that they themselves imply their guess is apparently as good as any other, and to also understand that thus far their study is taking into account land data ONLY and is, by their own admission, far from complete:

Berkeley Earth has not yet begun to analyze ocean temperatures (we hope to do this in the next year), so the plotted data is land only. Land warms more than oceans, so when we include the ocean we expect the total global warming to be less.

Has Global Warming Stopped?

This exercise simply shows that the decadal fluctuations are too large to allow us to make decisive conclusions about long term trends based on close examination of periods as short as 13 to 15 years.

Do Judith Curry and Richard Muller disagree?

Below is a joint statement by Judith Curry and Richard Muller:

In recent days, statements we've made to the media and on blogs have been characterized as contradictory. They are not.

We have both said that the global temperature record of the last 13 years shows evidence suggesting that the warming has slowed. Our new analysis of the land-based data neither confirms nor denies this contention. If you look at our new land temperature estimates, you can see a flattening of the rise, or a continuation of the rise, _depending on the statistical approach you take_

Continued global warming "skepticism" is a proper and a necessary part of the scientific process. The Wall St. Journal Op-Ed by one of us (Muller) seemed to take the opposite view with its title and subtitle: "The Case Against Global-Warming Skepticism -- There were good reasons for doubt, until now." But those words were not written by Muller. The title and the subtitle of the submitted Op-Ed were "Cooling the Warming Debate - Are you a global warming skeptic? If not, perhaps you should be. Let me explain why." The title and subtitle were changed by the editors without consulting or seeking permission from the author. Readers are encouraged to ignore the title and read the content of the Op-Ed.

We do not agree with each other on every feature of climate change. We have had vigorous discussions, for example, on the proper way to analyze hurricane records. Such disagreements are an essential part of the scientific process.

So much for putting your faith in incomplete studies. LOL

formatting link
Last update: 4/15/2010 KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
formatting link

Reply to
Swingman

Swingman wrote in news:sO-dnQFUftMaHIjNnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:

that global warming is a hoax.

Reply to
Han

The onus does not fall on us to prove that something does *not* exist. It is always the responsibility of those who say the sky is falling to prove it is.

Reply to
-MIKE-

That would be man caused global warming. Global warming in general has been occurring for the last 10,000 years or so since the last major ice age. Since ice ages occur cyclically and have a tendency to scrape a lot of stuff off land, it might be nice if we were able to prevent the next one so that cities like New York, Chicago, etc aren't erased. Well, maybe New York ;-)

Reply to
Doug Winterburn

Hah! Curmudgeonliness knows no age barriers. (new word!)

Oops, valid and linear graph. I misread it at first.

I think I'd feel safe if you had a weapon, Han. I don't think you'd be swiss-cheesing the neighborhood with it. Besides, nothing on the market could shoot all the way from NY/NJ to OR. I'm safe.

BUT, Hayseuss Crisco. Why do so many people lose these concepts?

1) Gun ownership does -not- equate to criminality. NRA members and concealed weapon licensees commit far fewer crimes than the average American. It's not the number of guns one owns, it's what they do with them. A gun is just a tool. 2) The NRA is a business which does things only for itself. It exists to make money for its owners, period. Occasionally, what it does is good for the country and for gun owners. This is a good thing. 3) Criminals commit crimes with legal and illegal weapons. Some are guns. Gun owners are responsible for REDUCING crime, not committing it. Figures between 1 and 3 million per year are attributed here. 4) Gun control increases crime by taking (defensive) weapons out of the hands of responsible people (NON-criminals) and leaving them in the hands of criminals (who use them offensively.) England and Australia are prime examples of this.

The report isn't out yet, due to be released tomorrow. I read his article, though. While I am apt to disagree with his outcome, I find that he's not in the alarmist group yet. Please read his article, where he says things like "It?s a scientist?s duty to be properly skeptical. I still find that much, if not most, of what is attributed to climate change is speculative, exaggerated or just plain wrong. I?ve analyzed some of the most alarmist claims, and my skepticism about them hasn?t changed." That doesn't sound like something TP would like, does it? TP makes him sound like a full convert, but he's nothing of the sort.

P.S: I think you'd like _Hard Green_ by Peter Huber. Let's do the most good with the least cost now, then work on the rest.

Good'un.

-- It takes as much energy to wish as to plan. --Eleanor Roosevelt

Reply to
Larry Jaques

Han, global warming alarmism (AGWK) is indeed a hoax. It has lies, misread data, imperfect models, and exaggerations all rolled into one nasty True Belief religion. It's sorta like Obamunism.

I'm with you in wanting CO2 emissions considerably reduced, but I don't believe humans need to change their way of life to do it; Only their attitude.

-- It takes as much energy to wish as to plan. --Eleanor Roosevelt

Reply to
Larry Jaques

Larry Jaques

DAGS "Bjorn Lomborg"... not a denier, but a voice of reason with regard to policies concerning changing global climate, reviled and almost professionally ruined by the AGW crowd in a most repulsive manner. If you can't grasp that these alarmist' are very often blind, bigoted, and totally without scruples, you're part of the problem.

Reply to
Swingman

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.