Global warming isolates Canadians in far north

[Ch. 12]

Hey Genius just because you worship some kook ultra left college professor who thinks he's the cats meow does'nt prove your theory either.

I sure don't see you disspelling anything I post with facts, you like to hear yourself talk is how I pretty much read you, A legend in his own mind.

Funny thing about you is you continue to come here and try to prove how smart you are and I continue to B!tch Slap you with the Truth.

BTW... you conveniently left these references out by "Real Scientist"
...OOOPS, looks like your the fool...FOOL!

What truth? It is the coalminers of WV take on snippets of research. I could quote one sentence from you, one from 700, and one from Bush and make it look like a Dem said it but that doesn't make it truth. Look up any VALID research and you'll see. Your fake scientific paper is well known to be a crackpot job by the WV mining industry so nice try.

Your fear of "kooky" professors is just a fear of knowledge b/c ignorance despises fact.

Nice try to save your face but you just look even more childish with your rants.

 

[delldude]

Intersting reading today:

"The Cooling World" - by Peter Gwynne

April 28, 1975 Newsweek


There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now.

31 years ago climate change was a hot subject

 

[Ch. 12]

Intersting reading today:
31 years ago climate change was a hot subject

That's right...if you believe that "global warming" means exactly what the misnomer of a title states and that temps will only go up, it's obvious that you haven't read ANYTHING outside of Fox News's portrayal of the issue. As I stated and so many others have, "warming" is a misnomer. In the upper atmosphere, there is warming. But that causes melting which causes changes in ocean currents which causes extreme weather...often much colder than before. It won't be all hot and all cold but it will be...and already IS...enough to disrupt ecosystems that are used to gradual change (thousands of years) and not what we've seen in three decades. It's obvious you don't know what global warming is nor do you care to know it any further than what you see as Fox News makes it seem that the argument is that the oceans will boil and temps will only go up. To you and Fox News, snow is an obvious sign that global warming doesn't exist. But that is what you get when you avoid the real publications on the topic.

 

[delldude]

Too much input for any computer to accurately model Ace....Too many variables Ace......

Besides....speculation abounds as to whether or not its just a normal cycle on the third stone from the sun.

Like I said....too many variables to predict with any accurate certainty.

Besides Gov't been heating up the upper atmosphere with Haarp research...they screwed it up.

 

[Ch. 12]

Too much input for any computer to accurately model Ace....Too many variables Ace......

Besides....speculation abounds as to whether or not its just a normal cycle on the third stone from the sun.

Like I said....too many variables to predict with any accurate certainty.

Besides Gov't been heating up the upper atmosphere with Haarp research...they screwed it up.

Since you can only remember as far back as the last argument I will point out, yet again (for the thousandth time) that yes...cycles are very normal on Earth. But no...there has never been one that happened in 30 years. 30,000 years is more the normal pace. Even an infant could see that there is a big difference between those numbers...the latter has three extra zeroes.

 

[delldude]

Since you can only remember as far back as the last argument I will point out, yet again (for the thousandth time) that yes...cycles are very normal on Earth. But no...there has never been one that happened in 30 years. 30,000 years is more the normal pace. Even an infant could see that there is a big difference between those numbers...the latter has three extra zeroes.

Its been increasing since the 19th century; Mr.Science, with some increase within the last 25 years due mostly to more precise records being kept.

As I stated and so many others have, "warming" is a misnomer. In the upper atmosphere, there is warming.

See you are talking out of your ass:

An enhanced greenhouse effect is expected to cause cooling in higher parts of the atmosphere because the increased "blanketing" effect in the lower atmosphere holds in more heat, allowing less to reach the upper atmosphere. Cooling of the lower stratosphere (about 49,000-79,500ft.) since 1979 is shown by both satellite Microwave Sounding Unit and radiosonde data, but is larger in the radiosonde data.



From your post if you try to get to a 30,000 year cycle ,you endure a 30 year period before a total at 30,000.

Its all bunk aimed at raising taxes on a global level you fool

Latest from the Liberal Touchy Feely Club

Too much scientistic agenda spinning?

 

[local 12 proud]

See you are talking out of your ass:

Too much scientistic agenda spinning?

Since when has he not been?

 

[local 12 proud]

The audacity of these men to pull back the curtain on The Wizard of Global Warming.

http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/2003...90130-5881r.htm

 

[delldude]

Nice link Local 12...thanks.

Why is all this important? Global warming alarmists would have governments impose significant regulations with tremendous economic implications. The Bush administration is under attack simply for stating that the science is uncertain whether human-induced global warming is occurring. At the same time, scientists that add credence to that assertion are being silenced.

Told you there is an agenda and its all about money for governments through regulating energy usage.

 

[Gilding the Lily]

Told you there is an agenda and its all about money for governments through regulating energy usage.

That is why I think that the Chicago Climate Exchange is a good idea: it is in private hands, rather than Government's... but yet it still helping to prevent the global warming problem, if, in fact, there is a problem.

 

[Ch. 12]

Its been increasing since the 19th century; Mr.Science, with some increase within the last 25 years due mostly to more precise records being kept.

I already told you that using the Weather Channel isn't going to help. The REAL science has used core samples from the ice sheets and other horticultural/geological indices.

An enhanced greenhouse effect is expected to cause cooling in higher parts of the atmosphere because the increased "blanketing" effect in the lower atmosphere holds in more heat, allowing less to reach the upper atmosphere. Cooling of the lower stratosphere (about 49,000-79,500ft.) since 1979 is shown by both satellite Microwave Sounding Unit and radiosonde data, but is larger in the radiosonde data.

You can argue semantics all you want. Is the upper atmosphere 100 miles or ten miles in your book? You post things that show that on certain dates there are lower than avg temps in the oceans or in certain regions and my response was to point out that warming happens in the atmosphere and doesn't necessarily mean that the surface will continue to perpetually warm. It will warm and then cool as the glaciers are melting quickly. But thanks for clarifying the upper/lower atmosphere issue. Doesn't change the argument.

From your post if you try to get to a 30,000 year cycle ,you endure a 30 year period before a total at 30,000.

That's an intelligent assessment If you take a 30k year increase over 30 years that is a problem. Your "reasoning" that 30 comes before 30k is another desperate attempt.

 

[delldude]

Kyoto was a gig to penalize the US for using the most energy,even though we are one of the most productive and lead in pollution control technology while letting the likes of Mexico,China and other countries dump all kinds of pollutants into the air and water while we pay throught he nose and wreck our economy.

Its all a front for global taxation by lib's.

My God...I'm feeling desperate today... :blink:

 

[CSAR GYRENE]

That is why I think that the Chicago Climate Exchange is a good idea: it is in private hands, rather than Government's... but yet it still helping to prevent the global warming problem, if, in fact, there is a problem.

It is highly unlikely that "global warming", if it exists at all, can be controlled at this point in time. Cycles come and go. Thats the way it has been for as long as we have been on this rock. A much better use of our time and energy is to figure out how to better live with the changes than try the chicken little approach.
Besides, whats the worst that could happen? those of us in the frozen north get a bit more tan, and we lose New York and LA......whats the down side of the equation? (Its a joke there, froggy, dont get all exited)

 

[delldude]

Ever hear of Edgar Cayce? I read all his books in the early 70's....whether or not you accept his "readings" is another subject...but he's the one who in the 40's predicted global climatic change....among many many other things.

But Cayce's most striking predictions -- particularly in view of many other prophecies relating to the approaching end of the millennium -- concern dramatic changes in the Earth's surface in the period of 1958 to 1998. The cause of these he put down to a tilting in the Earth's rotational axis which he said would begin in 1936.

The first sign of this change in the Earth's core would be the "breaking up of some conditions" in the South Pacific and "sinking or rising" in the Mediterranean or Etna area. Cayce forecast that, by the end of the century, New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco would be destroyed. He said that "the greater portion of Japan must go into the sea" at this time, and that northern Europe would be "changed as in the twinkling of an eye." In 1941, Cayce predicted that lands would appear in the Atlantic and the Pacific in the coming years, and that "the coastline now of many a land will be the bed of the ocean. Even many of the battlefields of (1941) will be ocean, will be the sea, the bays, the lands over which the new order will carry on their trade as with one another."

"Watch New York, Connecticut and the like. Many portions of the east coast will be disturbed, as well as many portions of the west coast, as well as the central portion of the United States. Los Angeles, San Francisco, most of all these will be among those that will be destroyed before New York, or New York City itself, will in the main disappear. This will be another generation though, here; while the southern portions of Carolina, Georgia, these will disappear. This will be much sooner. The waters of the Great Lakes will empty into the Gulf of Mexico."

Cayce prophesied that the Earth's axis would be shifted by the year 2001, bringing on reversals in climate, "so that where there has been a frigid or semi-tropical climate, there will be a more tropical one, and moss and fern will grow." By this time, he indicated, a new cycle would begin.

Like I said...many will discount his abilities,many believe he was onto something.Nevertheless he brought up climate change in the late century some 60 years ago.

More here: