Global Warming is fake (Page 3)

davidk14
davidk14: I was not talking about natural occurring radiation and have updated my previous comment to show that.
14 years ago Report
0
otcclass2008
otcclass2008: NASA: 2009 tied for 2nd-warmest year, 00s hottest decade too

As the past year's temperature data came in, it became increasingly clear that 2009 was going to be a very hot one unless something unexpected happened in the latter months of the year. Something unusual did in fact happen, but it only ended up shifting warm and cold air around. As a result, when NASA completed its analysis of 2009's surface temperatures, the year ended up in a statistical tie with a handful of others as the second warmest on record.

According to NASA's methods, the warmest year on record was 2005, and 2009 shares the second-warmest title with 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006, and 2007. No surprise, then, that the past decade was also the warmest record, a finding that's far more indicative of climate change than any given year's results.

The decade's warmth may also explain why many people didn't view 2009 as unusually hot—in essence, record temperatures are the new normal. Another factor is that the high global mean temperature was driven by the Southern Hemisphere, where it was the warmest year ever seen in NASA's records. For those with a US-centric view of global temperatures, NASA helpfully points out that the contiguous 48 states only account for about 1.5 percent of the world's surface.

Relevant to this morning's discussion of reproducibility, NASA also describes how to repeat its analysis. The people responsible for the work have also provided a helpful explanation of why NASA has decided 2005 is the hottest year on record, but a slightly different approach favors 1998 as the record holder.

While on the topic of climate, we'd be remiss if we didn't mention the fact that the IPCC messed up when it picked a target year for when melting of Himalayan glaciers reaches critical levels. For some reason, its numbers came from something other than the peer-reviewed literature, and were overly pessimistic. Those glaciers are melting, but there's a lot of ice there, and it's almost impossible for it to melt that quickly.
14 years ago Report
0
Outbackjack
Outbackjack: ">>>Well you ca harp on all you like about recording stations being so called inaccurate.

Its not that they're inaccurate- but clearly the information we had leading up to the 90's was more accurate than the information we have today."

How do you come to this conclusion?

"Why? I find it alarming that an organsation would claim to know the temperture of a country they have no recording station in. Isn't that a reasonable critism to make?"

Well I am not sure of the specific example but satellites can measure temperatures.

">>>Recording stations are on the rise in remote areas here

So? Austrillia is warming. Thats great. Re-read the topic title- we're talking global.

And, again, isn't your country notrious for its deserts? Wouldn't increasing the number of recording stations in deserts, while reducing the number of recording stations in mountainious areas create flawed stats?"

Australia is a part of this globe the last time I looked McLipton.
Where do you get these ideas about recording stations being reduced.
It just isnt the case in Australia.


"I'm not challenging the temperture- I'm challenging whether or not it was the hottest day recorded."
Heres a link supporting that,close the spaces and it will work:

http://www.espe ranceexp ress.com.au/ news/local/ news/general /hottest -day- recorded /1720134 .aspx

"That the gas's that you presented were very trace ammounts compared to Nitrogen. You claimed gases like Carbon Dioxide has gone up by 0.01% in 150 years, and made it seem like it was a significant ammount. I presented the other major gases in our atmosphere as a comparison, to show the folly of such a suggestion. Thats all."

You really make me wonder sometimes McLipton.How is it 0.01% in 150 years.
Heres the stats:

Carbon dioxide 1750 level=280 ppm current level=387ppm increase of=107 ppm

You will find it is just under a 40% increase.
Once again all them Big macs from your employer are clogging your arteries and clouding your judgement.
14 years ago Report
0
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: I'd gladly show you my source Outback.....but this website keeps censoring my links.....any suggestions?
14 years ago Report
0
otcclass2008
otcclass2008: LC:
If it is numbers then what you have to do is type those numbers yourself but put spaces in between the numbers and just let everyone know what you are doing. That is what I have to do.
14 years ago Report
0
MaryJane00
MaryJane00: Cospiricy to conspire!!
14 years ago Report
0
The_Under_Dog
The_Under_Dog: Global warming is real. This has occurred ever since the earth was formed. The earth has gone through warming and then cooling periods. The big question is whether man has caused an enhanced global warming effect with pollutants and deforestation. The media misrepresentation of the enhanced global warming debate causes many people to think that there is not a natural warming process and that any kind of climate change is due to man made effects. I do believe that human influence is contributing to an enhanced effect. By how much? We don't know because this has never been studied before.
14 years ago Report
0
Yogi Boogie
Yogi Boogie: someone said polar bear's doing fine , no buddy , actually they arent doing fine , they find their pray under da ice , i saw them waiting for long to freeze da water and get da pray they look for most probably seal
delay in freezing of rivers there killing almost 51 bears a year in antarctica just cuz of delay buddy
14 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: polar bears numbers have increased in recent years no? i havent seen any praying yet.
14 years ago Report
0
Yogi Boogie
Yogi Boogie: dats wat da problem is , how they will go for pray if no ice is there , n ya inventory suggests dat increase in no. gonna affect human beings nobody else
so indirectly global warming affecting human beings
14 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: id hazard a guess that global warming and cooling is real, but our explanations of it are muddied by bad info al gore and his nwo agenda etc etc.

time will tell
14 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: i was just making a pun from your atrocious spelling yogi. pray and prey mean different things
14 years ago Report
0
Yogi Boogie
Yogi Boogie: wat rubbish , i m stupid as alwayz
i did mean prey
sowwwwiiiiiiiieeeeeee
14 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: well thank you for enabling my faggyness
14 years ago Report
0
guess who
guess who: global warming may or may not be real but I live in a place that hardly ever snows and this year I may as well be in the north pole it has snowed for the last two weeks, extremely unusual.
14 years ago Report
0
guess who
guess who: flashie since both sexes do produce both estrogen and testesterone it is possible we are all faggy to some degree.
14 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: theres alot to consider. natural changes, haarp. im just not buying into the mass eco hysteria now coz the bods running the show are some of the biggest carbon bootprint twats not forgetting lying eugenicist fucktards
14 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: ok from now on i want to be called loretta
14 years ago Report
0
guess who
guess who: how about laurie for short?
14 years ago Report
0
john1576
john1576: Climate Change Skeptics were jumping with joy today as it emerged that statistics used to biuld models of changing weather patterns may not be as accurate as previously claimed. True believers in the weather disaster predictions fought back saying anyone can see Climate change is happening.
14 years ago Report
0
flashie
flashie: but, thats science... it must be true
14 years ago Report
0
guess who
guess who: even if the earth did get hot enough to ignite and actually did there would still be people saying it was not unusual it happens all of the time well actually it does get hot enough where I live for the sun to start grass fires.
14 years ago Report
0
WaxItYourself
WaxItYourself: So anyways I just joined this site and decided to look at the environment category since it is what I'm most interested in at the moment. Suddenly I see a thread about global warming and, as it is another interest for me, I decide to click on it. After reading a few pages I see much of the denial drivel that I've seen posted many times before. Al Gore? Al Gore did not invent global warming. CO2 was found to be a greenhouse gas back in the 1820s and in the late 1800s it was hypothesized that a doubling of CO2 would lead to about 5 degrees of warming if all other factors remained the same. In that time we've found numerous evidences for CO2 forcing from outbound radiation as measured by the IRIS and IMG satellites decreasing at CO2 and methane absorption wavelengths, downward infrared radiation increasing at the same wavelengths, a cooling stratosphere signifying that the warming in the troposphere is due to something other than the Sun and in close proximity to the surface, the Suns output remaining relatively constant outside of the sunspot cycle since measurements began in the 1800s while the temps continue to warm, the carbon-12 to carbon-13 isotopic concentration of the atmosphere change indication that the extra carbon is coming from plant life/fossil fuel combustion as plants descriminate against carbon-13, and so on. Seriously, before people start blaming it on Al Gore or the drive by scientists to form a one world leftist/communist style government (Yes that's another one I heard) should look into the actual science instead of politics/blog sites/monetary-backed thoughts and statistics.
14 years ago Report
0
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: My main problem with the "Carbon makes the Earth Warmer, and we are producing carbon" argument is the vast majority of carbon is NATURAL, or at least not from oil and gas emissions. 3%. 3% of the worlds Carbon comes from mankind. The rest is produced by mostly decaying plantlife, esspecially in the oceans, and burning forests.

So to say a massive change in our enviroment is based on our actions feels very misleading. If all electricity and cars were done away with 100 years ago, we would still be having the same problem- the call for conservation very much seems less and less based on scientific conclusions, and more a political grab for power to "punish" people for the sin of the extended lives we enjoy because of these conviences. In fact, I've seen charts(grrr that I cannot seem to find ) where, as sunspots and other solar activity occurs and our increased use of fossil fuels increase, has NO EFFECT on the overall tempture of the planet(whereas the sun has almost a direct effect). Its very interesting....
14 years ago Report
0
WaxItYourself
WaxItYourself: Lipton Campbell: There are many charts floating around the internet, some are true while others are false. You make the statement "If all electricity and cars were done away with 100 years ago, we would still be having the same problem..." - How do you come to this conclusion? Giving that solar output has been declining since 1970 and temperatures have continued to rise can you agree that temperature variations are not just down to the Sun? If solar output is declining and the amount of radiation the Sun puts out that is striking the planet has been declining, as measured by satellites, how are the first 5 months of 2010 the warmest first five months on record in all data sets?

The vast majority of carbon being natural is fact, yes. However the planet evolves just as life evolves. That being, as CO2 increases carbon sinks increase, particularly the ocean, and creatures in it evolve to cope with the increase acidification as a result. Sure this has naturally occurred before but such speedy change was also accompanied with mass extinction. See the Eocene-Paleocene Thermal Maximum, which was largely thought to be the result of an increased greenhouse, and the mass extinction event that took place because of it.

Basically, natural carbon emissions and natural carbon sinks give and take pretty much the same. Proof that we are the cause of the rise in carbon emissions, as stated before, is the isotopic ratio in the atmosphere. Specifically carbon-12 to carbon-13. Plants have a ratio of about 2% more carbon-12 to carbon-13 than the atmosphere. Fossil fuel is made of ancient decayed plants.The change in isotopic ratio in the atmosphere has changed by about 0.15% over the past 150 years.
14 years ago Report
0