CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 63337
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 10:12 am
 


Another global warming prediction failed. :lol:

I also like the author's nickname for the socialists who try to hide themselves as global warming activists: "Warmunists"

That's awesome! [B-o]

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/dgreen ... r-in-2015/

Quote:
I’m not currently underwater and looking out the window, there doesn’t seem to be a massive wall of water headed this way, but if that changes, I’ll do my best to let you know.

On June 12, 2008, correspondent Bob Woodruff revealed that the program “puts participants in the future and asks them to report back about what it is like to live in this future world. The first stop is the year 2015.”

As one expert warns that in 2015 the sea level will rise quickly, a visual shows New York City being engulfed by water. The video montage includes another unidentified person predicting that “flames cover hundreds of miles.”


So we’re both being flooded and on fire? That Global Warming sure is powerful stuff. Not only are we underwater, but we’re also on fire.

Then-GMA co-anchor Chris Cuomo appeared frightened by this future world. He wondered, “I think we’re familiar with some of these issues, but, boy, 2015? That’s seven years from now. Could it really be that bad?”

It would have been if McCain had won and Obama wouldn’t have had the opportunity to make the oceans stop rising.

CUOMO: I think we’re familiar with some of these issues, but, boy, 2015? That’s seven years from now. Could it really be that bad?

WOODRUFF: It’s very soon, you know. But all you have to do is look at the world today right today. You know, you’ve got gas prices going up. You got food prices going up. You’ve got extreme weather. The scientists have studied this for decades. They say if you connect the dots, you can actually see that we’re approaching maybe even a perfect storm. Or you have got shrinking resources, population growth. Climate change. So, the idea now is to look at it, wake up about it and then try to do something to fix it.


You know how liberals used to mock fundamentalists for expecting the end of the world? They’re the fundamentalists.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20991
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 10:18 am
 


It's not clear to me who actually said that New York would be underwater by 2015.

That website is for people who want to be told what to think, not for people who think.


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Los Angeles Kings
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 4680
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 10:31 am
 


"Warmunists" that's a new one.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20991
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 10:40 am
 


I wonder if the term will change the spectral properties of a carbon dioxide molecule though?


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 63337
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 10:53 am
 


Zipperfish wrote:
That website is for people who want to be told what to think, not for people who think.


You mean they post things you disagree with.

I suppose if it makes you feel better the next time you're in NYC you can walk around downtown wearing a life preserver and water wings...it's not like anyone in that city is going to notice! :lol:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 22865
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 10:59 am
 


Zipperfish wrote:
I wonder if the term will change the spectral properties of a carbon dioxide molecule though?


Well, we do know one thing about the "spectral properties of a carbon dioxide molecule". They didn't flood New York.

Hey, do you remember about 6 years ago when James Hansen from NASA/GISS was getting teased about one of his failed predictions concerning the flooding of New York?

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/22/a ... es-hansen/

That one originated at Salon. You guys like Salon, don't you? I enjoyed that bit about, "Oh did I say 20 years? I meant 40." But wait forty doesn't work either. ROTFL


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 9309

Warnings: (40%)
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 11:01 am
 



:lol:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20991
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 11:11 am
 


BartSimpson wrote:
You mean they post things you disagree with.



Not really. It's kind of the equivalent of Macdonalds--pretty packaging, everything you like but nutrition free.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 63337
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 11:13 am
 


Zipperfish wrote:
BartSimpson wrote:
You mean they post things you disagree with.



Not really. It's kind of the equivalent of Macdonalds--pretty packaging, everything you like but nutrition free.


Furniture is not typically considered nutritious but you feel free to eat what you like.

Image


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20991
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 11:14 am
 


N_Fiddledog wrote:
Zipperfish wrote:
I wonder if the term will change the spectral properties of a carbon dioxide molecule though?


Well, we do know one thing about the "spectral properties of a carbon dioxide molecule". They didn't flood New York.

Hey, do you remember about 6 years ago when James Hansen from NASA/GISS was getting teased about one of his failed predictions concerning the flooding of New York?

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/22/a ... es-hansen/

That one originated at Salon. You guys like Salon, don't you? I enjoyed that bit about, "Oh did I say 20 years? I meant 40." But wait forty doesn't work either. ROTFL


No I don't remember that. I have never read Salon. See above note about my opinion of those kinds of sites.

My point mainly being that people making outlandish projections about global warming doesn't change the fact that carbon dioxide is accumulating quickly in the atmosphere adn it is likely to have a significant effect.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 30437
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 11:18 am
 


Did the swimming lesson people get rich?
[door]


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 63337
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 11:25 am
 


Zipperfish wrote:
My point mainly being that people making outlandish projections about global warming doesn't change the fact that carbon dioxide is accumulating quickly in the atmosphere adn it is likely to have a significant effect.


So according to your calculations NYC will be under water when?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 22865
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 11:31 am
 


Zipperfish wrote:
BartSimpson wrote:
You mean they post things you disagree with.



Not really. It's kind of the equivalent of Macdonalds--pretty packaging, everything you like but nutrition free.


Really? Did you consider clicking the guy's link to see if what he claimed was true?

No?

That's not very "scientific" of you.

Here ya go. Try again.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whit ... hange-june

Watch the video. It's a trailer to the ABC video he claimed existed. They don't have the flood prediction on that one, but you can see it in an earlier one from Newsbusters.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whit ... -doom-fire

So by the trailers you're a little bit right. Actual experts (I recognized Obama's science adviser John Holdren, NASA/GISS head James Hansen, and that science expert woman from the weather channel) did not specifically give the date of 2015, but the ABC trailer presented by Cuomo definitely did.

However, all those guys have made some pretty ridiculous predictions. We know Hansen's. Do you remember Holdren's? Wanna be reminded?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 27544
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 11:31 am
 


Aren't the people most likely to say that there's no such thing as climate change also the ones most likely to believe that everything in the Bible literally and historically happened? Hey, they laughed at Noah too, dum-dums, and he lived to be like a thousand or something after all that crazazay sexy-time he had with his daughters! :lol:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 22865
PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 11:41 am
 


Zipperfish wrote:

My point mainly being that people making outlandish projections about global warming doesn't change the fact that carbon dioxide is accumulating quickly in the atmosphere adn it is likely to have a significant effect.


I'm going to put you on the spot then. How "significant"? What crises are you specifically predicting? How much of New York are you predicting will flood, and when? How scared do you want us?

Or wait. Are you saying these scares shouldn't cause us concerns? If so, no problem. But what are you arguing for then?


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 111 posts ]  1  2  3  4  5 ... 8  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.