CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 San Jose Sharks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 30248
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:47 pm
 


From http://blogs.forbes.com/jamestaylor/201 ... l-warming/

Quote:
Global greenhouse gas emissions have risen even faster during the past decade than predicted by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other international agencies. According to alarmist groups, this proves global warming is much worse than previously feared. The increase in emissions “should shock even the most jaded negotiators” at international climate talks currently taking place in Bonn, Germany, the UK Guardian reports. But there’s only one problem with this storyline; global temperatures have not increased at all during the past decade.

The evidence is powerful, straightforward, and damning. NASA satellite instruments precisely measuring global temperatures show absolutely no warming during the past the past 10 years. This is the case for the Northern Hemisphere mid-latitudes, including the United States. This is the case for the Arctic, where the signs of human-caused global warming are supposed to be first and most powerfully felt. This is the case for global sea surface temperatures, which alarmists claim should be sucking up much of the predicted human-induced warming. This is the case for the planet as a whole.


If atmospheric carbon dioxide emissions are the sole or primary driver of global temperatures, then where is all the global warming? We’re talking 10 years of higher-than-expected increases in greenhouse gases, yet 10 years of absolutely no warming. That’s 10 years of nada, nunca, nein, zero, and zilch.

There is a difference between global warming theory and alarmist global warming theory. Global warming theory holds that certain atmospheric gases warm the earth. Unless other factors intervene, adding more of these gases will tend to warm the atmosphere. This is well accepted across the scientific community. Alarmist global warming theory entails the additional assertion that the earth’s sensitivity to even very modest changes in atmospheric gases is extremely high. This is in sharp scientific dispute and has been repeatedly contradicted by real-world climate conditions.

Most powerfully, global temperature trends during the twentieth century sharply defied atmospheric carbon dioxide trends. More than half of the warming during the twentieth century occurred prior to the post-World War II economic boom, yet atmospheric carbon dioxide emissions rose minimally during this time. Between 1945 and 1977, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels jumped rapidly, yet global temperatures declined. Only during the last quarter of the century was there an appreciable correlation between greenhouse gas trends and global temperature trends. But that brief correlation has clearly disappeared this century.

Which brings us back to the sharp scientific disagreement about whether the earth’s climate is extremely sensitive or merely modestly sensitive to minor variances in the composition of its atmospheric gases. Carbon dioxide comprises far less than 1 percent of the earth’s atmosphere. In fact, we could multiply the amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere a full 25 times and it would still equal less than 1 percent of the earth’s atmosphere. The alarmists claim that the minor increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations during the past 100 years, from roughly 3 parts per 10,000 to roughly 4 parts per 10,000, is causing climate havoc. Real-world temperature data tell us an entirely different story.

The Scientific Method requires testing a proposed scientific hypothesis before accepting it as the truth. When real-world observations contradict the hypothesis, you go back to the drawing board. For more than a century now, real-world climate conditions have defied the alarmist global warming hypothesis. This is especially so during the past decade, when temperatures should be rising dramatically if the alarmist hypothesis is correct. Temperatures are not rising dramatically. They are not even rising at all.

Oh well, back to the old drawing board…

James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at The Heartland Institute and managing editor of Environment & Climate News.


I'm thinking the party is over on the Religion of Global Warming. The Chicken Little predictions of the alarmists simply are not bearing any fruit.

Sea level is not rising.

Average temperatures are not rising.

Polar bear populations are increasing.

The dome at Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station had to be removed due to damage from too much snow at the South Pole.

The IPCC conference in Cancun last year suffered under record cold weather.

and etc.

While the true believing alarmists will likely cling to their prognostications of no snow in the UK by 2010 and the Maldive Islands being inundated by 2009 the rest of us will politely nod at them when we run into them at the coffee shop while being sure to vote against any fool who proposes carbon taxes.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
 Los Angeles Kings
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2238
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:54 pm
 


BartSimpson wrote:
Polar bear populations are increasing.

People still legally hunt polar bears, so their population can't be that low.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 San Jose Sharks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 30248
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 3:00 pm
 


DanSC wrote:
BartSimpson wrote:
Polar bear populations are increasing.

People still legally hunt polar bears, so their population can't be that low.


It's legal for Canadians to hunt them. However, because the alarmists in the USA want to insist that they're right they got polar bears added to the US Endangered Species list and they made it illegal for an American to hunt polar bears in Canada.

The fact that the bear populations are bigger than ever is irrlevant to them because they've got an agenda. :roll:


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 6972
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 5:58 pm
 


Keep drinkin' that Fox News koolaid, Bart. You're like the Murray Hamilton character from Jaws.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 6151
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 6:37 pm
 


[sarcasm]Toronto had the hottest 8th July since the 1950's, so Bart's article carries no weight.[/sarcasm]


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Montreal Canadiens


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 6452
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 6:55 pm
 


Actually, what the article's source says is that the CO2 is not really a factor to the global warming. So that the CO2 produced by men are only a tiny fraction of the anomaly with are experiencing.

I gotta say it makes sense. I'm not an alarmist.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 6972
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:00 pm
 


Proculation wrote:
I'm not an alarmist.

That's okay, there's enough alarmists in Joplin, MO to make up for you.


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Ottawa Senators
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 4048
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:04 pm
 


Lemmy wrote:
Proculation wrote:
I'm not an alarmist.

That's okay, there's enough alarmists in Joplin, MO to make up for you.


That's a bit of a stretch.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 6972
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:09 pm
 


I'm not entering into this silliness again. Delude yourselves silly.


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Ottawa Senators
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 4048
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:11 pm
 


Figured as much.


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 4598
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:32 pm
 


Since all these predictions are based on "climate models" why should I believe in a computer generated prediction from an system that can't tell me accurately what the fucking weather will be like 24 hours from now?

Meterologists, scientists and politicians the only three occupations that you can be 100% wrong all the time and still keep your job. :roll:


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 389
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 8:08 pm
 


Even if all predictions come to be (ocean levels +2m; zero polar ice; extinction of the polar bear; flooded coastlines; island nations under water; etc.) these pale in comparison to an inevitable ice age. Alarmists do not ever learn to adapt and simply waste time and effort.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8545
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 8:56 pm
 


Ahh, so the Deniers have gone back to outright Denying there's Warming at all. That's nice.

Still Fail.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14940
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 10:43 pm
 


Gone back... there was a time they didn't?


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
Profile
Posts: 1254
PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2011 9:18 pm
 


The increase in atmospheric CO2, proculation, is entirely anthropogenic. The atmospheric CO2 is of two molecular types. One is produced naturally; the other is caused by the burning of fossil fuels.

The increase is entirely of the second type and that is conclusive proof of man's causation. Further, the atmospheric concentrations of CO2 are now the highest in almost twenty million years.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 412 posts ]  1  2  3  4  5 ... 28  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests




 
     
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.