Global warming - ostriches in the sand while the earth dies.

2014-10-22T16:07:20-04:00

Have you seen the most recent climate analysis?

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/

Global Analysis - August 2015 | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

a summary of global temperatures and precipitation, placing the data into a historical perspective

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 22 at 2014 4:08 PM

2014-10-22T16:08:07-04:00

Don't we have a drug test in the military? How can this NOT register:

The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for September 2014 was the highest on record for September, at 0.72°C (1.30°F) above the 20th century average of 15.0°C (59.0°F).
The global land surface temperature was 0.89°C (1.60°F) above the 20th century average of 12.0°C (53.6°F), the sixth highest for September on record. For the ocean, the September global sea surface temperature was 0.66°C (1.19°F) above the 20th century average of 16.2°C (61.1°F), the highest on record for September and also the highest on record for any month.
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the January–September period (year-to-date) was 0.68°C (1.22°F) above the 20th century average of 14.1°C (57.5°F), tying with 1998 as the warmest such period on record.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 22 at 2014 4:18 PM

2014-10-22T16:18:40-04:00

I'm not sure there is a whole lot of risk that the Earth will die, just that most or all of the life on earth might die. This might seem like an insignificent distiction, however I'm not sure were helping our arguement by focuing on the planet instead of billions of human lives.

Response by SGT Richard H. made Oct 22 at 2014 4:25 PM

2014-10-22T16:25:34-04:00

Sir, the problem with most global warming theory is that it's based on "temperatures on record". Temperature records have only been keep for about 130 years, which in the grand scheme of the earth is tiny. For every scientist saying that global warming is a new thing there's another one saying that this is just another cycle out of thousands of years of cycles. If you're old enough, you'll probably recall that the scientific craze of the early-mid 70's was that we were spiraling into another ice age, and it was based on basically the same size snapshot as the current warming theory is. Below is a graphic showing what I'm talking about. There are literally hundreds of them out there to support both sides of the debate, but I picked this one because it's pretty easy to read at a glance and matches what I've seen from scores of sites. I'm not necessarily saying that it's definitive, but then neither is most of the climate science out there.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 22 at 2014 5:32 PM

2014-10-22T17:32:31-04:00

I gotta say I agree with SGT Richard H. on this topic, and no, I don't smoke dope or have my head in the sand. For all the scientists who cry the sky is falling on global warming, there are others who say poppycock. I could post links, but they all say the same thing: what I just said.

Response by COL Randall Cudworth made Oct 22 at 2014 5:57 PM

2014-10-22T17:57:08-04:00

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member, my respect for you just dropped a notch. If you insist on bringing back up another topic that should die a horrible death like the ones about LTs saluting, the least you can do is be civil. If you want to debate theories, possible outcomes and such, by all means. Your comment to SGT Richard H. was out of line and typical of these type of discussions on the open internet.

I would expect better from a fellow professional soldier.

BTW, anything that follows the words "with all due respect" usually isn't.

Response by SPC James Mcneil made Oct 23 at 2014 8:46 AM

2014-10-23T08:46:00-04:00

First, I have to respond to the title of this thread; "ostriches in the sand while the earth dies." The earth is not dying. It may be becoming less inhabitable for us humans, but the earth is by no means dying. The earth was here long before we came along, and it will be here long after we're gone. So the concept that the earth is dying is completely false.

Second, I'd be curious to know where they're getting their data for analysis. Something seems fishy to me.

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Oct 23 at 2014 3:49 PM

2014-10-23T15:49:45-04:00

Ostriches don't bury their heads in the sand.
http://www.ostriches.org/factor.html

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 23 at 2014 3:57 PM

2014-10-23T15:57:22-04:00

The Ostrich Crap is what elevates this issue to a point which is counterproductive. It is the Ad hominem malarkey dressed up as real science that makes the discussion evolve into some kind of POLITICAL nonsense.

Response by SPC Greg Burnett made Oct 23 at 2014 9:10 PM

2014-10-23T21:10:36-04:00

On the idea of Anthropogenic Climate Change (ACC), I really don't care if there is climate change or not. More to follow on this.
But, I do not believe that there is any effect that man is having on it for a number of reasons.
1. The idea of science is to have a discussion on the subject at hand; shutting down people that don't agree with you by calling them stupid or not capable of understanding science is just plain not consistent with scientific debate. The whole idea of calling us "deniers" came about to connect us to holocaust deniers and put the idea into low information persons inclined to buy into ACC that we support the deaths of millions. Plain and simple, it is to compare us to Nazis and convince people we want a new holocaust carried out by climate change. The vitriolic hatred man-made global warming/climate change believers show towards skeptics is astounding.
2. Everything they cry about always starts out as "unprecedented" and then turns out to be precedented.
3. They started out with global cooling. When that didn't pan out they changed to global warming. Supporters didn't have a problem with the 180 degree switch. When the global warming thing didn't happen like they screamed and hollered it would, they switched to a Cover Your Ass position of "anything and everything that might or could happen is caused by man made CO2". They really seem to be saying "even though we have been completely wrong up to now, that is proof we are correct now". WTF? Still, supporters have no problem with that.
4. When someone skeptical points out that a winter or summer was cooler than normal, the true believers on TV laugh at them and call them stupid and point out that one season or even a year is not sufficient to disprove ACC, BUT... get one EF-5 tornado that hits a metro area or an extra hurricane and the same people are all over TV pointing out how that is proof of climate change.
5. Cherry picking. Skeptics are accused of cherry picking data, however believers have recently begun to deny that there was ever a Little Ice Age starting in the middle ages. 700 years of documented, historical fact and they just plain say it didn't happen. Of course, the temp changes that appear to have accompanied the Little Ice Age refute their claims that man made CO2 is the only possible way for temp to change so rapidly. For this to be true, there would have had to have been an associated reduction in man made CO2 levels at the beginning of the Little Ice Age and of course there wasn't.

Why don't I care? Same people worried about ACC are the ones that are now worried about world overpopulation. Attempts to slow population growth haven't worked anywhere, the only way we're gonna reduce it would be to commence with a depopulation campaign, by which I mean actually killing off "unwanted" or "undesirable" people.
This Earth can sustain A LOT more people than it has (I'd prefer smaller populations too, but..) and global warming will likely result in increased food production, so...
Who gives a rat's ass?
You know, unless you want to participate in eradication attempts.

Response by Capt Andrew Cosgrove made Oct 25 at 2014 9:23 PM

2014-10-25T21:23:35-04:00

Maj Dews you make a very basic mistake with this report.

1. It is for the month.

The truth is that temperatures have not risen considerably, in the past 18 years, despite a 9% increase in the CO2 levels during the same period. (http://www.remss.com/blog/recent-slowing-rise-global-temperatures)

Add to that fact that CO2 levels have been shown to lag behind temperature increases some 200 years (http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/vostok.html)

And finally, that whole 97% consensus that keeps getting thrown out has been resoundingly shown to be nothing but a huge propaganda effort

"Of the various petitions on global warming circulated for signatures by scientists, the one by the Petition Project, a group of physicists and physical chemists based in La Jolla, Calif., has by far the most signatures—more than 31,000 (more than 9,000 with a Ph.D.). It was most recently published in 2009, and most signers were added or reaffirmed since 2007. The petition states that "there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of . . . carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate."" (http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB [login to see] [login to see] [login to see] [login to see] )

So, in the ever so prescient "Occams Razor" and Einsteins method of removing the all the possibilities, we are left with an undeniable truth. We the people have been presented with a faux problem in order to wage war and save ourselves by electing certain people who want more money to solve the problem.

Does anyone else see where there could be room for abuse here?

The Recent Slowing in the Rise of Global Temperatures | Remote Sensing Systems

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 1:42 PM

2015-02-25T13:42:30-05:00

What are your thoughts

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 1:43 PM

2015-02-25T13:43:08-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 1:43 PM

2015-02-25T13:43:42-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 1:44 PM

2015-02-25T13:44:12-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 1:44 PM

2015-02-25T13:44:51-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 1:45 PM

2015-02-25T13:45:58-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 1:46 PM

2015-02-25T13:46:35-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 1:47 PM

2015-02-25T13:47:55-05:00

Response by PO2 Todd Voge made Feb 25 at 2015 1:50 PM

2015-02-25T13:50:10-05:00

So, while I don't have time to find a good Meme, I do have a thought. I remember back in the 70's when I was in grade school how we were so worried we were heading for an ice age. Global Cooling. They were going to seed the clouds with ash to keep the heat in. 15 years later, the pendulum went the other way.

Now "they" use "Global Climate Change" instead. WTH??? Yes, the global climate DOES change! It has to do more with volcano's and sunspots than what we do.

It's all a crock to get more money from us.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 1:50 PM

2015-02-25T13:50:56-05:00

First of all, the media creates a misnomer as to the concept of "global warming". That's all they talk about.....global warming this, global warming that. However, what they fail to explain in a majority of these articles is that it does not mean that the planet will CONTINUALLY grow warmer.

One concept that I have seen that does tend to support the scientific claims of ozone depletion/destruction is the retreating ice caps on both fronts. There are receding glaciers in Alaska, and concerns that they will be gone in the next 20-30 years from an article that I'd read in the past. I've also noticed that up until last year we had a spell of dry weather that could have potentially been attributed, which led to some crops suffering.

Additionally, the aspect of global warming regarding temperature, means that you will likely see more extremes in weather, and weather pattern changes in areas that aren't usually affected. One such change is that they are seeing an increase in severe weather activity in various aspects of Africa that have never experienced them before, including tornadoes.

Now.....I didn't see an option for what I'm thinking. Although I do believe that aspects of global warming are true, and the destruction of the ozone layer can eventually occur, I'm not 100% sure that people have the willpower to stop it. The United States is one of the few nations that is actually attempting cleaner burning fuels and other technologies. China produces more ozone pollution than several other industrialized nations combined, and shows zero interest in investing money into a cleaner air solution, because quite frankly there's no money in it. Consumers care about what is in their pocket or in their hands, and if the price of the TV set that you want goes up another $100, you're more likely to buy a competitors TV.

I'm not 100% sure on what is going on, but I do agree with some in the scientific community that the fuels/pollution that we are generating has to have some adverse actions on the planet itself.
v/r,
CPT Butler

Response by Col Joseph Lenertz made Feb 25 at 2015 1:57 PM

2015-02-25T13:57:12-05:00

"I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.  "Let's be clear: The work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. "There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period. "I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E=mc2. Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way. ." ~ Michael Crichton

Response by SFC Stephen P. made Feb 25 at 2015 4:29 PM

2015-02-25T16:29:33-05:00

Assuming the science is correct (remains to be seen), the proposed solutions seem ineffectual and likely to cause greater disruption than what they are intended to prevent.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 5:38 PM

2015-02-25T17:38:23-05:00

It is this opinion of scientific matters, that by one instance a whole study is invalidated, that brings those with motives of subterfuge to their goals. An oversimplification of the matter of global warming does not disprove it but rather illustrates the increased changes to the globe as a whole. Warmer weather creates higher levels of moisture in the air which moves slower, this in turn leads to cold air becoming stagnant and when snow does come there is greater amounts of it. It can be confusing to see such abundance of cold weather, but short periods of cold do not over shadow an universal increase of temperatures. If an opinion that one day of cold means there is no global change then it would follow the same individual must believe that they never need to eat again for immediately after breakfast they are not hungry.
Furthermore, it the argument is made that with record cold disproves global warming, then how is it not proven by record heat the other half of the year? The past 3 years have had every state in the Union break one summer month's record high. Water shortages have increased and irrigation has been diminishing its impact.
Trends are made from greater than one data point, and when one disagrees with the overall hypothesis this is what makes it based in reality. Be aware of opinion overshadowing fact and rhetoric being held as truth.

Response by SPC Christopher Smith made Feb 25 at 2015 6:21 PM

2015-02-25T18:21:36-05:00

I think global warming is not happening to an extinct that people have made it out to be, but I think people have not given Polar Shifting enough credit in much of our weather issues. For those who are interested to know, Magnetic North is moving towards Russia. I have to imagine we as people had little to do with that, and it is much more of a timing issue.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 6:26 PM

2015-02-25T18:26:49-05:00

Global Warming is a real concern and we can mitigate some of the damage, it's far to late to stop it. That wasn't an option though, so I selected the closest response.

Response by SGT Sean Lewis made Feb 25 at 2015 6:43 PM

2015-02-25T18:43:16-05:00

Global Warming being caused by humans is REAL. It is science FACT. Look to history when the oil and auto industries persecuted a scientist who proclaimed what is known to be true. Gas fumes, vapors, residue etc, is HARMFUL.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 7:53 PM

2015-02-25T19:53:52-05:00

As a defacto climatologist and astute observer of weather for over 35 years, I find the topic to be political and there are sites that virtually debunk the Goreites. I am pretty sure that those who think AGW is a big time threat are not worried about it tonight. Some are out wasting fuel in their big cars, houses and boats.

And who really besides weather people see the net effect of weather upon anything? Not many!

http://wattsupwiththat.com/

Watts Up With That?

The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:11 PM

2015-02-25T21:11:06-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:11 PM

2015-02-25T21:11:46-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:12 PM

2015-02-25T21:12:46-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:13 PM

2015-02-25T21:13:54-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:15 PM

2015-02-25T21:15:23-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:16 PM

2015-02-25T21:16:08-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:17 PM

2015-02-25T21:17:43-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:18 PM

2015-02-25T21:18:48-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:19 PM

2015-02-25T21:19:56-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:20 PM

2015-02-25T21:20:48-05:00

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Feb 25 at 2015 9:21 PM

2015-02-25T21:21:02-05:00

Whenever you hear "The science is settled" you can bet it isn't.

I'm not climatologist (and neither are the "scientists" who have ponied up to foist this issue on us) but I am a sailor and have studied weather (really, like in a classroom and all). Climate and weather are two different things, but they are a helluva a lot more related than climate and the disciplines of those who claim to be climatologists.

And then there's Al Gore... the man of no credentials in anything. Yet many hang on his every word.

All they're shown is that their "models" predict disaster but can not prove any relation between their models and reality. Indeed, they been caught several times altering data to make their models produce the results they want.

So, what is all the hoopla all about. Easy. Control. Not the weather. You and me. They want to control our behavior because they know better what is best for us. It's as simple as that.

What do you call people like this?

Again, easy.

Elites...

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:21 PM

2015-02-25T21:21:55-05:00

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:22 PM

2015-02-25T21:22:29-05:00

I think that the term "warming" when we are in an ice block is confusing, and the weather has changed throughout the years with the changes we have made to the Earth. From my understanding, we are creating more greenhouse gases- which makes sense with the size of the population and the cities, cars, and decreasing forestry. The problem is that people are focusing on the "warming" aspect, when in fact, it's changing the flow of the weather patterns. Alaska is warmer than New England, the south is below freezing. California is in a drought and the East Coast is going to flood between the rain in the south and the snow in the north when it melts. It is a real thing.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:22 PM

2015-02-25T21:22:51-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:23 PM

2015-02-25T21:23:55-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:24 PM

2015-02-25T21:24:39-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:25 PM

2015-02-25T21:25:19-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:29 PM

2015-02-25T21:29:00-05:00

Response by CW5 Jim Steddum made Feb 25 at 2015 9:30 PM

2015-02-25T21:30:03-05:00

I like the term climate change... it is real. NOT man made. Man-made toxins are a concern, but for health, not climate.

http://www.indiana.edu/~geol105/images/gaia_chapter_4/milankovitch.htm

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:31 PM

2015-02-25T21:31:49-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:32 PM

2015-02-25T21:32:44-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:36 PM

2015-02-25T21:36:02-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:36 PM

2015-02-25T21:36:55-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:37 PM

2015-02-25T21:37:29-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:38 PM

2015-02-25T21:38:13-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:38 PM

2015-02-25T21:38:57-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:39 PM

2015-02-25T21:39:33-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:40 PM

2015-02-25T21:40:33-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:41 PM

2015-02-25T21:41:11-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:41 PM

2015-02-25T21:41:44-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:42 PM

2015-02-25T21:42:55-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:43 PM

2015-02-25T21:43:29-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:44 PM

2015-02-25T21:44:06-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:44 PM

2015-02-25T21:44:35-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:45 PM

2015-02-25T21:45:21-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:48 PM

2015-02-25T21:48:01-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:48 PM

2015-02-25T21:48:42-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:50 PM

2015-02-25T21:50:26-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:52 PM

2015-02-25T21:52:39-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:53 PM

2015-02-25T21:53:38-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:56 PM

2015-02-25T21:56:18-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:58 PM

2015-02-25T21:58:01-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:58 PM

2015-02-25T21:58:43-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 9:59 PM

2015-02-25T21:59:22-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 10:00 PM

2015-02-25T22:00:01-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 10:00 PM

2015-02-25T22:00:44-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 10:01 PM

2015-02-25T22:01:17-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 10:02 PM

2015-02-25T22:02:22-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 10:02 PM

2015-02-25T22:02:56-05:00

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 10:23 PM

2015-02-25T22:23:28-05:00

The memes are always great fun, CPT Boling, but do you do anything productive during the course of the duty day, or are the memes an all-consuming obsession with you? ;-)

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 10:42 PM

2015-02-25T22:42:45-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 10:43 PM

2015-02-25T22:43:58-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 10:46 PM

2015-02-25T22:46:01-05:00

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Feb 25 at 2015 10:54 PM

2015-02-25T22:54:04-05:00

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 11:33 PM

2015-02-25T23:33:54-05:00

Response by Sgt Nick Marshall made Feb 25 at 2015 11:39 PM

2015-02-25T23:39:09-05:00

While the US may be, on average, colder this winter, the rest of the world has been getting warmer. Looking in your backyard to see what the weather is like across the country is useless.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 26 at 2015 4:10 PM

2015-02-26T16:10:11-05:00

Just another tax scheme in my book. Throughout the eons there have been warming and cooling cycles. I wonder how manmade the warming cycle was all those millions of years ago... In any event, let's say the US buys this BS and decides to tax 'big oil' or 'big coal' or 'corporate farmer'- really decides to punish them. Who do you suppose will really pay the tax, MAJ Private RallyPoint Member? Do you suppose 'big oil', 'big coal' and the 'corporation farm' will?

The answer is no. Those of us with our nose to the grindstone every day, eeking out a living to provide for our families, playing by all the rules will end up paying for it.

Response by SGT Steven Eugene Kuhn MBA made Feb 27 at 2015 1:06 AM

2015-02-27T01:06:47-05:00

DON'T DRINK THE KOOL AID

For sure, the media jumps on the “global warming” story every time there is a heat wave and each time a hurricane hits the East Coast.

But how much has the world really warmed?

Well, according to NASA’s own data, the world has warmed .36 degrees Fahrenheit over the last 35 years (they started measuring the data in 1979).

I think you would agree that a .36 degree increase in temperature over the last 35 years is hardly anything to get in a panic about.

Granted, that does mean the world is warmer, right?

The problem with that argument is that we experienced the bulk of that warming between 1979 and 1998 . . . we’ve actually had temperatures DROPPING ever since!

The reality is this: The world is 1.08 degrees cooler than it was in 1998.

Just take a look at this chart from Remote Sensing Systems, which provides data to NASA, NOAA, and other scientific organizations.

If you’re like me, this makes a lot of sense.

We’ve had cooler summers and longer winters.

Again, take one more look at the chart above — global warming reversed its rise in 1998. In the dossier John handed me, he explains exactly why this happened . . . and what’s going to happen next.

But for now, just keep this fact in your back pocket: the case for “global warming” is dead in its tracks.

“Global warming” proponents have said for a long time we’d see a heating of the oceans.

This proposition is necessary, since it means all those big chunks of ice are supposed to melt, killing off polar bears and causing states like Florida to get swallowed up by water.

In 2007, while accepting his Nobel Prize for his “global warming” initiative (and quietly pocketing millions of dollars), Al Gore made a striking prediction . . .

“The North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff. It could be completely
gone in summer in as little as seven years. Seven years from now.”

The arctic ice caps have increased in size by 43% to 63%.

It is seven years later, and recent satellite images show that not only have the icecaps not melted . . . but they’ve expanded in size by 43% to 63%.

Here’s what a Globe and Mail article had to say: “An area twice the size of Alaska — America's biggest state — was open water two years ago and is now covered in ice.”

I think we know who’s using actual science, and who’s fear-mongering their way to wealth and fame.

Since 2002, the ocean temperatures have fluctuated less than 1 degree Fahrenheit. There is no warming.

Again, there is nothing to get hysterical about here.

You’ve heard for years how climate change has been caused by . . . well, you!

Al Gore and his liberal friends have stood onstage blaming you and your “gas-guzzling” car, standard four‑bedroom house, and the factory downtown.

Al Gore spreads “Global Warming” propaganda for his own profit.

Shame on you, right?

Of course, the hypocrisy of the claim is that Al Gore himself racks up annual electric and gas bills of $30,000, more than 20 times the national average.

Now, while I am all for keeping the environment clean (I recycle, drive a fuel-efficient car, and reuse materials), humans have not caused “global warming” . . . nothing can be further from the truth.

Indeed, “global warming” alarmists and their allies in the liberal media are famous for saying that scientists agree that man has caused “global warming.”

President Obama even tweeted on May 16, 2014, “97% of scientists agree: climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” John Kerry, Al Gore, and a host of others have championed this statistic.

NOTE: I’ve shared a quick snapshot of the facts in John’s controversial 164-page document. Truth be told, John has 33 scientifically reviewed reasons that “global warming” is more than just a farce . . . it’s the product of bad, botched science. In John’s own words, the research in this document is “something you have not been allowed to hear for almost 20 years.” That is, the truth about our climate, the politicians manipulating the science, and the real key that controls our planet’s temperature — the sun.

As The Wall Street Journal reported, “The assertion that 97% of scientists believe that climate change is a man-made, urgent problem is a fiction.”

When further review was done, it was discovered that a mere 1% of scientists believe human activity is causing most of the climate change.

In outrage, a petition was signed by more than 31,000 scientists that states “there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of . . . carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate."

Indeed, even a founding father of the man-made “global warming” theory — Claude Allegre — recently came out and renounced his position by admitting, “The cause of this climate change is unknown.”

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made Apr 20 at 2015 3:46 PM

2015-04-20T15:46:16-04:00

Global warming can be a touchy subject ...

http://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/americans-don%e2%80%99t-talk-about-global-warming-very-often/ar-AAbnDw0

Americans Don’t Talk About Global Warming Very Often

Global warming can be a touchy subject—and many Americans would rather not talk about it. A whopping 74 percent of Americans "never" or "rarely" discuss global warming, while just 26 percent of Americans talk about it "often" or "occasionally," according to a national survey from the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication released Monday. And 25 percent of Americans say people they know never talk about global warming at all, despite the...