Colder winter and cooler summer, the global warming theory sounds like junk. What do you think?

1SG Larry Everly — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 14:23:54 -0400

Response by 2LT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 23 at 2014 2:26 PM

2LT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 14:26:55 -0400

1SG,
I believe the most up to date information shows global warming is occurring. It is a complicated issue though.
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/cold-snow-climate-change.html

It’s Cold and My Car is Buried in Snow. Is Global Warming Really Happening?

Global warming won't stop winter weather, but it does have significant implications for the intensity of the heaviest storms.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 23 at 2014 11:51 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 23:51:24 -0400

1SG, it is junk "science". It's not so much that warming and cooling don't exist but more so the simple fallacy that it's man made, which is false. The earth has warmed and cooled through various stages of its existence or the past thousands of years.

The really funny thing is some people don't understand that one volcanic eruption does more damage to the earth than everything humans can do combined in one year. SMH!!!

Response by CWO4 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2014 1:10 AM

CWO4 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 01:10:06 -0400

If you think 97% of expert scientific consensus is incorrect... then I have a great deal on a bridge I'd like to sell you.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2014 6:10 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 06:10:35 -0400

I love how the republicans say, "we're not scientists, so don't ask us about global warming".... then say there is no global warming, although 97% of climate researchers agree there is. The global warming deniers are on par with the 9/11 truthers and the birthers as being about as anti-intellectual as you can get.

Response by MSG Wade Huffman made Jul 24 at 2014 6:58 AM

MSG Wade Huffman — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 06:58:43 -0400

Isn't that why they quit calling it 'global warming' and started calling it 'climate change'? Still skeptical about the whole thing myself, but still review arguments from both sides.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2014 7:10 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 07:10:27 -0400

To look at all of the things we put into the ground, air, and water and say you do not believe that human activity can cause climate change would be the same thing as saying that you do not believe that what you put into your body can effect your overall health.

I am completely confused as to why people are so against conservation efforts. If climate change is bunk, conservation efforts that get people thinking about how they use our resources aren't a bad thing. If climate change is real and we treat it like it isn't, we all die. The only people advantaged by ignoring climate science are corporations fighting regulations.

Response by COL Randall C. made Jul 24 at 2014 8:16 AM

COL Randall C. — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 08:16:49 -0400

There is so much contradictory data from large segments of reputable scientists, anyone that comes down solidly on the side of "IT DOES!" or "IT DOESN'T" is the equivalent of a fringe element in a political view. I took a devil's advocate to both views last year to show a group of students that regardless of which side they were on, I could dig up scientific data that is "THE TRUTH!" to oppose their view.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2014 8:36 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 08:36:48 -0400

1SG,

I would pose to you that short term localized trend analysis is a fruitless endeavor in regards to evaluating global climate change.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Jul 24 at 2014 9:24 AM

MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 09:24:55 -0400

IMHO we are dealing with scientific questions that can't be answered within the scope of a human lifetime. Based on science's explanation of repeated ice ages followed by "global warming" which led to our development as a species and civilization, I believe that global warming is reality. Mankind has collective meteorological data for what, a few hundred years while earth, in its present life sustaining form has existed for a few billion years? If global warming truly is a cycle, then this is the first one that modern man is experiencing and as CPT Private RallyPoint Member alluded too, who's to say that what we're putting into our atmosphere - things that never existed before man - is not affecting our climate? I tend to stick with Occam's razor - the simplest explanation is generally the correct one.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Jul 24 at 2014 10:05 AM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 10:05:04 -0400

Climate Change or Global Warming is a Fact accepted by 93 percent of scientist internationally. I accept it. That doesn't mean there won't be pockets where it is Cooler. Also with more water released with Ice Melt that will eventually reduce the Salinity of the water and stop the Conveyor Belt that is the thermohaline circulation eventually the Earth will have a snap back effect and we will get another ice age either mini or maxi in either case we will only have ourselves to blame. Just an Abortion in the way we have treated this Earth which God has granted us. Piss poor Stewardship.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2014 10:50 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 10:50:06 -0400

The Science is there to prove that humans can impact small areas. (Smog in LA or China for example). But there is no evidence that mankind causes anything on a global scale.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2014 11:12 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 11:12:27 -0400

Another good article from a few months ago:

"peer-reviewed literature from 1991 through Nov. 12, 2012, found 13,950 articles on “global warming” or “global climate change.” Of those, I judged that only 24 explicitly rejected the theory of man-made global warming. "

http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/01/08/why-climate-deniers-have-no-scientific-credibility-only-1-9136-study-authors-rejects-global-warming

Why Climate Deniers Have No Scientific Credibility: Only 1 of 9,136 Recent Peer-Reviewed Authors...

This is a guest post byJames Lawrence Powell.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2014 11:15 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 11:15:27 -0400

I think we should send a huge box of crayons to all these "climate scientists", put them in a room together and tell them to color inside the lines until they can get their sh!t together and make sense. As the song said: Nobody's right, if everybody's wrong.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2014 12:30 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 12:30:29 -0400

http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/virtualmuseum/climatechange2/03_1.shtml

This is one of many articles which point to a cycle of 100,000 years that Earth experiences an Ice Age. We are currently at the cusp of the latest Ice Age, the last Mini Ice Age occurred during the dark ages. I doubt that Man/Cow Farts/Cars/Factories had much influence on the last few Ice Ages, I would ask for someone to come up with the science to show me they were.

As such, we are simply passengers on the roller coaster, we are not in control of the roller coaster. We cannot really effect the outcome of the ride only how comfortable we are on it.

Ice Age Climate Cycles

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2014 2:11 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 14:11:59 -0400

Someone may have already posted this, if so then sorry for the repeat.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/copenhagen-and-global-warming-ten-facts-and-ten-myths-on-climate-change/16467
I found it ineresting because it does not simply state that AGW does or does not exist. It goes into the facts about our limited ability to conduct actual scientific research on the subject without ignoring certain lack of credability for computer simulations and the basic overall processes we are using to analyze climate change.

Climate change IS real, that fact is irrefutable. AGW on the other hand, I believe, is still up for debate.

Response by CW2 Ernest Krutzsch made Jul 24 at 2014 3:18 PM

CW2 Ernest Krutzsch — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 15:18:29 -0400

The meteorologists can't even predict the weather from day to day, the climate changes, are we part of the cause, probably, are we the bulk of the cause, probably not. the problem is that when the "scientists" are caught in a lie, it makes the rest of us a bit skeptical....http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/09/26/nasa-giss-caught-changing-past-data-again-violates-data-quality-act/
In 1975, it was a new ice age, now it is climate change, global warming..Psst...the climate changes always will always has.. As I said previously, follow the money, those who proclaim the loudest get the most grants, and look at poor Al Gore, the planet is dying, but he still flies his private jet, why, because he took advantage of a situation and Capitalized on it!

NASA GISS caught changing past data again - violates Data Quality Act

From American Thinker - NASA's Rubber Ruler By Randall Hoven A funny thing happened on the way to determining how hot 2012 has been on a global basis: temperatures changed in 1880. We've been heari...

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2014 8:58 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 20:58:43 -0400

It's not global warming. It's magnetic pole reversal. :D

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2545465/Forget-global-warming-worry-MAGNETOSPHERE-Earths-magnetic-field-collapsing-affect-climate-wipe-power-grids.html

Forget global warming, it’s the MAGNETOSPHERE we need to worry about

EXCLUSIVE: Scientists estimate that the magnetic field has weakened by 15 per cent over the last 200 years, exposing humans to higher levels of radiation.

Response by Cpl Ray Fernandez made Jul 25 at 2014 12:36 AM

Cpl Ray Fernandez — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 00:36:05 -0400

Even if we reduced all means of man caused methods of producing carbon that reaches the atmosphere we would still not reduce it by more than 1%. I believe that the idea of limiting pollution is good for other reasons like reducing waste and making companies more efficient. Politics on both sides is clouding the issue since you have some using any unseasonal weather to claim it's an effect of climate change, and then you have the other side pointing out seasonal weather to justify the change. Sure the weather has been fairly consistent over the last 150 years, varying less than a degree, but that really shouldn't be the issue even if the temperatures are stable, air pollution poses a great risk to human health. Of the many runaway warming models that were used to claim global warming that were used early on and extrapolated temps to rise to near Venus levels failed to take into account the effects of water here on earth.

Response by 1LT Nick Kidwell made Jul 25 at 2014 2:05 AM

1LT Nick Kidwell — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 02:05:16 -0400

I do not doubt that climate change is actually happening, as there is empirical evidence to support the hypothesis, but I am unconvinced as to the level at which humans are actually influencing it. In my estimation, the scientific jury is still out on whether the current trends are caused by humans or if they are simply part of regular climatic cycles.

In the sciences, correlation =/= causality. It takes a WHOLE lot of solid empirical evidence to demonstrate causality. Furthermore, if a particular scientific stance has a political flavor, it will likely be popular...not because it it necessarily right, but because THAT is the research that gets the funding.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 25 at 2014 3:01 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 03:01:26 -0400

I wouldnt exactly call it "Global Warming" but I would call it Climate Change. Whether or not it is a man made or man aided phenomenon is irrelevant at this point as it is happening. You cant just flip a switch and say look, we stopped doing this and that so everything will get better now! It just doesnt work like that. I took a small block of leave to Michigan back in January and it was one of the winters on record since my birth. People would argue that a cold winter goes against a "global warming" theory, to them I would say, get your head out of your rear and stop taking things literally. The Term "Global Warming" was a misused term and does NOT directly indicate that all weather should now become warmer. Sure, the Desert is hot as hell when the sun comes out....what happens at night though...Its the same thing with climate. In Michigan right now, its one of the weirdest summers ever, it barely reaches the 90s and each week or day is a completely different temperature from the last. Before you spout off on jokes about Michigan being in the north, understand this, Michigan does have routine summers months of 80-90 degree temperatures, something they have not had this year for more than a few days at a time. Could this be a strange year for the State...I could give in to that idea but is it strange and does it make you wonder...it certainly does. I dont think the argument over whether or not climate change/global warming is man made or natural even has a place in science anymore, the argument needs to be, what can we do to assist ourselves in more efficiently using our resources and what to do if a cataclysmic event caused by a global shift in weather suddenly affects crop cycles and fresh water levels.

Response by SFC Jeff L. made Jul 25 at 2014 12:44 PM

SFC Jeff L. — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 12:44:45 -0400

To say that global warming is a man-caused phenomenon is a misnomer at best. You simply can not reason with a global warming fanatic. It's a religion, and you'll no sooner convince them of it than to convince them to believe in a different God. In spite of the fact (yes, fact) that the people responsible for the entire global warming panic have been exposed as frauds - websearch "2009, university of east anglia" to see it for yourself.

Doesn't it make you wonder why the language has gone from The Coming Ice Age (1979) to Global Warming (1990s, 2000s) to Climate Change (late 2000s) to Global Climate Disruption (2010s)? Why? The answer is because it allows them to claim that anything other than perfect weather is evidence of anthroprogenic global warming.

It isn't about weather. It's about money and control. Taxes, fines, carbon offsets and carbon exchanges, taxing industrial nations and giving that money to third-world countries, and imposing regulations on your personal behavior and choices. Why does Al Gore et. al. sell this stuff to the public while maintaining a personal carbon footprint the size of Kansas City? Money. Plain and simple.

You keep buying what they're selling. As for me, I'll recycle, conserve, reduce, and reuse because it's a good thing to do. Not because someone fooled me into thinking it's going to save the planet.

Response by SPC Randy Torgerson made Jul 25 at 2014 2:33 PM

SPC Randy Torgerson — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 14:33:02 -0400

A new discovery has recently brought many questions to the future of climate change with the discovery of an ancient ice core that was drilled out in Greenland when a team of international scientists working on the North Greenland Eemian Ice Drilling (NEEM) project hit bedrock. The team achieved this monumental find after a full two summers of work, which involved drilling down more than 1.5 miles to try and assess the risks of abrupt future climate change. Some of the key implications and findings surrounding this find include the following:

The ice core originates from the Eemian interglacial period, which was from about 115,000 to 130,000 years ago. The temperatures at this time were 3.6 to 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit above today's temperatures. The Eemian period was the most recent interglacial period on Earth. During this period there was a huge deal less ice on Greenland, and in addition to this, sea levels were 15 feet or more higher than today.

Do we have global warming today? Perhaps, but is it man made or a natural occurrence? You can believe anything you want. But real science with real facts should make a reasonable person come to an honest conclusion. I cited the article below by a link.

http://www.worldissues360.com/index.php/ice-drilling-project-greenland-climate-change-global-warming-10290/

World Issues 360 | Every Topics, Every Angles – Issues NewsWorld Issues 360 | Every Topics, Every...

When picking a toy for your cat you want 1 that is each protected and very good for providing your cat exercising. You can get some of these toys in the store and you can make some of them at residence.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 25 at 2014 9:07 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 21:07:29 -0400

Just to add fuel to the fire, here's an interesting interview with the founder of The Weather Channel on the global warming myth

http://americanprosperity.com/weather-channel-founder-debunks-global-warming-hoax/

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 25 at 2014 9:41 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 21:41:59 -0400

1SG Larry Everly When dealing with the Pro-AGW crowd, I want to pull my hair out! They do not knowing what they are talking about anymore than most who purport to understand any major field of Science.

First there is so much crossover in meanings. Not least of which is the use Global Warming which then become Climate Change. A political expediency used to make the topic more palatable. Politicians to get votes and impose sanctions without any real sense of what is involved.

Secondly, pollution does exist and it CAN affect the environment and it MUST be addressed and corrected. If anything just to make our air quality better and protect our national resources.

But here is the rub and the real part of this 'debate'. Physicians are not experts in this area but they do see the effects of pollution. Increased respiratory issues and disease.

However as we discuss this stuff, politics creep in. Talking points that are replete with political attacks on people who differ. So what is the larger issue and what can be done?

People with an agenda will marginalize each other, in effect saying, that 'deniers' are uneducated. Trust me, they are just as ignorant as they profess to be informed.

From a Meteorologist for over 30 years, I do get it. The fields of climatology and weather overlap. Science models for climatology have been based on Meteorological Models like the NGM, LFM, etc. If we are as bad as people say we are, then how much more unreliable are forecasts projected out to 50-100 years?

That is the point here. Politicians want to spend TRILLIONS of dollars based on a lot of anecdotal and limited empirical data sets. This is kind of like designing a space vehicle with your only tools being Business Math. In terms of cost that is okay but not for engineering.

Immediate corrections to pollution are necessary and alternate forms be found with regard to fossilized fuels. There are answers but not presumptions based on specious data without proper due diligence and peer review. MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca SSgt John Bratton

Response by Cpl Ray Fernandez made Jul 25 at 2014 10:34 PM

Cpl Ray Fernandez — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 22:34:10 -0400

Science is rarely settled. People revisit hypothesis and conclusions and reevaluate the conclusions that have been made on previous observations. How many times have we heard that after further study certain facts have been reevaluated upon obtaining new data with better technology. You have to look at the subject away from the tainting that occurs when politicians use it to prove their point, use it to argue against a point, and then the media delivers a halfassed interpretation of the data that may be one minor point of the study that they're covering. The best thing I can say is to look up the specific studies that are being cited and question the data and the methodology yourself, and don't take anyone else's opinion of what it means and determine the truth for yourselves.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 25 at 2014 11:17 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 23:17:33 -0400

Climate shifts are part and parcel of resultant weather patterns along with highs and lows. Transference of temperatures horizontally, vertically and through unseen events like temperature inversions, gravity waves and a host of other mitigating factors.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 26 at 2014 12:51 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 26 Jul 2014 12:51:57 -0400

To the global warming deniers, please answer these questions:

1) CO2 levels now are increasing at amazing rates, and there is NO correlation between volcananic or any other natural phenomenon to explain this, outside of human activity.

2) The heating pattern does not support solar genesis. Heat in the stratosphere vs atmosphere vs oceans rules out extra-terrestrial sources.

3) The oceans are acidifying and heating.

4) We're warming now almost 100 times faster than at any other transition from a cold to warming period than has been seen in the last million years.

5) For 30 years now, we've had monthly record highs. Even though the solar position would suggest a cooling stage.

The funny thing too - I drive a 4WD truck, I really don't pay that much attention to recycling - I'm not even close to a "green" type person. But the evidence is the evidence and I'm not going to just ignore that.

Response by Cpl Glynis Sakowicz made Jul 26 at 2014 12:59 PM

Cpl Glynis Sakowicz — Sat, 26 Jul 2014 12:59:53 -0400

I had a sister who was a Ph.D., and though her field was in Children with abused and neglected backgrounds, she had a wide circle of friends, one of whom was a Forensic Climatoligist (Not sure if I spelled that right) who has always stated that the Earth is cyclic. Periods of cold, periods of dry, and periods of hot. In the billions of years this planet has been here, there are few eras when the climate did not change.
For myself, I an either too stupid to understand it, or seriously confused when people say its Global Warming, when we have a winter that just wouldn't quit, and one of the coolest summers on record here in Texas. I mean, wouldn't a warming climate mean a hotter summer? Wouldn't it mean that the winters would be milder? Now, I get the storms and such, since Hurricanes are a lot worse when the oceans are warmer, and anyone in tornado alley knows that the worst storms seem to come on the hottest days, but I just can't understand how that works for snow and ice.
I just talked to my sister's friend a month ago, who told me that "Climate Change is inevitable... it changes every day, and every week. Even the best weathermen can't state, with any degree of certainty, what will happen next year, but there is one certainty, and that is that Greenhouse gases do affect the climate, but there were a great many more greenhouse gases before, and the end result was an ice age.
Apparently, I don't have the brain power to figure all this out, but I'm thinking, a Forensic Climatologist probably has the right of it.

Response by Capt Craig Bryan made Jul 26 at 2014 2:30 PM

Capt Craig Bryan — Sat, 26 Jul 2014 14:30:38 -0400

This is probably the simplest and clearest explanation of the difference between weather and climate, and directly addresses why a colder winter or summer does not contradict the notion of climate change (global warming):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBdxDFpDp_k

Weather Versus Climate Change

Neil deGrasse Tyson breaks down the differences between weather and climate change. COSMOS: A SPACETIME ODYSSEY AIRS MONDAYS at 9P.

Response by LCDR Gordon Brown made Jul 26 at 2014 3:27 PM

LCDR Gordon Brown — Sat, 26 Jul 2014 15:27:45 -0400

http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php

News - Global Warming Hoax

Global Warming Hoax - News and Information Source regarding the myth of Global Warming. Concentrating on the insignificance of man in the warming equation.

Response by 1LT Shawn McCarthy made Jul 26 at 2014 3:48 PM

1LT Shawn McCarthy — Sat, 26 Jul 2014 15:48:17 -0400

Why, oh why are we still having these discussions.

Here are some facts:
Between 1940-1975 the earth cooled about 1/3 of a degree. Pollution and volcanic activity cause this by limiting the amount of sunlight getting through.
This led to paranoia about global cooling.
Carbon Dioxide accounts for roughly a quarter of 'the greenhouse effect.' Human activity accounts for roughly a quarter of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Water vapor, on the other hand, accounts for over 2/3 of the greenhouse effect.
Without 'the greenhouse effect,' the earth would be inhospitably cold.
Alarmist predictions are almost always wrong. For instance, Al Gore predicted the virtual extinction of Arctic Ice by 2016. Instead, Polar sea ice is healthy and growing.

We know that CO2 warms. We know that it is created by a myriad of sources. We have NO IDEA what impact human activity has.
We know that planetary weather goes in cycles.

Calls for reductions are usually draconian. The Kyoto accords, for instance, would have destroyed the world economy if we all would have signed on.

We cannot make dangerous changes that we don't even know will help in response to something we don't completely understand.

And the chicken-littles in the MCGW camp do themselves a disservice with their fear-mongering.

Response by CSM Mike Maynard made Jul 26 at 2014 5:05 PM

CSM Mike Maynard — Sat, 26 Jul 2014 17:05:31 -0400

Since we only have "Scientific Consensus" (the collective judgment, position, and opinion of the community of scientists in a particular field of study), I'll wait until we have "Facts", "Proofs", "Evidence", etc to make a decision.

Response by SrA William Pfirrman made Jul 26 at 2014 7:03 PM

SrA William Pfirrman — Sat, 26 Jul 2014 19:03:47 -0400

Please, Please don't tell me you don't understand the difference between climate and weather. Just because it is a little cooler here or there for a day or two does not mean global warming is a hoax. You do know that, right?

Response by SSgt James Stanley made Jul 26 at 2014 10:45 PM

SSgt James Stanley — Sat, 26 Jul 2014 22:45:21 -0400

Global warming is a figment of Al Gore's imagination.

Response by SSG Robin Rushlo made Jul 27 at 2014 9:38 AM

SSG Robin Rushlo — Sun, 27 Jul 2014 09:38:31 -0400

Global warming will stop once someone puts duct tape over AL GORE's mouth.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 27 at 2014 11:56 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 27 Jul 2014 11:56:15 -0400

So I'm about done with this thread - I'll simply leave it at this...

Deniers go back and forth between "there is no warming" and "there is warming but it's not man-made". 2 facts:

1) Warming is happening. Look at the climate data, and we're getting warmer. The oceans are warming, the atmosphere is warming, and the oceans are acidifying.

2) I'm willing to have a conversation about whether or not it's man-made, because we're still running models. With that said, NO model fits anything we've seen for a million years. So to ignore human influence and just "assume" without any proven evidence that it's "natural" is moronic at best considering the consequences. There is NO data that can explain the warming patterns we're seeing that coincides with natural phenomena. As soon as you deny that warming is happening (be it man-made or other), you lose all credibility because thermometers are what they are.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Jul 27 at 2014 1:11 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Sun, 27 Jul 2014 13:11:17 -0400

Let's first agree on the terms. "Global Warming" has been replaced by "Climate Change" inasmuch as it is more accurate. Is there climate change? Absolutely and emphatically, yes. But, that isn't the root of today's battle. Progressives are using "man-made climate change" as an excuse to control us. They reason that you are hurting the environment and that you must do certain things to repair it. They want to use force of law as well as cultural and societal pressures to accomplish this.

They claim that "the science is established" to make dissenters shut up but, in truth, it isn't. Their only proof lies in computer models that they feed selected data to produce the results that substantiate their arguments. Burt Rutan, an accomplished engineer, provides an excellent review of their data.

See http://rps3.com/Pages/Burt_Rutan_on_Climate_Change.htm

Of course, Burt Rutan is no climatologist. Indeed, he explicitly disclaims being one. Then again, none of the "scientists" making the case for man-made climate change are climatologists either. They have fallen into that unfortunate trap that few academics elude, thinking that their uncommon knowledge within a specific field of study makes them expert in all things.

Bottom line: Global warming isn't junk. It is merely another tool of progressive tyranny, that we should shut up and do what our betters tell us to do.

Burt Rutan on Climate Change

This report includes many all-new data presentations and focuses on presenting climate data to Inform, rather than to Scare. Not a climate science reference, but a unique perspective - An engineering critique of the activist climate scientists and their process of data gathering, processing and presentation. It also has sections on climate adaptation and scientific consensus. No author approvals are required for distribution, please feel free...

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Jul 27 at 2014 1:23 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Sun, 27 Jul 2014 13:23:54 -0400

Note: Forgive me if this comment repeats. It doesn't appear that my first attempt succeeded, but it may have]

Let's first define our terms. "Global Warming" is no longer the theme of the debate. They replaced that term with "Climate Change". To be honest, their focus is "man-made" climate change".

Climate change is an absolute and unassailable fact. Earth's climate has gone through major and minor changes throughout its existence. These cycles began long before man appeared, so it is futile to argue with it. However, we may reasonably question man's effect on climate change.

Thus far, the data supporting the case for man-made climate change is suspect. The only evidence the proponents have advanced is in the form of computer models built on selected data sets and there is ample evidence that these data sets have been manipulated to make their case.

Burt Rutan, an excellent engineer, published an exhaustive study of these data. Granted, Burt Rutan is not a climatologist. He makes no claims to be one. However, he points out that he is expert in studying data and limits his conclusions to that aspect. You can see them explained in layman's terms at

http://rps3.com/Pages/Burt_Rutan_on_Climate_Change.htm

Sadly, the scientists who argue for man-made climate change are not climatologists either. They appear to be academics who have fallen into the trap believing that their uncommon knowledge in their limited fields of study make them expert in whatever they choose to focus on.

So, if it is not science, what is it? Personally, I believe it is tyranny. It is the effort of our "betters" to tell us what to do. They attempt to make us feel guilty about harming the environment and then use force of law as well as societal and cultural pressures to bend our will to theirs.

Burt Rutan on Climate Change

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Jul 27 at 2014 1:25 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Sun, 27 Jul 2014 13:25:34 -0400

Burt Rutan on Climate Change

Response by SSG V. Michelle Woods made Jul 27 at 2014 2:12 PM

SSG V. Michelle Woods — Sun, 27 Jul 2014 14:12:17 -0400

I shudder at the level of ignorance in this world, but what is most terrifying are all of the so-called experts who don't know that they don't know a thing. How could anyone who has done ANY kind of scholarly and legitimate research possibly stand firm in one direction or the other? Do yall really believe your resources and your perspectives are the end all/be all?

I'd go absolutely mad if I wasn't reassured by the Bible that I don't need to worry about anything. So I'll just go on about my frolicking way, but I'll leave everyone with this tip: BEFORE you refute someone's information, read it. See if it's valid.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 27 at 2014 4:47 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 27 Jul 2014 16:47:54 -0400

The news rarely reports those other voices, such as seasoned climatologists that although have acknowledged we do have some impact on the climate, they say it is insignificant to the forces scientists still don’t understand that have been warming the planet for over 10,000 years. These same voices have warned of an overdue period of major cooling, in a pattern that has occurred for thousands of years. I believe them because I studied this pattern in college long before the GW scare.

But like usual, we are creatures drawn to false dilemmas like moths to flames and so we think there are only two sides to the issue and only one is correct and absolutely correct. In fact, we are so drawn to false dilemmas that the voices of reason almost never get heard. This is great news for those seeking to persuade the public whether politicians or others who benefit from such crazy policies as the Kyoto Protocol.

These same voices point out that recent satellite imaging in places across the globe including where there are no thermometers reveals cooling temperatures not warming. But the major news houses will never report it on primetime and if so never in a way viewers might think it is true. Is it political bias? Maybe. But rest assured no story will pass the editor unless it is controversial and little more generates controversy like revealing extreme left views in a country that is mostly right of those views.

To understand the truth about such issues one must first accept two things: one, false dilemmas fail to describe let alone explain a world far more complex, and the other is that human beings can be reasonable or like a mob and false dilemmas brings out the mob’ish nature in us. The truth will then reveal itself more and more as one explores the data from all reasonable sources.

Regardless, we should improve our stewardship of our planet because the global climate is warming as it has on average for thousands of years so why help it if we can avoid doing so?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 27 at 2014 7:30 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 27 Jul 2014 19:30:11 -0400

First of all, the largest problem with this issue is the terminology. The first scientists who saw the trend toward higher average temperatures - worldwide - used the term "Global Warming" too loosely. The fact that North America doesn't fit that mold is irrelevant. The Arctic and Antarctic regions are experiencing higher then normal temps and that is what will affect our ocean levels, which in turn affects our currents, which in turn affects the climates of more temperate regions; i.e. between the two tropic latitudes and aforementioned circles. Too bad most Americans have a very narrow world view and miss that we are not the center of the world.

The more commonly accepted term nowadays is Global Climate Change. I believe once the science community at large begins insisting on that wording, their argument will have a lot less detractors. Or at least I hope so.

As for the actual reason for the climate change, I personally agree with the scientists that say the natural ups and downs of Earth's average temperature, which has caused both extreme droughts and ice ages in the past, are nothing new. However, from samples taken from glaciers and study of the gases trapped in them, we can deduce that human influence - especially since the industrial revolution - has sped up these natural changes.

And I, for one, am scared of my grandchildren and great-grandchildren not being able to play outside because of polluted air, water, and extreme temperatures. We can slow down our influence on these changes, but only if we all work together.

Response by SFC Mark Hines made Jul 28 at 2014 12:08 AM

SFC Mark Hines — Mon, 28 Jul 2014 00:08:14 -0400

Climate change is real and has been since weather started on Earth, but all the $ in the world, carbon tax and or carbon credits will not change it! The $, time, efforts and brain power should logically be applied to preparing for it, not trying (emphasis on 'trying') to stop it or change it!

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 28 at 2014 1:02 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 28 Jul 2014 01:02:48 -0400

Almost everyone knows that climate changes and that we affect it to some degree, what we do not know if this change is potentially catastrophic. And we know that people pollute so much that major waterways have been nearly killed. But life goes on and we continue to study. And will adapt. Not because some eggheads pretend to understand the science behind the science.

Atmospheric physics are the primary determinant in what is going to happen and there is NEVER a slam dunk, an irrefutable and immutable truth in regards to weather. One example was that used to be forecasters assumed ALL Tornadoes rotate cyclonically and just when we are sure of something, new insights prevail. This is what science is and Max Planck summed it up best when leave the interpretation of a theory to succeeding generations. Avoiding the pratfalls of dubious presumption.

Response by SPC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 28 at 2014 2:40 PM

SPC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 28 Jul 2014 14:40:03 -0400

It doesn't matter if the theory is legitimate or not. We have had cleaner energy technologies for decades. We don't use them because it would take years for them to become cost effective. So, because its to difficult to start now, we won't have the technology available later down the road. Since there doesn't seem to be a solution that anyone is willing to implement, this issue just turns into something we like to argue about but really doesn't matter because no one is bothering to really fix it.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 28 at 2014 6:58 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 28 Jul 2014 18:58:02 -0400

I think it happening, and that all of the effects of global warming are not understood, and probably won't be entirely predictable until they happen.

Response by Sgt Wilby Wolfson made Jul 29 at 2014 11:44 AM

Sgt Wilby Wolfson — Tue, 29 Jul 2014 11:44:47 -0400

Not my position, but just so you can understand this interesting dichotomy; The warmer climate is causing the polar ice caps to melt, which releases cold air which rushes south or north depending on which cap it is. This incoming cold air then cools the temperature all over the world. That is why they say the planet is heating up while anecdotally everyone feels the effects of colder seasons.

Response by TSgt Mark Meyer made Jul 29 at 2014 12:13 PM

TSgt Mark Meyer — Tue, 29 Jul 2014 12:13:25 -0400

I not big on global warning but I did hear somewhere. It doesn't matter what cooler summer or colder winter this year. It the average global tempature. They said the global average temp has risen a degree or two. Is global warming crap or real we should ask myth busters lol.

Response by Maj Jeremy R. made Jul 29 at 2014 12:14 PM

Maj Jeremy R. — Tue, 29 Jul 2014 12:14:39 -0400

Predicting climate change requires modeling. Modeling that makes assumptions. Become a student of chaos theory and the butterfly effect. Also take a look at Sir Michael Berry's paper Regular and Irregular Motion where he recounts the amount of data needed to account for the fourth,fifth, sixth...fifty-sixth impact of a ball (think billiards)...our assumptions are assumptions and nothing more. No I don't buy the modeling.

Response by CPO Greg Frazho made Jul 29 at 2014 12:22 PM

CPO Greg Frazho — Tue, 29 Jul 2014 12:22:38 -0400

Complete rubbish. I do believe in LNT (leave no trace), I'll give them that. I'm an off-roader, so I can and do take very seriously the 'use it, don't abuse it' philosophy when it comes to the High Desert, which is primarily where I roam.

That aside, though, the hysteric and sensationalist propaganda that's disseminated about this alleged coming catastrophe is just that: propaganda. It serves only the purpose of keeping those who spew that nonsense a job and I suppose, by extension, a sense of purpose.

As George Carlin once said, this planet has had the magnetic reversal of the poles, the Ice Age, volcanic activity and plate tectonics, and we now think we're somehow a threat to the planet? I think not. Earth's doing just fine; it ain't going anywhere. WE are!

Any ecosystem, including ours, runs in cycles. There are cooler years and warmer years. But if we're only talking a matter of a few degrees on either side of the base line, which is what it is, it's not really a reason to sound the general alarm and start panic.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 29 at 2014 2:46 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Jul 2014 14:46:07 -0400

The issue with Global Warming is that so few people actually understand what global warming is, and to call it "climate change" further drives people what it actually is. Global warming is referring to the average temperature of the Earth in the whole of the Earth's atmosphere raising. This has a lot to do with total energy output.
Too many people see Global warming as something that will affect them very simply as "it's hotter outside" and this is where politicians created the buzzphrase "climate change" (because they were questioned whether they even knew what Global Warming meant)
Global Warming is the raising of the mean atmospheric temperature of the earth as a whole. A change of 2 or 3 degrees would be a big deal, because it can change the manner in which our planet interacts with THE SUN. I am NOT saying that we will all be burnt to a crisp, I am saying that oxygen levels will change, our usual exposure to UV radiation will change. the manner in which our atmosphere behaves will change. That is global warming.
To say that we as inhabitants of this planet are in no way responsible for this is rather illogical. Though I understand that no raindrop believes itself responsible for a flood. Astronomers HAVE discovered evidence that these same atmospheric changes have occurred on other planets within a studyable range with no life on them, but I cannot be led to think that our presence on this earth has not affected, quite possibly accelerated, its life cycle.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 29 at 2014 9:12 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Jul 2014 21:12:13 -0400

Creating the perception that climate can be controlled is a means by which the advocates of a one-world government are using to persuade nations to surrender partial sovereignty to a global entity.

In 1989, when Russia collapsed and left the US as the only global superpower, I attended Command and General Staff Course with the military. Instructors were Army Reserve Officers from the DC area alphabet soup of acronyms such as the NSA, FBI, CIA etc....

We were given a block of instruction on the coming "one-world government" and signed for secret documents that were closely controlled and collected at the end of the session. We were told that it would happen through international corporations, that we wouldn't know that it happened, that all nations would surrender partial sovereignty to a one-world entity (possibly the UN), that nations would still retain their current governments, and that experiments in a global currency were about to be conducted in Zaire, now the Congo.

The US installed President Mabutuo (misspelled) in Zaire in the 70s, and, he was our man. I watched Zaire, but Mabutuo did not cooperate. He established a national bank and paid government workers and contractors with the national bank currency instead of Central Bank currency. A central bank is similar to the Federal Reserve Bank. All Central Banks are globally connected.

All attempts to depose Mabutuo failed because the people and the government supported him. During the Clinton administration the civil war in Rwanda caused mass migration into Zaire to avoid the slaughter. It destabilized the government, Mabutuo was deposed, and died shortly thereafter of "natural causes", as is the fate of most deposed rulers, and, as is currently happening to rulers deposed as a result of the Arab Spring.

The manufactured crisis of global climate change is the means of getting world governments to voluntarily surrendering partial sovereignty to a one-world entity. If this doesn't work they will try something else.

Response by PO2 Victor Taylor made Jul 30 at 2014 11:40 AM

PO2 Victor Taylor — Wed, 30 Jul 2014 11:40:54 -0400

there was a new report that came out, that scientists had falsified the data going back 70 years to support the global warming theory and it was to get funding from governments to study climates. I will see if i can find that article.

Response by SFC Dennis Yancy made Jul 30 at 2014 3:22 PM

SFC Dennis Yancy — Wed, 30 Jul 2014 15:22:17 -0400

If you look at historical records you will find same predict tions made in early 1800s.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 30 at 2014 6:52 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Jul 2014 18:52:12 -0400

Its WEATHER. By definition its unpredictable. Weather = Change. This concludes our science and math lesson for today.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 5 at 2014 11:50 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:50:42 -0400

Says it all. Simple facts.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 5 at 2014 5:56 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 17:56:22 -0400

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 5 at 2014 6:11 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 18:11:28 -0400

Is it just me, or does everyone around me also hear 'Apocalypse Now' theme song?

Response by Sgt John H. made Aug 6 at 2014 2:40 PM

Sgt John H. — Wed, 06 Aug 2014 14:40:09 -0400

If humans are the cause of climate change and the population continues to explode, why do we concentrate on eliminating the use of affordable and reasonably efficient fossil fuels and not population management and control. We should be supporting the productive systems that are currently available while we continue researching and moving towards obtainable and productive energy sources. The ever expanding population continues to demand higher standards of living, food, shelter. I see no panacea on the horizon that can fuel the technologies needed to provide for homo sapiens' basic needs. Punishing the U.S. economy by means of taxing and regulating our fossil fuel industries is entirely counter productive. This impedes our ability to be the solution. What good do we do by reducing ourselves to third world status while the other world powers prosper and grow...and abuse. I hear a lot of static but I see very few solutions. It seems we are always where we are, more concerned about winning the argument than solving the fundamental problems.

Response by PO1 Todd Keister made Aug 6 at 2014 5:29 PM

PO1 Todd Keister — Wed, 06 Aug 2014 17:29:22 -0400

Global warming is the most thoroughly debunked hoax in history. That's why its proponents changed it to "Climate Change." It's proponents have been exposed through their emails that they deliberately concocted the entire notion. See East Anglia University: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/11/23/climategate-2-0-new-e-mails-rock-the-global-warming-debate/

Read a quick primer here, written by yours truly a while back:
http://www.examiner.com/article/global-cooling-leaves-the-un-with-snow-on-its-face

Response by SGT Chris Birkinbine made Aug 11 at 2014 2:28 PM

SGT Chris Birkinbine — Mon, 11 Aug 2014 14:28:43 -0400

Global Warming term is a misnomer that confuses people who do not understand the Science (not their fault, it is the media). The correct term is Climate Change. It is the indication that the average temperature of the earth is rising. That means it CAN get colder in places.

Let me put this out as a physicist and scientist. The scientific community does NOT disagree that there is climate change. It does NOT disagree that there is a current rise in global average temperature.

What is disagreed on, is how MUCH of the 10% increase over the last hundred years is due to human activities, and how much are part of a natural cycle, and how much are part of a natural rise. (a cycle being the rise and fall of temperature over the course of some amount of time, and a rise being permanent, IE not part of a cycle, you can have both, where it cycles high a low, but the lows are always higher than previous, and the highs are higher than previous)

There seems to be some sort of idea in the general population that scientists disagree with each other on the rise in temperature. The problem is media and politicians over exaggerating the issues. When the public, or astute individuals find out that there is an over exaggeration, the natural reaction is to assume that the entire premise is false. It is more detrimental to exaggerate the situation than it is to quietly make policy to effect it.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 15 at 2014 12:08 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Aug 2014 12:08:06 -0400

In 1972 I was hired by NY Telephone. During coffee break we were all laughing at a NY Times article that said the reason it was so cold that winter was because Global Warming was melting the glaciers and cooling the oceans. They get an A+ for effort and not giving up!!!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 16 at 2014 4:58 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 16 Aug 2014 16:58:31 -0400

And if these fanatics couldn't stoop any lower, well, there's this. The deliberate twisting of the truth is mind boggling.

Babies Cause Global Warning

Global warming is just an excuse. It’s no secret that those in power believe that the earth is overpopulated.

Response by SFC Mark Hines made Aug 16 at 2014 10:33 PM

SFC Mark Hines — Sat, 16 Aug 2014 22:33:20 -0400

These two scientists are on the money! We, Earthlings, CANNOT stop the climate from changing but we can prepare for what Mother Nature has in store for us!

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/late-stop-global-warming/story?id=17557814

And this Brit has an ides too!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/10752606/We-should-give-up-trying-to-save-the-world-from-climate-change-says-James-Lovelock.html

And then the Canadians weigh in!

http://www.thegwpf.org/terence-corcoran-stop-wasting-money-stop-adapt-climate-change/

Humans have ALWAYS adapted to the environment and failed at trying to stop it!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10644867/We-have-failed-to-prevent-global-warming-so-we-must-adapt-to-it.html

The Aussies see it too!

http://www.angrysummit.com/trying-to-prevent-global-warming-costs-50x-as-much-as-it-would-just-adapting-to-it-how-governments-especially-australia-are-wasting-everyones-time-and-money

Too Late to Stop Global Warming?

Here's a dark secret about the earth's changing climate that many scientists believe, but few seem eager to discuss: It's too late to stop global warming.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 17 at 2014 5:12 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 17 Aug 2014 05:12:19 -0400

I have two thoughts, one anecdotal, one a little more substantive:
1. When I was a kid, the bugaboo was acid rain. This was in the age of Love Canal and sundry other ecological messes that led to the government "doing something" by (surprise!) growing more government... in this case the EPA.

When climate was spoken of, it was how civilization as we know it would end when the next ice age hit. Not if, but when. Founded on the observation that ice ages had occurred with something resembling a regular cycle and theorized that peaks and valleys in solar activity and/or asteroid strikes and/or large volcanic events were to blame. Granted, my 3d grade mind did not analyze all this scientifically, but I remember it very well to this day.

2. The biggest champions of global warming/ climate change alarmism happen to have a very large monetary stake in the adoption of a "carbon credits" exchange, whereby an industry can "offset" their carbon footprint by giving a company (or government) money that they will use to plant trees or some such. I feel very strongly that all of this hype is designed as one big money grab. It is evidenced by the notion in the UN that throwing money at Micronesia and other low-lying countries (notably not the Netherlands - not third world enough) will somehow keep a rising ocean at bay. That trading carbon as some form of notional commodity will have any real impact on the environment.

I don't need to be a scientist to understand that the giant ball of fire in the sky, plate techtonic activity, and the massive force of oceanographic/ atmospheric currents have far more to do with the climate than my car or can of Right Guard. It is the height of hubris to think that our feeble machinations on the surface do much more than scratch mother nature. Not to understate the LOCAL impact mankind can make; the wastelands in Kazakhstan and the desertification around the Sahara stand testament to what people can do, as does the amazing agricultural output of the Midwestern USA.

Want to make a difference? Plant a tree. There's a pile of acorns/ maple seeds/ pine cones laying around every fall so it doesn't cost anything. Buy a fuel efficient vehicle next time it comes time to buy a car because it makes sense for your budget. Feel strongly about it? Put your money where your mouth is. But don't insult my intelligence or make me pay thousands of dollars in taxes and increased utility costs to let you go make a speech saying how you did something about the problem.
If it gets too hot in 1000 years, people will migrate to more northern locations, just as they always have. Plenty of vacant lots in Canada and Siberia. Just be aware property values will crash when the current cycles turn over and the glaciers advance. Just ask Mrs Kruger in Madison Elementary School circa 1982.

Response by Sgt Packy Flickinger made Aug 17 at 2014 5:33 AM

Sgt Packy Flickinger — Sun, 17 Aug 2014 05:33:14 -0400

Some of the glaciers in the North Pole are increasing, many in Greenland, Canada and Antarctica are already almost gone. Ocean has already begun rising. I saw a show recently of one small town already evacuated because its been flooded. There is a world wide drought. There is record temperatures set every year high and low. It was predicted early on that record temperature swings would be seen. The massive snow storm in the north this year was an example. Global warming slows the air and ocean currents equalizing global temps leading to the extremes.

There is plenty of proof of global warming. Its not been proved what has exactly caused it though. Some studys show cows are actually a major cause. Their flatulence is 100x more a green house gas than the average car. There are as many cows on the planet as people.

As a conservative, this is the ONLY point I agree with the liberals on.

Response by PO1 Michael G. made Aug 17 at 2014 8:39 AM

PO1 Michael G. — Sun, 17 Aug 2014 08:39:40 -0400

The earth is a few billion years old. To cite a few colder than average seasons in the past couple of years as evidence of an actual scientific theory (with data, hypotheses, and experimentation, following a legitimate method) being "junk" would be like saying that the human body's temperature is not *really* 98.6 because you were running a fever one day of your life.

Besides which, this is what has happened to the arctic ice cap in the last 30 or so years: http://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/2007/seaice1979-2007sep05.jpg

"Junk" just is not an accurate description.

Response by SFC Jeff L. made Aug 19 at 2014 1:52 PM

SFC Jeff L. — Tue, 19 Aug 2014 13:52:28 -0400

Headline: Sub-Glacial Volcano expected to erupt in Iceland - Is Man to Blame for Resulting Loss of Ice and Increased Greenhouse Gasses? What Can Be Done to Stop It Before It's Too Late?

Response by SFC Jeff L. made Aug 21 at 2014 9:25 AM

SFC Jeff L. — Thu, 21 Aug 2014 09:25:52 -0400

Q. What do you get when you have a room full of officers looking at a map, and each agrees on the way to go?

A. The same thing you get with AGW supporters - movement by consensus, and not necessarily in the right direction.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 29 at 2014 10:38 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 Aug 2014 10:38:27 -0400

Probably because many are too emotionally compromised to accept scientific facts.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 29 at 2014 11:19 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 Aug 2014 11:19:41 -0400

800-ASK-GORE

Response by PFC Stephen Eric Serati made Aug 29 at 2014 10:53 PM

PFC Stephen Eric Serati — Fri, 29 Aug 2014 22:53:21 -0400

It's not just global warming,it's spills of all kinds in the waters ways ,oceans and on land,it's ships that dump waste and trash in the waters,it's the dying off of species,it's sonar hurting aquatic life,it's deforestation,fires,it's the destruction of animal habitats,it's dead zones caused by run off and emissions of poisonous agricultural,manafacturing,energy and domestic chemicals,it's over use of all of our natural resources,and it's all because deniers will not look out side their box and come up with real solutions,therefore they are incapable of connecting the dots on global scale.We better wise up and research it.Don't take BPs word for it,their for profits only.

Response by Sgt S.P. Woodke made Sep 21 at 2014 11:08 AM

Sgt S.P. Woodke — Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:08:45 -0400

oh didnt you know... didnt you Hear... they changed it... the name is now called climate Change...

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 21 at 2014 11:20 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:20:47 -0400

I don't know or care if the globe is warming. What I do know is that every plan I have seen for the government to deal with it is extremely expensive and would provide no measurable change in the temperature.

Conservation of free people is great, government control over the means of production to save the world from an intangible threat scares the crap out of me.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 22 at 2014 3:08 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 22 Sep 2014 15:08:54 -0400

Climate change is already happening I don't understand why people don't see it. It is not normal to get up and it's 80 degrees then drops to 30 and snows on the same day or the other way around. People think global climate is going to change like in the movie 2012. Climate change is here and is changing our world already. Is like this..... People claim that theories are just theories but so is the theory of gravity and I'm 100% sure that everyone believes in that one.

Response by SP5 Michael Rathbun made Oct 29 at 2014 7:42 PM

SP5 Michael Rathbun — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 19:42:13 -0400

The Earth's climate system is an enormously complex nonlinear dynamical system. Having worked on relatively small complex nonlinear dynamical systems (writing software for an automobile engine controller to regulate the idle speed, for example) I can state without hesitation that these things behave in ways that will blow your hat off (or whatever might indicate astonishment for you).

The study of complex nonlinear dynamical systems is somewhere between science and a black art, but there are some simple examples that can illustrate some principles.

Principle: Adding energy to a nonlinear dynamical system will tend to cause the peak-to-average ratio of at least one system parameter to increase. (In climate terms, it means that tripling the input of trapped solar energy is going to cause some things to become more extreme -- hotter summers some places, colder winters other places, five-mile-wide tornados...).

Simple illustration of this principle: A child on a swing.

You gently push the child forward, and she swings back. You push again, and she swings a bit farther. Note that her AVERAGE position is where she started: motionless at position zero. But by now her PEAK position may be quite a ways away from the stopped position.

Principle: nonlinear dynamical systems may exhibit sudden unexpected "phase" changes as the energy budget of the system changes.

Example: you continue to push the child on the swing until she eventually achieves such a height that the rope or chain on the swing loses tension and she actually does a bit of free fall before re-entering the normal swing regime. (When I was about six, it took me a while to figure out why things got jerky if swung too high.)

And that's a simple nonlinear dynamical system, consisting of swing set, child and adult pusher.

Perhaps it wasn't humans who dug up all that carbon and burned it for power and warmth, thereby tripling the relative concentration of a gas known to be opaque to a large part of the infrared spectrum, but there is demonstrably a lot more CO2 in the atmosphere now than there was 200 years ago.

This much is certain: you can't wish away the laws of Physics, and you can't BEGIN to predict what the global system will do as its solar energy intake continues to rise.

But it will make some cool movies, if there is anybody around to make them.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 8 at 2014 11:54 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 08 Nov 2014 23:54:32 -0500

Some more reading material. http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

Scientists blog from Antarctica and provide a glimpse of what it's like to do research in the field. Read their blog ...

Response by LCpl Steve Wininger made Nov 9 at 2014 12:12 AM

LCpl Steve Wininger — Sun, 09 Nov 2014 00:12:08 -0500

I am all for taking care of the planet, however, I believe the global warming scare is over exaggerated.

There is too many conflicting reports to call global warming a crisis. Depending on what scientist you ask, and their agenda, will get you different results.

My personal, non-professional belief, based on what little I know is, global warming is a hoax. Another way the government tries to use whatever it can to control us.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 9 at 2014 12:15 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Nov 2014 00:15:10 -0500

SSgt John Steigerwald <--- Another forecaster. lol and there are more, Johnny Bratton and we have a couple LTCs who are too.

Response by SSgt Gregory Guina made Nov 9 at 2014 12:27 AM

SSgt Gregory Guina — Sun, 09 Nov 2014 00:27:09 -0500

Global warming is 100% real if it weren't the Ice Age never would have ended.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 9 at 2014 11:26 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Nov 2014 11:26:50 -0500

I have my suspicions that global warming is a myth. Research has been done, myths proven/disproven, and more and more theories are flooding the Introwebs every day. But, in my opinion, I feel that global warming is nothing but unnecessary fear pressed on the public.

Response by CPL Rick Stasny made Nov 9 at 2014 11:27 AM

CPL Rick Stasny — Sun, 09 Nov 2014 11:27:01 -0500

There is no question that the earth is warming. However, I have to ask, what ended the last ice age? The earth warmed and the ice cap receded. This with no factories, automobiles, and other man made influence. It seems to me that the smaller the ice fields, the more rapidly they should shrink. I think that the neanderthals are to blame for whole damn thing. How dare they have too many camp fires.

Response by SFC Mark Hines made Nov 11 at 2014 1:01 AM

SFC Mark Hines — Tue, 11 Nov 2014 01:01:57 -0500

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/1153/the_rise_of_leftist_eco_fascism/page/2

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 11 at 2014 4:35 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 11 Nov 2014 04:35:11 -0500

I think I don't want to shovel any more snow.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 11 at 2014 4:53 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 11 Nov 2014 04:53:27 -0500

I think that "global warming" is a very misleading moniker for climate change. Colder winters and cooler summers is evidence of a change in climate pattern along with the rising in Ocean temperatures due to the change in certain currents which use to infuse cooler water from the poles. It all wacky weather ties into a changing climates on a global scale. And this scientific matter should have never been politicized. Once the two became unseparable any chance of a grown up conversation was lost. Never in my life could I have imagined a person using "I'm not a scientist" as an excuse for not listening to the results that scientists have concluded to on a subject and utterly disregard the profession instead of consulting with them.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 11 at 2014 10:33 AM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 11 Nov 2014 10:33:50 -0500

Can't get much colder than an Alaskan winter! On a more serious note, the winters have been too warm here (last yr it only went down to -40F for a few days) and our icebergs are melting so fast that polar bears have nothing to float on to hunt seal off the north coast. Our poor Polar Bears are going extinct thanks to global warming.

Response by Col Joel Anderson made Nov 17 at 2014 11:59 AM

Col Joel Anderson — Mon, 17 Nov 2014 11:59:31 -0500

I look at climate change like a relationship with a teenager. You can have a discussion with any young pup and explain to them consequences of their actions, consequences of cause and effect, consequences of not investing in their future and thinking things through to logical solutions and end-states.

The reality is that changes are occurring yet our comfort zone has not been radically affected. Yep it is currently 22 degrees outside and I just got in from a walk around campus. Although my immediate comfort zone was temporarily effected, what's the big deal. It will get warmer, it will get colder, it will rain, it will snow. So what?

I watched a 60 minutes segment on water last night. We are taking money out of our "environmental savings accounts" and not putting anything back in. Water issues abound. Tell California to "fear not" it will rain again some day. Climate issues abound. Ice caps and glaciers are receding at alarming rates. Weather patterns are changing. Population growth continues, urbanization and industrialization as well and yet we just keep bantering back and forth on philosophical diatribes that in the end, serve no purpose other than obfuscating issues and the endless stalemate of stale discussions about necessary change.

What happens in our dialogue when all of a sudden we hit a non-refundable/non-renewable savings account and hit the breakeven point of negative returns because we are far too enamored with arguing that something needs to be changed. We really do need to think into the future, outside of our comfort zones and get past the rhetoric.

Response by LCpl Steve Wininger made Nov 18 at 2014 4:23 PM

LCpl Steve Wininger — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 16:23:09 -0500

Junk!!! Today all 50 states, including Hawaii and Florida, reported temperatures in at least one area of their states below freezing. Global warming my A$$, IT IS FREEZING OUT!!!!!!!

Response by SSG Bill Sier made Nov 20 at 2014 1:37 PM

SSG Bill Sier — Thu, 20 Nov 2014 13:37:39 -0500

Global warming has been a reality since the last Ice Age. Whether we puny humans have had that much effect or the concept that we can do anything to reverse it is pure hubris on our part.

Response by CPT Craig Church, ASLA, LEED GA made Mar 1 at 2015 7:36 PM

CPT Craig Church, ASLA, LEED GA — Sun, 01 Mar 2015 19:36:15 -0500

I don't know. I am freezing my ass off here in the Northeast yet they say it's because of global warming? I am truly confused and hope I am dead before any of these claims com into fruition.

Response by PO1 John Meyer, CPC made Mar 22 at 2015 12:52 PM

PO1 John Meyer, CPC — Sun, 22 Mar 2015 12:52:12 -0400

This is factual science with junk research.

Global warming; global cooling. Both happen and can be proven with factual (and I stress the word, factual) scientific research. The problem is that the "facts" have been fiction when it comes to proving man made global warming.

The "scientists" that were a part of the original research into man made global warming have openly admitted that they fudged the numbers in order to "prove" man has enough of an impact on the atmosphere to cause global warming. Can you say paid off by Al Gore? Good. I knew you could!

Ever wonder why they changed the name from "global warming" to "climate change"? That's because they couldn't prove a continuous global warming trend. And there are other factors that they can't prove that were supposed to prove man made global warming, such as:

The shrinking of Antarctica, The Artic, and the ice around Greenland and the related coastal flooding. Oops.... seems all those places have grown in coverage, not shrunk and no related coastal flooding. There's one Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore.

The increase in amount and strength of hurricanes around the world. There's also supposed to be increased amounts of severe thunderstorms and tornadoes. Of course, there's no real proof of any of that. Oops.... There's another Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore.

Anyone remember the plight of the polar bear? You know.... polar bears were on the endangered species list because of the shrinking Artic ice, which was directly related to man made global warming. There were even commercials for more environmentally friendly products with the polar bear in mind. Does anyone know the current status of the polar bear? Guess what. The polar bear isn't on the list anymore! They were endangered due to man, but not because of global warming. They were being hunted out of existence, which has been corrected with hunting restrictions.

There's more, but this post is getting long and my carpal tunnel syndrome is starting to act up.

And right quick... lest we forget that in the 70s, environmentalist warned of the next Ice Age due to global cooling.

Response by SSG Bill Sier made Mar 25 at 2015 12:16 PM

SSG Bill Sier — Wed, 25 Mar 2015 12:16:52 -0400

The planet has been steadlily warming since the last Ice Age - long before mankind had any appreciable effect upon it. It is a natural occurence which is being hyped far out of its scope. Eventually, the tectonic plates will rearrange, making current borders superfluous. Where's the alarm about this?? Magnetic north will change, putting Garmin and other GPS vendors out of business. Where are the celebrity "Chicken Littles" trying to scare us??
This also is possible only if we aren't smashed into asteroids by a rogue planet, sucked into a black hole and rulled by a robot named Maximillian, or blown out of our solar orbit by a super volcano. Ain't skeered.

Response by SPC Donald Tribble made Mar 30 at 2015 10:42 PM

SPC Donald Tribble — Mon, 30 Mar 2015 22:42:22 -0400

We can argue semantics until we're blue in the face, but no one has ever seen this before. Something is not right.
http://www.fresnobee.com/2015/03/24/4444583/five-pictures-of-yosemites-half.html

Five pictures of Yosemite's Half Dome capture California's historic drought

Response by LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow made Mar 31 at 2015 5:38 AM

LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow — Tue, 31 Mar 2015 05:38:14 -0400

Top, it's not called Global Warming any more; rather it's called the more accurate Climate Change.

All you have to do is consider the extremely violent tornado and hurricane damage over the last several years. Or consider this winter, where west of the mountains there's been no winter, while east, the winter has been extreme.

The Jet Stream, the Gulf Stream and all the other flows have been horribly disrupted. The melting of glaciers in Alaska, Greenland, Iceland; the melting of the Ice Cap in the North Pole; the calving of glaciers and exposure of bare land in Antarctica. All of this is very real, and it is caused by man made action.

It IS a national security threat, and it IS a threat to our very existence...