Don't panic people!! Earth is still getting hotter and our world is ruined. Don't believe mother nature!! She lies!!

[Valiant Champion]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100107/.../sci_big_chill

[Poet]

oh 2012 nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

but seriously if it is true we should take it seriously and maybe this would be reason of end of the time.

[cristophe el perno]

Global 'climate change' - change can be in any direction, and scientists have been predicting for years that more frequent and more intense extreme weatehr events (such as cold snaps) will be one of the consequences of climate change.
We've also recently has a lot of the hottest summers on record across the earth, so the overall trend is still warming, but not everywhere or all the time.

[Phier]

Global 'climate change' - change can be in any direction, and scientists have been predicting for years that more frequent and more intense extreme weatehr events (such as cold snaps) will be one of the consequences of climate change.
We've also recently has a lot of the hottest summers on record across the earth, so the overall trend is still warming, but not everywhere or all the time.

Human caused climate change has become the new God, you can't disprove it due to how its defined.

[Gauvin]

Global 'climate change' - change can be in any direction, and scientists have been predicting for years that more frequent and more intense extreme weatehr events (such as cold snaps) will be one of the consequences of climate change.

How convenient,

But experts interviewed by The Associated Press did not connect the current frigid blast to climate change.

We've also recently has a lot of the hottest summers on record across the earth

2009 was one of the 10th warmest years since 1880, wow. I don't if they were trying to make that sound significant or scary... but it isn't.

[Valiant Champion]

Last year we had the 2nd coolest summer ever since recordings were began in the 1800s.

[motiv-8]

Last year we had the 2nd coolest summer ever since recordings were began in the 1800s.

And? This is grand proof that global warming doesn't exist?

[Erlinggra]

Last year we had the 2nd coolest summer ever since recordings were began in the 1800s.

I call bull http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5B71SO20091208

Human caused climate change has become the new God, you can't disprove it due to how its defined.

Of course you can, this is just another bull climate denier myth and you know its bull.

How to disprove greenhouses gasses effect on the climate: The first and easiest way would be to prove that greenhouses gasses actually don't work the way we think they do. If you could prove that co2 doesn’t trap heat you would revolutionize our understanding of chemistry, physics and all of their sub fields.

Prove the methodology is faulty. If someone could prove that there is something wrong with the way we measure temperatures you would at least be building a strong case.

Come up with an alternative explanation. If you could prove what has been causing the warming over the last 100 years it to would be a strong proof, the problem is most such attempts have been long disproved. However as much denier on this forum demonstrate, they don’t need one. They simply say “NATURAL LOL” the very simple answer to that statement is what natural process?

[Tiberius Tosi]

I call bull http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5B71SO20091208

I'm not saying his claim was right but you do realize that article was written before 2009 correct?

Predictions are wrong a lot of times, just watch your local weatherman.

[Ter]

I'm not saying his claim was right but you do realize that article was written before 2009 correct?

Predictions are wrong a lot of times, just watch your local weatherman.

Weather and climate physics are quite different things. It's a matter of scale.

Obviously climate change theory is still a work in progress but it won't be proved or disproved by single events like this.

[Tiberius Tosi]

December 2009 is too old for you?
The weather is something different entirely, predicting the weather can’t be done accurately because we never know the exact strength and size of pressure systems.

Oops I thought it was a prediction article for 2009, my bad .

Weather and climate physics are quite different things. It's a matter of scale.

Obviously climate change theory is still a work in progress but it won't be proved or disproved by single events like this.

I know, I believe in global warming and I can't stand when people are like "how is global warming real, it's snowing in Houston."

[Phier]

Of course you can, this is just another bull climate denier heritic myth and you know its bull.

How to disprove greenhouses gasses effect on the climate: The first and easiest way would be to prove that greenhouses gasses actually don't work the way we think they do.

We know arsenic kills people, we don't know what tiny % isn't harmful. Because of bad science some places in the US wanted to use a straight line graph for its toxicity and get VERY small natural amounts removed from water supplies at very great cost. This is one of the first things Bush did away with, and of course people claimed he liked poison water

Knowing what greenhouse gasses do in very large quantity, and knowing the dynamics of the earths climate and human % effects is two different things. Any honest climate scientist, pro warming or not, will admit we really don't know the system.

Prove the methodology is faulty. If someone could prove that there is something wrong with the way we measure temperatures you would at least be building a strong case.

That was done with the tree rings and the hockey stick graph. Warmest still use the holy hockey stick. Likewise we know polar bears are not dying out, and yet you would think they were living in a sauna.

Come up with an alternative explanation. If you could prove what has been causing the warming over the last 100 years it to would be a strong proof, the problem is most such attempts have been long disproved. However as much denier heritic on this forum demonstrate, they don’t need one. They simply say “NATURAL LOL” the very simple answer to that statement is what natural process?

Whats the warmers theory for why it was MUCH warmer 5500 years ago? Egyptian CO2 production? Having a theory is wonderful, that doesn't make it valid. Its like saying prior to Darwin life must have been divinely created because there wasn't another theory.

[Tominokar]

Any honest climate scientist, pro warming or not, will admit we really don't know the system.

We? This is the fundamental problem - laymen holding themselves in the same esteem as climate scientists. They 'know the system' a hell of a lot better, so for now I'll continue listening to the vast majority of climate scientists instead of people like you. Prepare for the worst, and hope for the best.

[Phier]

We? This is the fundamental problem - laymen holding themselves in the same esteem as climate scientists. They 'know the system' a hell of a lot better, so for now I'll continue listening to the vast majority of climate scientists instead of people like you. Prepare for the worst, and hope for the best.

Appeal to authority.

My first degree is in ecology, I'm a published researcher, and I've taken numerous seminars while in grad schools on how to dissect scientific literature.

I'm not some schmuck on the street saying 'derp its cold, global warming is stupid, derp.' I left the environmental sciences for biology precisely because dealing with the non-scientific which infected environmentalism in the late 80's was too frustrating to make a career out of it.

[Erlinggra]

Knowing what greenhouse gasses do in very large quantity, and knowing the dynamics of the earths climate and human % effects is two different things.

The thing is co2 in the atmosphere has increased by more than 30% because of humans activity our current understanding is that it's having an effect. But by all means go out do some research to prove the mountain of evidence wrong.

That was done with the tree rings and the hockey stick graph. Warmest still use the holy hockey stick. Likewise we know polar bears are not dying out, and yet you would think they were living in a sauna.

What about three rings? And don't you dare say "hide the decline climate gate lol". And please answer, why do you use the hockey stick graph as an example of bad science? It was ing affirmed in 2006 and I know you know this because it has been pointed out a million billion times for you so the typical ignorant excuse falls flat.

Whats the warmers theory for why it was MUCH warmer 5500 years ago? Egyptian CO2 production? Having a theory is wonderful, that doesn't make it valid. Its like saying prior to Darwin life must have been divinely created because there wasn't another theory.

5500 years ago the earth was tilted differently for one

Appeal to authority.

Someone needs to reread what an appeal to authority is.

My first degree is in ecology, I'm a published researcher, and I've taken numerous seminars while in grad schools on how to dissect scientific literature.

and like so many other posters I am a ing Nobel prize winner. Let me put it directly I don't believe you, because a person with a degree in ecology would know why killing off the fish that eats algae in a echo system is bad

I'm not some schmuck on the street saying 'derp its cold, global warming is stupid, derp.'

Strangely that is all you are doing. That and point to pseudo scientific arguments that have been disproved many, many times.

[Ciabhán]

This information comes from climatologists and researchers....

"Over the last 400,000 years the natural upper limit of atmospheric CO2 concentrations was about 300 ppm. Today, CO2 concentrations worldwide average about 380 ppm. Compared to former geologic periods, concentrations of CO2 in our atmosphere are still very small and may not have a statistically measurable effect on global temperatures. For example, during the Ordovician Period 460 million years ago CO2 concentrations were 4400 ppm while temperatures then were about the same as they are today

Do rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations cause increasing global temperatures, or could it be the other way around? This is one of the questions being debated today. Interestingly, CO2 lags an average of about 800 years behind the temperature changes-- confirming that CO2 is not the cause of the temperature increases. One thing is certain-- earth's climate has been warming and cooling on it's own for at least the last 400,000 years, as the data below show. At year 18,000 and counting in our current interglacial vacation from the Ice Age, we may be due-- some say overdue-- for return to another icehouse climate!"

"Of the 186 billion tons of CO2 that enter earth's atmosphere each year from all sources, only 6 billion tons are from human activity. Approximately 90 billion tons come from biologic activity in earth's oceans and another 90 billion tons from such sources as volcanoes and decaying land plants."

"If we are in a global warming crisis today, even the most aggressive and costly proposals for limiting industrial carbon dioxide emissions would have a negligible effect on global climate!"

"We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."

Stephen Schneider (leading advocate of the global warming theory)
(in interview for Discover magazine, Oct 1989)


"No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits.... Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world."

Christine Stewart, Minister of the Environment of Canada
recent quote from the Calgary Herald

</B>References:Historical Isotopic Temperature Record from the Vostok Ice Core
The data available from CDIAC represent a major effort by researchers from France, Russia, and the U.S.A.

1) Vostok ice core: a continuous isotope temperature record over the last climatic cycle (160,00 years).
Jouzel, J., C. Lorius, J.R. Petit, C. Genthon, N.I. Barkov,
V.M. Kotlyakov, and V.M. Petrov. 1987.
Nature 329:403-8.
2) Extending the Vostok ice-core record of palaeoclimate to the penultimate glacial period.
Jouzel, J., N.I. Barkov, J.M. Barnola, M. Bender, J. Chappellaz, C. Genthon, V.M. Kotlyakov, V. Lipenkov, C. Lorius, J.R. Petit, D. Raynaud, G. Raisbeck, C. Ritz, T. Sowers, M. Stievenard, F. Yiou, and P. Yiou. 1993.
Nature 364:407-12.
3) Climatic interpretation of the recently extended Vostok ice records.
Jouzel, J., C. Waelbroeck, B. Malaize, M. Bender, J.R. Petit, M. Stievenard, N.I. Barkov, J.M. Barnola, T. King, V.M. Kotlyakov, V. Lipenkov, C. Lorius, D. Raynaud, C. Ritz, and T. Sowers. 1996.
Climate Dynamics 12:513-521.
4) Climate and atmospheric history of the past 420,000 years from the Vostok ice core, Antarctica.
Petit, J.R., J. Jouzel, D. Raynaud, N.I. Barkov, J.-M. Barnola, I. Basile, M. Bender, J. Chappellaz, M. Davis, G. Delayque, M. Delmotte, V.M. Kotlyakov, M. Legrand, V.Y. Lipenkov, C. Lorius, L. Pepin, C. Ritz, E. Saltzman, and M. Stievenard. 1999.
Nature 399: 429-436.

[Phier]

The thing is co2 in the atmosphere has increased by more than 30% because of humans activity we know it’s having an effect.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1110141842.htm

What about three rings? And don't you dare say "hide the decline climate gate lol". And please answer why do you use the hockey stick graph as an example of bad science? It was ing affirmed in 2006 and I know you know this because it has been pointed out a million billion times for you so the typical ignorant excuse falls flat.

http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/13830/?a=f

http://climateaudit.org/2008/11/23/c...ees/#more-4428 (WARNING EVIL HERETIC WEBSITE!)

5500 years ago the earth was tilted differently for one

Its a 40k year cycle. Why we have a second warm period (which warmists have tried to make go away) in the medieval period is another mystery then becaues the tilt theory won't work there.

Someone needs to reread what an appeal to authority is.

and like so many other posters I am a ing Nobel prize winner. Let me put it directly I don't believe you, because a person with a degree in ecology would know why killing off the fish that eats algae in a echo system is bad

Being I am typing this in my office with a wall full of degrees behind me I find your disbelief humorous. I really need to finish my current article rather then wasting time here but procrastination is my nature. I have absolutely no idea where you get the fish comment from.

Strangely that is all you are doing. That and point to pseudo scientific arguments that have been disproved many, many times.

Proof is one of those funny things. When the variables get big enough it becomes opinion.

[Ter]

Any honest climate scientist, pro warming or not, will admit we really don't know the system.

They do admit there's still a lot to be done, but the best results at the minute show that we are having an effect. And I'd rather react to that and find out it's wrong than sit around arguing and find out it's too late.

[antares24]

That a lot more research on the climate is needed is obvious, but there's a majority of scientist that say that we are actually having an impact on climate.

And i don't really see why there's so much opposition to policies to contrast climate change, even if it turned out that today predictions were exaggerated and our impact on the climate was smaller that we thought most environment solutions would reduce the west energy consumption by rising efficiency and our huge imports of energy by switching more and more to solar and wind.

So, if we're right we can screw less the planet. If we're wrong we still get long term benefits.

but to remain in the spirit of the OP : this is the UK today from space (wtf it seem a picture from the ice age ), maybe our friends up north will like a bit of global warming these days

[Valiant Champion]

I call bull http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5B71SO20091208


Of course you can, this is just another bull climate denier myth and you know its bull.

How to disprove greenhouses gasses effect on the climate: The first and easiest way would be to prove that greenhouses gasses actually don't work the way we think they do. If you could prove that co2 doesn’t trap heat you would revolutionize our understanding of chemistry, physics and all of their sub fields.

Prove the methodology is faulty. If someone could prove that there is something wrong with the way we measure temperatures you would at least be building a strong case.

Come up with an alternative explanation. If you could prove what has been causing the warming over the last 100 years it to would be a strong proof, the problem is most such attempts have been long disproved. However as much denier on this forum demonstrate, they don’t need one. They simply say “NATURAL LOL” the very simple answer to that statement is what natural process?

Its obvious that co2 is a greenhouse gas. If it were not the Earth would have been locked in a deep freeze through most of its long existence. Jumping from greenhouse effect to global meltdown is a very big step.

Evidence that the Earth has been cooling the last several years may not be able to prove that global meltdown is not taking place......

But it doesnt have to...... It is up to global warming pros to prove that global meltdown is taking place. Not the other way around.