It's global warming, stupid
Cold comfort for climate change brigade
After the sensational flop that was the Copenhagen climate meeting I can't help but think what incredibly bad timing nature has for those leaders who were set with the task of convincing us the world is getting hotter. Following a recent news story that confirms the past decade was the hottest decade in recorded history much of the northern hemisphere has been plunged into record breaking cold - and it's grabbing the headlines on all the major news organisations.
Why so many idiots? When you warm the global atmosphere up, the models show us that it creates more and more erratic, violent weather patterns, that is what we are seeing with these vast cold snaps that are occurring. Worst case scenario would see the Greenland icecap melt, shutting down the major ocean pump situated off the coast of Greenland, shutting down the ocean currents plunging the Northern hemisphere into this type of weather permanently.
Erratic and extreme weather pattens are now our future and as we continue to do nothing to stop the planet from warming because of our pollution, it is a future we can not avoid.
We reap what we sow.
posted by Bomber @ 3:55 pm
35 comments
35 Comments:
http://globalwarmthis.blogspot.com/
So "chicken little" Al Gore has warned us of our upcoming doom from man-made Global Warming. We are led to believe we will all soon fall off the edge of the earth into the pits of Hell if we don't start using electric lawnmowers, and stop using those pesky road flares they're claiming puts rocket fuel into our water aquifers and consequently into our own bloodstreams. I am not a scientist, nor am I a climatologist. I'm just a simple person leading a simple life. I am not, however, a follower blinded by propaganda, status, greed or deception, and that is precisely what this Global Warming concept has been generated by.
As of this writing, this Winter, there are record snowfalls and record shattering frigid temperatures globally from China, W. Korea, Romania, Spain, Czech Republic, Nepal, Finland, Austria, Norway, Seoul, Germany, Bangladesh, France,The United Kingdom, Texas, Iowa, Massachusetts, British Columbia, Scotland, to Florida, and our "experts" have gone underground because apparently Hell is freezing over. And it appears to me that we have been duped by possibly one of the greatest hoaxes of all time, leaving the believers scratching their heads scrambling to find rationale where there is none.
You can fool some of the people some of the time, Al, but you can't fool Mother Nature.
Thanks for contributing moron, you do know what extreme weather means right? It is EXTREME, moron. Would you class these extreme weather patterns we are seeing that is dumping vast amounts of snow as extreme? Yes, yes you would and what does the modeling show when you heat the earth up? More extreme weather.
You can try and con a lot of people a lot of the time, but seeing as this attack on the science is the kind of tactic the tobacco companies have used for decades I'm guessing the above poster also believes that there is no connection between smoking and cancer.
NEXT
So you're changing your tune from warming to 'extreme changes' in order to force the facts to fit into your theory?
And you still think you have any credibility?
Oh for the love of Christ you clown! Global warming will create extreme weather - that has been the line since day one, there has been no change from that at all, and seeing as you are the one posting anonymously without the balls to put your name to your post, the credibility failure is yours.
I've been blogging on this and pointing out the extreme weather issue for as long as I care to remember, pretending it's a change is an out right lie.
Yeah well Global Warming creates anything the alarmists want it to create.
*That* is the truth.
Nick where have you been in this debate for crying out loud? Extreme weather has ALWAYS been the prediction you moron.
Deniers will grasp at any bullshit to try and undermine the fact that man made pollution is creating global warming.
Nice to see Exxon Mobile have so many friends on line
Global warming implies warming so how for the love of god can you link this with the coldest winter Europe has seen in 30 years?
This ought to be amusing.
Yea but Bobmer - there's this yokel from the midwest ya see. And his orange crop is freezing - so HOW can there be global warming?
He missed all that shit that forewarned everyone that a characteristic of global warming would be more regular, and extremes in weather patterns. Must have been harvesting a crop - or maybe talking up a few NZ investors, persuading them that Californian oranges were the shape of the future.
To that previous Anonymous - he also appears to have missed the bulletin that we could expect more regular extremes (I.e. extreme, as in hotter and colder).
What a fucking egg roll. Never mind, I'm sure he'll survive.
So you're saying Bomber global warming can actually means global cooling?
If I may, line from another writer - "Meanwhile they have a breadth and depth of intelligence that facilitates an ability to be sceptical on matters of research and study that they themselves neither research nor study!
Truly amazing people".
you think this is extreme weather wait till the northern currents shut down,and the northern hemisphere turns to a block of ice. mexico gets a serious illegal american immigrant problem. but honestly you can do what you like as far as protecting the climate goes ITS FAR TO LATE
The earth rotates on an axis that doesnt pass through the centre of the weight of the land,it is the sea that creates the balance by filling the voids where the weight needs to be to maintain balance,the sea makes the earth self balancing.Big deal? What this means is if weight changes the sea moves to keep the balance.
The northen hemisphere is melting but not evenly,the ice is disappearing in the arctic but alaska/canada not so much its actually building up, likewise the southern hemisphere in antarctica the part below NZ is melting fast (wilkins icesheet etc) but on the opposite side of antarctica the ice is growing. notice that these areas that are building ice in each hemisphere are opposite each other but not centered.
Folks, the good news is that the planet will survive.
We, on the other hand, may not.
Why would the shut down of the Gulfstream plunge Europe into this type of Weather pattern permanently?
Are you suggesting that Europe would end up looking like Antarctica instead of somewhere like northern North America?
Seems to me a lot of pseudo-science here, and not on Bomber's part. Take the illogical stance of the first post, "i'm not a scientist or a climate scientist, [therefore i'm no expert or authority] but here's what I have to say about climate change [a subject I just admitted I know nothing about]". As for the other naysayers, just because you don't understand something [likely because you don't want to] doesn't mean it's not true. Of course global warming leads to extreme weather events including localized freezing temperatures, storms etc. Every glacial retreat in the past (and the subsequent warming episodes) reaches a critical point where these extreme weather conditions emerge, often followed by, eventually, glacial advances. Hence, the arrogant fools on here admit they know nothing of climate science yet claim overall heating can't lead to localised cooling, apparently are unaware of this exact relationship happening in the past many times. The difference is the pace, duration of events, and extremity of climate change which has been facilitated or accelerated by anthropogenic green house gases. At the end of the day, I and anyone else with an iota of common sense or critical thinking will look at the evidence we're presented with, but ultimately rely on the testimony of epistomological authorities (i.e. those who actually know what they're talking about as opposed to Bob the mechanic from down the road) - in this case the climate and earth scientists.
Your ignorance on the issue surprises me o curious one. Yes, the sudden desalination of water near certain ocean pumps(as water evaporates the salt makes ocean water heavier and plunges down near certain ocean pumps which creates the global ocean conveyor current which regulates temperature from the tropics) , and there is one near Greenland would plunge Europe into an ice age if the ice shelf there melts. It has happened in the past and when climate researchers talk about sudden catastrophic climate change they are making reference to these in built feedback loops.
You have wondered before haven't you o curious one why Paris and London are so temperate compared to other cities along the same longitude haven't you?
Gotta love the move from "global warming" to "climate change".
Yeah if the fact don't fit the theory then find another theory to fit the facts.
If people thought the pretext for the invasion if Iraq was a fraud then they're going to love 'climate change'.
I wouldn't waste my time Bomber. Many of these anons are far too smart to fall for what us "mainstreamers" have to say. So smart in fact that they apparently 'just know' climate science is false without knowing anything about climate science. Perhaps we should ask the anons about quantum physics or cosmology while we're at it? Their arrogance knows no bounds, and their arguments are as weak as their critical thinking skills. Logical fallacy here, logical fallacy there..
Maybe we should start a show: "Ask Anon" where they can say things like "I may not know anything about climate science, but if there's one thing I know it's that climate change is false".
It's funny too because here I was thinking climate change was a fundamental fact which has been observed by researchers from many different disciplines including ecologists, archaeologists, geologists, agricultural scientists, biologists etc. (I guess they're part of the conspiracy now too?), and that the skeptics focused on anthropogenic contributions. But these anons are denying climate change all together!!? Funny also because they cite changes in climate as natural [thereby admitting change] yet flip flop a second later and deny change all together. That's called shifting the goal posts and is illogical even by their own arguments. Such as it is when 'debating' people who love to speak but refuse to listen. Oh well.
and the earths flat
Edward, global warming is not about evidence. You cannot even get the basics right.
Well, anon, I think i'll stick to listening to epistomological authorities rather than anonymous internet commenters, but thanks anyway.
Hi Edward. If you know so much about climate science could you please inform us as to what percentage of CO2 enters the atmosphere as a result of human activity as opposed to naturally? I would be happy to answer any questions about quantum physics or cosmology you may have while we're at it big man.
Edward, science is not about evidence. It is essentially about hypothesis, testing, experiments, conclusions and then peer review and criticism. It's not about computer models. And it's not about evidence. Epistomology or no epistomology.
(Nick - the anon above).
Where as spin doctoring is about pretending there is evidence and attacking the science in the exact same way the Tobacco industry pretended there was no science to connect cancer with smoking.
Scepticism with a capital K – Manufacturing Doubt
lol at bomber the idiot.
"The models show...bla bla bla."
Reality shows that storms etc have not increased during the last centuries warming.
When things start to cool though, then we get the real bad weather.
Stands to reason eh, all that energy has to go somewhere.
ie. warm to cold = energy dissapated.
Another fact is that cooler means more water locked up in ice so there is more drought.
One of the earliest civilizations discovered was destroyed by cooling.
"epistomology or no epistomology" only goes to show you have a pretty poor understanding of science Nick. As does claiming evidence doesn't have a role in the scientific method. And I never said I knew so much about climate science, that would be you. And that was my point. People who are capable of critical thinking or actually do science understand that it is impossible to be an expert in everything, which is exactly what I accused you and the other anon's of. Your reply merely illustrates the fact (apparently you think you are a polymath according to your first reply?). In short, your self-proclaimed claim to be an autority in several feilds ("...happy to answer any questions about quantum physics or cosmology") only denotes that either you are A: delusional or B: very, very full of yourself.
At any rate, as I said previously, i'll take my chances with actual experts thanks.
Hi Edward. If you know so much about climate science could you please inform us as to what percentage of CO2 enters the atmosphere as a result of human activity as opposed to naturally? I would be happy to answer any questions about quantum physics or cosmology you may have while we're at it big man.
Emissions arising from human activity are a small part of total carbon fluxes - the movement of carbon between the biosphere, oceans and atmosphere, but they are the largest part of the carbon that's accumulating in the atmosphere. That's risen by nearly 40% over the last 150 years.
lol at bomber the idiot.
"The models show...bla bla bla."
Reality shows that storms etc have not increased during the last centuries warming.
When things start to cool though, then we get the real bad weather.
Stands to reason eh, all that energy has to go somewhere.
ie. warm to cold = energy dissapated.
As the planet's climate system warms, the total energy content of the system rises. Critically, this affects the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere, and water vapour is the "fuel" for weather systems. More water vapour and more energy means more intense rainfall and bigger storms. Reality shows that extreme weather events have increased over the last century.
The Greenland ice cap will melt (because its warmer?)and countries further south will be plunged into permanent winter (because its warmer further north?). I support the right to free speech but some take liberties.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26581533-3102,00.html
AUSTRALIAN government climate experts have failed to detect an increase in the intensity of tropical cyclones after analysing 26 years of data since the early 1980s.
Climate scientists have warned that Australia should expect to see more intense cyclones in the future fuelled by rising global temperatures caused by greenhouse gases.
But this latest research from seven Bureau of Meteorology scientists shows that so far there is no conclusive evidence to suggest this is already happening.
LMAO - from the very article you are using to try and disprove global warming...
Co-author of the research, Dr John McBride, said: "We still expect more intense cyclones but we are comfortable with the fact that you cannot yet see that in the data."
The research did find a positive trend in the numbers of the most intense cyclones in the Southern Indian Ocean region.
But the authors said while it was "possible" that the trend could show climate change at work, this finding could instead be down to "changes in data quality".
In theory, scientists say ongoing rises in ocean temperatures should see the numbers of intense cyclones increase.
Professor David Karoly, a world-leading climatologist at the University of Melbourne, said the research did not change this expectation.
"It's very very difficult with a 20 or 30-year time scale to separate a climate change signal from natural variation. You would not expect to see a signal until about 2030."
I see why you post anonymously and are not brave enough to put your name to your opinion.
Bomber
Its clear that your lack of comprehension is the reason you are ignorant.
The Scientists say, research shows no link. But also say that may change in the future, but they dont know?
But the fact is current research of the last 26 years shows NO link.
These are weather events.Not climate change.
Heres my name. And this info isnt "my opinion". Its the researched facts by 26 Scientists from the Australian Met Office.
David Parker
ps, I bet Karolys "expectations" are that way so he can get more funding!ha
Here's what the latest Aussie BOM/CSIRO climate update has to say on weather extremes:
http://climatechangeinaustralia.com.au/documents/resources/Climate%20Science%20Update%202_7Dec09.pdf
Australia is experiencing more high temperature extremes, particularly a significant increase in the number of warm nights and heat waves. There was a significant increase in the duration of heat waves in Australia from 1957 to 1999 and increased temperature extremes. The observed trends in extremes are projected to continue into the future. A substantial increase in warm nights and heat wave duration and decrease in frost days are projected by the
end of this century under the IPCC-SRES scenarios.
Indicators of rainfall extremes are set to more than double within the next 100 years, with longer dry spells interspersed with heavier precipitation events. The magnitude of changes in both temperature and rainfall extremes generally scale with the strength of emissions.
With respect to tropical storms, there has been an increase globally (see AR4 Chapter 3), but that's not uniform (more in some places, fewer in others).
Post a Comment
<< Home