or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Global warming !!!! Global warming !!!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Global warming !!!! Global warming !!!! - Page 3

post #81 of 120
There are some folks out there who must dislike the Earth to such an extent that the slightest faux-pas by a prominent environmentalist, or a member of his family, or spokesperson is met with a shower of verbal bricks. Weird... what's so "wrong" with this planet (apart from the corporate polluters whose short term profit requirements reign supreme over every other consideration), that some people can't resist throwing bile at those who are more comfortable with a "responsible stewardship" approach? Nobody complains about running a company properly... but as soon as "looking after the planet in a sensible fashion" gets an airing, so many folk get bent out of shape. What is that all about anyway? Im my book, the term "tree-hugger", as a simple example, should be a compliment,, but it's always used as an insult, or for "name-calling" intent. That is so weird.

Earth is the only place we've got.. anywhere else, (if it exists) is unknown and inaccessible. What's so wrong (or embarrassing, etc etc?) about supporting the health of the Earth for the sake of those who follow us? One would have thought that everyone with kids would be super-concerned.... but apparently not. Perhaps the animosity is generated by the necessary regulations that come with "responsible stewardship", and that these rules, regulations and laws often have a habit of getting in the way of the free market. I am no fan of big government myself, and some of my more Libertarian views get severely tested by this issue. Libertarianism is all well and good, but in the process of claiming ones rights and liberties, is it correct that we trash the rights and liberties of others en masse? Civilization is always a series of compromises.. and Alex Jones should recognize that. I appreciate much of what A.J. et al have to contribute.. but their stance on global warming and refusal to even consider that human activity could be even a contributing factor, is destroying whatever credibility he has... and that is extremely frustrating in these days of ever more powerful centralized and consolidated media, when the alternative sources need all the credibility they can muster.

"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #82 of 120
Sadly Sammi Jo sensible to some means limiting your reproductive rights, limiting your job prospects, taxing your already limited income and finally taking all the spoils for themselves.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #83 of 120
post #84 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

This just in today

Good find MarkUK!

The original PDF article can be found here (free download);

Recent oppositely directed trends in solar climate forcings and the global mean surface air temperature
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #85 of 120


Global Warming Skeptics Argument Debunked

Quote:
Fluctuations In The Suns Cosmic Rays Have Not Caused Recent Climate Change

Among climate change skeptics, a favorite argument against the scientific consensus about the causes of global warming is that increased energy is causing the temperature to rise and not only on Earth, but on other planets in the solar system.

In fact, according to just-published research, trends on the sun independent of other factors would have led to a period of global cooling over the past 20 years.

Here we show that over the past 20 years, all the trends in the Sun that could have had an influence on the Earths climate have been in the opposite direction to that required to explain the observed rise in global mean temperatures, the abstract of the scientific analysis reads.

To read the study, click here.



Flame On!
post #86 of 120
Quote:

Only "debunked"?

Ha!

How about "ripped into shreds, minced to a fine powder, then dissolved in fuming nitric acid" ? Or such like?
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #87 of 120
fellows . . . I'm dissapointed in you. I thought you had started to think for yourself. Alas, the allure of Texas and big-arsed trucks is just too much
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #88 of 120
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pfflam View Post

fellows . . . I'm dissapointed in you. I thought you had started to think for yourself. Alas, the allure of Texas and big-arsed trucks is just too much

Fear not my friend.

I do think for myself. I don't even need to be guided like cattle.

I already drive a small Honda Civic sedan and use low wattage bulbs in my home.

No thanks to Al Gore or any other wealthy worldly figures. I do it to conserve money of all things.

So take heart this Fellows is quite the one to think on his own.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #89 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

I already drive a small Honda Civic sedan and use low wattage bulbs in my home.

No thanks to Al Gore or any other wealthy worldly figures. I do it to conserve money of all things.

Fellows

Honda CRX To Be Hybrid, Pushed Back To 2011



Quote:
... the product planners have decided it must be employ a hybrid drivetrain ...

The CRX shape still looks sweet today! Although I actually drive a Honda Civic coupe.

If you dig a little deeper you'll find that the CRX had a Cd (drag coefficient) = 0.30 and a drag area = 5.71 ft^2 (Cd * frontal area). Compare that to the Toyota Pious at 6.24 ft^2 and the Hummer at 26.3 ft^2.

The force necessary to overcome drag is proportional to velocity squared, so driving at a slower speed is more efficient, up to a certain point, since if you drive too slow the engine time running overtakes the efficiency gained from driving slower. The optimal fuel efficiency speed is ~ 50 MPH.

Although I rarely drive that slow, I also rarely exceed 70 MPH.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #90 of 120
Thread Starter 
I have a black 2006 Honda Civic that has this Body:




Honda builds fantastic autos.

I absolutely love mine.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #91 of 120
Thread Starter 
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #92 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

This just in today

Hmmm... amazingly enough the articles on solar variability I have read are not just tied to the 11 year cycle but much longer and broader cycles. Are you telling me that the 11 year cycle explains the various ices ages and warming trends that have occurred in the past?

The cycle you mention would make sense if we were claiming say, a mini-ice age and warm period occurring every 11 years or so. However we have scientific data that lets us know we have been through nine warmings and coolings in the last 12,000 years.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #93 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Hmmm... amazingly enough the articles on solar variability I have read are not just tied to the 11 year cycle but much longer and broader cycles. Are you telling me that the 11 year cycle explains the various ices ages and warming trends that have occurred in the past?

The cycle you mention would make sense if we were claiming say, a mini-ice age and warm period occurring every 11 years or so. However we have scientific data that lets us know we have been through nine warmings and coolings in the last 12,000 years.

Nick

The standard explanation is Milankovitch cycles for longer term variations in solar variability. See also Solar variation.

A PDF copy of the NCAR study published on September 14, 2006 in Nature I linked to in an earlier post is located here;

Variations in solar luminosity and their effect on the Earth’s climate

Abstract from this paper reads;

Quote:
Variations in the Sun’s total energy output (luminosity) are caused by changing dark (sunspot) and bright structures on the solar disk during the 11-year sunspot cycle. The variations measured from spacecraft since 1978 are too small to have contributed appreciably to accelerated global warming over the past 30 years. In this Review, we show that detailed analysis of these small output variations has greatly advanced our understanding of solar luminosity change, and this new understanding indicates that brightening of the Sun is unlikely to have had a significant influence on global warming since the seventeenth century. Additional climate forcing by changes in the Sun’s output of ultraviolet light, and of magnetized plasmas, cannot be ruled out. The suggested mechanisms are, however, too complex to evaluate meaningfully at present.

The abstract from the recent study that MarcUK found (and that Artman and I linked to in previous posts) reads;

Quote:
There is considerable evidence for solar influence on the Earth’s pre-industrial climate and the Sun may well have been a factor in post-industrial climate change in the first half of the last century. Here we show that over the past 20 years, all the trends in the Sun that could have had an influence on the Earth’s climate have been in the opposite direction to that required to explain the observed rise in global mean temperatures.

The well known sunspot 11-year cycle has been known and tracked for ~300 years (I believe). And if I recall correctly the latest IPCC WG1 AR4 states something like current mean global temperature is rising at a rate of ~ 0.2 degrees C/decade.

So that if I were to do a "loopy" extrapolation that is 20 degrees C/millenium! Temperature changes from glacial ice ages to interglacial periods take several thousand years and are only on the order of ~10 degrees C.

Also the link from Fellows by the Russian scientist who predicts a minimum ~2040 AD is when we expect a local minimum to occur anyway, due to the well known 11-year sunspot cycle. The Russian claims that it will be a historic low, but given the rather limited quantitative measurements of solar variability (~30 years), I don't know if he has done a harmonic analysis or a Fourier (spectral decomposition) or what. I do know that using the lowest frequency components from either can lead to very spurious results based on the statistical and/or resolution bands used in the analyses.

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #94 of 120
Let me be sure we are not talking past each other here. Are you claiming that because the solar variation related to the 11 year sun spot cycles in either insignificant or not significant enough to cause or explain global warming that all forms of solar variation could never cause global warming or cooling?

That is what it appears to be asserted by what I read.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #95 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Let me be sure we are not talking past each other here. Are you claiming that because the solar variation related to the 11 year sun spot cycles in either insignificant or not significant enough to cause or explain global warming that all forms of solar variation could never cause global warming or cooling?

That is what it appears to be asserted by what I read.

Nick

Certainly on very large time scales (millions to billions of years) we (e. g. astronomers) know the Sun's solar output will change over those temporal time scales. They can look at other stars, determine their distance, mass, sequence, estimate age, estimate lifetime, estimate output versus age, EM spectra, etceteras.





Now you have to realize that the second figure above with qualitative "Sunspot Observations" (Blue line) has been vertically shifted to best match the "Irradiance (daily/annual)" quantitative measurements. Thus ~ 1365.6 W/m^2 of Irradiance is ~ zero sunspots and ~ 1366.4 W/m^2 is ~ 200 sunspots.

Now we could discuss the Maunder Minimum where it appears that almost no sunspots were seen, but even there it is very unlikely that solar irradiance dipped below 1365 W/m^2. Also the line is in red (?) this may be due to lower numbers of sunspot observations (not sunspot count but number of times observations were made) or perhaps lower quality of optics at that time, I don't know, I'd have to look it up.

The Milankovitch cycles (envision Earth as a very slowly varying wobbling top in a very slightly wobbly orbit) appear to be the explanation of the recent ice ages we (e. g. they) have seen in the ice cores and sediment cores that we (e. g. they) have seen over the past million years or so.

Finally the quantitative irradiance measurements over the ~30 years are not sufficient to explain the recent warming trend over the past ~60 years. As pointed out in those previous references.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #96 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Let me be sure we are not talking past each other here. Are you claiming that because the solar variation related to the 11 year sun spot cycles in either insignificant or not significant enough to cause or explain global warming that all forms of solar variation could never cause global warming or cooling?

That is what it appears to be asserted by what I read.

Nick

Frank isn't referring to the new study, which has compared total solar output over the last thirty(?) some odd years and the warming we have seen. There is no correlation.

The 11 year cycle is irrelevant for these direct studies...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #97 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Hmmm... amazingly enough the articles on solar variability I have read are not just tied to the 11 year cycle but much longer and broader cycles. Are you telling me that the 11 year cycle explains the various ices ages and warming trends that have occurred in the past?

The cycle you mention would make sense if we were claiming say, a mini-ice age and warm period occurring every 11 years or so. However we have scientific data that lets us know we have been through nine warmings and coolings in the last 12,000 years.

Nick

Seriously, WTF???

I have no comprehension of that question, its so far removed from any perceived reality I just dont know where to start!
post #98 of 120
Maybe Nick is a Global Warming Agnostic: I don't know and you don't either.
I'll have a side of that, hold the Secular Humanism.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #99 of 120
Well sorry if you don't know where to start, but as is often the case around here, I get ten replies, try to address them all and then have one complain about how I replied to another.

Look, when you dig into these further, there are still plenty of questions, incomplete explanations, etc. In fact I wandered over to wikipedia and what we are all doing is basically wandering down the page for solar variation. The sun has cycles for many different variables, some predictable, some not. The article to which you linked appeared to claim that the most predictable cycle was not able to be linked in any fashion to the temperature increase here on the planet. Others linked to a cycle related to the tilt of the earth and ice ages. You look up the explanation for that and it somewhat explains certain cycles, but still falls far short of the number we are talking about that also occur within a much smaller timeline than it explains.

Sorry if you don't like the way I get to everyone but... tough shit. Really. To claim that the largest object in our solar system can have no effect on the weather and instead the answer lies only with one of the smallest and least significant items in our solar system (us) feels as backwards as a flat earth or a earth centered universe. To put it bluntly, humans and our explanations have erred worst when we cannot let our own egos get out of the way of explanations. If you don't think there is a little ego involved with "I saved the planet" well you are wrong.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #100 of 120
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Well sorry if you don't know where to start, but as is often the case around here, I get ten replies, try to address them all and then have one complain about how I replied to another.

Look, when you dig into these further, there are still plenty of questions, incomplete explanations, etc. In fact I wandered over to wikipedia and what we are all doing is basically wandering down the page for solar variation. The sun has cycles for many different variables, some predictable, some not. The article to which you linked appeared to claim that the most predictable cycle was not able to be linked in any fashion to the temperature increase here on the planet. Others linked to a cycle related to the tilt of the earth and ice ages. You look up the explanation for that and it somewhat explains certain cycles, but still falls far short of the number we are talking about that also occur within a much smaller timeline than it explains.

Sorry if you don't like the way I get to everyone but... tough shit. Really. To claim that the largest object in our solar system can have no effect on the weather and instead the answer lies only with one of the smallest and least significant items in our solar system (us) feels as backwards as a flat earth or a earth centered universe. To put it bluntly, humans and our explanations have erred worst when we cannot let our own egos get out of the way of explanations. If you don't think there is a little ego involved with "I saved the planet" well you are wrong.

Nick

I love that POST!!!!

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #101 of 120
I know. Humans could never affect the weather on our planet. Even with a thousand nuclear war heads. I mean, we're small (like an HIV virus) and we could never take down something as big as the planet (like a human host infected with HIV). Thread closed, back to reality moonbats!
post #102 of 120
My favorite hysteria:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...944914,00.html - 29k - Cached
post #103 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherman Homan View Post

My favorite hysteria:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...944914,00.html - 29k - Cached



Quote:
...they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing.

Not If us humans have anything to say about it.
Serving humanity one sarcastic comment at a time.
Reply
Serving humanity one sarcastic comment at a time.
Reply
post #104 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

I know. Humans could never affect the weather on our planet. Even with a thousand nuclear war heads. I mean, we're small (like an HIV virus) and we could never take down something as big as the planet (like a human host infected with HIV). Thread closed, back to reality moonbats!



Moon's mean temperature (equator) = -50 degrees C
Moon's mean temperature (85 degrees N) = -140 degrees C (Earth's mean = 14 degrees C)
Moon's albedo = 12% (Earth's = 30%, Coal = 4%, fresh snow = 90%)

Hmm, I wonder what could be causing such a difference in temperatures, since both bodies are the same distance from the sun god Horus!

Hmm, could it be the difference in albedo? If that were solely the case than the Moon would be warmer than the Earth since it absorbs more sunlight due to it's lower albedo.

Hmm, then what would it be? I mean if you are to believe NASA (those bunch of liers ), man walked on the Moon so it must be habitable, must be able to support life (as we know it), right?

Hmm, of course it can't because the Earth has an atmosphere and the Moon does not, that's simply not possible. because I don't believe it!

The Earth is flat and all heavenly bodies all revolve around 2D Earth, somehow, don't ask me how, because you all know it's common sense.

All hail the sun god Horus, for he hast giveth us thy light and warmth.

Quote:
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #105 of 120
Incidents like this show how "consensus" on global warming has been "reached."

Quote:
Marlo –

You are so full of cr*p.

You have been proven wrong. The entire world has proven you wrong. You are the last guy on Earth to get it. Take this warning from me, Marlo. It is my intention to destroy your career as a liar. If you produce one more editorial against climate change, I will launch a campaign against your professional integrity. I will call you a liar and charlatan to the Harvard community of which you and I are members. I will call you out as a man who has been bought by Corporate America. Go ahead, guy. Take me on.

Mike

Michael T. Eckhart

President

American Council On Renewable Energy (ACORE)

We could let the science speak for itself...or... I could threaten to destroy you because we don't agree.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #106 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

If you don't think there is a little ego involved with "I saved the planet" well you are wrong.

Nick

Spot on. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go watch my California neighbors fart into champagne glasses and speed off in their Prius.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #107 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Incidents like this show how "consensus" on global warming has been "reached."

We could let the science speak for itself...or... I could threaten to destroy you because we don't agree.

Nick

ACORE... hmmmmmm an association for a bunch of capitalists and control freaks that realize that the next place to make a whole shitload of money is to sell shares of bottled "Conscience Cleaner" to the terminally guilt-ridden. Can I buy shares of that?
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #108 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Incidents like this show how "consensus" on global warming has been "reached."



We could let the science speak for itself...or... I could threaten to destroy you because we don't agree.

Nick

What no link to the Cato Institute? This time it's the Competitive Enterprise Institute, d'oh, go figure BAU!

Specious economic arguments trump ecological science arguments, d'oh, go figure BAU!

Higher gas taxes in Europe have been around like forever, way before GW was a "hot" topic. I wonder if these were imposed to raise government tax revenues or to stop GW?

Oh, and let's save the people first, so that we can have more people, and more poor people, so that they can have more offspring, so that we can have more poor people, more people with more carbon emissions. We don't want to advocate birth control, because you know, that would stifle the economy!

And let's eliminate taxes so that people can make more money, so that they can, you know buy things, so that they can create even more carbon emissions.

And let's not increase vehicle efficiencies, and home heating/cooling efficiencies, because that would offend our economic god Greed!

Of all the things Dr. Lewis said more R&D was about the only sound advice;

Quote:
First, as Danish statistician Bjorn Lomborg recommends, encourage worldwide R&D investment in non-carbon-emitting energy technologies.

But that one just happens to be a NO BRAINER!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #109 of 120
I can't believe you defend an email like that.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #110 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I can't believe you defend an email like that.

Nick

And I can't believe your mischaracterization of that "over the top" email as;

Quote:
Incidents like this show how "consensus" on global warming has been "reached."

And the Harvard community Eckhart is referring to, is apparently the fact that Eckhart received an MBA and Lewis received a PhD (in Government) from Harvard.

Neither of these people are even remotely scientists! Please see Scientific opinion on climate change if you want to discuss the scientific consensus on AGW.

And how EXACTLY is Eckhart going to destroy Lewis's career;

Quote:
It is my intention to destroy your career as a liar.

Given the fact that Lewis is a winger to begin with;

Quote:
Marlo has been published in the Washington Times, Investors Business Daily, TechCentralStation, National Review, and Interpretation: A Journal of Political Philosophy. He has appeared on various television and radio programs, and his ideas have been featured in radio commentary by Rush Limbaugh and G. Gordon Liddy.

I seriously doubt that whatever Eckhart does will have ANY impact on Lewis's career, infact it would probably backfire, and enhance Lewis's career. And Eckhart was acting like a real asshat for sending such a vile email to Lewis.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #111 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobmarksdale View Post





Not If us humans have anything to DO about it.

TFTFY!

On Global cooling;

Quote:
Global cooling in general can refer to a cooling of the Earth. More specifically, it refers to a conjecture during the 1970s of imminent cooling of the Earth's surface and atmosphere along with a posited commencement of glaciation. This hypothesis never had significant scientific support, but gained temporary popular attention due to press reports following a better understanding of ice age cycles and a slight downward trend of temperatures from the 1940s to the early 1970s.

Earth as a whole has not been cooling in recent decades, but is in a period of global warming.

Conjecture;

Quote:
In scientific philosophy, Karl Popper pioneered the use of the term "conjecture" to indicate a proposition which is presumed to be real, true, or genuine, mostly based on inconclusive grounds, in contrast with a hypothesis (hence theory, axiom, principle), which is a testable statement based on accepted grounds.

Hypothesis;

Quote:
A hypothesis consists either of a suggested explanation for a phenomenon or of a reasoned proposal suggesting a possible correlation between multiple phenomena. The term derives from the Greek, hypotithenai meaning "to put under" or "to suppose." The scientific method requires that one can test a scientific hypothesis. Scientists generally base such hypotheses on previous observations or on extensions of scientific theories.

Scientific method;

Quote:
Scientific method is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena and acquiring new knowledge, as well as for correcting and integrating previous knowledge. It is based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning, the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.

Global warming;

Quote:
Global warming refers to the increase in the average temperature of the Earth's near-surface air and oceans in recent decades and its projected continuation. Global average air temperature near the Earth's surface rose 0.74 ± 0.18 °C (1.33 ± 0.32 °F) during the past century. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes, "most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations," which leads to warming of the surface and lower atmosphere by increasing the greenhouse effect. Natural phenomena such as solar variation combined with volcanoes have probably had a small warming effect from pre-industrial times to 1950, but a small cooling effect since 1950. These basic conclusions have been endorsed by at least 30 scientific societies and academies of science, including all of the national academies of science of the major industrialized countries. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists is the only scientific society that rejects these conclusions. A few individual scientists disagree with some of the main conclusions of the IPCC.

Scientific opinion on climate change;

Quote:
National and international science academies and professional societies have assessed the current scientific opinion on climate change, in particular recent global warming. These assessments have largely followed or endorsed the IPCC position that "An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities".

You can now go back to reading your Bible and other works of fiction, or MSM "dumbed down" articles and op-ed pieces on AGW. or the thousands of blog AGW disinformation websites.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #112 of 120
Thread Starter 
It is not just light bulbs and SUV's the globalists want to control. Now the globalists want to take away your sports cars.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/...ports_cars.htm


It is just a matter of months or days before they ban sex...

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #113 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Well sorry if you don't know where to start, but as is often the case around here, I get ten replies, try to address them all and then have one complain about how I replied to another.

Look, when you dig into these further, there are still plenty of questions, incomplete explanations, etc. In fact I wandered over to wikipedia and what we are all doing is basically wandering down the page for solar variation. The sun has cycles for many different variables, some predictable, some not. The article to which you linked appeared to claim that the most predictable cycle was not able to be linked in any fashion to the temperature increase here on the planet. Others linked to a cycle related to the tilt of the earth and ice ages. You look up the explanation for that and it somewhat explains certain cycles, but still falls far short of the number we are talking about that also occur within a much smaller timeline than it explains.

Sorry if you don't like the way I get to everyone but... tough shit. Really. To claim that the largest object in our solar system can have no effect on the weather and instead the answer lies only with one of the smallest and least significant items in our solar system (us) feels as backwards as a flat earth or a earth centered universe. To put it bluntly, humans and our explanations have erred worst when we cannot let our own egos get out of the way of explanations. If you don't think there is a little ego involved with "I saved the planet" well you are wrong.

Nick

sorry, but you need to go back and read this thread because your question to me was quote ridiculous given the context of what we are talking about.

Quote:
Are you telling me that the 11 year cycle explains the various ices ages and warming trends that have occurred in the past?

thats just laughable because it is so far removed from the reality of the information given in the thread. How you can come to the conclusion that is what I am saying is just 'WTF'
post #114 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

It is not just light bulbs and SUV's the globalists want to control. Now the globalists want to take away your sports cars.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/...ports_cars.htm


It is just a matter of months or days before they ban sex...

Fellows

you can still have sex, just make sure if its in your car, dont leave the engine running.
post #115 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

you can still have sex, just make sure if its in your car, dont leave the engine running.

Like Paris Hilton?
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #116 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post



Moon's mean temperature (equator) = -50 degrees C
Moon's mean temperature (85 degrees N) = -140 degrees C (Earth's mean = 14 degrees C)
Moon's albedo = 12% (Earth's = 30%, Coal = 4%, fresh snow = 90%)

Hmm, I wonder what could be causing such a difference in temperatures, since both bodies are the same distance from the sun god Horus!

Hmm, could it be the difference in albedo? If that were solely the case than the Moon would be warmer than the Earth since it absorbs more sunlight due to it's lower albedo.

Hmm, then what would it be? I mean if you are to believe NASA (those bunch of liers ), man walked on the Moon so it must be habitable, must be able to support life (as we know it), right?

Hmm, of course it can't because the Earth has an atmosphere and the Moon does not, that's simply not possible. because I don't believe it!

The Earth is flat and all heavenly bodies all revolve around 2D Earth, somehow, don't ask me how, because you all know it's common sense.

All hail the sun god Horus, for he hast giveth us thy light and warmth.

strangely it seems like 2001 all over again. hehe! sun god
post #117 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

TFTFY!

On Global cooling;



Conjecture;



Hypothesis;



Scientific method;



Global warming;



Scientific opinion on climate change;



You can now go back to reading your Bible and other works of fiction, or MSM "dumbed down" articles and op-ed pieces on AGW. or the thousands of blog AGW disinformation websites.

I don't understand what the point of your post was. I know what global warming is, I know what the scientific method is, I do support the theory that global warming is caused by humans, I absolutely hate MSM and the crap it spews, and I don't believe I've ever purposely read any articles on AGW other than those that support the idea. I hardly see how the fact that I read fiction or the bible has to do with anything. Apparently it's fairly popular.
Serving humanity one sarcastic comment at a time.
Reply
Serving humanity one sarcastic comment at a time.
Reply
post #118 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobmarksdale View Post

I don't understand what the point of your post was. I know what global warming is, I know what the scientific method is, I do support the theory that global warming is caused by humans, I absolutely hate MSM and the crap it spews, and I don't believe I've ever purposely read any articles on AGW other than those that support the idea. I hardly see how the fact that I read fiction or the bible has to do with anything. Apparently it's fairly popular.

Then I'm truly sorry for misinterpreting your reply to the previous post referring to that "hystirical" Time article on global cooling from 1974!

I should have directed my reply to the original poster.

And I'd like to take back my comments on the Bible and fiction, if that were possible.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #119 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

It is just a matter of months or days before they ban sex...

Yeah let me know how that turns out.

post #120 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Then I'm truly sorry for misinterpreting your reply to the previous post referring to that "hystirical" Time article on global cooling from 1974!

I should have directed my reply to the original poster.

And I'd like to take back my comments on the Bible and fiction, if that were possible.

Fair enough. Apology accepted.
Serving humanity one sarcastic comment at a time.
Reply
Serving humanity one sarcastic comment at a time.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Global warming !!!! Global warming !!!!