Climate change far worse than thought before
Harry Hope
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/global-warming/Climate-change-far-worse-than-thought-before/articleshow/5406955.cms
3 January 2010
Climate change far worse than thought before
NEW DELHI: Global alarm over climate change and its effects has risen
manifold after the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC).
Since then, many of the 2,500-odd IPCC scientists have found climate
change is progressing faster than the worst-case scenario they had
predicted.
Their studies will be considered for the next IPCC report, but since
that will come out only in 2013, the University of New South Wales in
Sydney has just put together the main findings in the last three
years.
Most are by previous IPCC lead authors "familiar with the rigour and
completeness required for a scientific assessment of this nature", a
university spokesperson said.
The most significant recent findings are:
* Global carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels in 2008 were 40
percent higher than in 1990.
The recent Copenhagen Accord said warming should be contained within
two degrees, but every year of delayed action increases the chances of
exceeding the two-degree warming mark.
Carbon dioxide is the main greenhouse gas (GHG) warming the
atmosphere.
* To keep within the two-degree limit, global GHG emissions need to
peak between 2015 and 2020 and then decline rapidly.
To stabilise climate, near-zero emissions of carbon dioxide and other
long-lived GHG should be reached well within this century.
More specifically, the average annual per-capita emissions will have
to shrink to well under one tonne carbon dioxide by 2050.
This is 80-95 percent below the per-capita emissions in developed
nations in 2000.
* Over the past 25 years temperatures have increased at a rate of 0.19
degree Celsius per decade.
The trend has continued over the last 10 years despite a decrease in
radiation from the sun.
* The studies show extreme hot temperature events have increased,
extreme cold temperature events have decreased, heavy rain or snow has
become heavier, while there has been increase in drought as well.
They also show that the intensity of cyclones has increased in the
past three decades in line with rising tropical ocean temperatures.
* Satellites show recent global average sea level rise (3.4 mm/year
over the past 15 years) to be about 80 percent above IPCC predictions.
This acceleration is consistent with a doubling in contribution from
melting of glaciers, ice caps, and the Greenland and West-Antarctic
ice sheets.
New estimates of ocean heat uptake are 50 percent higher than previous
calculations.
Global ocean surface temperature reached the warmest ever recorded in
June, July and August 2009.
Ocean acidification and ocean de-oxygenation due to global warming
have been identified as potentially devastating for large parts of the
marine ecosystem.
* By 2100, global sea level is likely to rise at least twice as much
as projected by the IPCC in 2007;
if emissions are unmitigated the rise may well exceed one metre.
The sea level will continue to rise for centuries after global
temperatures have been stabilised, and several metres of sea level
rise must be expected over the next few centuries.
* A wide array of satellite and ice measurements demonstrate that both
the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are melting at an increasing
rate.
Melting of glaciers and ice-caps in other parts of the world has also
accelerated since 1990.
The contribution of glaciers and ice-caps to global sea level rise has
increased from 0.8 mm per year in the 1990s to 1.2 mm per year today.
The adjustment of glaciers and ice caps to present climate alone is
expected to raise sea level by about 18 cm.
Under warming conditions they may contribute as much as around 55 cm
by 2100.
The net loss of ice from the Greenland ice sheet has accelerated since
the mid-1990s and is now contributing 0.7 mm per year to sea level
rise due to both increased melting and accelerated ice flow.
Antarctica is also losing ice mass at an increasing rate, mostly from
the West Antarctic ice sheet due to increased ice flow.
Antarctica is currently contributing to sea level rise at a rate
nearly equal to Greenland.
* Summer-time melting of Arctic sea-ice has accelerated far beyond the
expectations of climate models.
The area of summertime sea-ice 2007-09 was about 40 percent less than
the average prediction from IPCC climate models in the 2007 report.
* The studies say avoiding tropical deforestation could prevent up to
20 percent of carbon dioxide emissions.
* New ice-core records confirm the importance of GHG for temperatures
on earth, and show that carbon dioxide levels are higher now than they
have been during the last 800,000 years.
7
>
> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/global-
warming/Climate-change-far-worse-than-thought-before/articleshow/5406955.cms
>
> 3 January 2010
>
> Climate change far worse than thought before
The fraud against humanity exposed in Climategate is
far far worse than AGW fakers can hope to explain away.
No one still prosecuted over it yet as they flee
like roaches under the spotlight.
You are also going against genuine science in this paper:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0707/0707.1161v4.pdf
Holowarming is still a hoax and will remain a hoax
--------------------------------------------------
It has moved into pseudo science arrived at by faking data,
sneaking into peer review process, getting opposition sacked
from their jobs by ringing up their owners and the like.
Its become a means to an end.
Its a bad hoax at that. Its responsible for all
kind of unnecessary taxes and changes to the way
we live without any scientific or material proof.
Holowarming funding needs to be cut.
The holowarming crap needs to curtailed.
99% of all greenhouse gases is water vapor H20.
It is the billions of liters of water in the form
of clouds in the sky. Two thirds of the planet is water
and thats why there is so much of it about.
The 0.05% of CO2 and other trace gases
DO NOT contribute to global warming AND CAN NEVER EVER
become a major factor to global warming.
They don't have the heat capacity unlike H2O gas
to carry heat around the globe.
The holowarmers faking their science DO NOT integrate their results over
a 24 hour period - instead some fruit cakes science is used
calculating between 12:00 noon and 12:01 to get an answer
and deliberately avoid discussion on finer points of the erroneous methods.
A desert cools at the rate of 1 degree every 10 minutes
in the night when there no water vapor (i.e. cloud cover) around, despite
all the trace gases being the same because nearly all of the heat
around the planet is carried by water vapor.
Anyone claiming otherwise is a steaming lying holowarming
crap artist in need of some urgent education.
Bret Cahill
Like I've been saying all along. Everyone is a denier. It's just a
matter of degree.
Bret Cahill
1-20-2013
> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/global-warming/Climate-change-far-worse-than-thought-before/articleshow/5406955.cms
>
> 3 January 2010
>
> Climate change far worse than thought before
>
The *climate* is creating much colder and snowier *weather* across the
entire northern hemisphere in fall 2009/winter 2010 than thought before ;^D
Been snowing since Thursday here. Help us Al Gore!!!!! ;^D ROTFFLMMFAO!!!!
Jim Alder
news:soh1k5l7of0p5mlqb...@4ax.com:
> Since then, many of the 2,500-odd IPCC scientists have found climate
> change is progressing faster than the worst-case scenario they had
> predicted.
Then why should anyone take them seriously? Obviously they don't know what
they're doing.
--
My girlfriend asked me "Have you been having
sex behind my back?"
I said "Who in the hell did you think it was?"
John Q Public
> Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
> news:soh1k5l7of0p5mlqb...@4ax.com:
>
>> Since then, many of the 2,500-odd IPCC scientists have found climate
>> change is progressing faster than the worst-case scenario they had
>> predicted.
>
> Then why should anyone take them seriously? Obviously they don't know what
> they're doing.
More scare tactics from the left wantin a brand spankin new tax to give
em graft money
as it won't do shit fer environment either way!
Siobhan Medeiros
> Harry Hope wrote:
> >http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/global-warming/Cl...
>
> > 3 January 2010
>
> > Climate change far worse than thought before
>
> The *climate* is creating much colder and snowier *weather* across the
> entire northern hemisphere in fall 2009/winter 2010 than thought before ;^D
>
> Been snowing since Thursday here. Help us Al Gore!!!!! ;^D ROTFFLMMFAO!!!!
Well, up here in British Columbia the snow's already all gone. So by
your standards, it's all true. ROTFFLMMFAO!!!!
1-20-2013
Isn't *this* where the man-made global warming kooks usually spew some
silliness about not knowing the difference between climate and
weather....or something like that??? ;^D LOL!!!!
*FisherKing."
news:cS30n.21542$Ym4...@text.news.virginmedia.com:
> Harry Hope wrote:
>
>>
>> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/global-
> warming/Climate-change-far-worse-than-thought-before/articleshow/540695
> 5.cms
>>
>> 3 January 2010
>>
>> Climate change far worse than thought before
>
>
> The fraud against humanity exposed in Climategate is
> far far worse than AGW fakers can hope to explain away.
> No one still prosecuted over it yet as they flee
> like roaches under the spotlight.
>
> You are also going against genuine science in this paper:
>
> http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0707/0707.1161v4.pdf
And here is a genuine scientific paper that refutes yours:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0802/0802.4324v1.pdf
Therefore your guy is a fraud and a charlatan.
--
"The better educated a person is, the less likely it is that person will be
a conservative."
"Reagan proved deficits don't matter"
Dick Cheney
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it
is true that most stupid people are conservative." - John Stuart Mill
[When Bush and the GOP controlled the government six years ago] �it
was standard practice not to pay for things�We were concerned about
it, because it certainly added to the deficit, no question.�
f. barnes
> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/global-warming/Cl...
How are you going to avoid tropical deforestation without getting rid
a lot of people, billions of people probably? And by the way, there
is a direct correlation between human population growth and
deforestation. And I don't think that correlation can be changed
without wholesale slaughter,
Siobhan Medeiros
> Harry Hope wrote:
>
> >http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/global-
>
> warming/Climate-change-far-worse-than-thought-before/articleshow/5406955.cm s
>
>
>
> > 3 January 2010
>
> > Climate change far worse than thought before
>
> The fraud against humanity exposed in Climategate is
> far far worse than AGW fakers can hope to explain away.
> No one still prosecuted over it yet as they flee
> like roaches under the spotlight.
>
> You are also going against genuine science in this paper:
>
> http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0707/0707.1161v4.pdf
The science in the paper is nonexistent. Real scientists have torn
this paper to pieces.
http://rabett.blogspot.com/2007/10/loons-take-flight-as-halloween-nears.html
http://atmoz.org/blog/2007/07/10/falsification-of-the-atmospheric-co2-greenhouse-effects/
It appears you can't treat the Earth the same as the Sun. Go figure.
>
> Holowarming is still a hoax and will remain a hoax
> --------------------------------------------------
It's fact and it will remain a fact.
>
> It has moved into pseudo science arrived at by faking data,
> sneaking into peer review process, getting opposition sacked
> from their jobs by ringing up their owners and the like.
Yeah, 97% of scientists did that. It's all a huge conspiracy. Like
gravity and the round earth.
I assume of course that "scientists" like Lindzen and the author of
your bullshit paper are of course turning down the heaps of money
being thrown at them by the fossil fuels industry.
>
> Its become a means to an end.
>
Yeah, the end is humankind's continued survival.
> Its a bad hoax at that. Its responsible for all
> kind of unnecessary taxes and changes to the way
> we live without any scientific or material proof.
> Holowarming funding needs to be cut.
> The holowarming crap needs to curtailed.
>
Along with anything else you don't want to hear. Hell, we should shut
down every network except FOX News.
> 99% of all greenhouse gases is water vapor H20.
> It is the billions of liters of water in the form
> of clouds in the sky. Two thirds of the planet is water
> and thats why there is so much of it about.
Three points:
1. CO2 is many thousands of times more effective at trapping heat
than H20. That's why the planet Venus is hotter than Mercury even
though it's twice the distance from the sun.
2. If true, so what?
3. An increase in heat due to CO2 increase would lead to a rise in
humidity. It's called a positive feedback loop, moron. Know what a
"runaway greenhouse effect" is?
>
> The 0.05% of CO2 and other trace gases
> DO NOT contribute to global warming AND CAN NEVER EVER
> become a major factor to global warming.
So says the grade 8 dropout. Every credible astronomer, physicist,
and climatolgist on the planet says otherwise.
> They don't have the heat capacity unlike H2O gas
> to carry heat around the globe.
No, idiot. CO2 is far more powerful as a greenhouse gas, and methane
more powerful than CO2 (per molecule). Get yourself an education.
> The holowarmers faking their science DO NOT integrate their results over
> a 24 hour period - instead some fruit cakes science is used
> calculating between 12:00 noon and 12:01 to get an answer
> and deliberately avoid discussion on finer points of the erroneous methods.
>
Fuck, you're stupid. Even if they did that (which they don't), a rise
in temperature would be just as apparent.
> A desert cools at the rate of 1 degree every 10 minutes
> in the night when there no water vapor (i.e. cloud cover) around, despite
> all the trace gases being the same because nearly all of the heat
> around the planet is carried by water vapor.
>
Because THERE'S NO SUN AT NIGHT, moron.
> Anyone claiming otherwise is a steaming lying holowarming
> crap artist in need of some urgent education.
Yeah? Let's hear your credentials, rightard? Let me guess, you got
your Ph'D on a bar stool?
Michael Gordge
>
> Like I've been saying all along. Everyone is a denier. It's just a
> matter of degree.
So your denial that its all a fucking hoax is sitting at what degree?
MG
7
> 7 <website_...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote in
> news:cS30n.21542$Ym4...@text.news.virginmedia.com:
>
>> Harry Hope wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/global-
>> warming/Climate-change-far-worse-than-thought-before/articleshow/540695
>> 5.cms
>>>
>>> 3 January 2010
>>>
>>> Climate change far worse than thought before
>>
>>
>> The fraud against humanity exposed in Climategate is
>> far far worse than AGW fakers can hope to explain away.
>> No one still prosecuted over it yet as they flee
>> like roaches under the spotlight.
>>
>> You are also going against genuine science in this paper:
>>
>> http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0707/0707.1161v4.pdf
>
> And here is a genuine scientific paper that refutes yours:
>
> http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0802/0802.4324v1.pdf
> Therefore your guy is a fraud and a charlatan.
Fsck you and your crap AGW fraudulent science!!!!
It pretends to be science, but it is utter fraud.
The fakery begins with an assumption - that they
have an exact answer for how hot the planet should be.
Then when that doesn't work out, indicating their
models HAD UTTERLY FAILED, they remove the contra-indication
and then they blame it on holowarming gases
by fudging everything thereafter.
Isn't that just convenient?!!!!!
They take no account of oceans to store heat
and release it as water vapor later in the night.
The planet would then magically warm up to where it should be at.
Of course not for AGW fakers.
I mean which STUPID FSCKS taught them science?
Everyone knows if you stand on a cost, you get
a warm breeze at night. Two thirds of the planet
is water and water vapor carries the heat absorbed
in the day well into the night. The effects of
CO2 are pittance and not measurable above noise
when integrated over a 24 hour period.
1-20-2013
> In article <QvqdnXZJwNKqb93W...@rcn.net>,
> weather and which is climate?
>
Depends on how the man-made global warming/climate change kooks want to
spin it. Regardless, man-made global warming/climate change is a hoax.
I M @ good guy
Did you see;
"The studies say avoiding tropical deforestation could prevent up to 20
percent of carbon dioxide emissions."
If they just stop cutting trees maybe it
won't get so cold, this Global Warming is serious!
Its so hot, I'm freezing,
its so hot, I'm sneezing,
and its getting hotter all the time.
1-20-2013
> all the planet.
>
Sounds good.
Hope this helps!!! ;^D
John Q Public
<chine...@yahoo.com> said:
> In article <19590d84-16e0-4211...@34g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
> "f. barnes" <fre...@centurytel.net> wrote:
>
>> How are you going to avoid tropical deforestation without getting rid
>> a lot of people, billions of people probably? And by the way, there
>
> Make the forest more valuable to the people than firewood or farmland.
Yep wev'e heard that eco-tourism bullshit, puts millions of dollars
into local economies
requiring billions to survive!
Just so long as it isn't your kids starving ehh Freddy boy!
*FisherKing."
$Ym4....@text.news.virginmedia.com:
You're really a deranged ignoramous aren't ya?
--
I M @ good guy
I don't understand your reasoning, but then
I don't know how much of the land where trees
have been cut is being used to grow food.
In fact, considering the difficulty and cost
of removal of tree stumps, I have a problem
accepting that deforestation in the form of
clear cut to clear land to grow crops has ever
been used widely.
I believe almost all tree cutting in Brazil
at present is illegal lumber poaching and is
not related to any kind of agriculture, so the
stumps are not being removed, there is a big
government program to stop lumber poaching.
This leads me to believe there is lots of
misunderstanding about deforestation, in
the US the lumber companies, for their own
benefit, plant more trees than they cut.
And most trees have a life of less than
100 years, the idea that a tree is forever
is really a delusion.
All of the media articles about this are
futile, the governments essentially all try
to stop illegal cutting, and with helicopters
and patrol aircraft it would seem difficult
for the poachers.
John Q Public
You really need to research, forest area is burned thus fertilizing
soil which is then planted!
Tree stump removal. sheesh!
Siobhan Medeiros
I thought I just taught you.
The point is, for every "cold" story, there's a "warm" story - and
then some. That's why the average temperature of the planet is
>increasing<
Can't stand the taste of your own medicine, huh?
1-20-2013
And whether it's a "cold" story or a "warm" story, you man-made gw/cc
kooks attribute it to global warming, er - uh climate change - regardless.
For instance, much of the northern hemisphere is in a deep freeze - as
is expected this time of year. You gw/cc kooks claim the deep freeze is
due to global warming.
Then in the summer when heat and heat waves warm up the northern
hemisphere - as expected in the summer - you gw/cc kooks will once again
claim that the heat is due to, yep - you guessed it: global warming ;^D
The liberal, tree hugging, man-made gw/cc folks will attribute
*ANYTHING* to global warming, as long as it leads to higher taxes for
everyone to support their liberal agenda.
Ok, gotta go rake some more snow off the roof. They're saying we can
expect at least another foot of snow here by the end of the week - this
"global warming" is brutal! ;^D LOL!!!!
I M @ good guy
wrote:
I still don't understand, have you burned
a forest area? If the trees are 8 feet apart,
how is it possible to get around the stumps
and plow, plant, and till?
I rented a big wheel tractor once to pull
2 and 3 inch saplings out of the ground, but
was not able to pull a single one?
Have you ever farmed?
I M @ good guy
When did it start increasing again, was
2009 warmer than 1998?
Last Post
> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/global-warming/Cl...
>
> 3 January 2010
>
> Climate change far worse than thought before
>
> manifold after the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
> Climate Change (IPCC).
• IPCC has NO Science.
It is a political body with a green tinge.
>
> Since then, many of the 2,500-odd IPCC scientists have found climate
> change is progressing faster than the worst-case scenario they had
> predicted.
• The "2,500-odd" IPCC scientists were originally
52 and for Copenhagen that was boiled down
to 12. For the Copenhagen report 12 scientists
boiled down the the '07 report in an attempt to
panic all the small nations.
• Things like claiming imminent sea levels rising
to levels that at the minimum would take 866
years. (At the highest 2600 years). It made great
propaganda headlines, but in fact, it really is
nonsense.
— —
| In real science the burden of proof is always
| on the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
| neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
| iota of valid data for global warming nor have
| they provided data that climate change is being
| effected by commerce and industry, and not by
| natural phenomena
John Q Public
C'mon, do some research, slash & burn farming, just google it!
You think everybody plants like western farmers?
Transition Zone
>
> | In real science the burden of proof is always
> | on the proposer, never on the sceptics.
Really? Are the ice caps at their original size?
Last Post
• What/when was their "original size"???????
— —
| In real science the burden of proof is always
leona...@gmail.com
> On Jan 3, 8:47 am, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Harry Hope wrote:
>
> > >http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/global-
>
>
> > > 3 January 2010
>
> > > Climate change far worse than thought before
>
> > far far worse than AGW fakers can hope to explain away.
> > No one still prosecuted over it yet as they flee
> > like roaches under the spotlight.
>
> > You are also going against genuine science in this paper:
>
> >http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0707/0707.1161v4.pdf
>
> this paper to pieces.
• What 'real scientists'???
>
• Saturday I posted, with data, absolute proof
that AGW is a fraud.
> It appears you can't treat the Earth the same as the Sun. Go figure.
>
• There is a non-sequitur if ever I have seen one.
>
> > Holowarming is still a hoax and will remain a hoax
> > --------------------------------------------------
>
> It's fact and it will remain a fact.
• If it is , then prove it
>
> > It has moved into pseudo science arrived at by faking data,
> > sneaking into peer review process, getting opposition sacked
> > from their jobs by ringing up their owners and the like.
>
> Yeah, 97% of scientists did that. It's all a huge conspiracy. Like
> gravity and the round earth.
• There are only 4 "scientists did that": Mann,
Wigley,Jones and Briffa. There were a few
more that faked the data starting with Hansen,
his programmer Schmidt, and the team that
originally programmed the computer model
circa 1952±.
Plot of 19th century CO2 levels
Source: Jaworowski, NZCPR Research, 20 September 2008 p.20
image
Figure 2: Beck’s blended graph.
Source Energy and Environment, September 2008.
> I assume of course that "scientists" like Lindzen and the author of
> your bullshit paper are of course turning down the heaps of money
> being thrown at them by the fossil fuels industry.
>
• Lindzen is well funded by his foundation
• But nothing compares to the money graspers like
• Mann ($5+ mil) CRU, the CRU duo and Wigley
• Hansen gets 3 paycheques— Columbia U,
• GISS/NASA and Algore
> > Its a bad hoax at that. Its responsible for all
> > kind of unnecessary taxes and changes to the way
> > we live without any scientific or material proof.
> > Holowarming funding needs to be cut.
> > The holowarming crap needs to curtailed.
>
> > 99% of all greenhouse gases is water vapor H20.
> > It is the billions of liters of water in the form
> > of clouds in the sky. Two thirds of the planet is water
> > and thats why there is so much of it about.
>
> Three points:
>
> 1. CO2 is many thousands of times more effective at trapping heat
> than H20. That's why the planet Venus is hotter than Mercury even
> though it's twice the distance from the sun.
•
>
> 2. If true, so what?
>
> 3. An increase in heat due to CO2 increase would lead to a rise in
> humidity. It's called a positive feedback loop, moron. Know what a
> "runaway greenhouse effect" is?
>
>
>
> > The 0.05% of CO2 and other trace gases
> > DO NOT contribute to global warming AND CAN NEVER EVER
> > become a major factor to global warming.
>
> So says the grade 8 dropout. Every credible astronomer, physicist,
> and climatolgist on the planet says otherwise.
>
> > They don't have the heat capacity unlike H2O gas
> > to carry heat around the globe.
>
> No, idiot. CO2 is far more powerful as a greenhouse gas, and methane
> more powerful than CO2 (per molecule). Get yourself an education.
>
> > The holowarmers faking their science DO NOT integrate their results over
> > a 24 hour period - instead some fruit cakes science is used
> > calculating between 12:00 noon and 12:01 to get an answer
> > and deliberately avoid discussion on finer points of the erroneous methods.
>
> Fuck, you're stupid. Even if they did that (which they don't), a rise
> in temperature would be just as apparent.
>
> > A desert cools at the rate of 1 degree every 10 minutes
> > in the night when there no water vapor (i.e. cloud cover) around, despite
> > all the trace gases being the same because nearly all of the heat
> > around the planet is carried by water vapor.
>
> Because THERE'S NO SUN AT NIGHT, moron.
•• Those who would call others, "moron"
need only look in a mirror to see a real one.
• BTW: #7 is right and "everything you wrote is wrong"
>
> > Anyone claiming otherwise is a steaming lying holowarming
> > crap artist in need of some urgent education.
>
> Yeah? Let's hear your credentials, rightard? Let me guess, you got
> your Ph'D on a bar stool?
• Madeiros - once again you can eat some crow.
• Tyndall, John, in 1850 made a major discovery:—
1- CO2 absorbs solar radiation
2- Water vapour does not
• Since all of the atmospheric CO2 comes from
warm waters, linked_within_the_water_vapour
ergo: atmospheric CO2 can not absorb heat.
The heat comes from the warm water.
— —
I M @ good guy
wrote:
Ok, I will, but do you know of a government
that allows it, I don't see how any such activity
could be hidden.
Siobhan Medeiros
On the other hand, rightards claim that global warming is a fraud
every time there's a cold snap. Because they don't understand the
difference between weather and climate.
>
> The liberal, tree hugging, man-made gw/cc folks will attribute
> *ANYTHING* to global warming, as long as it leads to higher taxes for
> everyone to support their liberal agenda.
While rightards will attribute *ANYTHING* to a huge scientific
conspiracy, as long as their corporate masters tell them to.
> Ok, gotta go rake some more snow off the roof. They're saying we can
> expect at least another foot of snow here by the end of the week - this
> "global warming" is brutal! ;^D LOL!!!!
And yet another retard doesn't understand the difference between
weather and climate.
Siobhan Medeiros
> China Blue Öyster Cult wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <QvqdnXZJwNKqb93WnZ2dnUVZ_udi4...@rcn.net>,
Yeah. those glaciers aren't reaaaallllyyyy melting. It's just that
every scientist and journalist on the planet is in kahoots"
Last Post
>
> On the other hand, rightards claim that global warming is a fraud
> every time there's a cold snap. Because they don't understand the
> difference between weather and climate.
• HO, Ho, ho, that's rich
Weather_is_a_product_of_Climate.
I guess you do not know that.
— —
mrbawana2u
> [yawn/flush]
Keerist, you ancient pathetic fucktard,
you're old, senile, stupid, and a lib-turd shit eater.
*FisherKing."
ec908b...@u41g2000yqe.googlegroups.com:
Potty mouth.
Transition Zone
>
> On the other hand, rightards claim that global warming is a fraud
> every time there's a cold snap. Because they don't understand the
> difference between weather and climate.
They understand, they are just paid to quiet the controversy so as to
pollute easier. They know that the term "global warming" involves the
proven melting of the ice caps from what they once were. Notice that
not Repub has disproven what's in the Al Gore documentary "An
inconvenient truth"? If they could, don't you think that they would
have
tried it now?
About the best thing repubs have done to date is agree with global
warming and then say that it will help reduce deaths among the poor.
(now how pathetic is that)
leona...@gmail.com
>
>
> NEW DELHI: Global alarm over climate change and its effects has risen
> manifold after the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
> Climate Change (IPCC).
> Since then, many of the 2,500-odd IPCC scientists have found climate
> change is progressing faster than the worst-case scenario they had
> predicted.
Ø Actually only 52 signed on to the '07 report
and about ± 8 did the rehash for Copenhagen
>
> The most significant recent findings are:
>
> * Global carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels in 2008 were 40
> percent higher than in 1990.
Ø Atmospheric man-made CO2 amounted to ± 14.1 ppm
a mere trace of the overall CO2 content. CO2 is the
basic compound that supports ALL growth on Earth
>
> The recent Copenhagen Accord said warming should be contained within
> two degrees, but every year of delayed action increases the chances of
> exceeding the two-degree warming mark.
Ø Silly nonsense. There has been no real warming since "mediaeval warm
period" that Jones, Briffa and Mann were in such haste to "disappear"
> Carbon dioxide is the main greenhouse gas (GHG) warming the
> atmosphere.
Ø H2O (97%) is the main greenhouse gas
(GHG) none of which have any effect
on climate but do have a great deal of
influence on growth and life on Earth
> * To keep within the two-degree limit, global GHG emissions need to
> peak between 2015 and 2020 and then decline rapidly.
Ø CO2 emissions from human sources are something less than 3.5% So no
matter what those fools do, they will have little effect
> * The studies show extreme hot temperature events have increased,
> extreme cold temperature events have decreased, heavy rain or snow has
> become heavier, while there has been increase in drought as well.
Ø All extreme climate events have increased.
All part of the prelude to reglacification
> They also show that the intensity of cyclones has increased in the
> past three decades in line with rising tropical ocean temperatures.
Ø Another indication of the oncoming reglaciation
>
> * Satellites show recent global average sea level rise (3.4 mm/year
> over the past 15 years) to be about 80 percent above IPCC predictions.
> This acceleration is consistent with a doubling in contribution from
> melting of glaciers, ice caps, and the Greenland and West-Antarctic
> ice sheets.
Ø BULLSHIT
> New estimates of ocean heat uptake are 50 percent higher than previous
> calculations.
Ø Good! the warmer the oceans the more CO2
in the clouds the better for the crops and for
life in general
> Ocean acidification and ocean de-oxygenation due to global warming
> have been identified as potentially devastating for large parts of the
> marine ecosystem.
Ø Silly nonsense
>
> * By 2100, global sea level is likely to rise at least twice as much
> as projected by the IPCC in 2007;
>
> if emissions are unmitigated the rise may well exceed one metre.
Ø GHG emissions have ZERO to do with climate
no matter what the IPCC/CRU/NASA/AGW
crews claim. They have built careers around
falsehoods and they have too much at stake.
Spinning it out as long as they can might avoid
prison cells
> The sea level will continue to rise for centuries after global
> temperatures have been stabilised, and several metres of sea level
> rise must be expected over the next few centuries.
Ø ROTFLMAO the sea levels will start a
downward trend starting about 2100
> * A wide array of satellite and ice measurements demonstrate that both
> the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are melting at an increasing
> rate.
Ø Ssssuuuure the satellite that took a razor thin
layer of black ice for a 'lake the size of
California" — no one except AGW fools
would believe it
> Melting of glaciers and ice-caps in other parts of the world has also
> accelerated since 1990.
Ø Bullshit
>
> The contribution of glaciers and ice-caps to global sea level rise has
> increased from 0.8 mm per year in the 1990s to 1.2 mm per year today.
Ø Bullshit —— they can't even measure that small. Less than 1/2 inch
to less than 3/4 inch per decade
> The adjustment of glaciers and ice caps to present climate alone is
> expected to raise sea level by about 18 cm.
>
Ø IOW the IPCC computer models say glaciers
and ice caps are melting in the summertime
and their manipulators pretend it was winter.
>
> Antarctica is also losing ice mass at an increasing rate, mostly from
> the West Antarctic ice sheet due to increased ice flow.
>
> Antarctica is currently contributing to sea level rise at a rate
> nearly equal to Greenland.
>
> * Summer-time melting of Arctic sea-ice has accelerated far beyond the
> expectations of climate models.
Ø Bullshit
>
> The area of summertime sea-ice 2007-09 was about 40 percent less than
> the average prediction from IPCC climate models in the 2007 report.
Ø the summer sea ice was 40% MORE than the
IPCC prediction. The IPCC climate models
are useless
> * The studies say avoiding tropical deforestation could prevent up to
> 20 percent of carbon dioxide emissions.
Ø Bullshit
>
> * New ice-core records confirm the importance of GHG for temperatures
> on earth, and show that carbon dioxide levels are higher now than they
> have been during the last 800,000 years.
Ø Absolutely false
leona...@gmail.com
> Siobhan Medeiros wrote:
>
> > On the other hand, rightards claim that global warming is a fraud
> > every time there's a cold snap. Because they don't understand the
> > difference between weather and climate.
Ø 'weather' is a product of 'climate'
>
> They understand, they are just paid to quiet the controversy so as to
> pollute easier. They know that the term "global warming"
Ø is something that has not happened in 100,000 years
> (now how pathetic is that)
Ø Yes you ARE pretty pathetic
Bawana
> mrbawana2u <mrbawan...@gmail.com> wrote in news:6a009824-0a35-4eae-ada7-
> ec908b448...@u41g2000yqe.googlegroups.com:
>
> > On Jan 3, 10:14 pm, "*FisherKunt.\"" <Gill...@Brazil.com> wrote:
> >> [yawn/flush]
>
> > Keerist, you ancient pathetic fucktard,
> > you're old, senile, stupid, and a lib-turd shit eater.
>
> Potty mouth.
with an accurate description of the tardKing.