|
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man
Loogypicker wrote:
On Nov 4, 6:14 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation That does NOTHING to scientifically prove that man has had no impact on global warming. If you follow all of the long term sciences such as Archeology, Paleontology, etc. you will see that all of them show the long term cyclic variation in the climate. In fact from those same sciences, the climate is now at a 100k year peak, and is about to take the plunge to a much colder climate. One of the recent studies that confirmed this trend was the study of the settlement in what is now the English Channel and the North Sea. If these algorian and obamodytes really believed in global warming they would be supporting the operations of nuclear plant, be 100% behind the construction of new nuclear plants, and not closing the western waste storage facility. The only possible conclusion from their actions is that climate change is nothing more that a new way to tax the American Voter. |
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man
On Nov 5, 11:04*am, Keith Nuttle wrote:
Loogypicker wrote: On Nov 4, 6:14 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. *http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation That does NOTHING to scientifically prove that man has had no impact on global warming. If you follow all of the long term sciences such as Archeology, Paleontology, etc. you will see that all of them show the long term cyclic variation in the climate. *In fact from those same sciences, the climate is now at a 100k year peak, and is about to take the plunge to a much colder climate. One of the recent studies that confirmed this trend was the study of the * settlement in what is now the English Channel and the North Sea. If these algorian and obamodytes really believed in global warming they would be supporting the operations of nuclear plant, be 100% behind the construction of new nuclear plants, and not closing the western waste storage facility. *The only possible conclusion from their actions is that climate change is nothing more that a new way to tax the American Voter. Loogy: Are you asking someone to prove a negative? |
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 06:38:19 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker wrote: Sure enough! Now, tell me in the above where it scientifically states without a doubt that man has not aided in global warming. Never mind. Unfortunate - I thought you'd want to actually talk some science and maybe we could have come to some sort of conclusion. I'm not playing the semantics game with you. "semantics"???? It's the whole argument! |
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man
Tosk wrote:
In article 1ea92096-0803-421c-ae9d-d5dbc4ab9014 @k4g2000yqb.googlegroups.com, says... On Nov 5, 11:04 am, Keith Nuttle wrote: Loogypicker wrote: On Nov 4, 6:14 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation That does NOTHING to scientifically prove that man has had no impact on global warming. If you follow all of the long term sciences such as Archeology, Paleontology, etc. you will see that all of them show the long term cyclic variation in the climate. In fact from those same sciences, the climate is now at a 100k year peak, and is about to take the plunge to a much colder climate. One of the recent studies that confirmed this trend was the study of the settlement in what is now the English Channel and the North Sea. If these algorian and obamodytes really believed in global warming they would be supporting the operations of nuclear plant, be 100% behind the construction of new nuclear plants, and not closing the western waste storage facility. The only possible conclusion from their actions is that climate change is nothing more that a new way to tax the American Voter. Loogy: Are you asking someone to prove a negative? It seems that is a big part of his offense on this issue. Part of the problem is partisanship. He seems to trust "his" scientists over any others, his are right, everyone else is wrong. At least we stopped hearing the "settled science" bull****... For now anyway. No, it's not proving a negative. Show me your "science" that states that A) Global Warming is not occuring B) Man's pollution has no affect on global warming. |
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man
Frogwatch wrote:
On Nov 5, 11:04 am, Keith Nuttle wrote: Loogypicker wrote: On Nov 4, 6:14 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation That does NOTHING to scientifically prove that man has had no impact on global warming. If you follow all of the long term sciences such as Archeology, Paleontology, etc. you will see that all of them show the long term cyclic variation in the climate. In fact from those same sciences, the climate is now at a 100k year peak, and is about to take the plunge to a much colder climate. One of the recent studies that confirmed this trend was the study of the settlement in what is now the English Channel and the North Sea. If these algorian and obamodytes really believed in global warming they would be supporting the operations of nuclear plant, be 100% behind the construction of new nuclear plants, and not closing the western waste storage facility. The only possible conclusion from their actions is that climate change is nothing more that a new way to tax the American Voter. Loogy: Are you asking someone to prove a negative? No. |
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man
Keith Nuttle wrote:
Loogypicker wrote: On Nov 4, 6:14 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation That does NOTHING to scientifically prove that man has had no impact on global warming. If you follow all of the long term sciences such as Archeology, Paleontology, etc. you will see that all of them show the long term cyclic variation in the climate. In fact from those same sciences, the climate is now at a 100k year peak, and is about to take the plunge to a much colder climate. One of the recent studies that confirmed this trend was the study of the settlement in what is now the English Channel and the North Sea. If these algorian and obamodytes really believed in global warming they would be supporting the operations of nuclear plant, be 100% behind the construction of new nuclear plants, and not closing the western waste storage facility. The only possible conclusion from their actions is that climate change is nothing more that a new way to tax the American Voter. Again, (and again) no one is saying that cyclic warming/cooling events haven't taken place. BUT, there is lots of data that shows a direct correlation between CO2 levels and warming. It just amazes me that some just shove this data under the table and instead let the republican party talking heads act as their scientists. |
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man
NotNow wrote:
Keith Nuttle wrote: Loogypicker wrote: On Nov 4, 6:14 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation That does NOTHING to scientifically prove that man has had no impact on global warming. If you follow all of the long term sciences such as Archeology, Paleontology, etc. you will see that all of them show the long term cyclic variation in the climate. In fact from those same sciences, the climate is now at a 100k year peak, and is about to take the plunge to a much colder climate. One of the recent studies that confirmed this trend was the study of the settlement in what is now the English Channel and the North Sea. If these algorian and obamodytes really believed in global warming they would be supporting the operations of nuclear plant, be 100% behind the construction of new nuclear plants, and not closing the western waste storage facility. The only possible conclusion from their actions is that climate change is nothing more that a new way to tax the American Voter. Again, (and again) no one is saying that cyclic warming/cooling events haven't taken place. BUT, there is lots of data that shows a direct correlation between CO2 levels and warming. It just amazes me that some just shove this data under the table and instead let the republican party talking heads act as their scientists. These same long term studies show that the changing Carbon Dioxide levels were occurring long before man, started to build the current society. Carbon Dioxide levels are cyclic just like the temperatures. Even the privative climate computer models can not explain the cooling that has occurred in the past 10 years when the Carbon dioxide levels are supposedly raising. IF man knew EVER VARIABLE affecting the climate and he had a SUFFICIENTLY SOPHISTICATED computer model that showed global warming then we should act, until then anything we do is likely to make the situation worst as we don't know what we are doing. We have picked a couple of dozen variables out of millions and are trying to predict the future. It is like me modeling the stock market on my 386 laptop and betting a a million dollars on stocks that my computer says is going up. |
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man made:
On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 11:26:08 -0500, NotNow wrote:
Tosk wrote: In article 1ea92096-0803-421c-ae9d-d5dbc4ab9014 @k4g2000yqb.googlegroups.com, says... On Nov 5, 11:04 am, Keith Nuttle wrote: Loogypicker wrote: On Nov 4, 6:14 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation That does NOTHING to scientifically prove that man has had no impact on global warming. If you follow all of the long term sciences such as Archeology, Paleontology, etc. you will see that all of them show the long term cyclic variation in the climate. In fact from those same sciences, the climate is now at a 100k year peak, and is about to take the plunge to a much colder climate. One of the recent studies that confirmed this trend was the study of the settlement in what is now the English Channel and the North Sea. If these algorian and obamodytes really believed in global warming they would be supporting the operations of nuclear plant, be 100% behind the construction of new nuclear plants, and not closing the western waste storage facility. The only possible conclusion from their actions is that climate change is nothing more that a new way to tax the American Voter. Loogy: Are you asking someone to prove a negative? It seems that is a big part of his offense on this issue. Part of the problem is partisanship. He seems to trust "his" scientists over any others, his are right, everyone else is wrong. At least we stopped hearing the "settled science" bull****... For now anyway. No, it's not proving a negative. Show me your "science" that states that A) Global Warming is not occuring B) Man's pollution has no affect on global warming. Loogy, don't the words 'not' and 'no' imply negativity? How can you possibly say you aren't asking for the proof of a negative? If and when you figure out how to do that, let jps know so he can 'prove' there is no God. -- Loogy says: Conservative = Good Liberal = Bad I agree. John H |
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man made:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 06:40:44 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote: On Nov 4, 9:49*pm, BAR wrote: In article , says... Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. *http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm I noticed this was published in the great scientific journal... CommonDreams.org is an Internet-based progressive news and grassroots activism organization, founded in 1997. We are a nonprofit, progressive, independent and nonpartisan organization. Uh, Common dreams did nothing more than put the data, BY OTHERS on it's sight.: Tim Barnett, a marine physicist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego The study involved scientists from the US Department of Energy, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, as well as the Met Office's Hadley Center Ruth Curry, from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Wonder why it wasn't published. Couldn't they pay someone to publish it? Your cite had a definite anti-Bush sentiment not normally found in scientific studies. Did you notice that also? -- Loogy says: Conservative = Good Liberal = Bad I agree. John H |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:23 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com