Arguments about climate change

youngdan wrote:

http://www.newsmax.com/brennan/global_warming_Gore/2008/12/24/165048.html

CNN is just Ted Turner and his UN foolishness. Most media is talking about a new ice age.

The likes of CNN and the NY Times on the left are going bankrupt because fewer believe their rubbish every day.

Fox News and THE NY Post and their likes on the right are going bankrupt because even fewer believe their rubbish every day.

If those beetles in Colorado survived the freeze of the moment then they are SUPERBEETLES

Its NASA data youngdan. I know you will be happy with that as you often quote NASA as a reliable source.

http://www.flixya.com/video/1467718/NASA_%7C_Sea_Ice_2008

Did I not link to plenty of NASA numerous times already where they were saying the opposite.

Europe will probably freeze to an icicle this winter. Wait and see, it will be blamed on global warming.

Is it not time to realise that you are being fed a line of rubbish on every subject or will you still believe as starvation kicks in.

youngdan wrote:

Did I not link to plenty of NASA numerous times already where they were saying the opposite.

Europe will probably freeze to an icicle this winter. Wait and see, it will be blamed on global warming.

Is it not time to realise that you are being fed a line of rubbish on every subject or will you still believe as starvation kicks in.

No, I don't think you did. Would like like to provide a link now?

I don't share your apparent belief that there is an evil and all powerful mastermind pulling all the strings in the universe.

I know you don't but you are going to find out in a few weeks will you not.

Every time you chirp in it makes my job easier

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/02/19/january-2008-4-sources-say-globally-cooler-in-the-past-12-months/

This includes 4 sourses one of which is NASA


This is discussed in the article

http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Widescale+Global+Cooling/article10866.htm

Maybe the loons from the 70s are finally right and the ice age is coming

http://denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm


The problem with you Cactus is you believe everything but you eyes.

Enjoy the wakeup in the new year

http://misanthropicscott.wordpress.com/2008/02/29/global-warming-denier-proves-global-warming-is-real/

This is a better reply than i could give you to the weatherman's blog. One month is not a trend.

I think we have all agreed that we are in a 10 year cooling trend. Are you following the tread at all

youngdan wrote:

I think we have all agreed that we are in a 10 year cooling trend. Are you following the tread at all

We all agreed that a couple of months ago. The same people who predict the 10 year cool period also predict that warming will kick back in in line with the long trend after the cool period is over.

What you are saying now is the Earth is cooling.

Damn right it is. Tell the other 4 Amigos that it is cooling and they blowing hot air won't change that.

At least you have woken up.

We shall see how long this trend lasts when the figures for 2008 are released

youngdan wrote:

What you are saying now is the Earth is cooling.

Damn right it is. Tell the other 4 Amigos that it is cooling and they blowing hot air won't change that.

At least you have woken up.

We shall see how long this trend lasts when the figures for 2008 are released

Oh are you still wittering on with your ill-informed nonsense?

Listen to the eejit that is afraid to return to the iseq thread because he was saying it was going higher for the last 6 thousand points drop.

That reminds I will be posting my predictions for 2009 over there shortly. You don't have the credibility or balls to predict.

Have you not noticed that very few is worried about global warming anymore. Why don't you take a walk tonight without a cap. Don't worry about the brain freezing as it appears well insulated in your case.

youngdan wrote:

Listen to the eejit that is afraid to return to the iseq thread because he was saying it was going higher for the last 6 thousand points drop.

That reminds I will be posting my predictions for 2009 over there shortly. You don't have the credibility or balls to predict.

Have you not noticed that very few is worried about global warming anymore. Why don't you take a walk tonight without a cap. Don't worry about the brain freezing as it appears well insulated in your case.

O. K. boys, back up to the top of Auditor #'s debate triangle plee-uz.

My money is on your financial predications youngdan and on Ard Taoiseach's climate trends.

Thank you both. Did you have a good Christmas?

Actually I am looking forward to A-T's predictions for 2009. He got the call wrong on the markets because he was too optimistic. That is not the same as not having a good knowledge and a good interest in the economic front.

He refuses to talk on a subject he knows and likes but sticks his snout in on things he knows nothing about.

Time for 10 predictions from everybody and it will be a good thread I figure.

I had a great Christmas Cactus. Some beautiful gifts. A full body set of thermal underclothes to withstand the cold, A book "How to win friends and influence people" by Dale Carnegie and a framed picture of Armstong and Aldrin on the moon from my motherinlaw.

Ho Ho the Mistletoe

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/3982101/2008-was-the-year-man-made-global-warming-was-disproved.html

It is great to see the tin foil hat wearing loons of global warming being exposed. Everyday I read more articles laughing at them

youngdan wrote:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/3982101/2008-was-the-year-man-made-global-warming-was-disproved.html

It is great to see the tin foil hat wearing loons of global warming being exposed. Everyday I read more articles laughing at them

And most of them by the same authors. Christopher Booker, eh?

youngdan wrote:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/3982101/2008-was-the-year-man-made-global-warming-was-disproved.html

It is great to see the tin foil hat wearing loons of global warming being exposed. Everyday I read more articles laughing at them

Wake up youngdan. Your "Manhattan" scientists are all sponsored by Exxon. Would you ever check these things out ?

Yah Exxon is making the global warming loons look bad. Even the reporter is working for Exxon. I am working for Exxon.

Exxon made it snow in the Alps.

Lay off the conspiracy yheories Cactus, if Exxon was that powerfull why is oil at 35 dollars or is that part of the lizards plan as well.

It could all be a giant conspiracy by big oil involving thousands to deny warming, or else it could be that you were fed a load of lies

youngdan wrote:

Yah Exxon is making the global warming loons look bad. Even the reporter is working for Exxon. I am working for Exxon.

Exxon made it snow in the Alps.

Lay off the conspiracy yheories Cactus, if Exxon was that powerfull why is oil at 35 dollars or is that part of the lizards plan as well.

It could all be a giant conspiracy by big oil involving thousands to deny warming, or else it could be that you were fed a load of lies

Well, have a logical think about it, youngdan. Has an oil company any reason to prefer people not to worry about the effects of using lots of oil? Would it be worth hiring a PR company - indeed, the same ones as the tobacco industry use - to maybe stop people worrying so much?

Take your time.

youngdan wrote:

Exxon made it snow in the Alps.

Insufficiently, apparently...

Are you saying the person who wrote the article for the Telegraph mocking the global warming people is working for Exxon,

have a logical think about it.

Take your time.

youngdan wrote:

Are you saying the person who wrote the article for the Telegraph mocking the global warming people is working for Exxon,

have a logical think about it.

Take your time.

No, I'm not suggesting that - or that you do - or indeed that my mother does. I'm suggesting that (a) Exxon pays for PR which aims to discredit climate change science, and (b) funds scientists for the same reason.

People like Christopher Booker are contrarians, although not in the context of a Murdoch publication, and particularly not in the context of the Telegraph.

And I suppose the global warming scientists at the UN and elsewhere don't get paid.

youngdan wrote:

And I suppose the global warming scientists at the UN and elsewhere don't get paid.

The hundreds of thousands of scientists worldwide who make up the consensus opinion of science on climate change are paid by hundreds of different sources - many of them universities, and many of those scientists have academic tenure and freedom of speech. Yours would have to be an absolutely ubiquitous conspiracy.

Whatever these so called hundreds of thousands understand I bet they understand one thing, What side their bread is buttered on.

youngdan wrote:

Whatever these so called hundreds of thousands understand I bet they understand one thing, What side their bread is buttered on.

youngdan, all that's involved in my "conspiracy" is a couple of oil companies (deep pockets, vested interests) funding some PR and a handful of scientists. Contrarian journalists (and those who simply haven't changed their minds) do the rest. Libertarians and economic right-wingers are always going to suck up anything that lets them off regulation, so there's a ready-made audience.

What's involved in yours is hundreds of funding institutions, hundreds of thousands of scientists across decades of research, hundreds of thousands of independently convinced science graduates like myself - all for the sake of...what...governments? Governments who up to ten years ago opposed the whole idea - not forgetting that the Bush administration resolutely opposed climate change action in the US, and undeniably suppressed scientific findings it didn't like, which included climate change evidence. For what? So that they can raise taxes - except they haven't.

You're talking through your hat, which will be handy, since it will allow you to eat your words and your hat simultaneously over the next decade or two.

Which I will gladly do if 2 things happen.

1. If the present cooling trend reverses and it is proven that it is due to CO2 and not say solar activity which would effect all the planets.

2. If the taxes I expect fail to materialise.

Since the argument about cause is likely to continue, I will watch the taxes, they will be obvious to see if they are levied.

You of course say it is not about the money