i've actually read that we are on a brink of a cooling shift.Scientists have theorized that the suns magnetic field is due to undergo a reduction in size as part of the natural cycle or something. This would cause dramatic cooling.
Personally I believe the whole global warming panic is caused by governments worrying about diminishing rescources.
Global Warming does not exist, if it does it is canceled by global cooling/dimming. The Earth is flat. Rowbotham said so.
And now a delicious wisdom-nugget from our beloved village idiot:Quote from: Tom BishopGlobal Warming does not exist, if it does it is canceled by global cooling/dimming. The Earth is flat. Rowbotham said so.
Deleting my post will not silence me, Engy. Please try again.Then, repost?
climate models are ridiculous. None of them are ever right, and every model predicts something completely different. To me, that's not science, it's guesswork.
Deleting my post will not silence me, Engy. Please try again.Then, repost?
Global warming exists to fill in the Cold War "crisis" gap.
Just thought I'd add something to the debate...You have no understanding of what climate change is, do you?
I was watching the news this morning, and there was a story on "Scotlands climate change bill"
Through the report, phrases like "the climate crisis" and "the global warming phenomenon" were used.
After this report, the next item was the weather: "Temperatures are set to drop next week..."
Needless to say, I lol'd.
Fail.Fail is relative, as is your opinion.
Fail.Fail is related...
Fail is relative, as is your opinion.
considering the volume of CO2 in the atmosphere, I highly doubt it has an effect.
Methane and water vapour have higher concentrations in the atmosphere, and produce more of a warming trend.
In fact, the output of methane from termite mounds is colossal. Since the weight of termites is more than the weight of humans, we could argue that termite mounds affect global climate more than we do.
climate models are ridiculous. None of them are ever right, and every model predicts something completely different. To me, that's not science, it's guesswork.
I read the news and the scientists predicted that in 3 years, all the glacial ice in the Arctic Circle will melt, causing catastrophic effects (disrupting the hydrologic cycle in the oceans and rising the sea level). They first predicted it will be 500 years, but now they come down to 3 years. Exaggerating the concept, indeed. However, since these scientists are experts in the subject and their explanations could be plausible, the whole "global warming" idea still remain true.
SUSPEND JUDGEMENT
Just thought I'd add something to the debate...
I was watching the news this morning, and there was a story on "Scotlands climate change bill"
Through the report, phrases like "the climate crisis" and "the global warming phenomenon" were used.
After this report, the next item was the weather: "Temperatures are set to drop next week..."
Needless to say, I lol'd.
Just thought I'd add something to the debate...
I was watching the news this morning, and there was a story on "Scotlands climate change bill"
Through the report, phrases like "the climate crisis" and "the global warming phenomenon" were used.
After this report, the next item was the weather: "Temperatures are set to drop next week..."
Needless to say, I lol'd.
Global warming isn't about specific daily temperatures, it's about a very small average increase of temperatures globally over a long period of time. It's interesting to not though, that the average lowest temperature in Antarctica in 2006 was -70 degrees C and in 2007 it was -30. According to global warming "theory" the polar regions are affected much more than the temperate and tropical regions. A 40 degree rise in temperatures over 1 year is pretty significant I would say (this is according to New Scientist).
Just thought I'd add something to the debate...
I was watching the news this morning, and there was a story on "Scotlands climate change bill"
Through the report, phrases like "the climate crisis" and "the global warming phenomenon" were used.
After this report, the next item was the weather: "Temperatures are set to drop next week..."
Needless to say, I lol'd.
Global warming isn't about specific daily temperatures, it's about a very small average increase of temperatures globally over a long period of time. It's interesting to not though, that the average lowest temperature in Antarctica in 2006 was -70 degrees C and in 2007 it was -30. According to global warming "theory" the polar regions are affected much more than the temperate and tropical regions. A 40 degree rise in temperatures over 1 year is pretty significant I would say (this is according to New Scientist).
i know ::)
But you don't think that it's funny that they run a report on global warming and then immediately after tell us it's going to be cold next week. Irony, anyone?
I read the news and the scientists predicted that in 3 years, all the glacial ice in the Arctic Circle will melt, causing catastrophic effects (disrupting the hydrologic cycle in the oceans and rising the sea level). They first predicted it will be 500 years, but now they come down to 3 years. Exaggerating the concept, indeed. However, since these scientists are experts in the subject and their explanations could be plausible, the whole "global warming" idea still remain true.
SUSPEND JUDGEMENT
Which scientists predicted this and where? Scientists are not infallible.
SUSPEND JUDGEMENT
Just thought I'd add something to the debate...
I was watching the news this morning, and there was a story on "Scotlands climate change bill"
Through the report, phrases like "the climate crisis" and "the global warming phenomenon" were used.
After this report, the next item was the weather: "Temperatures are set to drop next week..."
Needless to say, I lol'd.
Global warming isn't about specific daily temperatures, it's about a very small average increase of temperatures globally over a long period of time. It's interesting to not though, that the average lowest temperature in Antarctica in 2006 was -70 degrees C and in 2007 it was -30. According to global warming "theory" the polar regions are affected much more than the temperate and tropical regions. A 40 degree rise in temperatures over 1 year is pretty significant I would say (this is according to New Scientist).
i know ::)
But you don't think that it's funny that they run a report on global warming and then immediately after tell us it's going to be cold next week. Irony, anyone?
No I don't think it's funny. I also think you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, and instead of putting forward ignorant opinions that make you look stupid (such as the claim that termites are responsible for global warming), you should do some research so that you can understand the process that is actually occurring.
Guys let's keep the spam posts down in here please.
Sure, but we can't assess the credibility of your claims if we don't know where they're coming from.Again, learn to read a post.
I read the news and the scientists predicted that in 3 years, all the glacial ice in the Arctic Circle will melt, causing catastrophic effects (disrupting the hydrologic cycle in the oceans and rising the sea level). They first predicted it will be 500 years, but now they come down to 3 years. Exaggerating the concept, indeed. However, since these scientists are experts in the subject and their explanations could be plausible, the whole "global warming" idea still remain true.When I wrote "read", obviously I was referring to a newspaper.
If you read that in a local newspaper, most likely it's a gross exaggeration on the part of the media, rather than the scientists.I hope your eye degree is low, so you can see the word "exaggerating" in my post.
If you read it in a scientific journal, it would be good to know which one, and what the evidence behind the claims were.No, it's not from a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Hence, I suspend judgment because there are not enough evidence to make a decision/conclusion.
Guys let's keep the spam posts down in here please.
tl;dr