Real survey of scientists about Global Warming

[imported_K3N]

Today, a psychological fraud has been bestowed upon man. A fraud revolving around the Matlthusian myths, of pro population control and the limiting of technological growth. This fraud is being used by the ruling class to further return the commoners (a.k.a the middle and the lower class) to a state of feudalism. This fraud is global warming.

As the Earth continued to get warmer in the early 2000s, astronomers discovered that the moons of Saturn and Jupiter were experiencing higher temperatures and as a result, small portions of solid matter, ice in particular, were partially melting. The polar ice caps of Mars were reported to be contracting as well. Yet the corporate media will choose to only report one side of the matter. Here is NASA article reporting on the polar ice caps of Mars melting in the early 2000s. Here is a NASA article in 2003 reporting on the melting ice caps on Mars http://science.nasa.gov/headli...03/07aug_southpole.htm

It turns out that the Sun is infact the impetus behind global warming, not some Malthusian myth of over-production as result of over population. As the Sun develops a lower amount of sunspot activities, Astronomers are noticing the ice caps on Mars are now expanding not melting anymore. Even here on Planet Earth, places are once again experiencing cold harsh weather, with places like the desert of Las Vegas experiencing a great amount of snow in late 2008, not seen since 30 years ago.

Global Warming is a Malthusian myth used to hamper the progress of humanity, and induce upon the commoners, a life of scarcity, where in the coming decades, a life of feudalism could be brought upon the commoners. Obama, puppet of the same puppeteers of Jimmy Carter, the Trilateral Commission, will stop at nothing to further drive down the standards of living as well as increase it's cost.

Informative author, Webster G. Tarpley further goes about this in the following video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...k3ntegra.blogspot.com/

 

[fskimospy]

K3N, you do realize that you only hurt the position of whatever issue you're trying to support when you let fly with these insane conspiracy posts, right?

 

[smokeyjoe]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Your ending analogy is not good either. Predicting long term trends is very different than predicting short term ones. How many hits is Alex Rodriguez going to get on opening day? I have no idea, and would never try to predict that. It's a pretty safe prediction that he's going to hit somewhere around .300 for the year though.

Comparing a global weather trend with one person in a baseball season is a stronger analogy?

Originally posted by: K3N

It turns out that the Sun is infact the impetus behind global warming, not some Malthusian myth of over-production as result of over population. As the Sun develops a lower amount of sunspot activities, Astronomers are noticing the ice caps on Mars are now expanding not melting anymore. Even here on Planet Earth, places are once again experiencing cold harsh weather, with places like the desert of Las Vegas experiencing a great amount of snow in late 2008, not seen since 30 years ago.

Global Warming is a Malthusian myth used to hamper the progress of humanity, and induce upon the commoners, a life of scarcity, where in the coming decades, a life of feudalism could be brought upon the commoners. Obama, puppet of the same puppeteers of Jimmy Carter, the Trilateral Commission, will stop at nothing to further drive down the standards of living as well as increase it's cost.

I wonder what all the alarmists will say when we see clear evidence the earth is going into a cooling cycle again. I figure they will take credit for the how "green" we made ourselves, even though things like cap-and-trade carbon reduction plans (in particular EU ETS) have shown little to no improvement in reducing CO2.

I don't disagree with there being an ultimate goal by a group of people to form a world government. Rockefeller (forget which one) and James Warburg have openly stated this to be so.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: smokeyjoe

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Your ending analogy is not good either. Predicting long term trends is very different than predicting short term ones. How many hits is Alex Rodriguez going to get on opening day? I have no idea, and would never try to predict that. It's a pretty safe prediction that he's going to hit somewhere around .300 for the year though.

Comparing a global weather trend with one person in a baseball season is a stronger analogy?

I wonder what all the alarmists will say when we see clear evidence the earth is going into a cooling cycle again. I figure they will take credit for the how "green" we made ourselves, even though things like cap-and-trade carbon reduction plans (in particular EU ETS) have shown little to no improvement in reducing CO2.

I don't disagree with there being an ultimate goal by a group of people to form a world government. Rockefeller (forget which one) and James Warburg have openly stated this to be so.

Yes, it's a statement about the difference between micro and macro predictions that is independent of subject matter. I simply used baseball because it's easy to relate to. If you would like a more weather based example, it is difficult to pick if it is going to rain any one particular day of the year, but the amount of rainfall for the whole year in an area is far easier to predict.

As for the whole one world government thing, all I can say is that you really don't want to throw your hat in with K3N. That's some insane conspiracy theory shit.

 

[imported_K3N]

How can one just look at 100 years of temperature data, and draw a preposterous conclusion when the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, and over 99.5% of the species ever existed has gone extinct.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: K3N
How can one just look at 100 years of temperature data, and draw a preposterous conclusion when the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, and over 99.5% of the species ever existed has gone extinct.

Wait a minute... you... you of all people... are complaining about someone drawing preposterous conclusions based on limited data?

This is awesome, you've come full circle.

 

[NeoV]

Ken... I mean K3n, about your little "the sun is causing global warming" issue -

Some uncertainty remains about the role of natural variations in causing climate change. Solar variability certainly plays a minor role, but it looks like only a quarter of the recent variations can be attributed to the Sun. At most. During the initial discovery period of global warming, the magnitude of the influence of increased activity on the Sun was not well determined.

sun image EIT Solar irradiance changes have been measured reliably by satellites for only 30 years. These precise observations show changes of a few tenths of a percent that depend on the level of activity in the 11-year solar cycle. Changes over longer periods must be inferred from other sources. Estimates of earlier variations are important for calibrating the climate models. While a component of recent global warming may have been caused by the increased solar activity of the last solar cycle, that component was very small compared to the effects of additional greenhouse gases. According to a NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) press release, "...the solar increases do not have the ability to cause large global temperature increases...greenhouse gases are indeed playing the dominant role..." The Sun is once again less bright as we approach solar minimum, yet global warming continues.

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/glob-warm.html

I'm going to go out a limb and say that they have a slight bit more knowledge than your pea-brain does about this stuff

I'm also fairly certain that when they talk about air composition from hundreds of thousands, and even millions of years ago - they aren't just looking at 100 years of temperature data.

 

[smokeyjoe]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Yes, it's a statement about the difference between micro and macro predictions that is independent of subject matter. I simply used baseball because it's easy to relate to. If you would like a more weather based example, it is difficult to pick if it is going to rain any one particular day of the year, but the amount of rainfall for the whole year in an area is far easier to predict.

As for the whole one world government thing, all I can say is that you really don't want to throw your hat in with K3N. That's some insane conspiracy theory shit.

It's insane to you because you are unaware that there are some people that want this.

"We shall have World Government, whether or not you like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent."

-James Warburg, Senate Report (Senate Foreign Relations Committee) (1950). Revision of the United Nations Charter: Hearings Before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Foreign Relations, Eighty-First Congress. United States Government Printing Office. p. 494

"For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents ... to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.
-David Rockefeller, Memoirs (2002, Random House publishers), page 405

But whatever.. most people will just dismiss it as CraZyTaLk and this thread is about fake Man Made Global Warming

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: NeoV
Ken... I mean K3n, about your little "the sun is causing global warming" issue -

Some uncertainty remains about the role of natural variations in causing climate change. Solar variability certainly plays a minor role, but it looks like only a quarter of the recent variations can be attributed to the Sun. At most. During the initial discovery period of global warming, the magnitude of the influence of increased activity on the Sun was not well determined.

sun image EIT Solar irradiance changes have been measured reliably by satellites for only 30 years. These precise observations show changes of a few tenths of a percent that depend on the level of activity in the 11-year solar cycle. Changes over longer periods must be inferred from other sources. Estimates of earlier variations are important for calibrating the climate models. While a component of recent global warming may have been caused by the increased solar activity of the last solar cycle, that component was very small compared to the effects of additional greenhouse gases. According to a NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) press release, "...the solar increases do not have the ability to cause large global temperature increases...greenhouse gases are indeed playing the dominant role..." The Sun is once again less bright as we approach solar minimum, yet global warming continues.

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/glob-warm.html

I'm going to go out a limb and say that they have a slight bit more knowledge than your pea-brain does about this stuff

I'm also fairly certain that when they talk about air composition from hundreds of thousands, and even millions of years ago - they aren't just looking at 100 years of temperature data.

Dude...the GISS press release is from 1999. FYI...a lot has happened since then...surely you're much better informed than what you appear to be based on your condescending attitude.

 

[taltamir]

hahaha... global warming as a conspiracy by the RICH to keep the poor poor and the middle class poorer is a joke! well not a joke, but a sad and pathetic conspiracy theory...

Penn and teller did an interesting show about global warming, they got the co-founder of greenpeace (Who left when it became an anti corporate socialistic movement that uses lies) as well the the original weatherman to show and agree that sun activity is controlling the weather...
They pointed out humans account for 3% of global carbon emissions, and that up until the 1970s we had a global cooling trend, also controlled by sun activity, that was pushed by environmentalists as the direct result of our pollution... (its blotting out the sun)

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: taltamir
hahaha... global warming as a conspiracy by the RICH to keep the poor poor and the middle class poorer is a joke! well not a joke, but a sad and pathetic conspiracy theory...

Penn and teller did an interesting show about global warming, they got the co-founder of greenpeace (Who left when it became an anti corporate socialistic movement that uses lies) as well the the original weatherman to show and agree that sun activity is controlling the weather...
They pointed out humans account for 3% of global carbon emissions, and that up until the 1970s we had a global cooling trend, also controlled by sun activity, that was pushed by environmentalists as the direct result of our pollution... (its blotting out the sun)

The idea the 'global cooling' is somehow similar to the current research on global warming is the myth that simply won't die. It was a short lived hysteria fanned by an ill considered Newsweek (I think) article that was never based upon much scientific evidence. The theory behind global warming is backed up by a massive collection of data and millions of man hours of research.

Penn and Teller have an amusing show, but they aren't exactly two people that I would trust to explain a controversial issue. They should probably stick to making fun of ghost hunters.

 

[taltamir]

actually, they always get experts to explain it. As well as every group involved... It is quite impressive to understand what exactly groups stand for... for example certain "anti war" groups are basically "anti capitalism socialists" according to.. well, themselves.

Anyways, the problem is how POORLY those who try to counter those "theories" phrase themselves... oil companies funding research that says global warning is a myth does more harm that good, as it is reminiscent of the tabbacco companies claiming that cigarettes don't cause cancer.

what they should say is "global warming/cooling is real, but it is the result of-and matches perfectly, sun activity that is well documented; humans only account for 3% of all carbon emissions, and despite exponentially increasing human emissions of CO2 over the past 100 years, the earths temperatures rise and fall remained perfectly inline with the activity of the sun"

I think the biggest problem is that those who try to educate people about global warming keep on calling it "myth" and "bunk" when it is perfectly clear that the earth has been warming up for the past 30 years (when the global cooling trend stopped).

Also, in the past, I Was told it was a myth, it was typically followed with "it is arrogant to think humans can ever possibly affect the weather" or "only god controls the weather" or "i THINK it is absurd to believe that humans could ever possibly affect the weather" and the like... Not to mention I KNEW that the temperatures have been rising for 30 years... So I found it hard to stomach listening to someone explain how GW is a "myth".

 

[taltamir]

PS. actually this kind of relates to the whole issue of this thread... it makes perfect sense for 97% of scientists to say that the earth is warming up... the question is weather humanity's carbon emissions are the cause.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: taltamir
actually, they always get experts to explain it. As well as every group involved... It is quite impressive to understand what exactly groups stand for... for example certain "anti war" groups are basically "anti capitalism socialists" according to.. well, themselves.

Anyways, the problem is how POORLY those who try to counter those "theories" phrase themselves... oil companies funding research that says global warning is a myth does more harm that good, as it is reminiscent of the tabbacco companies claiming that cigarettes don't cause cancer.

what they should say is "global warming/cooling is real, but it is the result of-and matches perfectly, sun activity that is well documented; humans only account for 3% of all carbon emissions, and despite exponentially increasing human emissions of CO2 over the past 100 years, the earths temperatures rise and fall remained perfectly inline with the activity of the sun"

I think the biggest problem is that those who try to educate people about global warming keep on calling it "myth" and "bunk" when it is perfectly clear that the earth has been warming up for the past 30 years (when the global cooling trend stopped).

Also, in the past, I Was told it was a myth, it was typically followed with "it is arrogant to think humans can ever possibly affect the weather" or "only god controls the weather" or "i THINK it is absurd to believe that humans could ever possibly affect the weather" and the like... Not to mention I KNEW that the temperatures have been rising for 30 years... So I found it hard to stomach listening to someone explain how GW is a "myth".

There are quite a few studies done on solar variation theory, and they have concluded that while the sun (obviously) plays a large role in the temperature fluctuations the Earth undergoes, it does not account for the all the warming we have experienced, and global temperatures do not fall 'perfectly in line' with the activity of the sun.

Penn and Teller most certainly do bring experts on, but they are very very selective with who they bring on, and the viewpoints presented. Lets remember that their show is first and foremost a comedy show. I like the show, I think it's funny... but lets be honest with ourselves here. Just like nobody should take the Daily Show as an authoritative source on politics, neither should anyone consider taking Penn and Teller's show as a serious source on global warming.