Thanks Thanks:  0
LMAO LMAO:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Ignorant Ignorant:  0
Moron Moron:  0
Page 1 of 10 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 233

Thread: The Great Global Warming Swindle

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    The Great Global Warming Swindle

    The Documentary "The Great Global Warming Swindle" clearly proves the mass fraud and deception of "Man Made Global Warming" is dressed up as science, but is actually propoganda. --- Dr. Riener (Former member of the IPCC).



    1) All the Proxie Measured data clearly shows the Temperature rising first and CO2 rises 800 years to 4000 years later.

    2) We are told that it is warmer than it has ever been in 640,000 years, yet the Midieval warm period 1000 years ago was 1.5 degrees warmer than now.

    3) The Holocene Maximum was 6 to 8 degrees warmer than now, and was like that for 7,000 years. Yet the Polar bears didn't go extinct.

    4) The previous interglacial warm period about 100,000 years was many 10's of degrees warmer than the Holocene Maximum and it was like that for 36,000 years. And yet the Polar bears didn't go extinct then; any more than now. (See Warm Period # 4)

    5) We are told that Man Made Global Warming will bring about global environmental destruction. Yet when anyone looks at these warm periods, it has brought about great wealth and prosperity for both humans and nature.

    6) The greates greenhouse gas is Water Vapor, it is 270 times the greenhouse gas compared to CO2. H2O makes up 40,000ppm (4%) of the Earth's atmosphere. CO2 is only 380ppm (0.038%). And human contribution is less than 1ppm per year.


    In this Graph the bottom plot is temperature and the top plot is CO2 levels.

    And as one can easily see:

    1) Temperature is always rising first (see the rectangles of time blocks).

    2) The 4 previous interglacial warm periods were all warmer than the current warm period (Holocene Maximum)

    3) Notice how the CO2 levels are rising near the end (now time) yet temperature is trending downward. Clearly proving that rising CO2 levels do not cause a rise in temprature.

    Al Gores Inconvenient Graph Challenged.JPG

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    174
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Didn't they thoroughly debunked your argument t at the scam.com thread you started ?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    6,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Not so sure!

    Following your logic we can dump as many pollutants into the water supply as we want and it will have no effect? Store as much radioactive material as we want, anywhere we want with no impact? How about pesticides, are is there no impacts on say the honeybee population? Seems to me just logically that man has quite an impact on the earth around him.

    More importantly I would ask is why have liability insurers all but stopped underwriting coverage for the risks associated with global warming? They have hundreds of White Papers on the subject. If it is such a HOAX, as you seem to claim, why are the insurance companies walking away from what can only be considered risk free profits?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Nourjan View Post
    Didn't they thoroughly debunked your argument t at the scam.com thread you started ?
    No they never did, all they would do is beat their chests and make one scientifically illiterate claim after another without one shread of measured data or field expirement to back up their worthless claims. I'm the one with the detailed data and the IPCC scientists actually doing the research.

    Here are the irrifutable facts:

    1) The Climate has had far greater changes before humans ever set foot on the Earth.

    2) It is always Temperature that rises first and CO2 that always rises second in the timeline based on all proxie data including Ice Core Data, Tree Ring Data, etc., ...

    3) All Proxie data from all Universities, Except for Dr. Michael Mann's cooked up Hockey Stick Graph (Which has been the laughing stock of the scientific community since 2001), clearly shows a 500 year long Medieval Warm Period and a 700 Year Long Little Ice age.

    4) The Holocene Maximum started 10,000 years ago and ended 3,000 years ago and on average was 6 to 8 degrees warmer than now. And was like that for 7000 years. Far warmer than the most insane global warming propogandist on steriods could of ever imagined it to ever be.

    5) Water vapor makes up 40,000ppm of our atmosphere and CO2 only makes up 380ppm, CO2 is less than 1% of all greenhouse gases, and humans are sponsible for less than 1ppm (parts per million).

    ...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    There have been a number of law suites filed in civil and federal courts by environmental organizations and their scientifically illiterate claims can't even pass the laught test. All of these law suites have been thrown out one their kiester. Not yet been one single law suite has ever been successful at sewing the fossil fuel industry. Insurance isn't need, only lawyars are needed.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    CO2 is no more a pollutant than Oxygen is a pollutant. Man Made Global Warming is about naturally occuring gases, not toxic gases. Environmental extremist are trying to outlaw greenhouse gases that life on Earth is totally dependant on for food, oxygen, warmth, weather stability and temperature stability. The only reason it isn't -250 degrees F in the shade and +250 degrees F in the sunlight, like it is on the moon, is because of greenhouse gases.

    You and I and all life on Earth is made up of CO2. To declare CO2 pollutant means you are also going to proclaim all life on Earth a pollutant too. Anyone that does that is not a true Environmentalist, but instead an Anti-Environmentalist.

    Anyone that says most of the warming of the 20th Century was caused by man made CO2; hasn't even looked at the basic numbers.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    As one can clearly see it is really the solar cycle of the sun driving The Earth's temperature and climate; and not CO2 levels as these graphs produced by the IPCC and NASA clearly show:

    Global Warming Artic Temperatures and Solar 3.JPG

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    6,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    [QUOTE=Edmund129;48105]As one can clearly see it is really the solar cycle of the sun driving The Earth's temperature and climate; and not CO2 levels as these graphs produced by the IPCC and NASA clearly show:

    FOR PROFIT INSURERS must not be as smart as you. Not only have they stopped underwriting general liability insurance, they have seriously curtailed coverage for directors of companies that emit greenhouse gasses. Why is that? Are they afraid of making too much money?

    You can repeat all of someone else's research you want. I choose to let the free market speak and they have spoke loud and clear saying the risks of climate change are too much for us to make a profit, and to the taxpayer, you take the risk. One final tidbit you won't get just anywhere, the US Flood insurance program (flooding and soil erosion being the biggest financial risks) is fully funded by the US Taxpayer, with risk free profits of administration going to the insurance companies.

    Always follow the money, and I will ask again why are insurance companies going hat in hand to the taxpayer if this is such a big hoax?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    The facts say the exact opposite.

    Acording to Dr. Richard Lindzen at MIT Senior Fellow Climatologist and Lead Scientific Reviewer at the IPCC, says that every book on Meterology and Climatology states that the root cause of violent storms is temperature differences in the Earth's atmosphere, and the greater these temperature differences are, the greater the magnitude of the storms. These temperature differences are mostly found between the polar and tropical zones of the Earth and the lower vs. upper atmospheric regions of the Earth.

    But in a Global Warming world, acording to Dr. Richard Lindzen, the exact opposite is happening. Greenhouse gases trap the suns heat and redistribute it more evenly. Greenhouse gases resist temperature difference and temperature changes thus causing milder weather and milder climates. But for some reason that isn't catastrophic enough, so we are told the opposite.

    Only talking about the negatives of using fossile fuels is clearly pushing an agenda that is intended on sending us back to the stone age. Today's environmental extremist never talk about the seriouis ramifications of not using fossile fuels for cheaper energy, never again having low cost travel over great distances at greater and greater speeds, never having emergancy 911 resque's able to reach those in trouble more quickly, never having a military able to confront the enemies before they have a chance to harm the citizenry, no more law enforcment which will force people to bare their own weapons to defend themselves, going back to killing whales, whalresses, seals, orcas, elephants, rinoes and trees for our raw materials, etc., ....

    Clearly not using fossile fuels is far more harmful to the environment than using fossile fuels.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Most of the flooding in recent decades has been caused by the EPA, and other radical environmental NAZI like groups, that have been tearing down dams along the Missouri Rivers and Mississippi Rivers destroying what was once a vast and huge series of dams built up over the 20th century to controll the nations flooding, and to also create irrigation for agriculture, and electricity for local cities and other communities.

    But in the 1990's the EPA has been grossly missmanaging these dams along the Missouri Rivers and Mississipppi Rivers and the rivers that feed these primary rivers since the 1990's to get the rivers to flow like they used to flow before the dams were built. In a time When the area did constantly flood and destroy forests, plant life and animal life on a regular basis. And because of the missmanagement of these dams by the EPA and many of them even being torn down, there has now been annual flooding of cities and fertal farmland along these rivers since, destroy much of America's bread basket. This has never had anything to do with greenhouse gases, but instead Environmentalists destroying the Environment so they can destroy America's standard of living and our national security to embolden our enemies even more and to destroy free Market Capitalism.

    The Greenhouse gas propaganda machine is more to do with covering up the Environmentalists extremist destruction of the environment on the rest of us, while avoiding blame for themselves. They create the problem, then they blame everyone else for it.

    ...

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    6,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund129 View Post
    Clearly not using fossile fuels is far more harmful to the environment than using fossile fuels.
    Here is what I would say Ed. If you want people who have not already formed an opinion to take you seriously have the respect for them to write original ideas extrapolated from what you have read. Your whole argument is cut and paste followed by the above quote. Tell you what, I will cut and paste all the points made from the thread already linked and we will call it a day. You have no way of verifying anything you're repeating is true. Where are your personal studies?

    "The Greenhouse gas propaganda machine is more to do with covering up the Environmentalists extremist destruction of the environment on the rest of us, while avoiding blame for themselves. They create the problem, then they blame everyone else for it."

    What on earth does that even mean?


    Second, and this comes to my follow the money statement. Who is feeding you this information? Is it someone on AM radio who wants you to buy Andy Willougby's 3 step plan and some gold coins at 20% over spot? Are they making a living ginning up this big conspiracy, or are they doing it from the goodness of their hearts? Or maybe it is research from one of the companies that pollutes and wants to do so on the cheap? Nah that could not be it.

    You know what else comes from humans besides CO2? Try sewage on for size, that's right poopy and pee pee. And do you know what countries have found from 100s of years of observation and dare I say "science"? That if you don't treat it and dispose of it properly it makes people sick. Does that mean that everyone who lives in an area with raw sewage gets sick? Of course not, but you are essentially telling your audience that because you found a few scientists who said something you happen to agree with that some conspiracy is going on. That is as silly as saying smoking is safe because your grandma smoked until she was 105 and you found a Dr that disagrees with the medical community.

    So where does this fit in with "climate change" you might ask. The vast majority of the world's scientists are in agreement that polluting the atmosphere has consequences, the only question is to what degree. I am not a scientist, nor do I want to take the time to cut and paste their work, so I will say this. There is a consequence to every action. If we pump a bunch of crap into the sky, the water, or the land it will eventually do damage. Damage to the point of human extinction? Well with water certainly, clean air maybe, and usable land almost without question. Many of us are not going back to the dark ages, so the less pollution the better is where I come down.

    My position is very simple and free market, the users and consumers of energy should pay the cost of what they consume. The taxpayer should not backstop what should be a free market function. So if climate change is a hoax as you say, let's let people that live in coastal areas buy coverage in the free market and pay a free market rate. No more taxpayer subsidized coverage. This means no more military intervention for oil companies, and no more taxpayer funds to treat the effects of pollution. When people have to dip into their own pockets they will make different choices and stop head bobbing to everything they hear.

    Most importantly though, in your cut and paste argument you glossed over the biggest fact about climate change related risks so I will repeat it. The insurance companies are running away in droves from almost all risks related to climate change. You can insure anything and everything Ed, from a tennis player's hands to a singers vocal cords. And the actuaries can calculate fairly accurately almost any risk. The model then becomes to weigh the probability and price of the risk against the premium they can collect. If there is a profit to be made they will take it every day, all day. That is what capitalism is all about, the effective allocation of resources. What they have said with respect to climate change is that it is a very real threat because they have no interest in taking the other side of the risk. If it was a hoax, they would be lining up around the block to collect your premiums. And that is all the proof I need that something real is afoot.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,006
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    For several years I have volunteered one of my computers to assist Oxford University in conjunction with BOINC projects in researching global warming. There have been some problems when it was discovered that some data collection points are not in correct places. Denver for one was placed next to an incinerator. Talk about screwing up results. There were several others examples but the researchers were going to correct the improper collection points but after several years I cut off my support of them. If they erver correct the data collection points I might be convinced to help them agaim but for now, I disbelieve everything they have came out with.

    On a different note, Bonic Projects have many other research projects with many different causes. For now I still devote one computer, divided among three projects, SETI, with University of California, Berkley, Einstein with Univ. of Wisconsin, and Milkway with Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

    Here is a link if any or interested in helping with many different projects and all it takes is allowing a computer to run with what is sent to it.

    Choosing BOINC projects

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Is Eireannach mise
    Posts
    1,245
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund129 View Post
    As one can clearly see it is really the solar cycle of the sun driving The Earth's temperature and climate; and not CO2 levels as these graphs produced by the IPCC and NASA clearly show:

    Global Warming Artic Temperatures and Solar 3.JPG

    Could you supply a link to your data and show how it supports you contention?
    Both long-term and short-term variations in solar activity are hypothesized to affect global climate, but it has proven extremely challenging to directly quantify the link between solar variation and the earth's climate.
    The Sun and the Earth's Climate
    "The absolute radiometers carried by satellites since the late 1970s have produced indisputable evidence that total solar irradiance varies systematically over the 11-year sunspot cycle,"

    I would say it is fairly much accepted that the Sun goes through and eleven year cycle of activity to dormancy. But if your theory is correct then the Earth should heat up and then cool down over eleven years. So why is it that the Earth is gradually heating up and NOT cooling down by the same rate? Why is it that particularly since the advent of peak oil and mass exploitation of fossil fuels that this warming trend is taking place? Is it just a co incidence?
    We have measured Temperatures since 1850
    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
    Shows average temperature going UP not up and down but a continual UPWARD trend.

    Satellites do not measure temperature. They measure radiances in various wavelength bands, which must then be mathematically inverted to obtain indirect inferences of temperature.
    Since 1979, microwave sounding units (MSUs) on NOAA polar orbiting satellites have measured the intensity of upwelling microwave radiation from atmospheric oxygen.
    Since 1979 the Stratospheric sounding units (SSUs) on the NOAA operational satellites provided near global stratospheric temperature data above the lower stratosphere.

    Lower stratospheric cooling is mainly caused by the effects of ozone depletion with a possible contribution from increased stratospheric water vapor and greenhouse gases increase.
    http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2003/2003_Shine_etal.pdf

    There is a decline in stratospheric temperatures, interspersed by warmings related to volcanic eruptions. Global Warming theory suggests that the stratosphere should cool while the troposphere warms
    Line-by-line calculation of atmospheric fluxes and cooling rates: 2. Application to carbon dioxide, ozone, methane, nitrous oxide and the halocarbons - Clough - 2012 - Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (1984–2012) - Wiley Online Libr

    The long term cooling in the lower stratosphere occurred in two downward steps in temperature both after the transient warming related to explosive volcanic eruptions of El Chichón and Mount Pinatubo, this behavior of the global stratospheric temperature has been attributed to global ozone concentration variation in the two years following volcanic eruptions.
    here


    Since 1996 the trend is slightly positive due to ozone recover juxtaposed to a cooling trend of 0.1K/decade that is consistent with the predicted impact of increased greenhouse gases
    http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v.../ngeo1282.html

    The above would take you five minutes to find on wikipedia
    As would this: Temperature record of the past 1000 years - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    It is my suspicion that you are posting this because of a particular neoconservative American political/economic position and not because of science.
    Care to prove me wrong?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,006
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by baylee View Post
    For several years I have volunteered one of my computers to assist Oxford University in conjunction with BOINC projects in researching global warming. There have been some problems when it was discovered that some data collection points are not in correct places. Denver for one was placed next to an incinerator. Talk about screwing up results. There were several others examples but the researchers were going to correct the improper collection points but after several years I cut off my support of them. If they erver correct the data collection points I might be convinced to help them agaim but for now, I disbelieve everything they have came out with.

    On a different note, Bonic Projects have many other research projects with many different causes. For now I still devote one computer, divided among three projects, SETI, with University of California, Berkley, Einstein with Univ. of Wisconsin, and Milkway with Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

    Here is a link if any or interested in helping with many different projects and all it takes is allowing a computer to run with what is sent to it.

    Choosing BOINC projects
    And by the way if anyone signs up with a project, they have access to interface ( website and they will answer back) with some of the project managers and
    Scientists working on the project.

    After assisting Oxford University for about 4 years now and with the problems of data collection points, I believe the findings are bogus and it is nothing more than scare tactics until they correct the mistakes.

    If they ( Oxford University ) go and correct the mistakes (Data collection points ) that have been made up to this point, I have a open mind, which could be changed.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Beacon View Post
    Could you supply a link to your data and show how it supports you contention?
    Both long-term and short-term variations in solar activity are hypothesized to affect global climate, but it has proven extremely challenging to directly quantify the link between solar variation and the earth's climate.
    The Sun and the Earth's Climate
    "The absolute radiometers carried by satellites since the late 1970s have produced indisputable evidence that total solar irradiance varies systematically over the 11-year sunspot cycle,"

    I would say it is fairly much accepted that the Sun goes through and eleven year cycle of activity to dormancy. But if your theory is correct then the Earth should heat up and then cool down over eleven years. So why is it that the Earth is gradually heating up and NOT cooling down by the same rate? Why is it that particularly since the advent of peak oil and mass exploitation of fossil fuels that this warming trend is taking place? Is it just a co incidence?
    We have measured Temperatures since 1850
    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
    Shows average temperature going UP not up and down but a continual UPWARD trend.

    Satellites do not measure temperature. They measure radiances in various wavelength bands, which must then be mathematically inverted to obtain indirect inferences of temperature.
    Since 1979, microwave sounding units (MSUs) on NOAA polar orbiting satellites have measured the intensity of upwelling microwave radiation from atmospheric oxygen.
    Since 1979 the Stratospheric sounding units (SSUs) on the NOAA operational satellites provided near global stratospheric temperature data above the lower stratosphere.

    Lower stratospheric cooling is mainly caused by the effects of ozone depletion with a possible contribution from increased stratospheric water vapor and greenhouse gases increase.
    http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2003/2003_Shine_etal.pdf

    There is a decline in stratospheric temperatures, interspersed by warmings related to volcanic eruptions. Global Warming theory suggests that the stratosphere should cool while the troposphere warms
    Line-by-line calculation of atmospheric fluxes and cooling rates: 2. Application to carbon dioxide, ozone, methane, nitrous oxide and the halocarbons - Clough - 2012 - Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (1984–2012) - Wiley Online Libr

    The long term cooling in the lower stratosphere occurred in two downward steps in temperature both after the transient warming related to explosive volcanic eruptions of El Chichón and Mount Pinatubo, this behavior of the global stratospheric temperature has been attributed to global ozone concentration variation in the two years following volcanic eruptions.
    here


    Since 1996 the trend is slightly positive due to ozone recover juxtaposed to a cooling trend of 0.1K/decade that is consistent with the predicted impact of increased greenhouse gases
    http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v.../ngeo1282.html

    The above would take you five minutes to find on wikipedia
    As would this: Temperature record of the past 1000 years - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    It is my suspicion that you are posting this because of a particular neoconservative American political/economic position and not because of science.
    Care to prove me wrong?
    Watch the Video in the original Posting. The Solar / CO2 / Temperature graph was published by NASA and the IPCC over 10 years ago.

    It had been first discovered in 1893 by Edward W. Maunder that solar cycles that had been observed for century's, since the days of Gallelao, to have a very close correlation with Earth's average Temperature and Climate. And all of NASA's data has supported that fact for most of its existance, until Government grant money was waved in their faces to change their minds.

    Maunder Minimum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    You keep attacking the messenger and never confront the message itself. This is a typical Stalinist tactic taught in todays colleges and universities. Which is absolutely pethidict. The facts speak for themselves:

    1) Greenhouse gases resist temperature change and therefor resist climate change. (Source: Dr. Richard Lindzen Senior Fellow Climatologist at MIT and lead scientific reviewer at the IPCC)

    2) The moon has no greenhouse gases and there is a 500 degree F temperature swing between daytime and night time. +250 Degrees F in the day time and -250 Degrees F at night. Because of the greenhouse gas effect on the Earth, there is normally only a few degrees difference between night and day with greenhouse gases. A reduction in greenhouse gases can cause there to be 10's of degrees difference between night and day time temperatures. Again the scientific proof is irrefutably clear, greenhouse gases resist temperature changes and climate changes, they don't amplify them.

    3) My facts are coming directly from the IPCC scientist themselves that are actually doing the work, but get ignored by the State controlled Media. (Like: CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNBC, MSNBC, PBS, etc., ...)

    4) Patric Moore (Co-Founder of Greenpeace) and other Greenpeace founders have all been claiming since the 1990's that the Marxist Style Communists have fled the soviet union and moved into the environmental extremist movements around the world and have very cleverly learned to use green languages to push agendas that have more to do with Anti-Capitalism, Anti-Industrialization and Anti-Globalization than any thing to do with real environmentalism.

    5) Today's Environmentalists are the greatest threat to the environment, when they intentionally mismanage man made dams to create flooding that destroys millions of acres of fertile farmland and turn once prosperous agricultural land into desolate wasteland. While also killing off vital wildlife and forests on purpose to intentional bring about poverty that will be more excepting of Marxist Style Communism.

    6) In America and in most other countries Environmental extremism is a required course in colleges and universities for getting ones diploma and degree into any field. And the acceptance of the destruction of the environment and the economy under the false disguise of protecting the environment; is considered mandatory education everywhere.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by ribshaw View Post

    You know what else comes from humans besides CO2? Try sewage on for size, that's right poopy and pee pee. And do you know what countries have found from 100s of years of observation and dare I say "science"? That if you don't treat it and dispose of it properly it makes people sick. Does that mean that everyone who lives in an area with raw sewage gets sick? Of course not, but you are essentially telling your audience that because you found a few scientists who said something you happen to agree with that some conspiracy is going on. That is as silly as saying smoking is safe because your grandma smoked until she was 105 and you found a Dr that disagrees with the medical community.

    So where does this fit in with "climate change" you might ask. The vast majority of the world's scientists are in agreement that polluting the atmosphere has consequences, the only question is to what degree. I am not a scientist, nor do I want to take the time to cut and paste their work, so I will say this. There is a consequence to every action. If we pump a bunch of crap into the sky, the water, or the land it will eventually do damage. Damage to the point of human extinction? Well with water certainly, clean air maybe, and usable land almost without question. Many of us are not going back to the dark ages, so the less pollution the better is where I come down.
    Here are the flaws in your arguments:

    1) Humans only produce 6.5 billion tons of CO2 per year, the Earth's atmosphere is 6.93 Quadrillion tons, if you divide 6.5 billion tons by 6.93 Quadrillion tons you get less than 1 part per million (ppm). That is right, humans only contribute less than 1 part per million of the 380ppm already in the Earth's atmosphere per year. Humans are the single smallest source of CO2 on the Earth. And CO2 is food for plants. If CO2 levels double, Earth's plants only need 1/4th as much water to live. Which hugely improves agriculture and nature as well.

    2) Nature produces more poope and pee pee by many orders of magnitude than humans do, how come you aren't complaining about that. You act as if only human poop is bad for the environment, when in a matter off act it too is food for plants. Or did you nap during your science biology class too?

    3) In Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth he said there were 12,000 scientific articles published on global warming over a 10 year period, and that 938 believed that humans were suspected of causing it. If you divide 938 by 12,000 you get about 7.7% of those papers suspecting humans. Since when does 7.7% constitute a landslide majority... News Journalists interviews and reviewed those papers and found that 53% of those 938 concluded that humans were not responsible for global warming. Now we are down to 3.3% of those 12,000 scientific papers on global warming blaming humans. Since when does 3.3% constitute a landslide majority of scientists. Obviously not only did you nap in science class, but you must of napped through math class too.

    4) Because of fossil fuels we no longer have to kill plants and animals like Whales, Whalresses, Seals, Orcas, elephants, rinos or trees for our raw materials anymore. Which means because of fossil fuels we are doing far less damage to the environment than in century's past.

    Here are some figures that show that 95% to 99% of all greenhouse gases is actually water vapor, and how puny a contribution to CO2 humans really make, also notice how puny CO2's contribution really is:

    Global Warming Greenhouse Gas Ratios.jpg

    How come the Global Warming Alarmists aren't wanting to reduce water vapor from the atmosphere, it clearly is the most dominate greenhouse gas.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    6,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund129 View Post
    Here are the flaws in your arguments:

    1) Humans only produce 6.5 billion tons of CO2 per year, the Earth's atmosphere is 6.93 Quadrillion tons, if you divide 6.5 billion tons by 6.93 Quadrillion tons you get less than 1 part per million (ppm). That is right, humans only contribute less than 1 part per million of the 380ppm already in the Earth's atmosphere per year. Humans are the single smallest source of CO2 on the Earth. And CO2 is food for plants. If CO2 levels double, Earth's plants only need 1/4th as much water to live. Which hugely improves agriculture and nature as well.

    2) Nature produces more poope and pee pee by many orders of magnitude than humans do, how come you aren't complaining about that. You act as if only human poop is bad for the environment, when in a matter off act it too is food for plants. Or did you nap during your science biology class too?

    3) In Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth he said there were 12,000 scientific articles published on global warming over a 10 year period, and that 938 believed that humans were suspected of causing it. If you divide 938 by 12,000 you get about 7.7% of those papers suspecting humans. Since when does 7.7% constitute a landslide majority... News Journalists interviews and reviewed those papers and found that 53% of those 938 concluded that humans were not responsible for global warming. Now we are down to 3.3% of those 12,000 scientific papers on global warming blaming humans. Since when does 3.3% constitute a landslide majority of scientists. Obviously not only did you nap in science class, but you must of napped through math class too.

    4) Because of fossil fuels we no longer have to kill plants and animals like Whales, Whalresses, Seals, Orcas, elephants, rinos or trees for our raw materials anymore. Which means because of fossil fuels we are doing far less damage to the environment than in century's past.

    Here are some figures that show that 95% to 99% of all greenhouse gases is actually water vapor, and how puny a contribution to CO2 humans really make, also notice how puny CO2's contribution really is:

    How come the Global Warming Alarmists aren't wanting to reduce water vapor from the atmosphere, it clearly is the most dominate greenhouse gas.
    I don't see how any of that points out any "flaws" in my "argument", when in fact I didn't make an "argument" but several observations about pollution in general. I used ONE example, of human waste and it was not a "complaint" but a fact. I am not writing a Phd dissertation on the ecosystem to satisfy your every whim.

    And to quote myself:

    "The vast majority of the world's scientists are in agreement that polluting the atmosphere has consequences, the only question is to what degree." and

    "There is a consequence to every action. If we pump a bunch of crap into the sky, the water, or the land it will eventually do damage."

    As I said previous times, I could care less about your cut and paste science class. I have ONE choice in my area for powering my house, electric, my guess is it is derived from coal, but since I don't have a choice I just pay my bill. I have ONE choice for Heat and that is natural gas, again I just pay my bill. It seems like natural gas is a huge boon for America, as long as companies don't F' up our water supply. And it is probably better for the environment. But again I have 0 choice so I pay my bill.

    I am not really sure what your "hang up" is with Global Warming that you would be all over the internet cutting and pasting. Maybe if you want to engage people in an actual discussion rather than setting up a strawman and then arguing against it you would get a little further.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Quote Originally Posted by ribshaw View Post
    I don't see how any of that points out any "flaws" in my "argument", when in fact I didn't make an "argument" but several observations about pollution in general. I used ONE example, of human waste and it was not a "complaint" but a fact. I am not writing a Phd dissertation on the ecosystem to satisfy your every whim.

    And to quote myself:

    "The vast majority of the world's scientists are in agreement that polluting the atmosphere has consequences, the only question is to what degree." and

    "There is a consequence to every action. If we pump a bunch of crap into the sky, the water, or the land it will eventually do damage."

    As I said previous times, I could care less about your cut and paste science class. I have ONE choice in my area for powering my house, electric, my guess is it is derived from coal, but since I don't have a choice I just pay my bill. I have ONE choice for Heat and that is natural gas, again I just pay my bill. It seems like natural gas is a huge boon for America, as long as companies don't F' up our water supply. And it is probably better for the environment. But again I have 0 choice so I pay my bill.

    I am not really sure what your "hang up" is with Global Warming that you would be all over the internet cutting and pasting. Maybe if you want to engage people in an actual discussion rather than setting up a strawman and then arguing against it you would get a little further.
    Amazing How when I post concrete facts to back up my arguments you call it cut and paste, just like a typical Stalinist Marxist Style Communist propagandist makes their arguments; attack the messenger and not the message. Because you are incapable of backing up any of your scientifically illiterate claims with any facts based on empirical measured data or experiments.

    You seem to believe that only human poop polutes but deer poop, fish poop, whale poop, krill poop, Buffelo poop and Elk Poop doesn't. Krill makes up more than 2.5 times the biomass than what 7 billion humans do and produce many orders of magnitude more poop than humans do. Amazing how you clearly biased hatred of humans parallels Marxist Style Communist propagandist do to justify the irradiation of 7 billion people.

    Here is a illustration published by the IPCC that demonstrates how very little contribution that humans really have to the CO2 build up in the Earth's atmosphere.

    Plant Photosynthesis on the land alone absorbs more than 10 times the amount of CO2 that what humans produce each and every year. In this illistration it also shows the oceans are more than capable of absorbing more than 3 times as much CO2 than what humans can produce. Other research on this has shown as much as 200 times the CO2 absorption than what humans produce.

    Also notice how plants and decaying plant life and animal life produces more than 20 times the CO2 compared to what humans produce.

    And also remember that Water Vapor is the most dominant greenhouse gas of all, with more than 100 times the concentration in our atmosphere compared to what CO2 has in it. Water Vapor is 270 times the greenhouse gas is compared to what CO2 is.


    Global Warming CO2 sources by quantity.JPG

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle



    Here is the full spectrum of all greenhouse gases and their electromagnetic wavelength absorption bands in our atmosphere.

    1) CO2 only has 3 absorption bands in the infrared spectrum and 2.5 of them are being overrun by Water Vapor absorption bands, which means CO2's only contribution to Global Warming is 1/2 of one absorption band. This is why Water Vapor is 270 times the greenhouse gas compared to CO2. Water vapor makes up 40,000ppm (4%) while CO2 only makes up 380ppm (0.038%).

    2) Also notice how Methane (CH4) only has 2 paper thin absorption bands in the infrared spectrum, even less of a contribution to greenhouse gas warming than CO2 does. Not only that, but if you look at the bottom sumation of all the absorption bands, water vapor again over runs both of Methanes (CH4) absorption bands, leaving Metane with Zero contribution to greenhouse gas warming. But yet we are lied to again by the Global Warming Propogandist that say Methane is between 23 to 30 times the greenhouse gas than what CO2 is. Methane only makes up 1.5ppm in our atmosphere compared to CO2 at 380ppm. Clearly we are being lied to again by Global Warming Propagandists which have all of their arguments based on pure junk science.

    3) Water Vapor has 7 absorption bands in the infrared spectrum while completely drowning out Methane and all but 1/2 of one abosrption band of CO2. Clearly Water vapor is 270 times the greenhouse gas than what CO2 is. How come Global Warming Alarmists are not advocating the removal of Water Vapor instead?

    4) Oxygen has at least one full absorption band of greenhouse gas warming than what CO2 is contributing, and Oxygen makes up 220,000ppm (22%) of the Earth's atmosphere. Even more than water vapor. Why isn't there a war on Oxygen removal from our atmosphere?

    Instead of attacking the biggest greenhouse gas sources, Environmental NAZI's attack the smallest greenhouse gas sources CO2 and Methane. This has never been about controlling greenhouse gases, this is about controlling us and controlling our lives and controlling the economy by an elite group of Environmental Fascists trying to grab for more power and control over the rest of us. Global Warming Alarmists are not Environmentalists, they are Anti-Environmentalists, Anti-Human, Anti-Capitalists, Anti-Industrialists and Anti-Globalizationists masquerading as Environmentalists. (Source: All the original Founders of Greenpeace)



    Global Warming absorbspec CO2 amount Contributed.JPG
    Last edited by Edmund129; 03-31-2013 at 10:45 AM.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    A perfect example of how Man Made Global Warming is really more to do with a Political Power Grab than to do with real science. The World Bank is requiring America to triple its tax on gasoline to help fight greenhouse gas emissions, thus tripling the price of gasoline from $4 a gallon to $12 a gallon. Clearly a premeditated attempt to destroy the American and World Economy; so that the World wide Marxist Style Communist propaganda machine can prove that Free Market Capitalism doesn't work. When it is really Command and Control Marxist Style Communism and its cronyism that doesn't work.

    This Video clearly shows how real science based on observations are being replaced with Junk Science based on cooked up computer models:



  22. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    6,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Did Al Gore show up at your house and force you to wear a sweater and turn down your thermostat? Engaging you in a discussion is a bit like trying to talk to a 3 year old that is tugging on my pant leg when they have to go pee pee. Good luck with your crusade to drive whatever kind of vehicle you want and to keep your house as warm or cool as you like. Someday my friend I hope you win those freedoms back for us.


  23. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    A perfect example of how Man Made Global Warming is really more to do with a Political Power Grab than to do with real science. The World Bank is requiring America to triple its tax on gasoline to help fight greenhouse gas emissions, thus tripling the price of gasoline from $4 a gallon to $12 a gallon. Clearly a premeditated attempt to destroy the American and World Economy; so that the World wide Marxist Style Communist propaganda machine can prove that Free Market Capitalism doesn't work. When it is really Command and Control Marxist Style Communism and its cronyism that doesn't work.

    This Video clearly shows how real science based on observations are being replaced with Junk Science based on cooked up computer models:



  24. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    More proof of how Man Made Global Warming is being used as a Marxist Style Communist Propaganda tool in our schools and universities to brainwash students into being dumbed down so that crooked and dishonest politicians can take advantage of the next generation of masses with higher taxes, fewer freedoms and liberties. In direct Violations of a 2000 Law in Both American and Great Britain that strictly prohibits using schools, colleges and universities from being used as Political Propaganda brainwashing institutes to indoctrinate students into the Communist party.

    Richard Lindzen has said that all of science is funded by Governments; and as soon as a scientific conclusion is found that disagrees with Government policies and political belief's the scientific funding is cut off. Today's Science is being forced to ignore the facts and comply with Government policies even if they are based on junk science and pure fiction. Richard Lindzen goes on to say that we need to find a way of funding science so that Governments are not involved and therefore not forcing scientific conclusions before the research is even done.




  25. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Internet Cafe Nigeria
    Posts
    6,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Oh, look everyone, the cut and past function works on my computer too.

    A spokesman for the Royal Society, Britain’s national academy of science, said: “The world’s leading climate experts at the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change believe that it is greater than 90 per cent likely that human activity is responsible for most of the observed warming in recent decades. That is a pretty strong consensus.

    “The science has come a long way since 1998 and it continues to point in one direction - the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to avert dangerous climate change.”

    When Al Gore knocks on your door, please do as instructed. Al Gore showed up today and took my Escalade and now I have to drive a smart car. And instead of heat I have to wear and itchy wool sweater and type with pencils because it is so cold in my house that I have to wear mittens.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •