Nasa says no global warming

Well, if it was homo sapiens it would probably be the best thing for the planet.

It is likely, just a matter of when...

-Tom

 

"In a literal sense, there is no such fish species as a "red herring"; rather it refers to a particularly strong kipper, meaning a fish—typically a herring but not always—that has been strongly cured in brine and/or heavily smoked. This process makes the fish particularly pungent smelling and, with a strong enough brine, turns its flesh reddish.[2] This term, in its literal sense as a strongly cured kipper, can be dated to the late Middle Ages, as quoted here c1400 Femina (Trin-C B.14.40) 27: "He eteþ no ffyssh But heryng red." Samuel Pepys used it in his diary entry of 28 February 1660 "Up in the morning, and had some red herrings to our breakfast, while my boot-heel was a-mending, by the same token the boy left the hole as big as it was before."[3]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring

 

oooohhhhh Monsanto takes another hit

Hungary destroys all Monsanto GMO corn

http://naturalsociety.com/hungary-destroys-all-monsanto-gmo-corn-fields/

 

Good on Hungary!

Global warming is not anthropogenic.

 

oh
care to enlighten the worlds scientific community with your counter theory.

Its pretty basic stuff Hoyt

carbon dioxide is one of the longest studied of any of the gasses starting in the early 1600s. Your not seriously going to argue ~400 years of scientific research describing its properties are you.

Its also a no brainer as to what past CO2 levels have been. There's about six or seven completely independent methods of measuring past CO2, and what a coincidence, they all show the same thing.

check out the spike in CO2 and explain what natural phenomena might just be responsible for it for us Hoyt. Cause every by every measure its the direct result of burning fossil fuels.



or need I really post again ( for what the tenth or twelfth time ) the link to realclimate and its detailed explanation how we know its the direct result of burning fossil fuels.

 

Old news, but it is good to see the deplorable Monsanto take a beating. (I'd be wary of using Hungary as an example of political excellence these days. The ruling party and their thugs are close to being total nutcases).

BTW, how many deaths have there been that are directly attributable to GM foods?

 

climatesanity showed more sanity.

The graph looks like an East Anglia polygraph.

 

Even the graph you post shows temp rise preceding co2 rise.

 

It also shows temp drop preceding co2 drop.

 

wrong on all counts

ever heard of the ice permeability issue. Atmospheric gasses trapped in ice can be as much as 7k years younger than the ice itself. Ice is used to develop temp data, atmospheric gasses are used to develop atmospheric CO2 levels. The lag is not stable, so the resolution of the data cannot be greater than the overall lag. IE, you have insufficient data to say CO2 lags temp. However, it has been proven that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and must produce warming once introduced into the atmospheric chemistry.

I can hear you now
"thank you sir, may I have another"

 

Ice freezes at 0 degrees. Always has and always will, except at the poles, where it freezes at 90 degrees.

 

If you hold your breath you will turn bluer but if you breathe out you will increase anthropogenic co2.
Will you feel guilty?
The corn plants appreciate your co2 and so do the ethanol companies, both fuel and beverage producers.

 

brilliant Hoyt, as usual, brilliant. Another, very adult approach. Dave would be proud of you, I'm sure.

cheers
B

 

Thanks. For a moment I thought I might be going dim.

 

going ?