What Do We Think About Climate Change

Acceptance/belief in their pet theory, but more importantly acceptance of the 'solution' to the 'problem' which is based on their pet theory. That solution is a HUGE expansion in government control of people worldwide.

Note that this is not even nearly the best solution to this supposed problem, even if we can all admit that the problem exists; it's just the only solution that the promoters of belief in the pet theory will entertain, which again highlights their true motivations.

Jimbo

 

D-Nile
is a lovely river where everyone is happy all the time

there is no interpretation of facts
but an interpretation of multiple sources of data
the scientific method admits a rare few things as facts

the data of co2 history is not being debated by anyone but a few lost souls who beg disbelief rather than face the most likely reality

what was a cyclical norm for 600,000 years has been dramatically broken
co2 has skyrocketed in recent years and a study of the isotopic signature of that co2 proves it having come from the burning of fossil fuels

simple reality is our natural cycle should have trended towards a cooling event
it hasnt
but it wants to for numerous naturally occurring reasons
pressure is building in the system for that cooling event to occur
while at the same time several man made influences drive the temp up a cliff
when the systems natural inclination to follow its natural cycle exceed the artificially induced warming trend we see in climate now
we just might end up headed off that cliff

or at least thats one posibility
the other being that we have so screwed up the atmospheric chemistry that we will force a aerobic stratification of the oceans resulting in significantly less oxygen in the atmosphere and a complete end to ocean fishing

please place heads back in sand
I only dropped in for a moment

I could use a vacation hmmm where will I go
Ive never visited D-Nile
I hear there is a lovely river side town known as Paranoia
where a now rare species called Conspiracy Hounds once lived
you hear one off in the distance from time to time
but they are getting rare
I think it got to warm and they're favorite food
the misinformation tree must have gone the way of the Dodo

cheers
B

 

This has always been the best you could ever do on this thread; attack the messengers rather than address the points raised in the message.

That there was a similar 'skyrocketing' of CO2 levels ~180 years ago does not trouble you in the slightest. The very scientists work the '280 ppm baseline' is based on showed the same thing in the original publication of his work, but removed that 'bothersome' bit when he presented it again later to an audience (the IPCC) with a different agenda.

Again, you are untroubled by these shenanigans.

Jimbo

 

I' m open to new ideas. So please explain further as i am not understanding.

The ‘solution’ is what?
‘true motivations’ is what?

 

The only solution the AGW alarm camp will entertain is mandatory cuts to CO2 emissions, enforced by vastly expanded gov't power, perhaps accomplished through a 'cap and trade' system.

Such a system will, in effect, create a new 'fiat' currency, which the big financiers of the world (who have long been the hidden backers of the UN and its agendas) will simply use to create more trillions of dollars out of thin air, that they then rent back to us.

You should be aware that this solution is not the only one available, again, even admitting that the 'problem' of 'too much CO2' is any problem at all.

But this is the only solution that the AGW alarm crowd, spearheaded as it is by the UN's IPCC, will even discuss.

So the true motivation is the lust for unchecked power and control and the greed for vast sums of money. Same as ever.

Jimbo

 

"the true motivation is the lust for unchecked power and control and the greed for vast sums of money. Same as ever."

Amen.

You are sooooooo right.

 

Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute (AARI) in St. Petersburg, Russia published recently 3 books summarizing scientific results of climate changes in the Arctic region for the last century. One of it dedicated to Arctic climate. Based on the results obtained they forecast coming temperature and sea ice cover area changes in the Polar seas for the next several decades.

The authors showed that the Arctic climate changes are natural in origin and several orders or magnitude greater than the anthropogenic impact on the climate. Estimates of possible changes of Arctic air temperature and ice cover propagation area for the 21st century are given on a basis of the revealed stable cyclic oscillations of 10, 20 and 50 to 60 years.

Attached image: Anomaly of mean annual air surface temperature 1900-2006 in the zone of 70-90 N and its predicted trend (I.E.Frolov et al. Scientific research in Arctic. Vol. 2. Climatic changes in the ice cover of the Eurasian shelf seas. -SPb.: “Nauka”, 2007,158 p).

http://www.springer.com/environment/global change - climate change/book/978-3-540-85874-4

Ivan Frolov, whose speciality is oceanography, has completed the study of Arctic Ice Cover, researching ice distribution in the seas of the Russian Arctic and has authored 70 scientific papers.

Cheers.

 

Jimbo, you have a better chance of the left side of this argument seeing the god they don't believe in than accepting the fact that the CO2 argument is a fraud. The left stands to lose their entire social engineering agenda if the Climate Change debate goes against them. They have come so close to achieving their goal without an election that to lose it now because of a few convenient lies would be devasting to them. Everything hinges on the draconian controls that would be needed to reduce the phony CO2 numbers. In the name of the Global Warming every aspect of our lives would be controlled and they are on the verge of gaining the weapon to subjigate the worlds economies. Thus the fanaticism and the refusal to see the elephant in the room that is the fraud and lies, and distortion of data called CO2 increase.

 

Of course!! Jimbo, Guillermo et al., we've not been discussing the facts with scientists, we've been arguing the toss with sociocidalcomarxisttotallysubvernaldespotilamic opinionists (see images below)and we'll not break their transmogrifying substantialism with good sense and numbers. They are frightened people who are frightened by the people whom they think are scorching this earth, except that the earth is not scorching, is it?
http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/moodyblues/imjustasingerinarockandrollband.html

Knut, in view of your comment, "First I do not have the knowledge or time to go into all the issues stated earlier." #2805 you are excused reading the following link. It's not for you.
http://climatesci.org/2009/05/05/re...states”-by-roger-a-pielke-sr-january-14-2009/

Arctic Ice endeavours to persevere. http://wwwoldfogey.blogspot.com/2008/07/endeavour-to-persevere.html

 

Pericles,

Please do not confuse the arguement with facts.

It was such a good story..........now you go and spoil everything.

I am off to tell the King!

 

Perry,

I know the facts by themselves cannot persuade anyone from a faith-based belief. But often people have beliefs which they sincerely believe are based on fact, but are not. Often such beliefs are in fact irrational fears, which are sometimes referred to as phobias.

A person who exhibits a phobia of spiders, for instance, will often build up a set of supporting beliefs about spiders, (they are aggressive, poisonous, creepy, etc.)which the person uses to placate his rational self, which insists that he have no irrational fears, but only legitimate ones based on a rational assessment of the risk associated with the object of the fear.

An important first step in overcoming a phobia, of spiders in this example, is to 'debunk' that set of supporting beliefs so that the person will at some point recognize the fear for its true nature: irrational, phobic and therefore debilitating. This will not in and of itself dispel the phobia; that still requires a further set of conscious efforts. But debunking the phony supporting, rationalizing beliefs is a necessary first step.

Jimbo

 

http://www.ipa.org.au/library/Review55-1 The past is the key to the present.pdf

 

I have just received today the last book from Ian Plimer, personally signed by Plimer himself:

"Heaven + Earth. Global Warming: The Missing Science"
http://connorcourt.com/catalog1/

I'm not reading it, but 'devouring' it

Cheers.

 

From the publishers internet page:
quote:
A PUB LISHER D EDICATED TO C ULTURE
quote end.

If this book has been subjected to the same amount of corrections/ reading as their internet site has, i'd expext some errors....

(I know what a "pub" is, I do not know what "lisher" is nor do I know of "ulture"..., "edicated" I are).

 

Personally, I think we have little control. We need a cause.
Media create the debate, for obvious reasons. It suits politics.
The end point is, we need new means of energy. Something that is not infinite.
Something that needs research, right now.
It effects our economies. Right now, we are prolonging fossil fuel supply, to ring that last dollar.