Science – Planet Earth continues to run a fever. Last month was the warmest March on record over land surfaces of the world and the second warmest overall worldwide. For the United States, however, it was just an average March, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported Thursday.
Not a member? Sign-up today!
TGrass3001
nopatacious
adrielh791966
daviant701973
DearHunter
popperous
agentX
yarrkz24
endtyranny
dexlovex2
JKHarris
alamala
religiarchy
BJTJ
Will1313
ind06
sleepingbeauty2
pyderi
GregD
Sandra_honestly
whatsnews9
Nikola.K
Goppy
Charlson
pawfoots
jovial
supernews
chazzzer
mdvaldosta
ForrestPhelps
LudoTony
aceofspades1
Debbie
GHOSTWHOWALKS
Radiofreeeuropa
queenb727
UnusualSuspect
libsRfunny
thinkingserious
miklkit
OnionHead
dadesider
complicious
prevgofreka
mishandled
doppich
myathesmith
BronxBomber
christopher1
RussianThreats
| Channels | Anchors | Art & Design | Autos |
|---|---|---|
154)
I call it Spring.
And it's going to get warmer before it gets cooler :)
I also call it GLOBAL WARMING -- CLIMATE CHANGE!!!
LOL
A warm March after a much colder winter. and that is global warming. More and more scientists are coming out and saying the Al Gore global warming is false. One scientist has found through testing and math that the greenhouse gases are not. Others will now work on verifying or discrediting his work. Russians are saying the new ice age is coming. Average earth temperature the last decade has been flat with a slight downturn this year. This story ignores what the sensors report that were put down 2000 meters in the ocean. Mostly flat temperature with a very slight downturn.
Everybody ignores the fact that the earth and moon have the same average temperature. How can that be if the earth is in the throws if a man made global warming?
"Everybody ignores the fact that the earth and moon have the same average temperature."
What does that even mean?
LOL I sure wish I had the cajones to speak as if I'm more educated and informed on a subject thousands of climatologists have spent their entire adult lives studying. Only a neocon could be so arrogant.
I correlate a direct relationship, between people who start off a rebuttal with LOL, and whether or not they are going to say anything real; offer any references, facts,
or non-reddish herrings.
Endo, please provide the source for your comments above...
endo,
Your only "reference" for your argument is Gore. Yet you can't provide any other to refute the issue that overall earth temps in March have set a record high.
You're definitely not a scientist on any level, certainly you've never debated or argued law before a judge.
So, what expertise do you have? Ideological constraints?
I call it glow bull warming. lol
Haha, you're so clever.... Did mommy help you with that one?
Did you get that from your Glo-Worm?
"I also call it GLOBAL WARMING -- CLIMATE CHANGE!!!"
Yeah, right lol. Several months of far below-average temperatures all winter long over pretty much all of the northern hemisphere, and it's just "Mother NAture" to the Church of Global Warming. One allegedly warm month, and it's "GLOBAL WARMING" lol
I stood out front of my house every day in February and emptied a can of my wife's hair spray into the air so all of could have a nice spring, and this is the thanks I get.
You are too kind ;)
Did you get an ass-whoopin from your wife for leaving her without hairspray?
Yes, I did. But in her defense, I enjoyed it.
lol.
"I stood out front of my house every day in February and emptied a can of my wife's hair spray into the air so all of could have a nice spring, and this is the thanks I get."
--Well, I can't say for sure what impact that would have on the environment but a hazardous exposure to hairspray fumes would certainly explain how you got a woman to agree to marry you. ;-P
Yes, but unlike you, it beats sniffing her ass.
Even your God on earth GW has conceded that the phenomenon of man -caused global warming is happening - read any newspaper from the last few days - lib or cons, large print or small, pictures or not - they all have the same story of GW's concession to science
Wolfie - I've missed your negs - at least the warming temps will dry the spit you have on your face from spitting into the wind
Even your God on earth GW
Are you serious?
Even your God on earth GW
Are you serious?
ok not yours ,slate - meant it for those who virtually deify him & his take on science
"Several months of far below-average temperatures all winter long over pretty much all of the northern hemisphere,"
Actually it was a very warm winter down here in the south.
locky wrote: "it's going to get warmer before it gets cooler"
thats what we've been trying to tell you.
and next time, instead of calling it "spring", remember to call it "the warmest spring on record" so you can be accurate.
What about when it's the "warmest century on record?"
Will deniers finally see what's happening?
TOO LATE THEN! We'll ALL be screwed. Drought. Starvation.
Like John McCain on the economy- do NOTHING and let it play out. We're just humans. We can cause global destruction but we WON'T fix it.
That Neocon strategy has really helped America so far, hasn't it?
We're just humans. We can cause global destruction but we WON'T fix it.
Sorry, but 17,000 scientists disagree with you.
Oh come on locky, your ganna use the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine petition, as evidence of scientific debate?
That thing is a joke. They let anyone sign it. At one point Michael J Fox, and the Spice Girls were listed as geologists,climatologists, you name it.. Heck, im currently in the process of getting Rick Astley added to it(no joke im rickrolling them, stay tuned for fun times when it gets approved)
They do not verify anything, if you send your name(or someone elses, or even Perry Mason), and say your a scientist, guess what? your added to the list.. You could be a 16yr old kid, or a garbage truck driver and they would add you to it, so long as you check a box that says you have scientific degree when sending in your 'credentials'.
17000 out of how many million, Locky? It is just silly to think that the carbon and other things we put into the atmosphere are harmless. Every single one of us puts more gases and debris into the atmosphere than our biological functions demand, and there are SIX AND A HALF BILLION of us!
Ohh typical Aidenag "know-nothing" retort. You do know contributing members of the IPCC report have signed that petition? You do know Canada has it's own list of scientists saying the same thing?
Face it, you guzzled too much Kool-Aid.
As for the bonehead who called it the "Warmest century on record," we've only been tracking for barely more than a century. So, it's also the COLDEST century on record! lol
I'm suprised all you deniers haven't fallen off the edge of the earth yet. At least you can go to bed secure in the knowledge that the sun will be revolving around us tommorrow & the moon won't get warm enough to rot the green cheese
"Sorry, but 17,000 scientists disagree with you."
That's 19,000 and climbing, and includes scientists who contributed to the IPCC report. But don't rain in Aidenag's parade. He has an agenda to push.
erased post.
ugh. why does propeller keep putting posts in the wrong places?
crespi
You are obviously a Goreabite. The inconvenient facts are that his movie was almost all wildly in excess of what the scientists were and are saying. Most of the leading scientists in the world say that Gores concept is bogus. Most believe that we are experiencing a global warming. A large percent believe that it only comes from the sun and will be like the middle ages one where it was a boon to agriculture. The greenhouse gas is a theory that at present is being challenged by scientists. Remember that scare that freon was causing the ozone depletion and then turned out to be false? Because of that false theory we are being forced to go to a gas that is not as good and more caustic so air conditioners are more costly and more prone to failure.
Way to go libs. Enforce a theory and ram it down peoples throats and when it turns out to be false leave the laws in place making it more expensive for everybody.
You have a diferent source of facts than the rest of us.
"Most of the leading scientists in the world say that Gores concept is bogus. "
Where is this from? When did they say it?
Why do you keep talking about Al Gore? Is there something personal for you in a discussion about temperature averages?
Global warming has exactly as much to do with liberal/conservative, as a scientific discussion of the existence of the Higgs particle.
Endo, you are aware that the climate scientists were saying this prior to Gore's documentary right? Please provide proof of everything you've been spewing. I can't wait to see it....
"The inconvenient facts are that his movie was almost all wildly in excess of what the scientists were and are saying"
Actually, the majority of scientists, and in fact if you don't count the ones paid by big Oil and Coal nearly every single scientist, agrees that the majority of global warming models weren't excessive enough and undercalculated the danger and effect of global warming.
Funny, the IPCC has adjusted many of it's extreme forecasts downward over the years. More inline with some of the outside funded studies.
Please provide where you are getting this info. From the studies and reports I've seen they have shown that they were to conservative in their predictions and things were happening faster than expected.
IAmMine: "Please provide where you are getting this info."
http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/ar...
You can google and find their wildly divergent predictions of sea level rise over the years along with the constantly varying parameters that they use for their "predictions".
Now, you show me where the IPCC has been too conservative. (In matters of importance)
Thanks here is some info on the author the political scientist Roger Pielke:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Roge...
And here is some info on being too conservative:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21423872/
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climat...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/...
this on just one quick little search on google...
Pielke has a somewhat nuanced position on climate change, which is sometimes taken for skepticism, a label that he explicitly renounces[1][2] . He has said:
"the evidence of a human fingerprint on the global and regional climate is incontrovertible as clearly illustrated in the National Research Council report and in our research papers "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_A._Pielke
If the graphs are accurately drawn in this article (there are no actual numbers here to verify the graphics), then 1995 was the most accurate prediction. Take a look.
Yeah, Tkyrchncs. The world is just CRAWLING with scientists.
Sure. If you include POLITICAL scientists like Al Gore, or anybody with a microphone-- including rock stars, well yeah, EVERYBODY'S an expert on climate. And the 17,000 scientists that look at our climate for a living just don't get it.
What is your science qualifications? I'm just curious what training you've had that makes you think that you can make make a judgment on the validity of a complex science question.
Are you just a typical example of a conservative mind-set in which you take a POSITION, and then cherry-pick info. in an attempt to support your stick-figure understanding of the world? Are you even capable of voicing anything that hasn't been spouted by Limbaugh or Fox?
What are your qualifications for passing JUDGMENT on this dynamic? I think we'd all like to hear.
>>Are you just a typical example of a conservative mind-set in which you take a POSITION, and then cherry-pick info
Like Steve Colbert said in his Press Corps Dinner:
"The greatest thing about this man [George W Bush] is he's steady. You know where he stands. He believes the same thing
Wednesday that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday."
He believes the same thing
Wednesday that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday."
That's because it took him so long to read Monday's reports
ROTFLMAO
Hey Iso, it doesn't take a scientist to read and comprehend numbers gathered by scientists.
There was some cherry-picking in the article in case you didn't notice.
I would like to ask Al Gore the same thing.
Ever notice that he likes to spout about the climate but isn't willing to debate anybody about it?
See, the difference between you and me is that I look at the science.
You look at a politician.
Locky, the Goracle has spoken. There is no debate. The debate is over. You may not look at the science since you are not a climate scientist. Got it? ;)