Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Rethinking Climate Change Assertions

November 27, 2013

Contrary to what President Barack Obama claims, the science on climate change is far from settled. That conclusion can be drawn from a new scientific repor....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(21)

daWraith

Nov-30-13 4:34 AM

Re the statistics below:

"You know how this works. GW alarmists will say to these statistics: “The is just the weather and it is not climate. You should learn the difference.”

But, if the statistics were reversed, almost 1,000 record highs and just 17 record lows, the words of the GW alarmist change to: “Aha! This is climate change and you had better get used to it, or else stop the carbon emissions before we all die.”

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Nov-30-13 4:32 AM

In 1934, the REAL hottest year on record, over 10,000 record high temperatures were set versus about 300 record lows. THAT"S a good indication that temperatures were increasing.

Records in the last 7 days:

205 snowfall records.

969 Low Max. 203 Low temps.

17 High Temp.

61 High minimum.

Yes, those are snowfall records in Texas. And yes, it is still Fall.

If Global Warming were REAL as Wheezerdawg keep babbling, this would NOT be happening.

More evidence for Global COOLING in the last 5 years than WARMING.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oldsteelmaker

Nov-30-13 2:30 AM

James Lovelock, one of the founders of modern climatology, and founder of the Gaia concept, was one of the major proponents of climate change. He now says there is no evidence it is happening as theorized. He also says any scientist that claims the "science is settled" should be stripped of their positions for being politicians, not scientists.

In 1900, everyone was positive physics had thoroughly described the world, and "the science was settled". Then some guys named Planck, von Pauli and Einstein came along, and threw that idea into the ditch.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oldsteelmaker

Nov-30-13 2:24 AM

Dawg, you know better. There is zero empirical evidence this is happening. The warmest time in the last hundred years was in the 30s, not now. The same Greenland glaciers supposedly showing by their retreat that this "irreversible" change is happening were well away from the coast then. There is photo evidence from the Danish government of that. Using the data from weather stations that have not moved in this country shows we were warmer then than the hottest times currently. Those, BTW, were a decade ago.

The only way to show otherwise is that unusual patterns are happening. There is no evidence of that. We just had the earliest start of Arctic ice formation in over a decade. How does that fit with the models?

It doesn't.

We just had the quietest Atlantic hurricane season in decades. algore said the storms would be worse and worse. How does that fit?

It doesn't.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Nov-29-13 5:29 PM

Wheezerdog, if that bullcrap you know nothing about, but pretend to, were TRUE, why didn't the earth just BURN UP back 65 million years ago when the dinosauers were the top of the food chain??

The CO2 level was 2000 ppm not the puny 400 ppm of today and man was about 64 million years away from being the big bad cause of everything???

Instead the earth went into an ice age instead and dinos disappeared for ever.

Reality is the biggest enemy of a disgraced theory held on to by a tiny few in the science world who ARE PAID to CONTINUE LOOKING FOR EVIDENCE.

The evidence to support Bigfoot is greater!!!

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Wheeldog

Nov-29-13 1:37 PM

When it comes to twisted logic, the WI sets the gold standard. Climate change is the result of a complex and dynamic mix of causes and processes. CO2 continues to be the primary human-generated contribution, and CO2 has a far longer effective lifespan than does methane. As CO2 and other GHG's increase in the atmosphere it sets off a self-reinforcing process affecting, among other things, sources of methane. Vast deposits of methane and other gasses are locked in arctic and antarctic permafrost and beneath the seas in hydrate form. As the general environment warms these are set free to increase the warming process. Human forced climate change is a reality.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oldsteelmaker

Nov-29-13 10:51 AM

Remember "The science is settled"? Noted climatologist Harry Reid, I recall, said that.

Not according to James Lovelock. Who, I hear the greenies cry, is this nobody?

Jim Lovelock is one of the founders of modern climatology. He is in his middle nineties, so he's been in the field for a while. He is the originator of the Gaia concept, that the world is a living organism. And, as recently as 8 years ago, he was a vocal leader of the climate change movement.

BUT, unlike algore and his ilk, he IS a scientist. A true scientist looks at ALL the data, not just the part that agrees with his ideas. Over the last 8 years he has concluded there are huge holes in the premises, and that none of the climate change theories can explain what has happened in that time frame.

In an interview he said anyone that claims the science is settled, in ANY subject, is no scientist.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oldsteelmaker

Nov-29-13 10:39 AM

Geo Metro, You DO realize that "passing gas", as my mom used to call it, is methane emission, right? And that every critter, big or small, emits some? And that decomposing vegetation also emits methane?

Do you have ANY idea how many billions of tons of insects there are in the world??? How many millions of square miles of swamps there are? To claim that some human activity, no matter how widespread, can come CLOSE to what happens naturally shows the ethical and intellectual bankruptcy of the green movement. As their initial claim have been disproved, they keep making wilder statements, hoping gullible fools like you will help with the power grab that is their true goal.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

1whoworks

Nov-28-13 10:50 PM

More lies from the liar in chief! He actually started a speech last week saying he "isn't an ideologue" Really? Really? Wow, thought he might actually be proud of that,

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Nov-28-13 8:18 PM

Bushwhinefactory, the coldest temperature ever recorded in 26003 for the month of November in almost 100 years of record keeping was 15F.

The official low for Monday night was 14F.

Anyone who thinks man-caused global warming is a reality in 2013 is frankly a misinformed buffoon.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Nov-28-13 8:06 PM

Bushwhineconstantly, 31,487 American scientists have signed this petition,including 9,029 with PhDs:

"We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is NO CONVINCING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate.

Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."

Only a fool would think otherwise.

My numbers are bigger than your numbers.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Nov-28-13 8:01 PM

Bushwineconstantly, 97% of about 300 scientists who are PAID to research Global Warming claim to believe it.

MILLIONS of scientists world wide do NOT.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BushCrimeFamily

Nov-28-13 4:57 PM

97% of scientists believe climate change is real. Only a fool thinks otherwise.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

atoddh

Nov-28-13 3:40 PM

Some coal mines do capture and sell their methane. Methane produced by land fills is also being used for power. It may be feasible to harvest methane from some enclosed livestock operations. The technology of drilling is being improved to avoid methane loss.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

atoddh

Nov-28-13 3:31 PM

Is the NR suggesting eliminating livestock?

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Nov-28-13 9:15 AM

caltrans, whine # 786,345,452.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Nov-28-13 6:34 AM

GEO, since methane is such a threat to the global temperature, maybe you could tell us what the coal mining industry does to eliminate all that methane the mines produce. Other than vent it to the atmosphere, I mean. Maybe coal booster methane is different from natural gas methane... LOL

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

caltransplant

Nov-27-13 6:57 PM

Lie # 28,832.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikeyd

Nov-27-13 6:40 PM

the methane that comes out of this dog of mine is more potent than an atomic bomb.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Nov-27-13 4:01 PM

A link to the solicitation, with supporting documenation,has been sent to an editor of the NR.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Nov-27-13 3:59 PM

Methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than Carbon Dioxide; and, studies at shale gas fields out west show that as much as thirty percent of the methane in a producing field is lost to the atmosphere through cracks induced by fracking. More is lost during distribution. Other studies, by Cornell U. and others, demonstrate that continuing to exploit shale gas as we are will cause more global warming than will continuing to burn coal at our present rate. On the plus side, the USDOE has developed technology to convert CO2 and H2O into gasoline, diesel and jet fuel; and, on October 29 of this year, the US DOE published "Solicitation Number 14-396" for their "Sunshine-to-Petrol (TM)" or "S2P", "Renewable Drop-in Transportation Fuels", for companies to participate with the USDOE in establishing an industry that will use solar power to convert CO2 and H2O into gasoline, diesel and jet fuel. A link to the solicitation, with supporting documenation,

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 21 of 21 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: