Greenhouse effect theory is pulverized in new study

[Superman]

This is called seasonal ice growth, and is a reason why USCG ice breakers have to help create shipping channels when the poles face away from the sun for 3mos. May is also the height of the freezing period, as the north pole starts to turn back toward the sun. This happens yearly and their ships bounce from north to south pole to open shipping lanes. Here's a shot of my boy Jeff working an ice breaker in 2007 in Antarctica. He's worked both poles and has the medals for each.

View attachment 3488

Want to know why this explanation doesn't 'hold water'? Because sea level rise is measurable. The only way you can get this type of measurable sea level rise, is the gross increase of seasonal melting polar ice over seasonal freezing, which is what we now have.

Cope just explained a lot of the climate change that has the antifa left up in arms and clutching their zes.

additionally, let's assume that we all were taught that the earth is not straight up and down, but angled. and now it rotates. Wouldn't those facts, as the planet rotates the sun and the sun goes through it's own changes (coincidentlaly or not, unprovoked by man), influence the exact climate on our little planet?

 

[Stryker]

Global sea level rise is a measurable change. What causes global sea levels to rise? The net increase of melting over freezing in the poles. What causes this to happen? Global rising ocean temps.

Usually dramatic climate shifts are only measurable in eons. We are showing measureable changes within our lifetimes. What is the only change to the global ecosystem during this short timeline? The creation of industry and factory farming would be biggest changes I can point to for our planet in that time span.

Any report stating the poles would be melted in this decade are completely off the rails. That was never going to occur. And I don't recall anyone stating a gloom and doom in our lifetime for complete polar melting. Though there have been plenty of models created to show the world if sea levels rose to support all of the melted polar ice. I'd never expect to entertain or believe a total melt at those insanely short numbers, as vehemently as I will not believe humans are not causing a change in our environment.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

Global sea level rise is a measurable change. What causes global sea levels to rise? The net increase of melting over freezing in the poles. What causes this to happen? Global rising ocean temps.

Usually dramatic climate shifts are only measurable in eons. We are showing measureable changes within our lifetimes. What is the only change to the global ecosystem during this short timeline? The creation of industry and factory farming would be biggest changes I can point to for our planet in that time span.

Any report stating the poles would be melted in this decade are completely off the rails. That was never going to occur. And I don't recall anyone stating a gloom and doom in our lifetime for complete polar melting. Though there have been plenty of models created to show the world if sea levels rose to support all of the melted polar ice. I'd never expect to entertain or believe a total melt at those insanely short numbers, as vehemently as I will not believe humans are not causing a change in our environment.

Nice hypothesis. Too bad it continuously fails testing.

 

[Superman]

so if the poles melted, how much money would we have to pay in taxes to right this wrong?
asking for a friend.

 

[ark steel]

so if the poles melted, how much money would we have to pay in taxes to right this wrong?
asking for a friend.

just like one of you racist, homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic mother ******* to worry about how it affects your pocket. What about the children who haven't even had a chance to even choose their gender yet? I mean the ones we don't abort. Nobody gives a **** about the aborted ones.

Besides, if you have to ask....

 

[Stryker]

You know what falls apart? People without degrees writing science articles and self promoting them as fact without consensus.

Probably zero Supe. DC would be underwater.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[Superman]

just like one of you racist, homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic mother ******* to worry about how it affects your pocket. What about the children who haven't even had a chance to even choose their gender yet? I mean the ones we don't abort. Nobody gives a **** about the aborted ones.

Besides, if you have to ask....

you forgot xenophobic. STOP WITH YOUR OPPRESSION!

 

[Spike]

The Hoax continues to crumble...don't the idiots know we are STILL coming out of the last Ice Age?


Alarmists Are In Way Over Their Heads On Rising Ocean Claims

Dr. Singer is an expert in remote sensing measurements, having served as founding director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service, vice chair of the U.S. National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere, deputy assistant administrator for policy at the EPA, and as a reviewer for several of the IPCC reports. He is an elected Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Physical Society, and the American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics.

"First of all, the accelerated warming that was forecast to produce catastrophic sea level rise flooding Bangladesh and Pacific islands causing hundreds of millions of refugees to flee coastal regions hasn’t occurred. This isn’t to say either that the planet hasn’t been warming, or that sea levels haven’t risen. Of course they have, although these are hardly new developments. I can also make an argument that rising sea levels and warming periods may be somewhat disconnected matters.

Let’s understand that the world’s mean temperatures have been rising at a pretty constant rate of about one degree Fahrenheit (0.6oC) over the past 100 years, and is likely to continue , although with both warmer and cooler fluctuations, for many hundreds of years into the future. Over each of the past several centuries, including the last one, sea levels rose by about 7 inches (18 cm).

Accordingly, neither the overall warming trend or sea level rise began with the fossil-burning Industrial Revolution… nor have they changed in any detectable way due to human influences. And we can’t even really know that the second follows the first.

Sea levels rose during the Little Ice Age from about 1400-1859 AD… a period which was considerably colder than now.

The end of the last Ice Age 18,000 years ago caused the sea level to rise by a huge amount…about 400 feet. This change happened rapidly at first, caused primarily by the melting of huge ice sheets covering North America and Eurasian land masses which disappeared about 8000-5000 years ago.

The West Antarctic Ice sheet began to melt at that time also, but at a much slower rate, and that melting continues today. We might expect this melting to continue until it is gone in another 7,000 years or so… or until the next Ice Age, whichever comes first. Other smaller ice sheets that once existed in the Antarctic are already gone. "

https://www.forbes.com/sites/larryb...ir-heads-on-rising-ocean-claims/#65925a181194

 

[CharlesDavenport]

You know what falls apart? People without degrees writing science articles and self promoting them as fact without consensus.

That's not how facts work. Consensus has nothing to do with it. Neither does the number of people with degrees writing about it. You've exposed both the elitist and group think around this issue.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

That's not how facts work. Consensus has nothing to do with it. Neither does the number of people with degrees writing about it. You've exposed both the elitist and group think around this issue.

There is consensus in New England that the Pats**** don't cheat.

 

[Sarge]

Back in the day, there was consensus that the earth was flat.

 

[Spike]

They should make it mandatory everyone start burning old tires on every street corner, to save the world from an icy death!

GLOBAL COOLING WARNING!


Warm = good , Cool = death


Global Warmists Angry Half The Earth Isn’t Covered In Ice

A newly published study indicates global warming starting shortly after the Industrial Revolution may have helped the Earth narrowly avert a catastrophic ice age, and global warming advocates and their mainstream media allies are very angry about it. Yes, really.

For the past 3 million years, the Earth has undergone a regular cycle of long ice age glaciations occasionally interrupted by short warm periods. The glaciations last approximately 100,000 years and the warm periods last an average of only 10,000 years.

Our present warm period has been in existence for 10,000 years, leading many scientists to worry that a new ice age glaciation may be imminent.

A study in the science journal Nature examined the natural cycles that cause the cyclical glaciations and warm periods and concluded that by the 1800s—after 500 years of cooling temperatures during the Little Ice Age—the conditions were at hand for the Earth to end its 10,000-year warm period and plunge into another full-blown glaciation.

During glaciations, ice sheets more than a mile deep cover much of Europe, Asia, and North America. The Nature study concluded human-caused global warming may have been the deciding factor preventing the plunge into another ice age. The study also noted that global warming may be preventing such a plunge even today.

Got that? It is a horrible thing that thousands of feet of glacial ice do not cover New York, Chicago, London, Stockholm, St. Petersburg, Warsaw, and Berlin today because 100,000 years from now—when the glaciation would finally end—there would be pretty new lakes and rivers left behind, along with fertile soil for whatever species may or may not exist on Earth 100,000 years from now.

Population centers with tens of millions of people would be literally destroyed—including the eradication of the entire nations of Canada, Great Britain, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Ireland, and all of the Baltic nations—and billions of people would die of starvation as a result of related crop failures and other climate disasters.

This is what global warming advocates and the mainstream media want to happen because it is better for billions of people to die a painful natural death than to live in the temperate world of today as a result of global warming.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/01/21/global-warmists-angry-half-the-earth-isnt-covered-in-ice/

 

[SteelChip]

Well, we will soon see how this Global Warming stuff plays out. The petri dish on the left coast will give us the results soon enough.

Gov. Jerry Brown celebrated the passage of a bill Monday night to extend California's cap-and-trade program through 2030.

Under California’s system, emissions are capped and polluters are required to obtain permits for the greenhouse gases they emit. Though companies can trade for more capacity through a state-run auction or on the private market, the additional cost is intended to create an incentive for them to reduce their carbon footprint.

Revenue raised from the auctions were originally meant for state projects to offset the effects of climate change, including hundreds of millions of dollars for the high-speed rail line under construction.

Republicans complained that the measure would increase gas prices and home utility bills.

The existing cap-and-trade program raised gas prices by 11 cents a gallon, the state’s Legislative Analyst reported last year. But estimates of how the current legislation might affect consumers has varied widely. It’s difficult to predict how much gas will cost in the future, let alone what share could be attributed to extending cap-and-trade.

: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article161887448.html#storylink=cpy

 

[Ron Burgundy]

They should make it mandatory everyone start burning old tires on every street corner, to save the world from an icy death!

GLOBAL COOLING WARNING!


Warm = good , Cool = death


Global Warmists Angry Half The Earth Isn’t Covered In Ice

A newly published study indicates global warming starting shortly after the Industrial Revolution may have helped the Earth narrowly avert a catastrophic ice age, and global warming advocates and their mainstream media allies are very angry about it. Yes, really.

For the past 3 million years, the Earth has undergone a regular cycle of long ice age glaciations occasionally interrupted by short warm periods. The glaciations last approximately 100,000 years and the warm periods last an average of only 10,000 years.

Our present warm period has been in existence for 10,000 years, leading many scientists to worry that a new ice age glaciation may be imminent.

A study in the science journal Nature examined the natural cycles that cause the cyclical glaciations and warm periods and concluded that by the 1800s—after 500 years of cooling temperatures during the Little Ice Age—the conditions were at hand for the Earth to end its 10,000-year warm period and plunge into another full-blown glaciation.

During glaciations, ice sheets more than a mile deep cover much of Europe, Asia, and North America. The Nature study concluded human-caused global warming may have been the deciding factor preventing the plunge into another ice age. The study also noted that global warming may be preventing such a plunge even today.

Got that? It is a horrible thing that thousands of feet of glacial ice do not cover New York, Chicago, London, Stockholm, St. Petersburg, Warsaw, and Berlin today because 100,000 years from now—when the glaciation would finally end—there would be pretty new lakes and rivers left behind, along with fertile soil for whatever species may or may not exist on Earth 100,000 years from now.

Population centers with tens of millions of people would be literally destroyed—including the eradication of the entire nations of Canada, Great Britain, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Ireland, and all of the Baltic nations—and billions of people would die of starvation as a result of related crop failures and other climate disasters.

This is what global warming advocates and the mainstream media want to happen because it is better for billions of people to die a painful natural death than to live in the temperate world of today as a result of global warming.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/01/21/global-warmists-angry-half-the-earth-isnt-covered-in-ice/

The world would be a great place if it wasn't for all those damn people.

 

[Stryker]

That's not how facts work. Consensus has nothing to do with it. Neither does the number of people with degrees writing about it. You've exposed both the elitist and group think around this issue.

It's how the scientific method works. You test your hypothesis, you get a result. Other scientists test that hypothesis and a consensus is reached. The beauty is new technology can then come to exist that allows more advanced testing and can create a new consensus.

Remember when the earth was the center of the universe? It was written in a book that people would kill you if you said it wasn't true, even with scientific testing. Though new technology created better testing methods to make it irrefutable. Though people will still try to refute consensus, since flat earthers still exist, and many others that choose not to understand science. I am not one of those people.

I choose to follow the science, not the left or right slanted articles supported by different industries, to confuse and dilute knowledge.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

It's how the scientific method works. You test your hypothesis, you get a result. Other scientists test that hypothesis and a consensus is reached. The beauty is new technology can then come to exist that allows more advanced testing and can create a new consensus.

Remember when the earth was the center of the universe? It was written in a book that people would kill you if you said it wasn't true, even with scientific testing. Though new technology created better testing methods to make it irrefutable. Though people will still try to refute consensus, since flat earthers still exist, and many others that choose not to understand science. I am not one of those people.

I choose to follow the science, not the left or right slanted articles supported by different industries, to confuse and dilute knowledge.

The problem with AGW is that in spite of the hypothesis consistently failing testing, there is still a consensus. The opposite of the scientific method.

 

[Tibs]

Here are the cliff notes for our distinguished global warming skeptics on the board:

Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (methane, carbon dioxide, etc.) let visible light pass through, but absorb infrared light.

This causes the earth to heat up. The warmer atmosphere emits more infrared light, which tends to be re-absorbed

Since the industrial age began around 1750, atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased by 40% and methane has increased by 150%.

Such increases cause extra infrared light absorption, further heating Earth above its typical temperature range (even as energy from the sun stays basically the same).

Energy that gets to Earth has an even harder time leaving it causing Earth’s average temperature to increase–– producing global climate change.

Emissions are measurable. Temperature changes are measurable. The effects are measurable.

They lead to the same conclusion. 97% of scientists agree. The standouts have ties to fossil fuel industries.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/sunlorrie">@sunlorrie</a> but don’t take 97% of scientist’s word for it, take the people who have been to space’s:<a href="https://t.co/ovdtoolSGx">https://t.co/ovdtoolSGx</a></p>— HOT CORN Li'l (@karengeier) <a href="https://twitter.com/karengeier/status/807612113870954496">December 10, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[ark steel]

The problem with AGW is that in spite of the hypothesis consistently failing testing, there is still a consensus. The opposite of the scientific method.

when they find results that don't fit the 'consensus" they spend a **** ton of $ to figure out why it really DOES fit their "consensus' but the non-elites just arent smart enough to understand.

 

[Steeltime]

Tibs:

The graph you post about the past 1300 years is a proven fraud. It is the Mann trick of "disappearing" the Medieval Warming Period ("MWP").

Here is what the IPCC published as to earth's temperature history over the past years, including the WMP:

That's the debate about Mann's phony hockey stick, Tibs. His graph combined different types of data sets (tree ring data vs. actual temperature readings) to "hide" the MWP and claim that NOW, TODAY IS HOTTER THAN EVER.

Except that claim is not true and was never true:

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/mann-made-climate-change-disappearing-the-mwp/

Further, for the love of God, for the love of Allah, for the love of all that is holy ... GIVE UP THE DAMN 97% CLAIM.

http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/07...e-scientists-agree-with-un-ipcc-95-certainty/

 

[Tibs]

Alright Steeltime, you need to stop what you're doing, because it's wrong and unacceptable. If you continue in this manner, we're going to have a normal, adult conversation about global warming. That may just break the board and crash the server, as it's literally never happened since I've been here. You have been warned! Get back to the name-calling, meme-posting and slinging of insults that we know and love around here.

ps - I'll look into this theory about a theory about "disappearing" the Medieval Warming Period showing that proven facts published by NASA may also actually be a theory.

 

[Supersteeler]

ps - I'll look into this theory about a theory about "disappearing" the Medieval Warming Period showing that proven facts published by NASA may also actually be a theory.

When you check into it don't forget to think about the money trail. Where it's going, where it's coming from, and why. Plays a very important role in the "scientific" climate research. If God forbid somebody posted conclusive findings that showed that natural Earth cycles were the primary cause of climate change and that we couldn't do anything to stop it, think about how many well paying jobs and programs would end. That wouldn't benefit anyone, especially the person who published the findings. He/she would have in essence ended their own profession. .It's much better to leave it as a controllable force, so that people can continue to throw money at it. As long as they think they have the control, they'll continue to fund it and the huge donations will continue to be made.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

When you check into it don't forget to think about the money trail. Where it's going, where it's coming from, and why. Plays a very important role in the "scientific" climate research. If God forbid somebody posted conclusive findings that showed that natural Earth cycles were the primary cause of climate change and that we couldn't do anything to stop it, think about how many well paying jobs and programs would end. That wouldn't benefit anyone, especially the person who published the findings. He/she would have in essence ended their own profession. .It's much better to leave it as a controllable force, so that people can continue to throw money at it. As long as they think they have the control, they'll continue to fund it and the huge donations will continue to be made.

No, no, the only money in climate research comes from oil companies paying people to deny it. There is no money coming from political parties, government, greenie groups, George Soros, and Peter Lewis paying people to say it's real.

 

[Spike]

The neo-fascist fear-mongering socialists WANT you to live in fear - fear THEY control

REJECT them, IGNORE the chicken little fools


Twenty-Five Years Since The Ozone Hole Killed Us All

DDT
Global Cooling
China Syndrome
The Ozone Hole
Acid Rain
Global Warming
Climate Change

– the left moves seamlessly from one world ending snake oil scam to another.

In 1992 they blamed the ozone hole on President Bush, and said it was going to kill us all!

 

[Tibs]

No, no, the only money in climate research comes from oil companies paying people to deny it. There is no money coming from political parties, government, greenie groups, George Soros, and Peter Lewis paying people to say it's real.

Which means what exactly? That dirty money flows freely, but somehow climate change money is dirtier, or more nefarious than the anti-climate change campaign? Funded by big oil and big corporations? Funded by the Koch brothers, pounded down your throats by Fox News? Really? None of that matters?

The neo-fascist fear-mongering socialists WANT you to live in fear - fear THEY control

Turn on the snowflake machine. The alt right Trumpsters are slipping, slipping, slipping down a slippery slope. Make sure you stand up, right here on the board.. Stand up and defend Trump over the next few weeks. The whole lot of you.

The neo-fascist fear-mongering socialists

Make sure you hang around as Trump kneels on his sword. And make sure you have your hurt feelings in check if you've been called a scumbag, far right extremist on this board.

 

[Supersteeler]

Which means what exactly? That dirty money flows freely, but somehow climate change money is dirtier, or more nefarious than the anti-climate change campaign? Funded by big oil and big corporations? Funded by the Koch brothers, pounded down your throats by Fox News? Really? None of that matters?
Turn on the snowflake machine. The alt right Trumpsters are slipping, slipping, slipping down a slippery slope. Make sure you stand up, right here on the board.. Stand up and defend Trump over the next few weeks. The whole lot of you.

Make sure you hang around as Trump kneels on his sword. And make sure you have your hurt feelings in check if you've been called a scumbag, far right extremist on this board.

Uhhh, Trump supporters are not the ones prone to prolonged absence on the board when things aren't going well. Just sayin....