Global Warming

[garyb]

yep.
nice one.
everything smells and tastes like smoke and there's ash everywhere...

[Audiographe]

There has been in the history of the earth two extinctions.
Dinosaures and Before a total animal extinction on the surface because
Interest rate too high CO ² (Volcanoes)
"Période du Cretacé Ridicule"
And this ridiculous period is nothing beside what happens.
There was that small living organism that can survive.

[BingoTheClowno]

not accurate projection.

CO2 is the most important life giving gas. plants breathe it in and breathe out O2. the earth actually has had extremely LOW levels of CO2 in the last few hundred years.it's a good thing that the CO2 levels are rising, we have the chance for a very green earth in the near future. typically, according to the ice core samples that have been done, CO2 levels begin to rise about 100years AFTER the temperature begins to rise, followed by a bloom of plant life and an increase in O2.

nice graph, though.

Plants don't "breathe", they process CO2 and water in what's known as photosynthesis. But I guess we can call it breathing since you are the expert climatologist on Planet Z.

[BingoTheClowno]

Almost 1 Million people forced to evacuate their homes.

Arnold Schwarzenegger:
"The people are happy. They have everything here,"

Are you still there in your home Gary?

[BingoTheClowno]

more useful information is here:
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_400k_yrs.html

you can even find facts to back up this claim:

Putting it all together:
total human greenhouse gas contributions
add up to about 0.28% of the greenhouse effect

With respect to greenhouse gases, current carbon dioxide atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and methane far exceed those of any time in the last 650,000 years. The report examines a wide range of less significant greenhouse gases. Increases in concentrations are primarily due to fossil-fuel combustion, agriculture and land-use change.

On global warming, the observed change is now unequivocally evident in air and ocean temperatures, melting of snow and ice, rising sea-levels (through thermal expansion) and is a result of human activities. This effect is at least five times greater than that due to natural solar emission variations.

With respect to changes in the climate system, changes include shifts in wind patterns and precipitation, ocean salinity and acidity, sea ice, ice sheets and aspects of extreme precipitation. Paleoclimate comparisons confirm the unusual nature of recent warming.

It is very likely (more than 90 per cent) that greenhouse gas increases caused most of the warming since the mid-20th century. It is extremely unlikely (less than 5 per cent) that the warming was caused by natural variability.

Looking ahead, it is anticipated through this century that mean temperatures will rise by 0.6-0.7 degrees Celsius by 2025, 1.3-1.7 degrees by 2055 and 1.7-4.0 degrees by 2095. There will also be more frequent, intense, longer-lived heat waves, minimum temperatures will warm faster than maximum temperatures, there will be a decrease in frost days (in mid to high latitudes) and an increased growing season (in mid to high latitudes).

There will be an increase in mean rainfall in the tropics (monsoons) and high latitudes, a decrease in the subtropics and mid latitudes. The intensity of extreme rainfall events will increase and there will be longer periods between events in the subtropics and mid latitudes.

Tropical cyclones will deliver increased peak winds and precipitation and possibly become less frequent with geographic shifts of occurrence.

Mid-latitude storms will become fewer with a pole-ward shift by several degrees but will have lower central pressure leading to increased wind speed and wave heights.

The extent of snow cover and sea-ice will decrease, glacier and ice sheets will lose mass, and the summer Arctic sea ice could be lost as early as the middle of this century. There will also be an increase in the depth of the thaw.

There is agreement that the Earth will lose its current carbon dioxide absorption efficiency, greater atmospheric accumulation of carbon dioxide although there are significant model differences and uncertainties still exist.

By the end of this century there will be a further 0.19-0.58 metre rise in sea level, although there will be regional differences and there remain outstanding uncertainties with respect to additional contribution of ice flows to the sea-level rise.

Atlantic ocean overturning is expected to decrease by 0-25 per cent but it is unlikely to be the precipitation of a collapse in the overturning.

There is still uncertainty surrounding El Nino. The phenomenon is likely to continue as a cause of year-to-year climate variability but trends in its frequency and magnitude are confused. There is also some uncertainty about monsoons, with likely increased precipitation but some confusion due to the impact of aerosols (dust).

Australia


Mean temperatures south of 30 degrees south will rise 2.6 degrees Celsius (2.4-2.9 range) by 2100, and north of 30 degrees south mean temperatures will rise 3.0 degrees (2.8-3.5 range) by 2100. Rises in mean temperatures will be less in coastal regions, but more inland.

Extreme temperatures - days over 35 degrees - will become more frequent. Melbourne can expect an increase from eight now to 9-12 by 2020 and 10-20 by 2070. Perth can expect an increase from 15 now to 16-22 by 2020 and 18-39 by 2070.

Mean precipitation south of 30 degrees south, from June to August will experience a 26 to 7 per cent decrease by 2100. On the east coast rainfall will increase in summer and decrease in winter although that is a less robust projection.

In New South Wales and Queensland summer rainfall will increase in magnitude by 30 per cent, with one in 40-year events becoming one in 15-year events. Return periods of extreme rainfall events will halve through this century and there will be a marked increased in the frequency of rainfall deficits, doubling in some cases by 2050.

Snow cover will be reduced. 30-day snow cover will be reduced to 14-54 per cent by 2020 and 30-93 per cent by 2050.

Almost all indications are for a moisture balance deficit, and thus a drier Australian environment.

There will be a modest strengthening of winds over the inland and the north and a slight weakening on the southern coasts.

Some of the factors contributing to existing uncertainties are include El Nino which significantly influences Australian climate yet there is as yet no clear view of how this will change in a warmer world; monsoon projections vary across models; detailed assessments of the performance of models representing existing Australian climate is still lacking; representation of topography in the models is limited; and more downscaling (connecting the resolution of the models to the resolution at which details for decisions are required) is still needed for our region.


The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established in 1988 by two United Nations organizations, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), to evaluate the risk of climate change caused by human activity.

The IPCC shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former Vice President of the United States Al Gore

[BingoTheClowno]

N.J. to sue EPA over auto emissions

New Jersey and 10 other states are planning to sue the federal government as early as today in a case that could force automakers to sell thousands more low-emissions vehicles in the state.
The state Attorney General's Office said the suit would be filed against the Environmental Protection Agency, which is weighing whether to allow states to adopt tougher tailpipe standards to fight global warming.
The EPA has taken nearly two years to make the decision, the states complain. "We are joining in the lawsuit because EPA's failure to act is holding up New Jersey's efforts to deal with greenhouse gas emissions from cars," Leland Moore, the attorney general's spokesman, said Tuesday. "Our position is that it's time for EPA to either act or get out of the way."

[hubird]

[garyb]

in bingo's style:

THE IPCC AND W.H.O. ARE PERPETRATING FRAUD AND BAD SCIENCE. SO SAY THE ACTUAL SCIENTISTS!!!!

did you even read this link? are you offering other data to show how this is not true? or are you just repeating drivel written for masses who don't check the ACTUAL research? why willfully repeat dubious factoids from a corrupt organization like the IPCC, an organization that isn't even run by scientists and that forges scientists names to it's works to make it's conclusions look more convincing. the actual scientists are saying things like in this article:
Top scientists dispute "the consensus" [Henry Payne]


Even as the MSM continues what George Will calls “a campaign without peacetime precedent. . . by opinion-forming institutions to indoctrinate Americans,” a superb series of articles by Lawrence Solomon for Canada’s National Post blows holes in the GW “consensus” — and exposes the journalistic malpractice at institutions like the New York Times.

Solomon has interviewed some of the world’s top scientists — Antonino Zichichi (President, World Federation of Scientists), Christopher Landsea (Atlantic Oceanographic & Meteorological Laboratory), Carl Wunsch (Prof., Physical Oceanography, MIT), Duncan Wingham (Prof., Climate Physics at U-London), and so on — all of whom take issue with the MSM’s claim that man is catastrophically warming the planet.

More disturbingly, many of these experts pointedly disagree with the IPCC’s report, disputing its findings or outright accusing the U.N. of fraud. Landsea, for example, resigned from the IPCC in protest over their politicization of hurricane data.
http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/ ... ade_activi
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/1 ... al_Warming


what about THIS study?

refute it if you can, and not by citing the same source that these actual SCIENTIFIC studies irrevocably disprove.


THE UNITED NATIONS IS FULL OF LIARS!!!! sorry if this makes you uneasy or disagrees with your religion.

have you read the "universal declaration of human rights"? this document shows the UN's bad faith. it gives the right to education, but only as far as the education furthers the "purposes and principles of the United Nations". it gives all kinds of nice rights, but only so far as the "purposes and principles of the United Nations" are concerned. under this organization, you have no rights if the leadership finds it necessary. you can be lied to if the leadership finds it necessary. unacceptable.

[next to nothing]

"THE UNITED NATIONS IS FULL OF LIARS!!!!"

and the worst one even has a veto.

[garyb]

piddi, i have no problem with you saying that.

what war has the UN stopped?

disband the whole thing, it's a sham.

[BingoTheClowno]

THE IPCC AND W.H.O. ARE PERPETRATING FRAUD AND BAD SCIENCE. SO SAY THE ACTUAL SCIENTISTS!!!!

Proofs by (right wing) columnists and obscure websites are not counted as scientific evidence. Don't you have any official websites like maybe for example the United States government sites or internationaly recognized websites?
The rest is all crap as usual.

[hubird]

@ UN, we don't have any better.
take an historical perspective (just like you do with the climate discussion), we are just in second one-and-halve.

[next to nothing]

"what war has the UN stopped?"

Far too few i agree. a rather anal point is "they didnt start that many either".

[hubird]

that's what I meant

[MikeRaphone]

Gary sees red

[garyb]

i don't care if the source is right or left wing. those are meaningless monikers to me. i'm looking for facts and evidence, not jr. high science.

once again, this site here is well documented with the exact kind of sources mr. clown is looking for and is nicely laid out for the lay person. the evidence shows quite clearly, that water vapor is the main "greenhouse" gas, and that humans are responsible for .001% of water vapor. water vapor is 95% of all greenhouse gases! there have been periods in earth's history that had similar temperatures to today with over 10 times the current levels of CO2!

here's a quote from a REAL scientist:

" There is no dispute at all about the fact that even if punctiliously observed, (the Kyoto Protocol) would have an imperceptible effect on future temperatures -- one-twentieth of a degree by 2050. "
Dr. S. Fred Singer, atmospheric physicist
Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia,
and former director of the US Weather Satellite Service;
in a Sept. 10, 2001 Letter to Editor, Wall Street Journal

A TAX ON CO2, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY A TAX ON BREATHING, WILL NOT STOP GLOBAL WARMING!!!

[garyb]

what wars did the UN start?

well, let's just check some of the most obvious UN "actions".
1. the Korean War
2. the Vietnam war(a UN police action, how else can the USA commit acts of aggression without a declaration of war? check it out)
3. Kosovo(American troops wore UN badges)
4. Operation Desert Sheild(a fully UN sanctioned operation)
5. Operation "Enduring Freedom"(another fully sanction UN operation)
6. Lebenon.

one could argue that the Un was only "reacting" to already bad situations in these "Police" actions, and publically, that's true. a very small amount of research will find key members of the UN involved with all of the escalation of violence in these conflicts, some very greedy men being manipulative in order to build power for the world government. it's in the language of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that it's your right to have a world government over you and that if you oppose it(the purposes and principles) you have NO rights. contrast this to the American Bill of Rights, which states that humans have rights no matter what the government says and that there's a limit to how much the government can infringe on them. in facxt the US Bill of Rightsstates:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. which means if we forgot to protect a certain right with this document(the constitution), it doesn't matter. the government can't steal it.


the UN was formed by Mr. Rockefellor and his buddies at the Grove along with his soon to be Bilderberger buddies. this is undeniable history.

[garyb]

Plants don't "breathe", they process CO2 and water in what's known as photosynthesis. But I guess we can call it breathing since you are the expert climatologist on Planet Z.

well actually the technical term is respiration, which they do...do.

the colloquial term for "respiration" is "breathing", so i used that for simplicity's sake, i have enough trouble composing my thoughts and typing. if typing wasn't so painful, i could shed more light, to use a term the "guys" "on the square" like to use...

i've included a link to a google search of "plant respiration", because i know you don't like to think that i know what i'm talking about......
http://search.earthlink.net/search?q=re ... 41&abtli=1

otherwise, i apologise for any grammatical, spelling or syntax errors you may encounter....

[garyb]

oh, some strange evidence about the formation of the UN..

[BingoTheClowno]

Plants don't "breathe", they process CO2 and water in what's known as photosynthesis. But I guess we can call it breathing since you are the expert climatologist on Planet Z.

well actually the technical term is respiration, which they do...do.

the colloquial term for "respiration" is "breathing", so i used that for simplicity's sake, i have enough trouble composing my thoughts and typing. if typing wasn't so painful, i could shed more light, to use a term the "guys" "on the square" like to use...

i've included a link to a google search of "plant respiration", because i know you don't like to think that i know what i'm talking about......
http://search.earthlink.net/search?q=re ... 41&abtli=1

otherwise, i apologise for any grammatical, spelling or syntax errors you may encounter....

I've looked at the first page and again, you're wrong!
Why are you being stuborn?