PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

climate killer - the assault

Check out this graph from NASA. It shows we have just achieved the warmest decade in history. You don't trust NASA now? I remember some people thought the moon landing was faked. What complete idiots!

http://climate.nasa.gov/news/index.cfm? ... NewsID=249

All you wing nuts, let's get real! Do not engage in "selective memory". That is what compulsive gamblers and religious morons do. About 30% of republicans are teabaggers. This does not bode well for our backwards inbred country!

and who`s willing to work on this? Who changes the things? There`s none. Except from people working for anybody who`s paying the highest salaries independent from the results of the work and given statements.
It needs new humans to change things or a final crash down.

A single graph, an unreleated rant about the moon landing and some disparaging against anyone that disagrees as a 'right wing nut' etc...is NOT an effective argument nor attempt to stir this pot kiddo.

(Besides the fact that it seems to be some recursive loop that you're stuck in)

So what if it's the hottest decade in history, (which it's not, according to other data from NOAA, etc.).

IT'S NOT ALL OUR FAULT!

If you wanna buy into this so much - and take everything at face value - then YOU pay for it!
(or just turn off your computer and stop wasting 'fossil fuels')

Greg

Wow, NASA had satellites in 1880, who'd have thunk it?

Check a little bit further into the past and you will find that this is not the hottest decade in history at all - unless your history starts at 1880

temperatures stopped rising about 1995.

the 1800's were the end of the "little ice age". it's not surprising that this last century was a warming period, after a long cold period.

what the quote? "there are lies, there are damn lies and there are statistics".

Pretty funny that you think you are more intelligent than NASA. This explains the 30% of republicans who like Sarah Palin.

braincell wrote:Pretty funny that you think you are more intelligent than NASA. This explains the 30% of republicans who like Sarah Palin.

Your mental framework has all this squeezed into fake left/right paradigms, and when people argue with you, you blame Republicans - in a cloaked way fitting all of us here that disagree into that camp because that's all this paradigm can grasp.

You are wrong and need a better argument.

NASA's data is just NASA's data, and until ALL various sources of data is correlated, then your so-called argument to the contrary is moot.

But again, since you believe in it so much, then YOU can pay for it (and you will willingly I presume).

It's *not* just NASA's data. Scientists are overwhelmingly in agreement. Only the wing nuts disagree. Polar bears are having to swim 300 miles between ice and then are too tired to catch food. Look at Greenland Greg, the glaciers are melting. Anyone can see this. There is a direct correlation to increased CO2 in the atmosphere. It's not just a coincidence. There are chemical markers on CO2 which comes from fossil fuel. This can't be refuted and you are clearly in the minority if you think otherwise.

http://commonsenselogic.blogspot.com/20 ... moore.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics

A lot of people form their opinion about global warning from just a few newspaper articles / magazines etc. who were written by people who got their information from similar sources who got theirs from similar sources etc.etc. It's the same old shit doing the rounds over and over again. Most of these writers couldn't understand properly researched papers - some papers are useless junk that newspaper hacks and politicians can 'understand' - others can only be read by meteorologists and that is an inexact science (see how many weather forecasts are messed up). I simply cannot form a proper informed opinion on this subject due to the bias and unreliable information out there and I don't have a degree in a related subject so complex papers are beyond me.

What does make sense to me is this:

1) Politicians have their own agendas - they will 'cherry-pick' such information to suit their aims.
2) There is more money to be made by the elite to say global warning exists.
3) There is more tax a government can rake in to say global warming exists.
4) It is ridiculous to assume that CO2 is the only cause of global warming - a quote from a top professor in the subject from a respectable university - as the climate is an extemely complex phemonenon which current models are a gross simplification

You are in the distinct minority, it's not just politicians, it's 98% of all scientist and bringing taxes into it just proves you are one of the conservatives, a hideous group of people who are superstitious, paranoid, backwards and can't take change or new ideas of any sort and Jimmy is too mentally handicapped to say anything without stupid jpeg images.

braincell wrote:You are in the distinct minority, it's not just politicians, it's 98% of all scientist and bringing taxes into it just proves you are one of the conservatives, a hideous group of people who are superstitious, paranoid, backwards and can't take change or new ideas of any sort and Jimmy is too retarded to say anything without stupid jpeg images.

My brother is retarded....I take extreme offence to that...I will be contacting the moderator with regards to your juvenile comments.

Back to the juvenile images again. Grow up Jimmy.

Apparently you missed the point.
My brother had a stoke when he was six.
He IS mentally retarded...your use of the word disgusts me...
I don't even know how someone who calls themselves "liberal" would stoop to such a low name calling reference....I just find your behavior, just typical of the typical liberal...when it doesn't suit your needs...name calling is all that is left....and name calling of the most defenceless people of the world...
You should be ashamed of yourself.....even calling yourself a liberal...
A true liberal would stand in defence of the handicapped........you are just predictable and pathetic.....

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=30000


G