Have you looked at the North Pole lately?
- Thread starter igrowone
- Start date
What an economic disaster to our great country if the powers that be bought into this nonsense.I'm glad the truth is coming out in bits and pieces,better than nothing!I would dare to say our worst enemies would get a nut if our leaders would buy into this insanity and start making draconian economic changes as suggested by some nutcases.Still fishing Tampa bay and waiting for Algores predictions,he's a few years late and a brain short.No snook in flooded streets or redfish in the parking lots..Maybe that wouldn't be such a bad thing after all lol
We could be investing in more horses and bayonets.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]![/FONT]
Delingpole: Climate Alarmists Finally Admit ‘We Were Wrong About Global Warming’
Climate alarmists have finally admitted that they’ve got it wrong on global warming.
This is the inescapable conclusion of a landmark paper, published in Nature Geoscience, which finally admits that the computer models have overstated the impact of carbon dioxide on climate and that the planet is warming more slowly than predicted.
The paper – titled Emission budgets and pathways consistent with limiting warming to 1.5 °C – concedes that it is now almost impossible that the doomsday predictions made in the last IPCC Assessment Report of 1.5 degrees C warming above pre-industrial levels by 2022 will come true.
...
https://www.breitbart.com/big-gover...lly-admit-we-were-wrong-about-global-warming/
Global Warming: Who Are The Deniers Now?
Climate Change: Global warming is "settled science," we hear all the time. Those who reject that idea are "deniers." But as new evidence trickles out from peer-reviewed science studies, the legs beneath the climate change hypothesis — that the earth was doing just fine until carbon-dioxide spewing human beings came along — is increasingly wobbly.
A new study published in the journal Nature Geoscience purports to support action by global governments to reduce carbon dioxide output in order to lower potential global warming over the next 100 years or so. But what it really does is undercut virtually every modern argument for taking radical action against warming.
...
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/global-warming-who-are-the-deniers-now/
I'll post this short update here instead of waiting for Breitbart to post their retraction.
!
Last edited:
U
Ununionized
When a magic gasser tells you he thinks climate is changing, remind him there is an international regulatory and physical standard saying it most certainly hasn't changed since the International Standard Atmosphere was adopted.
The International Standard Atmosphere very accurately records the pressure and temperature amid other physical constraints on the atmoshere's mass-energy relationships. If the temperature of the planet changed even a small amount international standards would reflect that.
Indeed if there were any variance to the Atmosphere's mass-energy relationships the International Standard Atmosphere would reflect that so we could calibrate our instruments and sensors properly, and warranty for liability, ANYTHING associated with generation of heat or the instrumentation of any gas or mix.
Everyone from welders to scuba divers to air conditioning/refrigeration men would understand what is changing in global Atmospheric chemistry/energy.
There's no such change ever recorded since the Standard Atmosphere etched the Atmosphere's mass/energy relationships into the stone of international regulatory and physical standards.
The hillbillies of the Magic Gas Innumerati don't even realize there IS such a standard, and that their
hick church,
can't even calculate the temperature of the global, International Standard Atmosphere right.
The temperature of the global International Standard Atmosphere is the result of actually CORRECT, mathematical temperature discovery process.
The Magic Gassiness church - the same government church that swears to you ''Thair up standin' guvurmint fellurs has discovered pot is like heroin, worse for you than methamphetamine,'' and that ''they has got the critical peer review to prove it in court,''
can't calculate either the global atmospheric temperature,
Venus' global atmospheric temperature,
or the temperature of a volume of any gas,
because they don't use the right process in 'deriving' their temperature. In SCAMMING it.
When someone tries to ''calculate'' the temperature of a volume of gas, and refuses to use Gas Law - THE gas law that GOVERNS atmospheric temperature,
when they do it for our Global Atmospheric Temperature, they always come up with the identical error : a temperature SHORTFALL of 33 DEGREES.
What is the ERROR if you proceed with Stefan-Boltzman calculations and REFUSE to use GAS LAW to determine the COMPRESSION or DENSITY of the volume of
compressible phase matter?
When you try this with Earth's Global atmospheric temperature and get the error that always arrives,
that error is ALWAYS: 33 DEGREES SHORT.
As SOON as one uses Gas Law - this is why there IS gas law among other reasons, Stefan-Boltzmann massage doesn't account for the variable density of compressible phase matter -
to assure the DENSITY of the gas is correct,
the so-called 'calculation' - it's really just an erroneous string of partial calculations
once they refuse to account for the density or compression warming of the atmosphere -
the error disappears right along with their fraudulent, FAKED, 'calculation' - refusing to do the step
GAS LAW is DESIGNED to take care of
and solve for density.
What is the claim of the grant scam's largest celebrity James Hansen?
That with a fast enough computer, he could calculate temperatures of compressible phase matter, gases, using mathematics that refuses to account for Gas Law's ''hydrostatic'' or 'density' equation, hence the 'hydrostatic condition' or density.
The ABSOLUTELY PREDICTABLE ERROR of REFUSING to CALCULATE gas TEMPS using GAS LAW?
33 DEGREES SHORTFALL.
What does the church of the fraudulent gas claim?
That with a computer fast enough you don't have to use GAS LAW to calculate GAS TEMPERATURES.
Why can't their FAKE CHURCH calculate the temperature of the global atmosphere that MATCHES the TEMPERATURE of PROPERLY PROCESSED MATHEMATICAL ACCOUNTING of it?
Because they REFUSE to ACCOUNT for the 33 DEGREES COMPRESSION WARMING
that is an INTRINSIC QUALITY to COMPRESSIBLE PHASE MATTER.
Why does there even have to be a law for solving gas temperatures? Why can't you just use the same law for some sand or wood or ice?
Because gases are compressible phase matter and must have their intrinsically highly variable density accounted when processing the mass/energy relationships associated with any volume of them.
It's a f***g scam. They can't hit the temperature of our global atmosphere, and the reason is transparent once you check their story and their church's FAKE story.
They also can't explain why their story makes them answer the question ''what happens to the temperatures of light-warmed rocks, 20% less light warms?''
with the answer ''Wayle, if'n the magical gassiness makes the light not reach the rock to warm it, the timpurchure goes up evur time the magic insulation makes less light warm it!''
It's the story about a cold nitrogen bath
conduction scrubbing a rock,
being a magical heater,
whose light blocking evaporative phase change refrigerant,
is the core
of the magic heater
that's actually a light blocking cold nitrogen bath.
The International Standard Atmosphere very accurately records the pressure and temperature amid other physical constraints on the atmoshere's mass-energy relationships. If the temperature of the planet changed even a small amount international standards would reflect that.
Indeed if there were any variance to the Atmosphere's mass-energy relationships the International Standard Atmosphere would reflect that so we could calibrate our instruments and sensors properly, and warranty for liability, ANYTHING associated with generation of heat or the instrumentation of any gas or mix.
Everyone from welders to scuba divers to air conditioning/refrigeration men would understand what is changing in global Atmospheric chemistry/energy.
There's no such change ever recorded since the Standard Atmosphere etched the Atmosphere's mass/energy relationships into the stone of international regulatory and physical standards.
The hillbillies of the Magic Gas Innumerati don't even realize there IS such a standard, and that their
hick church,
can't even calculate the temperature of the global, International Standard Atmosphere right.
The temperature of the global International Standard Atmosphere is the result of actually CORRECT, mathematical temperature discovery process.
The Magic Gassiness church - the same government church that swears to you ''Thair up standin' guvurmint fellurs has discovered pot is like heroin, worse for you than methamphetamine,'' and that ''they has got the critical peer review to prove it in court,''
can't calculate either the global atmospheric temperature,
Venus' global atmospheric temperature,
or the temperature of a volume of any gas,
because they don't use the right process in 'deriving' their temperature. In SCAMMING it.
When someone tries to ''calculate'' the temperature of a volume of gas, and refuses to use Gas Law - THE gas law that GOVERNS atmospheric temperature,
when they do it for our Global Atmospheric Temperature, they always come up with the identical error : a temperature SHORTFALL of 33 DEGREES.
What is the ERROR if you proceed with Stefan-Boltzman calculations and REFUSE to use GAS LAW to determine the COMPRESSION or DENSITY of the volume of
compressible phase matter?
When you try this with Earth's Global atmospheric temperature and get the error that always arrives,
that error is ALWAYS: 33 DEGREES SHORT.
As SOON as one uses Gas Law - this is why there IS gas law among other reasons, Stefan-Boltzmann massage doesn't account for the variable density of compressible phase matter -
to assure the DENSITY of the gas is correct,
the so-called 'calculation' - it's really just an erroneous string of partial calculations
once they refuse to account for the density or compression warming of the atmosphere -
the error disappears right along with their fraudulent, FAKED, 'calculation' - refusing to do the step
GAS LAW is DESIGNED to take care of
and solve for density.
What is the claim of the grant scam's largest celebrity James Hansen?
That with a fast enough computer, he could calculate temperatures of compressible phase matter, gases, using mathematics that refuses to account for Gas Law's ''hydrostatic'' or 'density' equation, hence the 'hydrostatic condition' or density.
The ABSOLUTELY PREDICTABLE ERROR of REFUSING to CALCULATE gas TEMPS using GAS LAW?
33 DEGREES SHORTFALL.
What does the church of the fraudulent gas claim?
That with a computer fast enough you don't have to use GAS LAW to calculate GAS TEMPERATURES.
Why can't their FAKE CHURCH calculate the temperature of the global atmosphere that MATCHES the TEMPERATURE of PROPERLY PROCESSED MATHEMATICAL ACCOUNTING of it?
Because they REFUSE to ACCOUNT for the 33 DEGREES COMPRESSION WARMING
that is an INTRINSIC QUALITY to COMPRESSIBLE PHASE MATTER.
Why does there even have to be a law for solving gas temperatures? Why can't you just use the same law for some sand or wood or ice?
Because gases are compressible phase matter and must have their intrinsically highly variable density accounted when processing the mass/energy relationships associated with any volume of them.
It's a f***g scam. They can't hit the temperature of our global atmosphere, and the reason is transparent once you check their story and their church's FAKE story.
They also can't explain why their story makes them answer the question ''what happens to the temperatures of light-warmed rocks, 20% less light warms?''
with the answer ''Wayle, if'n the magical gassiness makes the light not reach the rock to warm it, the timpurchure goes up evur time the magic insulation makes less light warm it!''
It's the story about a cold nitrogen bath
conduction scrubbing a rock,
being a magical heater,
whose light blocking evaporative phase change refrigerant,
is the core
of the magic heater
that's actually a light blocking cold nitrogen bath.
Last edited:
Narrow minded folks will always hate.
It's pretty obvious you link a southern accent to simple thought.
I dismiss anything you have to say as coming from a hypocrite.
It's pretty obvious you link a southern accent to simple thought.
I dismiss anything you have to say as coming from a hypocrite.
Hurry up and warm up...I wanna move back to Maine...yeehaw
That's the spirit !
greenland happenings
greenland happenings
normally the quiet time for this thread, the mins and maxes are the interesting times
however, some action up north, having a mini-melt at the end of october on the greenland ice sheet
not normal, really not normal, what does it portend? as usual time will tell
greenland happenings
normally the quiet time for this thread, the mins and maxes are the interesting times
however, some action up north, having a mini-melt at the end of october on the greenland ice sheet
not normal, really not normal, what does it portend? as usual time will tell
Attachments
What I find funny about the topic of global warming or climate change if you prefer is that those who say it isn't real act as if that opinion were true then there is no need to worry and we can all just go back to business as usual. The fact of the matter is that Global warming/Climate Change is just one of a host of environmental concerns. Such that even if we removed it from the list of things endangering life on this planet, there are still far too many real threats that we aren't taking seriously enough and which have the potential to cause our extinction as quick if not sooner then Global Warming/Climate Change.
If science can't convince these denier types, then who or what can? It weirds me out when I consider that we could have had utopia but instead we have had to settle for this. I take the long view these days, and that's that evolution will eventually sort it out. It is what it is.
W
Water-
I agree, but it all depends on the rate of climate change. There have been times in the past when ice ages and warming's have come very quickly within a few generations. It will happen again eventually
G
Gr33nSanta
you are right man, we are so fucked, erosion, dead zones, pollution, greed , ... it's exponential and too late, this place is fucked, might as well smoke weed the rest of your life to numb your existence and or to make you smarter and do something about it, you decide for yourself, one thing for sure is that cannabis sativa can save us.
Last edited:
Well not all of the things I'm talking about are tied to Climate Change. For example a recent concern is the rate at which the planet is losing it's insect population. In theory a thing like Global Warming should be causing the insect population to increase as pretty much all insects thrive in warmer conditions and yet they are dying off. They're not really sure why and it is an area of research that is getting urgent attention because many insects besides just bees assist in pollination. If I remember correctly what I've heard somewhere between 50%-90% of the world's food supply depends on the pollination accomplished by bees and other insects. Most of the human population depends on the food that insect pollination creates and if insects disappear we could see mankind dying off from starvation and malnutrition in less then a decade.
Sometimes you can test the validity of someone's theory by comparing what they say...with what really happens.
A stroll down memory lane--
1. From Stanford University professor Paul Ehrlich on the very first Earth day in 1970: “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”
Then a year later, 1971 he said: “By the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by some 70 million hungry people,” he claimed. “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000 and give ten to one that the life of the average Briton would be of distinctly lower quality than it is today.”
2. From Kenneth E.F. Watt at the University of California in 1970: “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but 11 degrees colder by the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.”
3. From James Hansen, head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for three decades and one of the best “climatologists” in the world was asked by journalist and author Rob Reiss in 1988 how the “greenhouse effect” would affect the neighborhood outside his window within 20 years (by 2008). “The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water,” Hansen claimed. “And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won’t be there. The trees in the median strip will change.... There will be more police cars … [since] you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up.” In 1986, Hansen also predicted in congressional testimony that the Earth would be some two degrees warmer within 20 years.
4. Princeton professor and lead UN IPCC author Michael Oppenheimer,“chief scientist” for the Environmental Defense Fund proclaimed that by 1995 the “greenhouse effect” would be “desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots.” By 1996, he added, the Platte River of Nebraska “would be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers. Mexican police will round up illegal American migrants surging into Mexico seeking work as field hands.”
5. In March 2000 “senior research scientist” David Viner, working at the time for the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, told the U.K. Independent that within “a few years,” snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event” in Britain. “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.” The very next year, snowfall across the United Kingdom increased by more than 50 percent. In 2008, perfectly timed for a “global warming” legislation debate in Parliament, London saw its first October snow since 1934 — or possibly even 1922, according to the U.K. Register.
6. In early 2004, the CRU’s Viner and other self-styled “experts” warned that skiing in Scotland would soon become just a memory, thanks to alleged global warming. “Unfortunately, it’s just getting too hot for the Scottish ski industry,” Viner told The Guardian. Another “expert,” Adam Watson with the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, told the paper that the skiing industry in Scotland had less than two decades left to go. Yet in 2013, too much snow kept many Scottish resorts closed.
7. In 2005, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) warned that imminent sea-level rises, increased hurricanes, and desertification caused by “man-made global warming” would lead to massive population disruptions. Especially at risk were regions such as the Caribbean and low-lying Pacific islands, along with coastal areas. By 2010, some 50 million “climate refugees” would be frantically fleeing from those regions of the globe.
8. In 2008, Al Gore claimed this:“the entire North Polarized [sic] cap will disappear in five years.” “Five years, is the period of time during which it is now expected to disappear.”
The following year, Gore made similar claims at a UN “climate” summit in Copenhagen. “Some of the models … suggest that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during some of the summer months, could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years,” Gore claimed in 2009. “We will find out.”
Well....not one of these predictions panned out: Millions did not starve to death, Great Briton is alive and well, world temps did not drop 11 degrees, the West Highway along Hudson River was not flooded, there was no 1995 North American drought, Platte River did not run dry, no food riots, snow still falls in the UK, Scotland ski resorts are still in business, Caribbean Island population increased by 25%, and the North Polar Cap has not disappeared.
Now, can anyone provide at least 4 (half of the eight falsehoods I cited above) where Global Cooling/Global Warming/Climate Change proclamations have actually been proved true?
And...then also answer this question: Why is NOAA withholding information requested under FOIA for certain data, emails, correspondence, and methodology used in the Paris Agreement?
See my earlier post for details, https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=7959139&postcount=375
If NOAA has nothing to hide...then why not release the information?
A stroll down memory lane--
1. From Stanford University professor Paul Ehrlich on the very first Earth day in 1970: “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”
Then a year later, 1971 he said: “By the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by some 70 million hungry people,” he claimed. “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000 and give ten to one that the life of the average Briton would be of distinctly lower quality than it is today.”
2. From Kenneth E.F. Watt at the University of California in 1970: “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but 11 degrees colder by the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.”
3. From James Hansen, head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for three decades and one of the best “climatologists” in the world was asked by journalist and author Rob Reiss in 1988 how the “greenhouse effect” would affect the neighborhood outside his window within 20 years (by 2008). “The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water,” Hansen claimed. “And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won’t be there. The trees in the median strip will change.... There will be more police cars … [since] you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up.” In 1986, Hansen also predicted in congressional testimony that the Earth would be some two degrees warmer within 20 years.
4. Princeton professor and lead UN IPCC author Michael Oppenheimer,“chief scientist” for the Environmental Defense Fund proclaimed that by 1995 the “greenhouse effect” would be “desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots.” By 1996, he added, the Platte River of Nebraska “would be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers. Mexican police will round up illegal American migrants surging into Mexico seeking work as field hands.”
5. In March 2000 “senior research scientist” David Viner, working at the time for the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, told the U.K. Independent that within “a few years,” snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event” in Britain. “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.” The very next year, snowfall across the United Kingdom increased by more than 50 percent. In 2008, perfectly timed for a “global warming” legislation debate in Parliament, London saw its first October snow since 1934 — or possibly even 1922, according to the U.K. Register.
6. In early 2004, the CRU’s Viner and other self-styled “experts” warned that skiing in Scotland would soon become just a memory, thanks to alleged global warming. “Unfortunately, it’s just getting too hot for the Scottish ski industry,” Viner told The Guardian. Another “expert,” Adam Watson with the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, told the paper that the skiing industry in Scotland had less than two decades left to go. Yet in 2013, too much snow kept many Scottish resorts closed.
7. In 2005, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) warned that imminent sea-level rises, increased hurricanes, and desertification caused by “man-made global warming” would lead to massive population disruptions. Especially at risk were regions such as the Caribbean and low-lying Pacific islands, along with coastal areas. By 2010, some 50 million “climate refugees” would be frantically fleeing from those regions of the globe.
8. In 2008, Al Gore claimed this:“the entire North Polarized [sic] cap will disappear in five years.” “Five years, is the period of time during which it is now expected to disappear.”
The following year, Gore made similar claims at a UN “climate” summit in Copenhagen. “Some of the models … suggest that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during some of the summer months, could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years,” Gore claimed in 2009. “We will find out.”
Well....not one of these predictions panned out: Millions did not starve to death, Great Briton is alive and well, world temps did not drop 11 degrees, the West Highway along Hudson River was not flooded, there was no 1995 North American drought, Platte River did not run dry, no food riots, snow still falls in the UK, Scotland ski resorts are still in business, Caribbean Island population increased by 25%, and the North Polar Cap has not disappeared.
Now, can anyone provide at least 4 (half of the eight falsehoods I cited above) where Global Cooling/Global Warming/Climate Change proclamations have actually been proved true?
And...then also answer this question: Why is NOAA withholding information requested under FOIA for certain data, emails, correspondence, and methodology used in the Paris Agreement?
See my earlier post for details, https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=7959139&postcount=375
If NOAA has nothing to hide...then why not release the information?
Bug Armageddon.
Bug Armageddon.
According to this research, 75% of all flying insects have disappeared in the last 25 years. No insects, no us.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-armageddon-75-per-cent-plummet-a8008406.html
Bug Armageddon.
According to this research, 75% of all flying insects have disappeared in the last 25 years. No insects, no us.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-armageddon-75-per-cent-plummet-a8008406.html
!
