report scams here at scam.com dont get scammed Scams and Scammers - Expose hypocrisy and spread respect ! Don't get ripped off! REGISTER  

Go Back   scams > Scam Message Board > Science Scams
Register FAQ Register To Post Member List Promote Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #37  
Old 11-13-2011, 12:40 PM
thistle thistle is offline
Most Valued Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,600
Re: Global Warming - Global Madness

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
Did you just respond to a 6 month old post?
Yeah, but what a post it was!


Reply With Quote

  #38  
Old 04-29-2012, 06:19 PM
minnow minnow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57
Re: Global Warming - Global Madness

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrison View Post
Global warming is real there is a scientific consensus on it and if you are on the side argueing it isn't real then I'm sorry but any "evidence" you give is a lie.

The earth goes through natural cycles of warming and cooling and climate change is a natural process. However we have speeded up this natural process by pumping out vast amounts of Greenhouse gases, changing the earths albido, changing the water cycle, deforestation etc all of these affect climate.

There is no debate on global warming it is a fact you may as well debate if gravity exists or not. The greenhouse effect is a thermodynamic fact.
now your're sounding like al gore
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtevF...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uP1Q-...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFK-U...eature=related
__________________
Ram
-
Join For Free n Get Paid TODAY !
Make free $ Like You're Printing It
http://buzurl.com/im91

Reply With Quote

  #39  
Old 04-30-2012, 11:11 AM
Spector567's Avatar
Spector567 Spector567 is offline
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,232
Re: Global Warming - Global Madness

LOL now your sounding like an idoit. Only idiots refer to Al Gore at all for any side of this debate.

Honestly do you consider linking a bunch of random Youtube videos to be a response to anything?

All it says to me is that your too lazy and illiterate to do any thinking or reading on your own that you need it to be dumbed down to pretty pictures.

Try actually responding in text to what people have actually said. Than you might get some respect.



Reply With Quote

  #40  
Old 04-30-2012, 11:19 AM
EvilZoe's Avatar
EvilZoe EvilZoe is offline
Je suis un travesti executif
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,979
Re: Global Warming - Global Madness

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
LOL now your sounding like an idoit. Only idiots refer to Al Gore at all for any side of this debate.

Honestly do you consider linking a bunch of random Youtube videos to be a response to anything?

All it says to me is that your too lazy and illiterate to do any thinking or reading on your own that you need it to be dumbed down to pretty pictures.

Try actually responding in text to what people have actually said. Than you might get some respect.

That's TOO HARD!
__________________



"The one thing women don't want to find in their stockings on Christmas morning is their husband." ~ Joan Rivers

Reply With Quote

  #41  
Old 05-02-2012, 04:38 AM
LogicallyYours's Avatar
LogicallyYours LogicallyYours is offline
Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,378
Re: Global Warming - Global Madness

Perhaps you should watch the Potholer54 series on Climate Change.
__________________
"Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
-----------------------------------------------------------
"I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

Reply With Quote

  #42  
Old 05-08-2012, 08:36 PM
phlipper phlipper is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 834
Re: Global Warming - Global Madness

Game Over - Skeptics Win; Alarmists Lose
From Today's "Forbes" -

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybel...everish-pitch/
Global Warming Chorus Discord Rising To Feverish Pitch

Some leading voices in the Global Warming Gospel Choir are now abandoning the old climate crisis hymnal. One is James Lovelock, the father of the “Gaia” theory that the entire Earth is a single living system who predicted that continued human CO2 emissions will bring about climate calamity. In 2006 he claimed: “Before this century is over billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where climate remains tolerable.” Time magazine featured Lovelock as one of 13 “Heroes of the Environment” in a 2007 article (along with Al Gore, Mikhail Gorbachev and Robert Redford).

Recently, however, he has obviously cooled on global warming as a crisis, admitting to MSNBC that he overstated the case and now acknowledges that: “…we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books…mine included…because it looked clear cut…but it hasn’t happened.” Lovelock pointed to Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” and Tim Flannery’s “The Weather Makers” as other alarmist publications.
The 92-year-old Lovelock went on to note, “…the climate is doing its usual tricks…there’s nothing much happening yet even though we were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now.” He added, “The world has not warmed up very much since the millennium. Twelve years is a reasonable time.” Yet the temperature “has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising…carbon dioxide has been rising, no question about that.”

Fritz Vaherenholt, a socialist founder of Germany’s environmental movement who headed the renewable energy division of the country’s second largest utility company, has recently coauthored a new book titled “The Cold Sun: Why the Climate Disaster Won’t Happen”. In it he raises a man-made blizzard of criticism charging the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) with gross incompetence and dishonesty, most particularly regarding fear-mongering exaggeration of known climate influence of human CO2 emissions.

Dr. Vahrenholt’s distrust of the IPCC’s objectivity and veracity took root two years ago when he became an expert reviewer for their report on renewable energy. After discovering numerous errors, he reported those inaccuracies to IPCC officials, only to have them simply brushed aside. Stunned by this, he asked himself: “Is this the way they approached climate assessment reports?” He came to wonder: “…if the other IPCC reports on climate change were similarly sloppy.”

This concern prompted Vahrenholt to dig into the IPCC’s 2007 climate report, and he was horrified by what he found. On top of discovering numerous factual errors, there were issues involving 10 years of stagnant temperatures, failed predictions, ClimateGate e-mails, and informative discussions with dozens of other elite skeptical scientists.

Vaherenholt concludes in an interview which appeared in the German news publication Bild that: “… IPCC decision-makers are fighting tooth and nail against accepting the roles of the oceans, sun, and soot.” Accordingly, IPCC models are completely out of whack. “The facts need to be discussed sensibly and scientifically, without first deciding on the results.”
Vahrenholt isn’t the only significant German scientist to find that IPCC’s global warming projections are exaggerated. Another is Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, the director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research who serves as the German government’s climate protection advisor. Schellnhuber coauthored a paper refuting reliability of General Circulation (climate) Models upon which their alarmist 2001 projections were based.

The study compared measured versus model-simulated temperature trends at six global sites according to two different scenarios; one with greenhouse gas influence plus aerosol influences, and the other with greenhouse temperature influences only. Results showed that while both scenarios failed to reproduce observed temperature recordings, the one using only greenhouse influences demonstrated the greatest deviation from reality: “…where the [greenhouse gas scenario] trends are clearly overestimated.”

Schellnhuber recently admitted in a speech to agricultural experts that: “warmer temperatures and high CO2 concentrations in the air could very well lead to higher agricultural yields.”
When appearing on Fox Business News with Stewart Varney in January 2011, Greenpeace co-founder Peter Moore agreed that benefits of any global warming, to the extent that this is occurring for any reason, are greatly underrated: “We do not have any scientific proof that we are the cause of the global warming that has occurred in the last 200 years…The alarmism is driving us through scare tactics to adopt energy policies that are going to create a huge amount of energy poverty among the poor people. It’s not good for people and it’s not good for the environment…In a warmer world we can produce more food.”


Moore is among an expanding multitude with no confidence in alarmist climate predictions. “There are many thousands of scientists’ who reject man-made global warming fears…It’s all based on computer models and predictions. We do not actually have a crystal ball, it is a mythical object.” When asked who is responsible for promoting unwarranted fear and what their motives are, he said: “A powerful convergence of interests. Scientists seeking grant money, media seeking headlines, universities seeking huge grants from major institutions, foundations, environmental groups, politicians wanting to make it look like they are saving future generations. And all of these people have converged on this issue.”
The release of scandalous e-mail exchanges among IPCC scientists has taken large tolls in public climate opinion polls. A majority of Americans nationwide acknowledge that there is significant disagreement about global warming in the scientific community. Most responders even go even further, believing that some scientists have falsified data to support their own beliefs.

An August 2011 Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of American Adults showed that 69% said it is at least “somewhat likely” that some scientists have falsified research data in order to support their own theories and beliefs, including 40% who said this is “very likely”. (The number who said it’s likely is up 10 points since December 2009.) And while Republicans and adults not affiliated with either major political party felt stronger than Democrats that some scientists have falsified data to support their global warming theories, 51% of the Democrats also agreed.

As for “scientific consensus”, 57% of those surveyed believed there is significant disagreement within the scientific community on global warming. This was up five points from late 2009.

Rapidly growing public skepticism in the U.S. and abroad about the veracity climate calamity claims is now putting alarmists on the defensive. As Paul Ehrlich at Stanford University reported in a March 2010 Nature journal editorial, this has his colleagues in big sweats about how to counter a barrage of challenges: “Everyone is scared s***less, but they don’t know what to do.”

And speaking of scary, Ehrlich is best known for his 1968 doom and gloom book, “The Population Bomb”, which predicted that a worldwide crisis in food supply and natural resource availability would lead to major famines and economic failures by 1900. In another book titled “The Machinery of Nature”, he predicted that carbon dioxide-induced famines might kill as many as a billion people by 2000.

Ehrlich’s claims were based upon a theory advanced by none other than John Holdren, who is now serving as the Obama administration’s Science Czar. The central premise was that human CO2 emissions would produce a climate catastrophe in which global warming would cause global cooling… resulting in widespread agricultural disaster. Holdren’s theory was that the warm temperatures might speed up air circulation patterns to bring Arctic cold farther south, and Antarctic cold farther north.

Yup in other words, they were worried about a global warming-induced ice age.

During a March 2011 Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) cited a 1971 study where Holdren wrote: “The effects of a new ice age on agriculture and the supportability of large human populations scarcely need elaboration here.” Senator Inhofe then turned to Senator Boxer (D-CA), and stated, “So even the president’s people are agreed with me, Madam Chairwoman!”

Accordingly, even if Holdren’s calamitous prediction never caught the planet by storm, let’s at least give him some credit for realizing that global warming is a lot more life-friendly than the opposite. Isn’t it unfortunate that most members of his overheated chorus aren’t in concert with this brutally cold fact?

Reply With Quote

  #43  
Old 05-16-2012, 12:44 AM
lexx's Avatar
lexx lexx is online now
Most Valued Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 13,993
Re: Global Warming - Global Madness

anybody catch the latest PBS documentary on WARMING!? the CO that's INCREASED suddenly is HUMAN MADE CO vs natural CO!? but that triggers the release of more natural CO too!?
__________________
i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

Reply With Quote

  #44  
Old 11-09-2012, 06:02 AM
edmund129's Avatar
edmund129 edmund129 is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 366
Re: Global Warming - Global Madness

Here is a perfect example of the mass fraud behind Man Made Global Warming, as you can see there are CO2 measurements going back to the early 1800's taken from flasks of air captured at that point in time. Notice how the CO2 levels are all over the place depending on when and wher eit was measured. Notice how they cherry pick the smaller CO2 numbers for the early 1900's. so as to create a fraudulent rise in CO2 levels.

Notice how there was as much as 550ppm measured in the early 1800's, far higher than Global Warming propogandist tell us will cause the end of the world.

Current CO2 levels are only measured in one place, Maui, Hawaii. All other CO2 levels aroung the world are ignored b.y. Global Warming Propogandist. Remember the CO2 station in Maui is surrounded b.y. warm CO2 outgassing Pacific ocean and CO2 outgassing volcanoes. Mt Kilawao has been errupting continously none stop since 1983. No wonder why the CO2 levels have and such a smooth increase in CO2 with no other direction detected.


Attached Images
 

Reply With Quote

  #45  
Old 09-24-2013, 01:37 AM
lexx's Avatar
lexx lexx is online now
Most Valued Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 13,993
Re: Global Warming - Global Madness

so can there be ANY IDEAL spot to measure ACCURATELY the AVERAGE if you want to call it that!? where was it MEASURED back THEN!? all i KNOW is we have had NO DRY summers around here for many yrs now!? and seasonal changes like 2 vs 4? those bein cold and hot, both bein TOO WET!? but why get all wrapped up in this WARMING crap when there are PLENTY of OTHER POLLUTION conditions going MAN MADE to WORRY ABOUT!?
__________________
i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you


Reply With Quote

Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Global Warming JTB7 Science Scams 1204 04-07-2012 12:51 PM
Global P.ower Elite Back Away from Global Warming pwrone Political Chat 0 09-27-2010 03:53 PM
Global warming again pancho Science Scams 18 06-05-2007 01:56 PM
The end of Global Warming Worried_in_the_USA Science Scams 52 06-05-2007 01:54 PM
Global Warming SubJunk Science Scams 236 10-17-2006 08:34 PM

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump




This site may contain advice, opinions and statements of various information providers. Scam.com does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any advice, opinion, statement or other information provided by any information provider, any User of this Site or any other person or entity. Reliance upon any such advice, opinion, statement, or other information shall also be at the User’s own risk. Neither Scam.com nor its affiliates, nor any of their respective agents, employees, information providers or content providers, shall be liable to any User or anyone else for any inaccuracy, error, omission, interruption, deletion, defect, alteration of or use of any content herein, or for its timeliness or completeness, nor shall they be liable for any failure of performance, computer virus or communication line failure, regardless of cause, or for any damages resulting therefrom. Just because a business, person, or entity is listed on scam.com does not necessarily constitute they are scammers. This is a free open forum where people can debate the merits from the consumer's or business owner's perspective. Registration and participation is always FREE.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:17 AM.




Scam.com Is Proudly Hosted By Rackco and Protected By CloudFlare


Scams Message Board - Copyright 2004-2013 Scam.com , All Rights Reserved.