THE SKY IS FALLING!

Al Gore and his merry man..

Enjoying all that ice? BTW Its now called a global warming 'pause' in 2014.

source

Edited February 17, 201412 yr by Sayonarax

Having a beer with my friend today,, he says to me "stuck my head out the window today, a bit warm i thought, must be global warming"

just like the word quintessential, people don't know what it means, just like to say it.

Great sets of data, shame most of them are totally bogus.

How did they get all those temperature readings?

No satellites.

Someone dipping a thermometer in the water from a moving boat?

Every tried reading a mercury thermometer to an accuracy of 0.2 of a degree in a moving boat (or anywhere else)?

Permissible margin of error is an issue much overlooked in this debate.

The global warming doom mongers remind me of the Aids adverts on UK tv in the 1980's suggesting mankind would soon be wiped out across the planet.

It proved to be a damp squib.

The difference between the two are enormous, but you can rest assured that there was a huge amount of money, research and resources, not to mention some major life-style changes that helped to SLOW the AIDS epidemic. It is far from over.

Stay on the topic of global warming.

Millenarianism is very much the topic.

Having a beer with my friend today,, he says to me "stuck my head out the window today, a bit warm i thought, must be global warming"

Well, that means he's done more actual field research than most 'consensus' climate 'scientists'.

Please stay on topic.

A lost cause, Scott. No one is talking about the data set described in the original post.

For one thing it requires finding the dataset on the Guardian article and then installing Google Earth.

I took a look at the dataset for Pattaya, temperature of which does, indeed, appear to be dramatically rising since the 1970's. But wouldn't you expect that with all the hot air that's been generated here in the last few decades?

S0 News February 17, 2014: Weather, Spaceweather, Quake Review

I saw a book once and dinosaurs ruled the earth

a long time before man ruled the earth

Climate change knocked them out without the help of man

Wrong. CO2 has been many times the level it is today and it has never driven climate.

This plain to see in the ice core data.

Please cite your source. I went digging for cites but all of them were saying the opposite of what you claim.

Regard: In prehistory, CO2 and warming went in lock-step

And: CO2 as a primary driver of Phanerozoic climate

Hint for those playing along at home: Try using Google Scholar for locating primary source materials such as peer-reviewed research articles. Using the regular Google search engine is great for finding blogs, editorials and any screwball with an opinion to share, but we're all interested in the science now, aren't we?

Global Warming..BS.....you must work for Al Gore.

Al Gore isn't making ice melt in the Arctic, Antarctic, and nearly all glaciers.

I saw a book once and dinosaurs ruled the earth

a long time before man ruled the earth

Climate change knocked them out without the help of man

Lots of things have happened during the history of Earth - which weren't done my Mankind. Even things during the past 100k years. Judging from most of the posts on this thread, and the 'likes', it appears GW deniers (yes, I still use the term 'global warming') are in the vast majority. Thankfully, out in the general public, and among scientists, GW is believed to be happening - because it is happening. Perhaps not 100% of climate-related data is impeccable, but the overwhelming majority of it points to the Earth getting warmer, and seas rising.

Have you noticed they don't call it Global warming any more Its now known as Climate Change

How old are you? Because "climate change" has been the term of preference since the 90's:

And the 80's, when the IPCC was formed:

And the 70's:

And the 60's:

And the 50's:

So that may be one reason why none of us have noticed this.

There is nothing unusual about what is happening with the weather. It has been hotter in the past and cooler. There has been more CO2 and less CO2. Etc..etc..etc.

You are simply incorrect. The advent of burning oil for power has unleashed significantly higher levels of CO2 into the atmosphere than existed previously. All the graphs show the trend beginning in the late 19th century, exactly when the industrial age began. The acceleration of global warming, the trend, is indeed highly unusual. The fact that there gave been time periods in the past when climate changed is not relevant to the current change.

Wrong. CO2 has been many times the level it is today and it has never driven climate.

This plain to see in the ice core data.

so what about this ?

" The last time there was this much carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Earth's atmosphere, modern humans didn't exist. "

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/the-last-time-co2-was-this-high-humans-didnt-exist-15938

Edited February 17, 201412 yr by Asiantravel

How old are you? Because "climate change" has been the term of preference since the 90's:

I am old enough to know that both terms have been used for quite some time but the move not to use the term "global warming" in the mas media was initiated by that master political propagandist Frank Luntz. Look the global climate is changing. The direction of the global climate change is that of warming. There is a valid scientific hypothesis for explaining the warming. What seems to be a solid fact that the global climate is on a warming trend does not preclude local weather conditions from displaying colder spells of weather. But I am not going to convince the deniers any more effectively than trying to convince a believer that intelligent design is nonsense.

You must be yet another brainwashed soul to believe that the shift in temperatures and erratic idiosyncratic temperature fluctuations and sea temperature changes are all due to the minute short period of our human population coming into an industrial awakening.

The earth has been changing temps for millenniums and the people running about spouting misinformation about global warming are either of 2 groups - brainwashed followers (sheople) or money hungry politicians behind one of the biggest unsupported scientific lies, scams and deception ever brought to the general public. Even the most scientific minds have already been caught manipulating the numbers to perpetuate the ongoing global warming money pit the politicians have us brainwashed into paying taxes into.

And if you are attributing the pollution we create to support your arguement for this purported global warming that we as human’s have created with our industrialization – go figure this into your scientific global warming equations – just one volcano eruption spews more toxic gases and ozone damaging pollutants into the atmosphere than we as humans could discharge for millions of years – just 1 volcano eruption far exceeds any amount of industrial air pollutants we could ever produce in thousands if millions of years’ time – this essentially cancels out each and every scientific calculation which supports global warming.

It’s time to leave the global warming band wagon behind and focus on so much more important life changing factors across our planet and at home domestically in each and every country. There are many more things to worry about than temperature climate changes that have turned what was once frozen tundra a few millenniums ago into what is today arid dessert lands. The earth has been making these changes for millions of years – without our help – what makes you think the short time we have been occupying the earth has contributed to alter these changes of which we have no control of. It’s like as if the global warming supporters are saying they could have prevented the ice age from happening (?)

Don't get me wrong - we need clean air and clean water - but I am sure each time you climb into your car or sit on the back of a motorized motorcy taxi - your scientific mind does not tell you to get off and walk to save the planet from global warming.

How old are you? Because "climate change" has been the term of preference since the 90's:

I am old enough to know that both terms have been used for quite some time but the move not to use the term "global warming" in the mas media was initiated by that master political propagandist Frank Luntz. Look the global climate is changing. The direction of the global climate change is that of warming. There is a valid scientific hypothesis for explaining the warming. What seems to be a solid fact that the global climate is on a warming trend does not preclude local weather conditions from displaying colder spells of weather. But I am not going to convince the deniers any more effectively than trying to convince a believer that intelligent design is nonsense.

You are correct. There is an hypothesis, not yet a theory. The data is so miniscule that either side grasps at even the most minute new "fact" to support their side. My best example; "there is more CO2 in the air." So? Isn't that what helps plants grow? Or is that science wrong as well?

Fact for a planet billions of years old does not come from a couple of decades of data gathering. Humans have just recently been connected on a worldwide basis; the data gathering is about the size of an atom. We know so little about oceans and their affect on weather. How often are meteorologists wrong?

Which side is correct? Probably neither. But, keeping it a healthy debate. Also, stay with the scientific method or you are spouting nonsense to the general populace. Hypothesis, theory, experiment, fact. And experiment both sides of the theory, (which seems to be lost on modern scientists in their quest for more funding).

It amazes me that supposedly reasonable people will accept data just because it is repeated so often. George Orwell famously wrote that 965,658 repetitions make a truth - (can't remember the exact number but the concept is there). Orwell was a prophet if any author deserves that title. Those who blindly accept this Global Warming crap are completely oblivious to the fact that the temperatures recorded for MARS and the moons of JUPITER rose in concert with temperatures here on Earth which indicates that solar activity has more to do with "climate change" than humans do. One good volcanic belch puts out more greenhouse gasses than all the cars in the world combined and we experience such activity daily. A huge number of automated data collection stations have been found to have experienced drastic LOCALIZED changes to their immediate environment. Some had BLACK parking lots or runways built in their vicinity and others were near incinerators or other sources of heat that skewed the data upward. The movers and shakers of the socialist movement wrote over 100 years ago that a FAKE emergent situation could be used to coerce the population to move in the direction of communism and expressly noted that money could be extorted from individuals and businesses to help avert this FAKE disaster. Wake up people.

so what about this ?

"The last time there was this much carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Earth's atmosphere, modern humans didn't exist."

So, what's your point?

You must be yet another brainwashed soul to believe that the shift in temperatures and erratic idiosyncratic temperature fluctuations and sea temperature changes are all due to the minute short period of our human population coming into an industrial awakening.

I increased the size of the word 'all' in the missive, above. No one is saying GW is ALL caused by humans. .....only that humans, with their incessent and gross pollution are a significant factor. There are also; volcanoes, bovine farts, methane releases, and a lot more - which contribute to climate change.

"let's be clear. The planet is not in jeopardy. We are in jeopardy. We haven't got the power to destroy the planet- or save it. But we might have the power to save ourselves." Michael Chrichton

Honestly, how can anyone take anything this guy says seriously? A person who is now described as oil industry shill spouting his propaganda and lies for the oil industry.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laurie-david/michael-crichton-the-oil-_b_15430.html

Hey, be nice to the oil industry or you can sit in the dark, take cold showers and start to walk to work.

Without the oil industry most people would be dead.

Imagine trying to survive winter in N. America or N. Europe without oil and the electricity that comes from it.

So how did the human race evolve, prosper, spread to many parts of the globe, develop agriculture, writing, art, the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, etc etc before the oil industry came along?

Hi Bommerangutang,

I'd just like to thank you for your sensible posts on this thread. Also I'd like to thank those others who base their replies on scientific data. I fear that it is a losing battle, however.

Thai Visa is full of people who are total nutcases: climate change deniers, supporters of Suthep, believers in conspiracy theories (irrational beliefs such as: Japan will become uninhabitable due to Fukushima, mobile phone masts cause sickness, the US government caused the twin towers to collapse).

As you know, there are some people who understand science and logic and rational argument, and there are others who do not. It has always seemed to me that, if in doubt and if you are not an expert in the field, then check what most scientists from reputable institutions believe, and then tend to follow their conclusions. In the case of climate change, where some 95% of scientists think that climate change is anthropogenic, that might suggest that one should agree with their conclusion. And yet many people on ThaiVisa seem to think that, they ThaiVisa members, albeit uneducated in any sciences remotely connected with meteorology or atmospheric science or physics in general, can give their 'opinion'.

Uneducated opinions are worthless.

Good wishes to you, Bommerangutang. You have the patience of Job.

Hi Bommerangutang,

I'd just like to thank you for your sensible posts on this thread. Also I'd like to thank those others who base their replies on scientific data. I fear that it is a losing battle, however.

Thai Visa is full of people who are total nutcases: climate change deniers, supporters of Suthep, believers in conspiracy theories (irrational beliefs such as: Japan will become uninhabitable due to Fukushima, mobile phone masts cause sickness, the US government caused the twin towers to collapse).

As you know, there are some people who understand science and logic and rational argument, and there are others who do not. It has always seemed to me that, if in doubt and if you are not an expert in the field, then check what most scientists from reputable institutions believe, and then tend to follow their conclusions. In the case of climate change, where some 95% of scientists think that climate change is anthropogenic, that might suggest that one should agree with their conclusion. And yet many people on ThaiVisa seem to think that, they ThaiVisa members, albeit uneducated in any sciences remotely connected with meteorology or atmospheric science or physics in general, can give their 'opinion'.

Uneducated opinions are worthless.

Good wishes to you, Bommerangutang. You have the patience of Job.

"95% of scientists..." Balderdash! You talk about facts and bring up a completely unsubstantiated statement? And, how do you qualify, or quantify "scientist?" For my money a scientist is an experimenter, not a theorist. (Hypothesizer?) To each his own on that point.

"Global warming"... What a bunch of BS...
If anyone here has been brainwashed by 'An inconvenient truth' by our beloved Mr. Gore, I recommend you to watch the documentary 'Not Evil, Just wrong' (Same guy that made 'FrackNation' as an answer to 'Gas land').
Yea, he is not completely neutral as well, and it's quite easy to see he has a strong libertarian view point. Still an easy and convenient way to see the other side of the coin...

Edited February 17, 201412 yr by banglassie

An off-topic post has been deleted.

HMMM - What a question to ask during the coldest winter in a century...LOL

Meanwhile, within human history, the Earth has been much warmer and much colder - no much folks can do about Sunspot Activity and Natural Cycles...

There is a day-old report on NPR (America's National Public Radio) which reports something that will drive deniers nuts (nuttier than they already are? ....that's a stretch). It purports that warming arctic is causing jet stream to flow eratically, further north and south, therefore explaining why US states like Georgia and Alabama are experiencing unprecedented cold weather.

SOURCE

What's that I heard someone say; 'The arctic is not warming' ? Tell that to the polar bears who are running short of ice, and have to swim more often.

HMMM - What a question to ask during the coldest winter in a century...LOL

Meanwhile, within human history, the Earth has been much warmer and much colder - no much folks can do about Sunspot Activity and Natural Cycles...

Fersure the Earth has gone through much colder and much hotter times. Thanks for pointing that out, Einstein. That's not the issue. The issue is whether it's heating up at a faster-than-expected rate, and whether a significant portion of that heating is caused by people, their machines and activities.

It's like saying, if there were a war and hundreds of people dying; "Well, what's the big deal, there have been earlier wars where many more people were killed."

Edited February 18, 201412 yr by boomerangutang

Honestly, how can anyone take anything this guy says seriously? A person who is now described as oil industry shill spouting his propaganda and lies for the oil industry.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laurie-david/michael-crichton-the-oil-_b_15430.html

Hey, be nice to the oil industry or you can sit in the dark, take cold showers and start to walk to work.

Without the oil industry most people would be dead.

Imagine trying to survive winter in N. America or N. Europe without oil and the electricity that comes from it.

So how did the human race evolve, prosper, spread to many parts of the globe, develop agriculture, writing, art, the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, etc etc before the oil industry came along?

They did, just at a MUCH slower pace.

An off-topic post has been deleted.

Please stay on topic.

A lost cause, Scott. No one is talking about the data set described in the original post.

For one thing it requires finding the dataset on the Guardian article and then installing Google Earth.

I took a look at the dataset for Pattaya, temperature of which does, indeed, appear to be dramatically rising since the 1970's. But wouldn't you expect that with all the hot air that's been generated here in the last few decades?

I have not been able to look at the data set. I would expect to see temperature rises for any town or city which has been growing. More concrete and black roads equals heat sink. It would be interesting to plot the thermal mass growth of a place like Pattaya against its measured average temperature rise. I am willing to bet there would be a correlation there.

Global climate warming change made Al gore one of the richest men in the World

My best example; "there is more CO2 in the air." So? Isn't that what helps plants grow? Or is that science wrong as well?

So what if it does? How is that germane to this discussion?

And is that really your best example? The presumption that if a certain amount of something is beneficial, more must be even better? Really?

We're supposed to drink about 4 liters of water every day to stay properly hydrated. So according to your theory, more must be better right? Guess what happens if you drink 8 liters of water daily - you can die. It's called hyponatremia. Anyone who takes vitamins knows this. Not enough causes a deficiency. The right amount keeps you healthy. Too much can kill you.