What is going on with the ' winter ' in Thailand

[sandyf]

The Romans grew grapes and produced wine in Eastern England. Try doing that now. So global warming is not new!

Romans growing grapes has nothing to do with Global Warming.

Global Warming / Cooling over thousands of years is not at all unusual, over 50 to 100 years it certainly is.

I was brought up in the north east of Scotland and when I was at school we used to cycle out to the fruit farms and pick raspberries and strawberries for the princely sum of 1d per punnet. No fruit farms for a long time now, climate change closed them down.

Doubt it. More to do with the 'princely sum of 1d'.

Wrong way round, 1d per punnet is what they paid people to pick the fruit, not what they sold it for. With the condition of the local economy there was no shortage of pickers. As a schoolboy it could be a bit difficult to get in with all the unemployed adults, effectively slave labour. My mother always said it was worth more to eat them than pick them.

As far as the weather is concerned there was always snow on the ground for 3/4 months, cars put chains on. Come Easter it would be sunny and quite warm. Nowadays they can go through a winter without snow and if it does come it doesn't last, same applies to the sun in the summer.

[up2u2]

Doubt it. More to do with the 'princely sum of 1d'.

Wrong way round, 1d per punnet is what they paid people to pick the fruit, not what they sold it for. With the condition of the local economy there was no shortage of pickers. As a schoolboy it could be a bit difficult to get in with all the unemployed adults, effectively slave labour. My mother always said it was worth more to eat them than pick them.

As far as the weather is concerned there was always snow on the ground for 3/4 months, cars put chains on. Come Easter it would be sunny and quite warm. Nowadays they can go through a winter without snow and if it does come it doesn't last, same applies to the sun in the summer.

They ran out of slave labour was my point.

Have no idea what you are talking about regarding the weather.

[sandyf]

Doubt it. More to do with the 'princely sum of 1d'.

Wrong way round, 1d per punnet is what they paid people to pick the fruit, not what they sold it for. With the condition of the local economy there was no shortage of pickers. As a schoolboy it could be a bit difficult to get in with all the unemployed adults, effectively slave labour. My mother always said it was worth more to eat them than pick them.

As far as the weather is concerned there was always snow on the ground for 3/4 months, cars put chains on. Come Easter it would be sunny and quite warm. Nowadays they can go through a winter without snow and if it does come it doesn't last, same applies to the sun in the summer.

They ran out of slave labour was my point.

Have no idea what you are talking about regarding the weather.

Obviously never lived in the north east of Scotland in the 50's, but have all the answers.

[chiang mai]

http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/carbon-clock/

[movieplay]

That carbon clock is impressive when you use NASA's, the NOAA's current charts, that have been adjusted to show continual warming. But when you use their old charts that show the reality that the 1930's were warmer than it was today, then the 'co2 dominant climate forcing theory' falls apart, that's why it's necessary to use only the newer charts.

In the 1930's it was 117*F in Melbourne Australia at 8.00AM! There was the dust bowl biggest drought in US history, hurricanes, tornadoes..That's exactly what we are told are the risks of global warming, severe dry droughts, hurricanes, etc.

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/hansen-the-climate-chiropractor/

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/11/25/biggest-fraud-in-history-perpetrated-by-tom-karl-and-gavin-schmidt/

better to have the AGW co2 dominant climate forcing theory than the truth because we are trying to save the world here and these stupid 'deniers' keep sabotaging our efforts.

[chiang mai]

Have to say it pi sses me off no end when people try and tell us that everything is OK and it's normal, it's happened before they tell us, like they were here and know that for fact, whereas science says the opposite, maybe they're just very afraid and it's a truth avoidance mechanism.

[movieplay]

It may not be ok and normal, there is too much air and water pollution we can agree but what, if anything can be done about it..if the co2 theory doesn't hold water then the establishment science is barking up the wrong tree.. thats not going to help anyone, why not just put all these resources into cleaner air and water instead of focusing on 'co2'..

[up2u2]

The best website for the key Global Warming / Climate Change data is NASA's Vital Signs of the Planet website.

NASA Vital Signs

Also if you want to learn about how Climate Deniers effectively promote their propaganda the documentary Merchants of Doubt is an excellent insight into how it is done.

[chiang mai]

I agree about the NASA site, I can't watch the other one, I get too angry.

[movieplay]

I'll read the Merchants of Doubts in a second.. regardless of conservative/liberla agenda's etc.

but Charts are Charts, you can't deny the charts were changed over time to fit this 'global warming' agenda.. you can't deny that the 1930s were hotter than hell, just look at the newspapers, you can't deny that the number of days over 95* in the US is going down. remember hurricane katrina and the 10 hurricanes that proceeded it in about a 5 year period around 2000? Where are the hurricanes now? less hurricanes less tornadoes, more rain and snow.. facts on the ground speak louder than adjusted charts. seems like the 30's were the hottest decade and around the late 90's was the second just like the old charts indicate warming to appox. 1940, cooling to 1978, warming to 1997 and now we are in another cooling cycle..PDO index is consistent with that.

The British Met Office which is commited to the AGW theory actually said "global warming set to resume, expect colder winters" so even the establishment is predicting colder winters as they put out charts that show endless warming..

[chiang mai]

I'll read the Merchants of Doubts in a second.. regardless of conservative/liberla agenda's etc.

but Charts are Charts, you can't deny the charts were changed over time to fit this 'global warming' agenda.. you can't deny that the 1930s were hotter than hell, just look at the newspapers, you can't deny that the number of days over 95* in the US is going down. remember hurricane katrina and the 10 hurricanes that proceeded it in about a 5 year period around 2000? Where are the hurricanes now? less hurricanes less tornadoes, more rain and snow.. facts on the ground speak louder than adjusted charts. seems like the 30's were the hottest decade and around the late 90's was the second just like the old charts indicate warming to appox. 1940, cooling to 1978, warming to 1997 and now we are in another cooling cycle..PDO index is consistent with that.

The British Met Office which is commited to the AGW theory actually said "global warming set to resume, expect colder winters" so even the establishment is predicting colder winters as they put out charts that show endless warming..

The challenge you face is that you have to refute the likes of NASA and their numbers before I change my mind, you have to do that by proving they are wrong on a line by line basis and by quoting globally accepted authoritative views, not just by saying it is so.

[movieplay]

OK so this is a movie about how big oil or big tobacco funds things like 'climate denial' etc. the big oil companies have actually funded AGW groups, agw research etc, it was in the 'climategate' emails.. so if they are funding skeptics then they are playing both ends.

in this video Lindzen makes that claim and provides an example pointing out that millions of big oil dollars have been funding agw groups, when the other guy claims that they are funding the skeptics he challenged him to provide an example, in which the other guy declines to do so..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOU306AvvHE

[movieplay]

I'm saying these charts are based on adjusted data, modeled data , and that there is no thermometer for the whole world, they construct these charts using biases. They changed the old charts which appear to be more accurate because they said they had it wrong in the first place decades ago.. they even got 'caught' changing temperature data from the 1930s because they said it wasn't really that hot then.. Given that reality these charts cannot be considered scientific fact, rather they are the opinion of a government scientific organization. Government professionals and all their military and security experts also claimed that iraq had WMD and that they were a grave threat to the USA, was that a fact? no but it was presented as such.. then it was 'well ok we were wrong..sue us.'

I'll read the Merchants of Doubts in a second.. regardless of conservative/liberla agenda's etc.

but Charts are Charts, you can't deny the charts were changed over time to fit this 'global warming' agenda.. you can't deny that the 1930s were hotter than hell, just look at the newspapers, you can't deny that the number of days over 95* in the US is going down. remember hurricane katrina and the 10 hurricanes that proceeded it in about a 5 year period around 2000? Where are the hurricanes now? less hurricanes less tornadoes, more rain and snow.. facts on the ground speak louder than adjusted charts. seems like the 30's were the hottest decade and around the late 90's was the second just like the old charts indicate warming to appox. 1940, cooling to 1978, warming to 1997 and now we are in another cooling cycle..PDO index is consistent with that.

The British Met Office which is commited to the AGW theory actually said "global warming set to resume, expect colder winters" so even the establishment is predicting colder winters as they put out charts that show endless warming..

The challenge you face is that you have to refute the likes of NASA and their numbers before I change my mind, you have to do that by proving they are wrong on a line by line basis and by quoting globally accepted authoritative views, not just by saying it is so.

[chiang mai]

I'm saying these charts are based on adjusted data, modeled data , and that there is no thermometer for the whole world, they construct these charts using biases. They changed the old charts which appear to be more accurate because they said they had it wrong in the first place decades ago.. they even got 'caught' changing temperature data from the 1930s because they said it wasn't really that hot then.. Given that reality these charts cannot be considered scientific fact, rather they are the opinion of a government scientific organization. Government professionals and all their military and security experts also claimed that iraq had WMD and that they were a grave threat to the USA, was that a fact? no but it was presented as such.. then it was 'well ok we were wrong..sue us.'

I'll read the Merchants of Doubts in a second.. regardless of conservative/liberla agenda's etc.

but Charts are Charts, you can't deny the charts were changed over time to fit this 'global warming' agenda.. you can't deny that the 1930s were hotter than hell, just look at the newspapers, you can't deny that the number of days over 95* in the US is going down. remember hurricane katrina and the 10 hurricanes that proceeded it in about a 5 year period around 2000? Where are the hurricanes now? less hurricanes less tornadoes, more rain and snow.. facts on the ground speak louder than adjusted charts. seems like the 30's were the hottest decade and around the late 90's was the second just like the old charts indicate warming to appox. 1940, cooling to 1978, warming to 1997 and now we are in another cooling cycle..PDO index is consistent with that.

The British Met Office which is commited to the AGW theory actually said "global warming set to resume, expect colder winters" so even the establishment is predicting colder winters as they put out charts that show endless warming..

The challenge you face is that you have to refute the likes of NASA and their numbers before I change my mind, you have to do that by proving they are wrong on a line by line basis and by quoting globally accepted authoritative views, not just by saying it is so.

That's not really an answer, is it! The medical profession has changed its mind many times as new evidence, technology, assumptions and findings become known as to the cause of cancer. So it is with everything in this life, nothing is yet perfect hence past views get modified as new data and approaches become known. Those things in themselves are no reason to dispute the source of the findings, their abilities or conclusions, is it! Unless of course you are a conspiracy theorist in which case, good grief and good night!

So, back to my point, can you, will you, are you able to refute NASA findings on a line by line basis or does it just fit well with friends and is fun to be a doubter on such an important issue?

[chiang mai]

OK so this is a movie about how big oil or big tobacco funds things like 'climate denial' etc. the big oil companies have actually funded AGW groups, agw research etc, it was in the 'climategate' emails.. so if they are funding skeptics then they are playing both ends.

in this video Lindzen makes that claim and provides an example pointing out that millions of big oil dollars have been funding agw groups, when the other guy claims that they are funding the skeptics he challenged him to provide an example, in which the other guy declines to do so..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOU306AvvHE

This is a nothing nonsense of a news channel attracting attention, irrelevant.

[Stevemercer]

I'll bite again on this topic.

Mankind has been busy digging up or pumping up all the coal, oil and gas over the last 100 years (and next 100 years) and burning it so the carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere. All this coal, oil and gas comes from plants (that have sequestered the carbon dioxide) that have been buried and compressed over the last billion years. So we will release into the atmosphere a billion years worth of carbon dioxide sucked away by plants in just 200 years. Of course this is going to have some sort of impact and the percentage of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing. No one disputes this.

At the practical level, I wonder if many people in cooler countries (for example Norway or Britain) really care that much if the temperature increase a few degrees. Perhaps it's more of a worry for people in hot countries, like Thailand. Obviously I'm ignoring possible increases in ocean levels, more extreme weather etc.

[MAJIC]

The Romans grew grapes and produced wine in Eastern England. Try doing that now. So global warming is not new!

Romans??

They are doing it now. There are British wines that are even better than the French ones

Try these,French wine is over rated!

http://www.englishwineproducers.co.uk/

[movieplay]

I'm not in a position to do a line-by-line 'refute' we're talking about many thousands of data points and sources.. this is from Judith Curry

scientists are doing their best to interpret large datasets with numerous biases such as station moves, instrument changes, time of observation changes, urban heat island biases, and other so-called inhomogenities that have occurred over the last 150 years. Their methods may not be perfect, and are certainly not immune from critical analysis, but that critical analysis should start out from a position of assuming good faith and with an understanding of what exactly has been done.

What I'm saying is that these charts have to be considered opinionated, when your talking about .8*C change since 1880, according to the official line and they're telling you they 'act in good faith' They radically changed the old charts but they don't explain that sort of thing line by line on their website, instead they just sort of bury the old charts and pretend they don't exist, its the same thing they do when their climate models fail, they take them out and continue on..

Steve Mercer is talking about comfort, thats not the issue really, you have the IPCC telling us we're gonna get a new 1930s type super drought and extreme weather that will destroy countries but instead we're gonna get early very cold winters and crop failures.. its a preparing for the wrong calamity issue.

[chiang mai]

I'm not in a position to do a line-by-line 'refute' we're talking about many thousands of data points and sources.. this is from Judith Curry

scientists are doing their best to interpret large datasets with numerous biases such as station moves, instrument changes, time of observation changes, urban heat island biases, and other so-called inhomogenities that have occurred over the last 150 years. Their methods may not be perfect, and are certainly not immune from critical analysis, but that critical analysis should start out from a position of assuming good faith and with an understanding of what exactly has been done.

What I'm saying is that these charts have to be considered opinionated, when your talking about .8*C change since 1880, according to the official line and they're telling you they 'act in good faith' They radically changed the old charts but they don't explain that sort of thing line by line on their website, instead they just sort of bury the old charts and pretend they don't exist, its the same thing they do when their climate models fail, they take them out and continue on..

Steve Mercer is talking about comfort, thats not the issue really, you have the IPCC telling us we're gonna get a new 1930s type super drought and extreme weather that will destroy countries but instead we're gonna get early very cold winters and crop failures.. its a preparing for the wrong calamity issue.

A couple of anecdotes:

"IPCC telling us we're gonna get a new 1930s type super drought and extreme weather that will destroy countries", thirty years ago I had a home near Napa Valley, a green and lush wine growing area of CA, today much of it is a dustbowl.

Forty five years ago my father, normally a quite rational and intelligent man, was heard to rant about those bl oody scientists who claim to have found a hole in the ozone layer and that global warming was in prospect, what nonsense he said, as if such a thing could ever happen!

FWIW I think that denying global warming exists is similar to needing religion, folks have to cling to the idea it exists because the alternative is so terrifying!

[movieplay]

I don't deny global warming exists, I am denying that it exists now and that it continues endlessly. I mentioned Judith Curry, she was part of the IPCC but turned against it in 2009, she is also predicting global cooling-(you can read her blog and articles), so are dozens of other scientists and scientific organizations, every year more scientists jump ship from the global warming bandwagon.. with the predictions and models of global warming failing, 5 or 10 years from now AGW will be in the same category as Iraqi WMD.

Your comparing your own experience in Napa Valley to a historical event that lasted from more than 5 years in the 1930's known as the Dustbowl. The dustbowl was a severe drought caused by global warming during the hottest decade since the medieval warm period which caused severe crop failures and contributed to the Great Depression.

Again, that is exactly what the global warming people warn about, that excessive global warming will cause severe droughts, hurricanes, and tornadoes nand that's what you had in the 30's. You think the 1970s were 'just as hot' as the 1930's? Look at the newspaper clippings on tony heller and then take a look at the 70's media:

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/02/the-1970s-global-cooling-alarmism.html

people were not imagining things, the 30's were very hot and the 70's were very cold, for people in the 70's who were old enough to remember the 30's it was obvious, not just the weather data.

Your going to discount the entire historical record because the same government that told you Iraq had WMDs and that they were a grave threat, gave you a 'new' chart in place of the old one they issued, and the old one supported the basic reality that the 30's were warmer than the 70's; so your just gonna believe the new even though there is no explanation as to why they changed the charts.

Edited December 2, 2015 by movieplay

[IMA_FARANG]

It may not be the whole answer but part of it at least probably has something to do with the weather condition known as "El Nino".

Look it up on Wikipedia if you have never heard of it.

It also has a lot to do with the "drought" in Thailand and other counties in South East Asia also.

Scientists are forecasting this year will be one of the strongest El Nino events in the last decade.

El Nino and it's counterpart, known as El Nina are a roughly 10year oscillation between warmer seas and air temperatures in the Western Pacific ocean areas.

These alternating warm ocean waters can cause changes in the "normal" climate on both sides of the Pacific Ocean from Southeast Asia to California.

Right now a strong El Nino is causing warmer and drier "normal" weather to SEA and relatively cooler and wetter "normal" weather to the U.S. west coast.

[Stargeezr]

This is my 3rd day back in Bangkok, and I have found it to be hotter than 10 years ago when I came to Thailand at this time of

year. I remember going to Chiang Mai and having very cold mornings at San Khampang . I guess I will have a bit longer to

get used to the hotter temps this year. It sure does beat shoveling snow, and wearing my Canadian made parka every day.

I hope to get to Pranburi for a few days, while I visit my buddy in Hua Hin. Not sure if I will meet with Kenny from Pranburi,

but hope to see a few of my friends at least in the HH area. I heard thunder about 30 mins ago in BKK, but Pattaya with rain,

well that should at least clean the air and cool the place down for a bit. Pf you want to complain, try going to Pattani and area

and go wading around a temple of 2. That is where I would complain if I went there for my vacation, and had to deal with flooding

and their weather.

Just saying there are worse places than where I am presently at

Geezer

Edited December 2, 2015 by Stargrazer9889

[55Jay]

IMO, anyone who regurgitates the opinions and positions of others and feels that somehow gives them credentials to disparrage, discredit and dismiss those who may disagree, wholly or in part, is no better than the Fox Noise dolt who shows a live image of it snowing outside the New York studio window, then chortles, "Global Warming? YEAH RIGHT!

Just like the religious parrots, they know jack chit.

[tropo]

If I recall correctly, in 2011 we had a cold spell in Hua Hin with temperatures down to 12-14 for over a week.

I remember some years in Pattaya I rode (motorcycle) at night throughout "winter" in shorts. Other years I needed longs. Warm "winters" are nothing new, but it's far too early to talk about this. Let's see at the end of January. In 2011 we had a very cool spell in early March. The 2013 "winter" was long and cool. How was last "winter" in Pattaya? (missed it but warm in the Philippines).

[HooHaa]

you know nothing, ezzra snow,

winter is coming.

Edited December 2, 2015 by HooHaa

[chiang mai]

I don't deny global warming exists, I am denying that it exists now and that it continues endlessly. I mentioned Judith Curry, she was part of the IPCC but turned against it in 2009, she is also predicting global cooling-(you can read her blog and articles), so are dozens of other scientists and scientific organizations, every year more scientists jump ship from the global warming bandwagon.. with the predictions and models of global warming failing, 5 or 10 years from now AGW will be in the same category as Iraqi WMD.

Your comparing your own experience in Napa Valley to a historical event that lasted from more than 5 years in the 1930's known as the Dustbowl. The dustbowl was a severe drought caused by global warming during the hottest decade since the medieval warm period which caused severe crop failures and contributed to the Great Depression.

Again, that is exactly what the global warming people warn about, that excessive global warming will cause severe droughts, hurricanes, and tornadoes nand that's what you had in the 30's. You think the 1970s were 'just as hot' as the 1930's? Look at the newspaper clippings on tony heller and then take a look at the 70's media:

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/02/the-1970s-global-cooling-alarmism.html

people were not imagining things, the 30's were very hot and the 70's were very cold, for people in the 70's who were old enough to remember the 30's it was obvious, not just the weather data.

Your going to discount the entire historical record because the same government that told you Iraq had WMDs and that they were a grave threat, gave you a 'new' chart in place of the old one they issued, and the old one supported the basic reality that the 30's were warmer than the 70's; so your just gonna believe the new even though there is no explanation as to why they changed the charts.

The very moment that someone introduces the weapons of mass destruction and Iraq into a global warming debate is a sure sign the conservation is not going anywhere useful! Strangely, the government you refer to doesn't rule all 195 other countries on the planet, nor does it control their scientific research, nor does it require all 195 to sing the same song!

[55Jay]

I don't deny global warming exists, I am denying that it exists now and that it continues endlessly. I mentioned Judith Curry, she was part of the IPCC but turned against it in 2009, she is also predicting global cooling-(you can read her blog and articles), so are dozens of other scientists and scientific organizations, every year more scientists jump ship from the global warming bandwagon.. with the predictions and models of global warming failing, 5 or 10 years from now AGW will be in the same category as Iraqi WMD.

Your comparing your own experience in Napa Valley to a historical event that lasted from more than 5 years in the 1930's known as the Dustbowl. The dustbowl was a severe drought caused by global warming during the hottest decade since the medieval warm period which caused severe crop failures and contributed to the Great Depression.

Again, that is exactly what the global warming people warn about, that excessive global warming will cause severe droughts, hurricanes, and tornadoes nand that's what you had in the 30's. You think the 1970s were 'just as hot' as the 1930's? Look at the newspaper clippings on tony heller and then take a look at the 70's media:

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/02/the-1970s-global-cooling-alarmism.html

people were not imagining things, the 30's were very hot and the 70's were very cold, for people in the 70's who were old enough to remember the 30's it was obvious, not just the weather data.

Your going to discount the entire historical record because the same government that told you Iraq had WMDs and that they were a grave threat, gave you a 'new' chart in place of the old one they issued, and the old one supported the basic reality that the 30's were warmer than the 70's; so your just gonna believe the new even though there is no explanation as to why they changed the charts.

The very moment that someone introduces the weapons of mass destruction and Iraq into a global warming debate is a sure sign the conservation is not going anywhere useful! Strangely, the government you refer to doesn't rule all 195 other countries on the planet, nor does it control their scientific research, nor does it require all 195 to sing the same song!

I don't think that comment was about WMD at all.

[chiang mai]

I don't deny global warming exists, I am denying that it exists now and that it continues endlessly. I mentioned Judith Curry, she was part of the IPCC but turned against it in 2009, she is also predicting global cooling-(you can read her blog and articles), so are dozens of other scientists and scientific organizations, every year more scientists jump ship from the global warming bandwagon.. with the predictions and models of global warming failing, 5 or 10 years from now AGW will be in the same category as Iraqi WMD.

Your comparing your own experience in Napa Valley to a historical event that lasted from more than 5 years in the 1930's known as the Dustbowl. The dustbowl was a severe drought caused by global warming during the hottest decade since the medieval warm period which caused severe crop failures and contributed to the Great Depression.

Again, that is exactly what the global warming people warn about, that excessive global warming will cause severe droughts, hurricanes, and tornadoes nand that's what you had in the 30's. You think the 1970s were 'just as hot' as the 1930's? Look at the newspaper clippings on tony heller and then take a look at the 70's media:

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/02/the-1970s-global-cooling-alarmism.html

people were not imagining things, the 30's were very hot and the 70's were very cold, for people in the 70's who were old enough to remember the 30's it was obvious, not just the weather data.

Your going to discount the entire historical record because the same government that told you Iraq had WMDs and that they were a grave threat, gave you a 'new' chart in place of the old one they issued, and the old one supported the basic reality that the 30's were warmer than the 70's; so your just gonna believe the new even though there is no explanation as to why they changed the charts.

The very moment that someone introduces the weapons of mass destruction and Iraq into a global warming debate is a sure sign the conservation is not going anywhere useful! Strangely, the government you refer to doesn't rule all 195 other countries on the planet, nor does it control their scientific research, nor does it require all 195 to sing the same song!

I don't think that comment was about WMD at all.

Indeed, but the poster quotes the same government as being responsible for both actions, as if they are indicative of behavior of that government on ALL issues or as if one is supportive of the other, nonsense - go to war, let's fool the populous and lie about WMD, global warming, let's fool the populous and lie about the end of life on the planet, absolute nonsense.

[55Jay]

I don't deny global warming exists, I am denying that it exists now and that it continues endlessly. I mentioned Judith Curry, she was part of the IPCC but turned against it in 2009, she is also predicting global cooling-(you can read her blog and articles), so are dozens of other scientists and scientific organizations, every year more scientists jump ship from the global warming bandwagon.. with the predictions and models of global warming failing, 5 or 10 years from now AGW will be in the same category as Iraqi WMD.

Your comparing your own experience in Napa Valley to a historical event that lasted from more than 5 years in the 1930's known as the Dustbowl. The dustbowl was a severe drought caused by global warming during the hottest decade since the medieval warm period which caused severe crop failures and contributed to the Great Depression.

Again, that is exactly what the global warming people warn about, that excessive global warming will cause severe droughts, hurricanes, and tornadoes nand that's what you had in the 30's. You think the 1970s were 'just as hot' as the 1930's? Look at the newspaper clippings on tony heller and then take a look at the 70's media:

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/02/the-1970s-global-cooling-alarmism.html

people were not imagining things, the 30's were very hot and the 70's were very cold, for people in the 70's who were old enough to remember the 30's it was obvious, not just the weather data.

Your going to discount the entire historical record because the same government that told you Iraq had WMDs and that they were a grave threat, gave you a 'new' chart in place of the old one they issued, and the old one supported the basic reality that the 30's were warmer than the 70's; so your just gonna believe the new even though there is no explanation as to why they changed the charts.

The very moment that someone introduces the weapons of mass destruction and Iraq into a global warming debate is a sure sign the conservation is not going anywhere useful! Strangely, the government you refer to doesn't rule all 195 other countries on the planet, nor does it control their scientific research, nor does it require all 195 to sing the same song!

I don't think that comment was about WMD at all.

Indeed, but the poster quotes the same government as being responsible for both actions, as if they are indicative of behavior of that government on ALL issues or as if one is supportive of the other, nonsense - go to war, let's fool the populous and lie about WMD, global warming, let's fool the populous and lie about the end of life on the planet, absolute nonsense.

Oh. That. Well, you did bring up religion so The Illuminati ought to be fair play. LOL.

Actually, the comment made me consider the foolishness of our species when reviewed by a future civilization or species.

[chiang mai]

The very moment that someone introduces the weapons of mass destruction and Iraq into a global warming debate is a sure sign the conservation is not going anywhere useful! Strangely, the government you refer to doesn't rule all 195 other countries on the planet, nor does it control their scientific research, nor does it require all 195 to sing the same song!

I don't think that comment was about WMD at all.

Indeed, but the poster quotes the same government as being responsible for both actions, as if they are indicative of behavior of that government on ALL issues or as if one is supportive of the other, nonsense - go to war, let's fool the populous and lie about WMD, global warming, let's fool the populous and lie about the end of life on the planet, absolute nonsense.

Oh. That. Well, you did bring up religion so The Illuminati ought to be fair play. LOL.

Actually, the comment made me consider the foolishness of our species when reviewed by a future civilization or species.

I brought up (the subject of) religion, where?