Obama, DiCaprio team up against climate change

[Jingthing]

So they are now grooming Leonardo  DiCaprio for future US presidential politics. Well unlike the rest he does actually have experience of sinking ships and rising sea levels. 

No they're not.

[canuckamuck]

The use of celebrities to spread propaganda is hardly a new thing. People are more likely to agree with a popular celeb because they think they relate to them based on characters they have played, or songs they have sung. It's all part of wagging the dog.

 

Little Leo has been a prop ever since he was Alyssa Milano's little brother.  I wonder if he ever had an original thought?

 

[hawker9000]

17 hours ago, maoro2013 said:

The earth has had many changes from ice age to other over the approximately 4.5 billion years of it's existence. 

Depending on what you read,  mostly extreme, the problem is man made. Other media would say the Earth is actually cooling but this is not enough to slow the momentum of the ones who postulate the warming theory and accuse mankind of  their faults.

 

I need to see some credible evidence before I would agree to what some say. I am sick of graphs supposedly telling me the story with no X axis numbers reeks of an act to keep the momentum going.

 

A lot of money is made out of this for some.

 

I was forced to attend a meeting about this subject as the fairly large company I worked for insisted on all managers attending this two day lecture. The total crap put forward left me totally convinced the whole thing was a charade. This was  presented by the director of climate change.

 

We were also instructed that the ocean levels were rising as the Carteret Islands were being inundated. Well the fact is, like a number of coral atolls, these islands are sinking absolutely nothing to do with rising sea levels. I loved on a yacht for ten years and the water level around the marina hasn't changed noticeably

It would be good to have some real facts, not temperature readings at convenient times and places.

 

You don't get it.  It's the temperature readings at convenient times and places that get the government subsidies and "study" funding.

 

DiCaprio & Obama teaming up.  Who cares?   0² + 0² = 0

 

[Rancid]

I like the idea of not turning our home/planet into the toxic wasteland it is fast becoming. However as one that trusts neither politicians nor the media, I can't help but feel suspicious of climate change motives. Whether real or not, we should be addressing all aspects of pollution and over-development in an attempt to keep our planet habitable, and that includes not destroying our ecosystem with GM crops. Remember Goldman Sachs was a big proponent with billions to be made in trading carbon credits, if they like the idea then it probably firstly wont be good for the rest of us, and secondly will probably make no difference.

 

I fear that the steps that will be adopted will be just to show something is being done, with insiders profiting enormously, while we lose the focus of all the other damage being committed left unaddressed. As such I see it as a scam, but for different reasons to most.

[maoro2013]

1 hour ago, hawker9000 said:

 

You don't get it.  It's the temperature readings at convenient times and places that get the government subsidies and "study" funding.

 

DiCaprio & Obama teaming up.  Who cares?   0² + 0² = 0

 

Actually I do get it and agree with you.  I may have expressed myself badly and I  did. I don't believe all the hype  but the movement has so much momentum  it will not be easily stopped 

[Cory1848]

23 hours ago, pkspeaker said:

temperature record from the British Antarctic Survey, temps taken at the Antarctic Pennensula: [ www.theaustralian.com.au%2fnews%2fnation%2fantarctic-cooling-after-decades-of-warming-say-scientists%2fnews-story%2fb69b61d71286ae3668301baa33ab0eb1/RK=0/RS=atSQMPeQXWXulTlKqben4wNWX74- ]

antarctic cooling for 20 years

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/antarctic-cooling-after-decades-of-warming-say-scientists/news-story/b69b61d71286ae3668301baa33ab0eb1

 

 

and it's corroborated by more ice in Antarctica: [ http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses ] and also by Antarctic sea ice extent records broken in 2013 and 2014 & BAS recorded lowest temperature ever at antarctica at -55.4*C in August 2014.

 

http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/06/29/scientists-and-studies-predict-imminent-global-cooling-ahead-drop-in-global-temps-almost-a-slam-dunk/

 

Asia glaciers "mysteriously" expanding

http://www.livescience.com/48256-asia-karakoram-glaciers-stability.html ..and more 'mystery' expanding glaciers in South America: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/06/090622-glaciers-growing.html

 

Arctic Ice has just very recently started to rebound http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.1.html http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.8.html http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.2.html http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.10.html http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.4.html http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.12.html http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.13.html http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.7.html

 

http://www.climatedepot.com/2013/12/04/new-paper-russian-solar-physicist-by-habibullo-abdussamatov-predicts-another-little-ice-age-within-the-next-30-years/

 

http://www.iceagenow.com/List_of_Expanding_Glaciers.htm

 

NO GLOBAL WARMING ON SATELITE OR RADIOSONDE FOR 18 YEARS

 

where's your winning argument and scientific consensus now?

 

 

The scientific consensus is as I stated, about 97 percent of climate scientists upholding, through real science, that global warming is man-made. Here's a website debunking several specific arguments made by climate change deniers, including some of those you mention above, with a link to lots more:

http://billmoyers.com/2014/05/16/eight-pseudo-scientific-climate-claims-debunked-by-real-scientists/

 

Also, you cite the website <www.climatedepot.com>, which is run by a fellow named Marc Moreno. His history and lack of credentials speak for themselves:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Morano

 

Happy reading!

 

 

 

 

 

[pkspeaker]

There WAS not a 'consessus' that global warming "was man made".  There WAS a consensus that human activity contributes to it, but it was vague as to how much, that's why it was so easy to get 97%.. a leading skeptic climatologist, Roy Spencer, was part of that 'consesnsus'.  At this point there is not even a consensus that global warming exists because..  There is observed data showing ice increasing and cooling. SO who's the denier here?  un-adjusted USCRN shows cooling from when nit was installed in 2005 to 2014 2015-18 will be the elnino/lanina pattern as a weak solar cycle bottoms out, the AMO index is going cold and the PDO will should also be cold around 2020 with that solar minimum. 80% of volcanoes erupt during solar maximums or solar minimums!  Let's take a look at the most recent big ones.  1991 Pinatabo-at the top of solar cycle 22, eleven years earlier mt St Helens- top of 21.  Tambora 1815-Dalton Minimum; Laki- 1783-Maunder minimum, AND the ones that blew during the mins were more powerful..  it's a wild card of intense cooling. Climatologists call this the triple crown of cooling, low solar activity, high volcanic activity, and cold oceans.   The climate reality is that the trend is cooling, not warming, don't tell that to an industry that is receiving $100's of billions of government largess.  They admit to this reality and the funding bottom drops out, ALOT of $$ at state here.

 

The 'official' global temperature chart that shows now much hotter than the 1930's have been adjusted over time, including adjusting the 1930's down.  It's raw politics, not science.

 

This is just 1 example:

https://judithcurry.com/2015/06/04/has-noaa-busted-the-pause-in-global-warming/

 

ARGO buoys and satellites don’t show a warming trend.  Nevertheless, the NOAA team finds a substantial increase in the ocean surface temperature anomaly trend since 1998.

In my opinion, the gold standard dataset for global ocean surface temperatures is the UK dataset, HadSST3.  A review of the uncertainties is given in this paper by John Kennedy http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadsst3/uncertainty.html.  Note, the UK group has dealt with the same issues raised by the NOAA team.  I personally see no reason to the use the NOAA ERSST dataset, I do not see any evidence that the NOAA group has done anywhere near as careful a job as the UK group in processing the ocean temperatures.

If real data doesn't agree with the agenda of AGW, they simply remove it and cherry pick data.

Edited October 5, 2016 by pkspeaker

[hawker9000]

Some won't believe this, but in California they're actually going to regulate cow farts.  Yeap.  'Not making that up. 

 

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, hawker9000 said:

Some won't believe this, but in California they're actually going to regulate cow farts.  Yeap.  'Not making that up. 

 

What's your point? You don't know about cow farts? 

[hawker9000]

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

What's your point? You don't know about cow farts? 

Lol.  That koolaid must be powerful stuff.  

 

Cow farts??  Seriously???   Why not just start monitoring human farts?  We'll all have to start wearing wifi equipped diapers that send in our emission data to a brand new wingnut-created Dept of Flatulence  (staffed with wingnut-trained "experts", of which I'm sure there will be no shortage when it comes to air...) and be fined for "excess emissions".  They could also peddle new "carbon offset" allotments, and hand out "mandatory medical referrals" to, emm, habitual offenders...   ROFL    Oh, and canned beans will have to start carrying labels with their "expected methane ratings".    And we'll all have to go in for "emissions checks" every few years at special testing stations, like we do for our cars,

 

YGTBSM.

 

 

  

 

 

[Grubster]

On October 4, 2016 at 8:43 AM, OMGImInPattaya said:

Why are they fighting "climate change"? It's been changing (warming) since the last ice-age and that's a good thing. When the earth froze over it was a real downer.

I agree why the fighting, it is happening for what reason I'm not sure, but shouldn't we just prepare for more of it and do what we can, we probably wouldn't burn coal, oil, or have a billion cows farting if we didn't need the electricity and food. I won't be turning my power off anytime soon. Now I'm off in my gas guzzler to get a nice steak dinner.  Take care.

[Grubster]

On October 6, 2016 at 2:42 AM, Jingthing said:

What's your point? You don't know about cow farts? 

What do you do for a living? Why I'm a cow fart regulator. Smelly job, but pays well with full government benefits. You couldn't make this stuff up.

[Catoni]

On 10/4/2016 at 7:13 AM, Jingthing said:

I don't think his personal hypocrisy which I wouldn't bother denying is especially relevant to the issues here. It's a convenient way for science deniers to play games though. 

 

     No.... not denying science.....  climate has always changed on this planet...  Where I grew up was buried under a mile thick sheet of ice that spread out as far as the eye could see...(the last Glacial Period) .....it lasted more than 80,000 years.  Then, just 20,000 years ago it started to melt back with "Global Warming"  (must have been all those caveman cooking fires releasing CO2 ) ..   and the ground was all permafrost for a few hundred years after it began retreating.    Now it's all forests, farmland, towns and cities, lakes and rivers.  I believe that is an improvement. 

         We just came out of the "Little Ice Age" circa 1850...(L.I.A. approx. 1300 - 1850).... so I would expect it to warm for a couple of hundred years.

       We've warmed only 0.85 degree C between 1880 - 2012.  (IPCC, 2013: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S. K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. Page 3.)

   The "Little Ice Age" was not a nice time for growing crops.  Longer more bitter winters...  shorter growing seasons, failed harvests... famine.   Not nice at all . 

    Are you aware that this planet is still in an Ice Age that began about 2.5 million year ago ? ?    The planet does not necessarily stay in an Ice Age just because some people want it to.  

 

    If you like it colder..... then leave Thailand and move to the nice cool town of Barrow Bay on the north shore of Alaska....  or Inuvik in northern Canada, or move to the the Arctic shores of Russia.    Why would you want to stay in the hot tropics ? ? 

     

 

    

Edited October 10, 2016 by Catoni
Quote marks