Michael Crichton,the late author of State of fear,posited that small .ideological organizations became large ,money making organizations,needed a constant "State of Fear" to keep the big money coming in. He used footnotes all through the fictional novel.to ensure that the reader knew it was serious debate on the subject..speaking of debates,his team won the IQ2 debate on the subject:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fz8KiA-YMt8&list=PL1B692C4A75C9AE<br />
The new thinking is that we're going into a New Ice Age..Chicken Little is never too fa away!
No one can predict the weather. Especially the weatherman.
The Sea ice is growing. <br />
The Land ice is vanishing. <br />
Of nearly 14,000 research papers in EVERY branch of earth ba<x>sed science - geology, biology, chemistry, zoology. All but 27 conclude with evidence (you know, something can actually be qualified and quantified) that global warming is real and that humans have caused it. <br />
THAT'S why we should believe them. Now do you have something tangible to bring to the table or are you going to keep your fingers in your ears and expect people to respect you for it?
@ senergetic LOL I love how people just want to use data that they like. So what 14,000 years. the world is 6,000,000 years old. It has been much warmer/cooler in the past. Useing .23 % of the age of the earth as proof that there such a thing as global warming would be just as logicak as a patient going to the emergency room for a disease and have the Dr took your History and physical going back to the time you entered the ER. try peddling that crapola else where.
I will take the typical liberal stance here<br />
ITS ALL W"S FAULT !!!
A lot of the research is government funded and reports citing humans' contribution to global warming as significant offer justification for high 'green' taxes. I suspect this is not a coincidence!<br />
Computer generated models for global warming and its effects have been shown to be highly inaccurate at best. The so-called 'father' of global warming produced three long-term temperature predictions that varied according to level of man-made greenhouse gases contributing to the atmosphere. One of the predictions was ba<x>sed on what should happen if we stopped the emissions completely. We kept billowing out those gases yet the actual temperature increase observed turned out to be lower than the one the predicted in the event we stop generating greenhouse gases. The model was great for justifying extra taxes to combat global warming though!
Don't you realize that global cooling is caused by global warming? I thought everyone knew this.
I got blocked over the man made global warming issue the other day. Not an ounce of vitriol- just for having a conflicting opinion.
The ice cap just didn't shrink as much this summer as it has in the past.
It's only growing phenomenally by percentage because it's up 50% from historic lows. "The experts added, however, that much of the ice remains thin and slushy, a far cry from the thick Arctic pack ice of the past. Because thin ice is subject to rapid future melting, the scientists said this year’s recovery was unlikely to portend any change in the relentless long-term decline of Arctic sea ice."
One datum point doesn't disprove a model.
Christy told CNSNews that he analyzed all 73 models used in the 5AR and not one accurately predicted that the Earth’s temperature would remain flat since Oct. 1, 1996. (See Temperatures v Predictions 1976-2013.pdf)
“I compared the models with observations in the key area – the tropics – where the climate models showed a real impact of greenhouse gases,” Christy explained. “I wanted to compare the real world temperatures with the models in a place where the impact would be very clear.” (See Tropical Mid-Troposphere Graph.pdf)
Using datasets of actual temperatures recorded by the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (NASA GISS), the United Kingdom’s Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research at the University of East Anglia (Hadley-CRU), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), satellites measuring atmospheric and deep oceanic temperatures, and a remote sensor system in California, Christy found that “all show a lack of warming over the past 17 years.”
“All 73 models’ predictions were on average three to four times what occurred in the real world,” Christy pointed out. “The closest was a Russian model that predicted a one-degree increase."
- See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/climate-scientist-73-un-climate-models-wrong-no-global-warming-17#sthash.Fwy0j7rc.dpuf