Carbon drought ..

[AlbertaFarmer5]

A5
You are good at juvenile insults but not very good at backing up your arguments with credible evidence. Try sticking to the issue being discussed and present something of substance without the personal crap.

Why not just say you disagree with me or the post and explain why and back it up with some independent evidence? Try it it's not that hard unless you don't have anything to back your opinions up?

And why don't you refute the science and evidence presented in the video, instead of attacking the Scientist personally as is the Modus operandi's of anyone who does not comprehend the science behind a complicated subject. He is eminently more qualified than you are, yet you come here attacking his character, Because you obviously have no qualifications to refute the science he presents.

Just like with your fellow posters you never respond to anything that require an answer which would question your belief system , Only way to get you to respond is To lower ourselves to your level with Comments such as the troll comment. Works every time.

[checking]

Worried about expert qualifications of Femia on climate.

The reverse says this isn't much different than a spouting off about climate through setting up your own Committee on climate, but having nothing in the field except an unrelated degree in economics and political science?

[fjlip]

"The Dunning-Kruger effect... Humans think they know it all until they begin to actually understand it (whatever "it" is) and figure out they know nothing."


Or were totally WRONG. Read a good one, Life can be understood from the end, but must be lived be lived from the beginning. We are constantly learning, ask the older guys, it has been HOT and COLD, not our fault, and we can not make a difference. Totally agree we can use better tech to reduce recycle reuse. Not try to dream of changing the MASSIVE earth climate. Happy Easter!

[recapped]

Chuck, name one alarmist event that has actually come true.

[furrowtickler]

[furrowtickler]

[chuckChuck]

And why don't you refute the science and evidence presented in the video, instead of attacking the Scientist personally as is the Modus operandi's of anyone who does not comprehend the science behind a complicated subject. He is eminently more qualified than you are, yet you come here attacking his character, Because you obviously have no qualifications to refute the science he presents.

Just like with your fellow posters you never respond to anything that require an answer which would question your belief system , Only way to get you to respond is To lower ourselves to your level with Comments such as the troll comment. Works every time.

Here is the rebuttal to Happers primary argument.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-pollutant.htm

Is CO2 a pollutant?
What the science says...

While there are direct ways in which CO2 is a pollutant (acidification of the ocean), its primary impact is its greenhouse warming effect. While the greenhouse effect is a natural occurence, too much warming has severe negative impacts on agriculture, health and environment.

Climate Myth...
CO2 is not a pollutant
'To suddenly label CO2 as a "pollutant" is a disservice to a gas that has played an enormous role in the development and sustainability of all life on this wonderful Earth. Mother Earth has clearly ruled that CO2 is not a pollutant.' (Robert Balling, as quoted by Popular Technology)

We commonly think of pollutants as contaminants that make the environment dirty or impure. A vivid example is sulphur dioxide, a by-product of industrial activity. High levels of sulphur dioxide cause breathing problems. Too much causes acid rain. Sulphur dioxide has a direct effect on health and the environment. Carbon dioxide, on the other hand, is a naturally occuring gas that existed in the atmosphere long before humans. Plants need it to survive. The CO2 greenhouse effect keeps our climate from freezing over. How can CO2 be considered a pollutant?

A broader definition of pollutant is a substance that causes instability or discomfort to an ecosystem. Over the past 10,000 years, the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has remained at relatively stable levels. However, human CO2 emissions over the past few centuries have upset this balance. The increase in CO2 has some direct effects on the environment. For example, as the oceans absorb CO2 from the atmosphere, it leads to acidification that affects many marine ecosystems. However, the chief impact from rising CO2 is warmer temperatures.

Figure 1: CO2 levels (parts per million) over the past 10,000 years. Blue line from Taylor Dome ice cores (NOAA). Green line from Law Dome ice core (CDIAC). Red line from direct measurements at Mauna Loa, Hawaii (NOAA).

Rising CO2 levels causes an enhanced greenhouse effect. This leads to warmer temperatures which has many consequences. Some effects are beneficial such as improved agriculture at high latitudes and increased vegetation growth in some circumstances. However, the negatives far outweigh the positives. Coast-bound communities are threatened by rising sea levels. Melting glaciers threaten the water supplies of hundreds of millions. Species are becoming extinct at the fastest rate in history.

How we choose to define the word 'pollutant' is a play in semantics. To focus on a few positive effects of carbon dioxide is to ignore the broader picture of its full impacts. The net result from increasing CO2 are severe negative impacts on our environment and the living conditions of future humanity.

Intermediate rebuttal written by John Cook

[Radical]

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/feb/01/leaked-emails-climate-jones-chinese

[Radical]

http://behindthenumbers.ca/2016/03/03/dont-believe-the-hype-on-bcs-carbon-tax/

[Radical]

OCT 9, 2016 12:27
Time to cry WOLF WOLF WOLF!!!

There is most certainly a pattern to climate change... …but it’s not what you may think:

For at least 114 years, climate “scientists” have been claiming that the climate was going to kill us…but they have kept switching whether it was a coming ice age, or global warming.

1895 – Geologists Think the World May Be Frozen Up Again – New York Times, February 1895

1902 – “Disappearing Glaciers…deteriorating slowly, with a persistency that means their final annihilation…scientific fact…surely disappearing.” – Los Angeles Times

1912 – Prof. Schmidt Warns Us of an Encroaching Ice Age – New York Times, October 1912

1923 – “Scientist says Arctic ice will wipe out Canada” – Professor Gregory of Yale University, American representative to the Pan-Pacific Science Congress, – Chicago Tribune

1923 – “The discoveries of changes in the sun’s heat and the southward advance of glaciers in recent years have given rise to conjectures of the possible advent of a new ice age” – Washington Post

1924 – MacMillan Reports Signs of New Ice Age – New York Times, Sept 18, 1924

1929 – “Most geologists think the world is growing warmer, and that it will continue to get warmer” – Los Angeles Times, in Is another ice age coming?

1932 – “If these things be true, it is evident, therefore that we must be just teetering on an ice age” – The Atlantic magazine, This Cold, Cold World

1933 – America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line Records a 25-Year Rise – New York Times, March 27th, 1933

1933 – “…wide-spread and persistent tendency toward warmer weather…Is our climate changing?” – Federal Weather Bureau “Monthly Weather Review.”

1938 – Global warming, caused by man heating the planet with carbon dioxide, “is likely to prove beneficial to mankind in several ways, besides the provision of heat and power.”– Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society

1938 – “Experts puzzle over 20 year mercury rise…Chicago is in the front rank of thousands of cities thuout the world which have been affected by a mysterious trend toward warmer climate in the last two decades” – Chicago Tribune

1939 – “Gaffers who claim that winters were harder when they were boys are quite right… weather men have no doubt that the world at least for the time being is growing warmer” – Washington Post

1952 – “…we have learned that the world has been getting warmer in the last half century” – New York Times, August 10th, 1962

1954 – “…winters are getting milder, summers drier. Glaciers are receding, deserts growing” – U.S. News and World Report

1954 – Climate – the Heat May Be Off – Fortune Magazine

1959 – “Arctic Findings in Particular Support Theory of Rising Global Temperatures” – New York Times

1969 – “…the Arctic pack ice is thinning and that the ocean at the North Pole may become an open sea within a decade or two” – New York Times, February 20th, 1969

1969 – “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000” — Paul Ehrlich (while he now predicts doom from global warming, this quote only gets honorable mention, as he was talking about his crazy fear of overpopulation)

1970 – “…get a good grip on your long johns, cold weather haters – the worst may be yet to come…there’s no relief in sight” – Washington Post

1974 – Global cooling for the past forty years – Time Magazine

1974 – “Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age” – Washington Post

1974 – “As for the present cooling trend a number of leading climatologists have concluded that it is very bad news indeed” – Fortune magazine, who won a Science Writing Award from the American Institute of Physics for its analysis of the danger

1974 – “…the facts of the present climate change are such that the most optimistic experts would assign near certainty to major crop failure…mass deaths by starvation, and probably anarchy and violence” – New York Times
Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive,
for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the
harbinger of another ice age

1975 – Scientists Ponder Why World’s Climate is Changing; A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable – New York Times, May 21st, 1975

1975 – “The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind” Nigel Calder, editor, New Scientist magazine, in an article in International Wildlife Magazine

1976 – “Even U.S. farms may be hit by cooling trend” – U.S. News and World Report

1981 – Global Warming – “of an almost unprecedented magnitude” – New York Times

1988 – I would like to draw three main conclusions. Number one, the earth is warmer in 1988 than at any time in the history of instrumental measurements. Number two, the global warming is now large enough that we can ascribe with a high degree of confidence a cause and effect relationship to the greenhouse effect. And number three, our computer climate simulations indicate that thegreenhouse effect is already large enough to begin to effect the probability of extreme events such as summer heat waves. – Jim Hansen, June 1988 testimony before Congress, see His later quote and His superior’s objection for context

1989 -“On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but – which means that we must include all doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change. To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This “double ethical bind” we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.” – Stephen Schneider, lead author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Discover magazine, October 1989

1990 – “We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing – in terms of economic policy and environmental policy” – Senator Timothy Wirth

1993 – “Global climate change may alter temperature and rainfall patterns, many scientists fear, with uncertain consequences for agriculture.” – U.S. News and World Report

1998 – No matter if the science [of global warming] is all phony . . . climate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” —Christine Stewart, Canadian Minister of the Environment, Calgary Herald, 1998

2001 – “Scientists no longer doubt that global warming is happening, and almost nobody questions the fact that humans are at least partly responsible.” – Time Magazine, Monday, Apr. 09, 2001

2003 – Emphasis on extreme scenarios may have been appropriate at one time, when the public and decision-makers were relatively unaware of the global warming issue, and energy sources such as “synfuels,” shale oil and tar sands were receiving strong consideration” – Jim Hansen, NASA Global Warming activist, Can we defuse The Global Warming Time Bomb?, 2003

2006 – “I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.” — Al Gore, Grist magazine, May 2006

** and so on, and so on...

Etc...Analysis of the sun has revealed that there has been a sharp decrease in the amount of sunspots this year.

Sunspots release solar flares and vast amounts of magnetic energy.

For the fourth time this year, the sun has gone blank, which has led some experts to believe that a new Ice Age is on the horizon and could hit us by 2019.

According to Space Weather.com, the occurrence of a spotless sun is going to become more regular.
Meteorologist Paul Dorian believes that this is indicative behaviour of an approaching Ice Age.

He told the Daily Star: “If history is any guide, it is safe to say that weak solar activity for a prolonged period of time can have a cooling impact on global temperatures in the troposphere which is the bottom most layer of Earth’s atmosphere — and where we all live.”

http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/634631/Global-warming-and-rising-CO2-levels-may-be-SAVING-humanity-from-a-devastating-ICE-AGE?_ga=1.39365028.666602943.1475773513

[Radical]

Scientists Aren’t Dumb; They’re Just Liars, Say Totally Reputable Scientists
by Rollin Bishop | 7:10 pm, October 1st, 2012 0
submit to reddit


Scientific papers being retracted after publication isn’t some kind of new phenomenon. The age of press releases might have made such snafus a more widely-known event, but it’s one of those things that happens from time to time. Common wisdom was that the majority of retractions were due to errors present in the work, but a new study has concluded that it’s actually misconduct like fraud or plagiarism that causes most retractions. In other words, scientists aren’t dumb; they’re just liars.

[Radical]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/opinion/texas-towns-environmental-narcissism-makes-al-gore-happy-while-sticking-its-citizens-with-the-bill.amp