Recent Heat Spike Unlike Anything in 11,000 Years

There has also been a lot of progress. If initial failures were a good reason to give up on all technological advances, we would still be hunter gatherers. It's a ridiculous argument.

 

AS I said, there are NO renewable energy sources remotely capable of producing the current needed to replace current methods of production, besides nuclear and hydroelectric= the ABSOLUTE, NON-"SPIN" TRUTH.

Deal with it, and spend YOUR OWN MONEY "researching" whatever you think will work as well...NOT MINE.

 

Why?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rise of sea levels is 'the greatest lie ever told'


If one thing more than any other is used to justify proposals that the world must spend tens of trillions of dollars on combating global warming, it is the belief that we face a disastrous rise in sea levels. The Antarctic and Greenland ice caps will melt, we are told, warming oceans will expand, and the result will be catastrophe.

Although the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) only predicts a sea level rise of 59cm (17 inches) by 2100, Al Gore in his Oscar-winning film An Inconvenient Truth went much further, talking of 20 feet, and showing computer graphics of cities such as Shanghai and San Francisco half under water. We all know the graphic showing central London in similar plight. As for tiny island nations such as the Maldives and Tuvalu, as Prince Charles likes to tell us and the Archbishop of Canterbury was again parroting last week, they are due to vanish.

But if there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change . And the uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story.

Despite fluctuations down as well as up, "the sea is not rising," he says. "It hasn't risen in 50 years." If there is any rise this century it will "not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm". And quite apart from examining the hard evidence, he says, the elementary laws of physics (latent heat needed to melt ice) tell us that the apocalypse conjured up by
Al Gore and Co could not possibly come about.

The reason why Dr Mörner, formerly a Stockholm professor, is so certain that these claims about sea level rise are 100 per cent wrong is that they are all based on computer model predictions, whereas his findings are based on "going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Apparently, not every TRUE EXPERT IN THE FIELD agrees with the "consensus", huh?

 

Here's a (*)(*)(*)(*)load of scientific journals on doubling of CO2 the atmosphere.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q...a=X&ei=jjU_Ub3GJ8O_rQH0zIHIAg&ved=0CC4QgQMwAA

As has been pointed out you, the percentage isn't particularly important. It's the way that the molecules behave in the atmosphere, and the effect of doubling the concentrations. Which you conveniently ignored addressing the second part of my post.

 

I guess you didn't read post #152 of http://www.politicalforum.com/current-events/293270-nature-says-global-warming-real-16.html where I pretty much shredded that article?

I suggest you go back in look. For everyone else, just click here.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Nils-Axel-Morner-wrong-about-sea-level-rise.html

 

Translation: There's another load of UNPROVEN CLAIMS from Warmists.

COs molecules can only do what they do, and , for the umpteenth time, it doesn't matter HOW you and the other Warmists want to pretend they somehow, magically, become Super Molecules, at LESS THAN 400 PPM TOTAL, there just aren't enough of them to have any significant effect on ANYTHING.

Now, factor in the FACT that the HUMAN PRODUCED portion of the ALREADY MINISCULE .000387 TOTAL CO2, is less than 6% of that total=.00002322.

Yes, even though small amounts of OTHER SUBSTANCES CAN BE VERY EFFECTIVE, that does not make it so for the very BENIGN, CO2, in the miniscule concentrations that it exists in the REAL WORLD. Sorry about your illogical Straw Man goofiness; funny, but asinine.

Sorry, your bullcrap only fools the other scientifically -challenged Warmist Deluded, which is why , when asked for PROOF of your claims, you post PURE CONJECTURE, and don't even realize the difference.

The Train Engineer who heads the UN IPCC is laughing ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK....

 

How else are they going to get to the Arctic?

 

So the moral of the story is the earth has done this before industrial man was present a mere 11000 years ago which is a blink of earths eye.

 

No, that isn't the 'moral of this story'. You're a conservative, right?

 

I'll go with the PRE-EMINENT OCEANAGRAPHIC EXPERT, thank you..

"Shred" that...

- - - Updated - - -

Let us know when solid ice sheets a mile thick are receding at a rate of miles per day,and the Great Lakes are being formed,as happened about 12,000 years ago, in the MASSIVE WARMING that FAR EXCEEDS anything going on ANYHWERE ON EARTH TODAY, with ZERO human input, ok?

Get back to us when the "New Great Lakes" are being formed , willya?

Now, hurry up and post some more complete nonsense,and call it "facts"....

 

Do I detect an imminent Grokmaster meltdown?

 

Is that what you call it when you go down in flames....per usual?

Or have you located the "New Great Lakes" forming somewhere today?

Checkmate. As usual.

 

If CO2 has no effect, then why is the earth's temp 14C instead of -18C?

 

It is indeed the moral of the story. I am fiscally conservative socially liberal if I had to be pigeon holed but I prefer the term free thinker.

 

It (CO2) has an effect...on GREEN PLANTS.

Almost entirely because of WATER VAPOR.

 

That brings us to another part of the issue- the politicization of science. Pro- climate changers like Al Gore et al habe been vaught in soany lies and distortions, it's difficult for me to take them seriously.

 

Do you have anything to dispute my actual post that showed Muller to be entirely wrong?

- - - Updated - - -

Well maybe you should pay attention to actual scientists instead of some random politician who made a movie. If you looked at actual scientific facts instead of pretty picture you might actually learn something.

The only people who give two (*)(*)(*)(*)s about Al Gore are the deniers, they are the only ones who ever bring him up.

 

Hey, what good are facts when you make up your own reality?

 

[video=youtube;P2qVNK6zFgE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2qVNK6zFgE[/video]

 

Oh goodness, go learn something
http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-plant-food.htm

 

A 19th century Pentacostal preacher could do a better job of excoriating us for our sins than this tripe. Try harder.

 

I just posted a scientific study which proves it.

You can peer review it.

You can quit posting that silly global warming propaganda link too.

its bs... They claim its only real in a green house then they turn around and claim the climate is suffering from being in a green house.

tsk tsk tsk...




.

 

Did you not read anything I posted? If that was a scientific study, then you should be able to link me to the peer reviewed journal it was posted in.

You posted a youtube video. And if you would have actually read my post, you would see that increased CO2 is only beneficial to plants in a controlled, greenhouse environment. In the real world, other factors contribute to plant growth.

Skeptical science has direct links to actual published studies and facts. You would know that if you were actually interested in facts.


Using a play on words certainly doesn't make you any more informed on the subject. A greenhouse a controlled environment. Earth is not.

 

Have we not been informed ad nauseum that the Koch brothers control an evil empire that have done NOTHING but destroy the earth, mankind and should never be trusted?
Seeing as they were a major contributor of funds to the BEST study I feel its only politically correct that we all totally ignore the evil lies contained within. Its for the best intentions of mankind. Or so we've all been told.

 

Yes, I posted a youtube video, of the experiments, and it shows an overall plant growth increase of 52%, when a plant has triple the CO2 currently available in our atmosphere.

According to you and global warming enthusiasts, our entire Atmosphere is a greenhouse....

You claim a green house is a controlled environment, and earth isnt.... They why claim Humans are responsible, if when you have no control ?


oh and if you watch the video, Triple the CO2 available in the atmosphere, increases root length by 339%, and increase root weight by 143%. So yeah, plants need more than CO2 to grow, but when they have the CO2, they can go get it....