Leftist hypocrisy

[B. Max]

Another nail in the coffin of the global warming alarmists.

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId...FTOKEN=80542511

[NovaScotian]

Ya! Ignore those international recognized "scientists"and follow the heartland institute!

[jbg]

Ya! Ignore those international recognized "scientists"and follow the heartland institute!

Likely, the truth is somewhere in between. Weather, I believe, runs in cycles.

[geoffrey]

Actually, while I do agree with the idea of climate change, I think we may see some growth over this year in Rockies glaciers. We've had an enourmous amount of snow here, breaking tons of records for the ski resorts, and a mild summer is predicted (great for skier/mountain biker folks like I). Low melt rates over the summer and massive accumulations mean only one thing... glacial growth.

Again though, that's more based on WEATHER and not CLIMATE.

[jbg]

Actually, while I do agree with the idea of climate change, I think we may see some growth over this year in Rockies glaciers. We've had an enourmous amount of snow here, breaking tons of records for the ski resorts, and a mild summer is predicted (great for skier/mountain biker folks like I). Low melt rates over the summer and massive accumulations mean only one thing... glacial growth.

Again though, that's more based on WEATHER and not CLIMATE.

Expanding on the issues of "cycles", my bet is that if we are in a warming now, it's cyclical. There's the Pacific Decadal Oscillation ("PDO") and sunspot/solar forcing cycles (long term), North Atlantic Oscillation a/k/a Arctic Oscillation (quasi-long term), El Nino Southern Oscillation ("ENSO") (the familiar short-term El Nino and La Nina) cycles. These all have an impact and interplay with each other to produce cycles. Sometimes, such as during 1976-7, 1977-8 and 1978-9 they all come together to produce a calamitous seeming cooling. Then, the "chicken littles" cluck about global cooling. Other times, such as during 1988-9, 1990-1, 1991-2, and 1997-8 they all come together to produce a calamitous seeming warming. Then, the "chicken littles" cluck about global warming.

Now, when there are cold events, such as record setting snows in NYC, or Halifax's "White Juan", some people, a few of whom are "chicken littles" call it "climate change", as if there's never been a big windstorm or snowstorm before.

[B. Max]

Ya! Ignore those international recognized "scientists"and follow the heartland institute!

The study was published in the September 2006 issue of the American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate.

I didn't know the HLI published studies in that journal.

[BubberMiley]

Now, when there are cold events, such as record setting snows in NYC, or Halifax's "White Juan", some people, a few of whom are "chicken littles" call it "climate change", as if there's never been a big windstorm or snowstorm before.

Personally, I try to avoid having an opinion over things I know nothing about.

[Catchme]

Actually, while I do agree with the idea of climate change, I think we may see some growth over this year in Rockies glaciers. We've had an enourmous amount of snow here, breaking tons of records for the ski resorts, and a mild summer is predicted (great for skier/mountain biker folks like I). Low melt rates over the summer and massive accumulations mean only one thing... glacial growth.

Again though, that's more based on WEATHER and not CLIMATE.

Climate is weather.

[B. Max]

Climate is weather.

No it's not. Weather changes day by day. Climate is something that can only be measured over thousands of years.

[jbg]

Climate is weather.

No it's not. Weather changes day by day. Climate is something that can only be measured over thousands of years.

Educating the willfully ignorant can be frustrating. Hope you have as full a head of hair after the effort, unless you pound the wall rather than rip your hair out.

[Who's Doing What?]

Yes the worlds climate is cyclical and has warmed and cooled hundreds possibly thousands of times before. But to say man has had no influence on the environment while pumping tons of GHG's into the atmosphere is absolutly rediculous.

The situation is so complex that to try and explain it is next to impossible. There are so many variables it is crazy. A single volcano can and has altered the entire global climate by filling our atmoshpere with particulate matter and gases.

As for glaciers growing in the Himalayas, there is no exact list of what we can expect to occur when it comes to global warming and climate change.

What you can expect is severe changes in weather patterns. Drought where there shoul be rain. Rain when there should be snow, or none at all. When Krakatoa blew, (in 535 I believe it was), and altered the global climate for years, Mexico was thrown into drought and Europe was thrown into a mini ice age. Who knows what was going on in the Himalayas? So to be claiming victory because one place in the world is growing it's glaciers while 99% of the world are watching their glaciers retreat at alarming rates is foolish.

EDIT: Here is one theory of just how world altering that Krakatoa eruption was. Did a Krakatoa Eruption in 535 A.D. Help Precipitate the Decline of Antiquity and the Spread of Islam?

[Catchme]

Interesting link thank you.

However, I do not buy the idea that Islam went wild without challenge from other beliefs because the peoples were starving because of Kakatoa. Mohammed was not even born in those years when people were starving around 535CE, he would not be born for another 35-36 years, in 571CE, well past the time they were starving in that area. Then add another 20 while he grew up, so you have 55 years or so after the eruption, and the climate reverted to mormal within 4 years.

The time lines do not match. Moreover, the maps shown are a 150 years apart, it's not like the expansion of Islam happened within Mohammed's lifetime even, as he died in 632CE. The Islamic expansion did not reach its peak for another 100 years or so in 720CE.

Th Islamic expansion, IMV was more to do with the collapse of the Roman Empire and a vaccuum left. If you look at the maps The Slavs, Bulgarians Avars and Khazars also had swallowed Roman territory in that 100 year time frame.

Plus, they are completely over looking the fact of Islam breaking away from the Catholic Church doctrine and all that went on with that.

I say a bit of re-writing of history went on in that article.

[Who's Doing What?]

I just found it when checking my date for the Krakatoa eruption. Didn't really get right into it.

[Catchme]

I just found it when checking my date for the Krakatoa eruption. Didn't really get right into it.

NP, but it is an interesting impact, if you think about it from the point of view of perhaps being what helped precipitate the swifter decline of the Roman Empire, as that first map was 30 years after the eruption. The Roman Empire had shrunk significantly during that 30 year time frame as well. They could not feed and supply their extended occupation lines.

[Who's Doing What?]

Doing a bit more reasearch into it. The connection to Islam is - " the ancestors of Mohammed moved from Yemen (then the richest, most fertile part of the Arabian peninsula) where the Marib Dam was fatally breached and not repaired again - hence drought and fleeing of the population - to the area around Mecca. Later with Mohammed came the emergence of Islam."

My interest in this was piqued when I read about a mysteriously abaondoned city in Mexico. Then I saw a documentary connecting the two events.

Apparently this eruption threw the whole world into disarray. I found that it took "natural systems" a century to fullly recover. That is crazy. A whole century to get back to normal after an eruption that could be measured in minutes or hours.

Certainly one of, if not the biggest event in the history of civilization.

[shoggoth]

Not mentioned are some of the other things the paper says (http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/h.j.fowler/fowl...cher_JC2006.pdf)

Instrumental records show a systematic increase in global mean temperature (Folland et al. 2001a,B ), with global mean temperature increasing at a rate of 0.07°C decade-1 over the last century (Jones and Moberg 2003). In addition, the 1990s were the warmest decade, and 1998 the warmest year since the start of the global mean temperature record in 1856 (Jones and Moberg 2003). However, the warming has not been globally uniform. High northern latitudes have been particularly affected, with reconstructions of mean surface temperature over the past two millennia suggesting that the late. twentieth century warmth is unprecedented (Mann and Jones 2003) and attributed to the anthropogenic forcing of climate (Thorne et al. 2003).

most of the world’s mountain glaciers have been shrinking for at least the last 30 years

But no doubt this paper will be added by the skeptics to the "not all scientists are convinced" stack.

[jbg]

I just found it when checking my date for the Krakatoa eruption. Didn't really get right into it.

NP, but it is an interesting impact, if you think about it from the point of view of perhaps being what helped precipitate the swifter decline of the Roman Empire, as that first map was 30 years after the eruption. The Roman Empire had shrunk significantly during that 30 year time frame as well. They could not feed and supply their extended occupation lines.

Before you get too disappointed, I think there was another eruption later on that did grease the skids for the local G-ds and Buddhist faith, and ease Islam into Indonesia.

[Saturn]

Another nail in the coffin of the global warming alarmists.

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId...FTOKEN=80542511

Dude, go have another drink!

[B. Max]

Instrumental records show a systematic increase in global mean temperature (Folland et al. 2001a,B ), with global mean temperature increasing at a rate of 0.07°C decade-1 over the last century (Jones and Moberg 2003). In addition, the 1990s were the warmest decade, and 1998 the warmest year since the start of the global mean temperature record in 1856 (Jones and Moberg 2003). However, the warming has not been globally uniform. High northern latitudes have been particularly affected, with reconstructions of mean surface temperature over the past two millennia suggesting that the late. twentieth century warmth is unprecedented (Mann and Jones 2003) and attributed to the anthropogenic forcing of climate (Thorne et al. 2003).

As some scientists have put it, the UN's fourth assessment is not a scientific paper, but rather a political document. Which the global warming alarmists will add to rest of their junk science, misleading information and out right lies and fabrications. Example the Mann and Jones hocky stick.

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=19734

[BayLee]

Another nail in the coffin of the global warming alarmists.

l

I wasnt aware of any nails put in any coffins.

Except Harper who in a desperate attempt for votes now also suddenly says global warming is real

[jbg]

Another nail in the coffin of the global warming alarmists.

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId...FTOKEN=80542511

Dude, go have another drink!

Here's yet another coffin nail. Apparently, the Kyoto sponsors are so serious that they granted Iceland a free pass to emit more GHG's. Clearly, Kyoto's a tilted deck that has nothing to do with science, climate or environmental betterment, and made an exception for Iceland (link), specifically, some aluminum smelters it wanted badly to develop. Excerpts below:

February 4, 2007

Smokestacks in a White Wilderness Divide Iceland

By SARAH LYALL

NORTH OF VATNAJOKULL GLACIER, Iceland —

*snip*

This is the $3 billion Karahnjukar Hydropower Project, a sprawling enterprise to harness the rivers for electricity that will be used for a single purpose: to fuel a new aluminum smelter owned by Alcoa, the world’s largest aluminum company. It has been the focus of the angriest and most divisive battle in recent Icelandic history.

The culmination of years of effort by the center-right government to increase international investment in Iceland, the project has already begun to revitalize Iceland’s underpopulated east. But it has also mobilized an angry and growing coalition of people who feel that the authorities have sacrificed Iceland’s most precious asset — the pristine land itself — to heavy industry from abroad.

Now, with proposals on the table for three more power-plant-and-aluminum-smelter projects, environmentalists say the chance to protect Iceland’s spectacular, and spectacularly fragile, natural beauty is running out.

*snip*

Icelanders tend to view their unpredictable environment — carved from volcanoes and ice and full of stunning waterfalls, geysers, fjords and glaciers — with respect and awe. The air is so pure that the Kyoto Protocol gave Iceland the right to increase its greenhouse emissions by 10 percent from 1990 levels.

*snip*

They are also allowed to pollute: another Kyoto exception gave power-intensive industries that use renewable energy in Iceland the right to emit an extra 1.6 million metric tons of carbon dioxide a year until 2012.

[Catchme]

Well, it is no wonder they gave them the right when they had almost nothing for emissions in the first place.

[jbg]

Well, it is no wonder they gave them the right when they had almost nothing for emissions in the first place.

Anything, including a free pass (link) to get an extra ratification needed to allow treaty to go into effect. Cynical, if you ask me.

[Robert777]

Call me selfish. But I don't care what the temperature is like 200 or a 1000 years from now. The Kyoto Accord means a loss of jobs for Canadians. And I don't think that the likes of leftist David Suzuki is one of them. Leftists like him, will still have his big house and trips to exotic places every year. The working man and the economy is what we should be worried about, not some polar bear or Greenland Glacier.

If the world becomes "WaterWorld" 200 years from now.....the only one that will care is Kevin Costner.

I am still going to drive my Camaro, truck and 1973 Volkswagen Beetle. And I like it if the winters warm up.

So much for Global Warming, I am freezing my A$$ off right now in Toronto.

PROUD TO BE A REFORMER, BUY A GUN AND PO A LIBERAL! :angry:

[g_bambino]

Call me selfish. But I don't care what the temperature is like 200 or a 1000 years from now. The Kyoto Accord means a loss of jobs for Canadians. And I don't think that the likes of leftist David Suzuki is one of them. Leftists like him, will still have his big house and trips to exotic places every year. The working man and the economy is what we should be worried about, not some polar bear or Greenland Glacier.

If the world becomes "WaterWorld" 200 years from now.....the only one that will care is Kevin Costner.

I am still going to drive my Camaro, truck and 1973 Volkswagen Beetle. And I like it if the winters warm up.

So much for Global Warming, I am freezing my A$$ off right now in Toronto.

PROUD TO BE A REFORMER, BUY A GUN AND PO A LIBERAL! :angry:

I'd wager you have no concern for any working man other than yourself, despite your words. If you were truly worried for all working men, you would have a vested interest in the future, not just the present in which you live; for, in the grand scheme of things, what happens to those polar bears and to those glaciers will have an effect on how the following generations of working men and women survive. It seems you don't care at all whether it will be better for them or worse, otherwise you'd at least entertain the thought that driving your Camaro and VW might currently be contributing to the degradation of the working man's world 20, 50 or 100 years from now.