So obama believes in the myth of global warming...

[joebudda]

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/view.php?id=33891:bow:

That doesn't change the fact that Antarctica (polar) and Greenland ice sheets are growing.

http://www.globalwarming.org/node/160
A forthcoming study in Nature, that has appeared on its website as an "advance online publication," has found that the Antarctic has been cooling for some time now. This contradicts the findings of the climate models upon which the case for global warming is built. They predict that the Earths poles will warm more rapidly than the rest of the Earth.

Nice attempt at moving the goal post though.

 

[Carey]

What about Silicon Age People herders (Bible thumpers). Are they aware of the dramatic decrease in the polar ice mass?

Yes and they also know if it has to do with mans influence on the environment it is too late to stop it.

It wont hurt to live a little greener as log as it does not create any hardship on the economy. But thinking we can stop what has been prophecied bu both the Bible and by prophets like Nostradomas for millenia is stupid.

Luke 21 : 25"There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea.

 

[Baggins]

That doesn't change the fact that Antarctica (polar) and Greenland ice sheets are growing.

http://www.globalwarming.org/node/160
A forthcoming study in Nature, that has appeared on its website as an "advance online publication," has found that the Antarctic has been cooling for some time now. This contradicts the findings of the climate models upon which the case for global warming is built. They predict that the Earths poles will warm more rapidly than the rest of the Earth.

Nice attempt at moving the goal post though.

That'll be due to climate change won't it? The theory of global warming doesn't state that all places will warm up in a linear fashion, it says that a warming Earth will lead to changing weather patterns

Actually the physical accumulation or loss of ice has little to do with the increasing global temperature directly and more to do with that temperature increase changing climate patterns.

This will lead to more precipitation and hence ice accumulation in some areas, whilst others, like Baffin Island apparently, will suffer a loss in precipitation and therefore the ice there will dwindle.

The fact that global temperatures are increasing isn't an hypothesis it is a stone cold fact only rejected by fanatics who would argue that black was white if it suited their religious or political agenda.

Interestingly it has been shown that ice cap melting could be a temporary buffer to CO2 accumulation in the atmosphere as ice melt contains large quantities of minerals that will lead to increased plankton growth and hence a carbon sink. It will only be a slowing of CO2 accumulation though unless we do something about our own carbon use, but it could give as little more time to get our ess aitch one tee together.

 

[chaim]

Your source doesn't actually reference the Nature paper it claims to be based on so it is near impossible to verify if anything they say is true.

However it is well known that global climate models do not do a good job modeling Antarctic climate. It is also well known why, global climate models do not take into account the Antarctic Ozone hole. Ozone is a powerful greenhouse gas, every spring there is a gigantic hole in the ozone layer over central Antarctica, as a result heat escapes and central Antarctica cools. However if you look a the fringes of Antarctica you see a very different story:
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2008-010
Similarly if you look at Greenland as a whole it is loosing ice at an alarming rate:
http://www.agu.org/cgi-bin/SFgate/S...is/indexes/fm08/fm08&maxhits=200&="C31B-0496"
(Notice these sources are the actual folks who do the research, not some blog)
Really don't think you should be complaining about moving goal posts. Most of the claims you have made in the course of this thread have been soundly refuted by scientific sources. At which point you just ignore the post and dredge something new up from a blog or you tube.

That doesn't change the fact that Antarctica (polar) and Greenland ice sheets are growing.

http://www.globalwarming.org/node/160
A forthcoming study in Nature, that has appeared on its website as an "advance online publication," has found that the Antarctic has been cooling for some time now. This contradicts the findings of the climate models upon which the case for global warming is built. They predict that the Earths poles will warm more rapidly than the rest of the Earth.

Nice attempt at moving the goal post though.

 

[Btodd]

But thinking we can stop what has been prophecied bu both the Bible and by prophets like Nostradomas for millenia is stupid.

Luke 21 : 25"There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea.

LOL, yeah I definitely don't want science to make us think twice about what the Bible and Nostradamus said. They've both made such staggeringly accurate predictions. And really specific ones, too.....they certainly don't hide it in metaphor, and then reveal it as a 'prediction' after the fact, with a little careful re-interpretation.


Btodd

 

[Carey]

LOL, yeah I definitely don't want science to make us think twice about what the Bible and Nostradamus said. They've both made such staggeringly accurate predictions. And really specific ones, too.....they certainly don't hide it in metaphor, and then reveal it as a 'prediction' after the fact, with a little careful re-interpretation.


Btodd

Fulfilled Prophecy: Evidence for the Reliability of the Bible

by Hugh Ross, Ph.D.

Unique among all books ever written, the Bible accurately foretells specific events-in detail-many years, sometimes centuries, before they occur. Approximately 2500 prophecies appear in the pages of the Bible, about 2000 of which already have been fulfilled to the letter—no errors. (The remaining 500 or so reach into the future and may be seen unfolding as days go by.) Since the probability for any one of these prophecies having been fulfilled by chance averages less than one in ten (figured very conservatively) and since the prophecies are for the most part independent of one another, the odds for all these prophecies having been fulfilled by chance without error is less than one in 102000 (that is 1 with 2000 zeros written after it)!

http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/prophecy.shtml

 

[Saving Hawaii]

Fulfilled Prophecy: Evidence for the Reliability of the Bible

by Hugh Ross, Ph.D.

Unique among all books ever written, the Bible accurately foretells specific events-in detail-many years, sometimes centuries, before they occur. Approximately 2500 prophecies appear in the pages of the Bible, about 2000 of which already have been fulfilled to the letter—no errors. (The remaining 500 or so reach into the future and may be seen unfolding as days go by.) Since the probability for any one of these prophecies having been fulfilled by chance averages less than one in ten (figured very conservatively) and since the prophecies are for the most part independent of one another, the odds for all these prophecies having been fulfilled by chance without error is less than one in 102000 (that is 1 with 2000 zeros written after it)!

http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/prophecy.shtml

We're talking a book that uses circular logic to prove the Bible. I'm a Christian as you Carey, but I don't think we can justify the Bible via the Bible. The Harry Potter books are also pretty internally consistent, but that doesn't mean that they're true.

-----

And what's with this "one in ten chance" that Jesus would be killed stuff... I mean, really?

 

[Btodd]

If I weren't familiar with Hugh Ross and Reasons to Believe already (I looked into them when I was a new Christian), I would wonder who in the world had the nerve to try that argument.

I would love to see some of the assumptions made to try and put probabilities to these events, as well. Reminds me of those arguments that try to state what the odds were of cosmic events with a data set of 1.


Btodd

 

[Carey]

We're talking a book that uses circular logic to prove the Bible. I'm a Christian as you Carey, but I don't think we can justify the Bible via the Bible. The Harry Potter books are also pretty internally consistent, but that doesn't mean that they're true.

-----

And what's with this "one in ten chance" that Jesus would be killed stuff... I mean, really?

You justify the Bible via fulfilled prophecies.

 

[RacismIsBad]

You justify the Bible via fulfilled prophecies.

You seem to miss the problems with your logic. The Bible has prophecies that later in the Bible occurred... ah never mind, you're not making a logical argument.

 

[Saving Hawaii]

You justify the Bible via fulfilled prophecies.

And Lord of the Rings is chalk full of prophecies that are fulfilled with half of the wordplay and interpretation.

 

[Carey]

Can Obama say magnetic field??

LOL


This then asks the question, is global warming a function of global pollution such as exhaust from automobile exhaust? The first ice age occurred about many years ago. There were no automobiles then and no automobiles when the magnetic field reversed from Reverse toNormal in the most recent reversal. This paper suggests that global warming and cooling are controlled by what goes on within the earth and not what the environmentalist claim, that heat from outside the earth is causing global warming.

[1] Scientific American, Volume 292, April 2005,Probing the Geodynamo, Page 55

[2] www.earthsgeomotor.com Earths Magnetism, Chapter 2

http://www.earths-magnetic-field-and-how-it-reverses-and-more.com/PageThirty.htm

 

[romanov]

Here is a nice link.

 

[Baggins]

Here is a nice link.

So even so called skeptics think that 50% of the Earth's warming is caused by human activity.

If that is the case I wouldn't really call them AGW skeptics.

 

[Carey]

So even so called skeptics think that 50% of the Earth's warming is caused by human activity.

If that is the case I wouldn't really call them AGW skeptics.

?? I dont know how you got that from this??


[FONT=times new roman,times]“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.” [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]“The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]“After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]“For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” - Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]“CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another….Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.” - Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.[/FONT]

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index....ecord_id=2158072e-802a-23ad-45f0-274616db87e6

 

[Baggins]

By being able to read:

Study: Half of warming due to Sun!

What is the other half due to Carey - Pixies?

 

[Baggins]

Meanwhile back in reality:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7786910.stm

Arctic ice is decreasing in size and thickness at an accelerating rate.

Hmmm, what to believe right wing web sites or reality?

It is a toughie I'll grant you that.

 

[romanov]

To hard to resist.

 

[Zlex]

?? I dont know how you got that from this??


[FONT=times new roman,times]“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever. [/FONT]

Crtics like me and Ivar, by decidedly not ignoring the issue, by decidedly studying the evidence, can only conclude that there is no evidence for the supposition that man's emissions of CO2 have any significant (or even measurable) impact on our climate at all, so any global scheme to 'regulate' mans' emissions of CO2 as CO2 is baseless.

Monitor and regulate NOx. Monitor and regulate SOx. Monitor and regulate particulate emissions/smokestack opacity. Increase energy usage efficiency. DOn't waste energy, don't [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] the nest. I'm with you, humming Kumbaya the whole way. But as soon as the church congregation lurches to 'CO2', we are well into Cargo Cult voodoo science, nonsense to scare the kids. Might as well be the "Religion of N2" for chrissakes, for all the verifiable 'science' in this religion.

If the problem is global temperature, then measure the efficacy of any programs by their impact on global temperature, but while doing so, let's not throw all that science out that first and foremost can't tell you or I what the current 'global temperature' should be at any given moment in time. It apparently 'is what it is', and not only that, you and I and ten billion people would have a Hell of a time overwhelming the influence of natural drivers well in excess of our puny ability to drive 'global temperature.' Particulates? No doubt, there is scientific evidence of that. But we can -- and have, and do -- objectively know how to do something about particulate emissions. Ditto NOx, ditto SOx.

Beyond that, there is no evidence of the same for 'CO2' None. Not in the record, not in fact. There is only one place in all of creation where that happens, and that is inside the unreality of uncalibrated and never verified and in fact self contradicted computer models describing worlds that do not exist.

The very models used to claim the problem predict an outcome (mid altitude 'hotspot' trends) nowhere in actual evidence. The 'signature' of MMGW via CO2 emissions is nowhere to be found.

Not only that, the historical evidence of 'runaway CO2 driven global warming' is nowhere to be found, even though CO2 levels were in the past far in excess of what they are today.

As well, the icecaps on Mars also exhibited a period of retreat, and that points to the obvious main driver of 'global warming.'

So, that leaves the Kumbaya what if a butterfly farts in the rainforest/isn't it best to be safe?what about the children? model of justifying the constructivist regulation of the global economies based on 'CO2' emissions....

There is only one set of heads being put into the scientific sands, and those are the heads attached to the accolytes whose knees are bent and praying blindly in the Church of CO2 caused MMGW.

 

[Carey]

By being able to read:



What is the other half due to Carey - Pixies?

Who and how do we measure what half is ??? Do pixies tell us??

Now lets get back to reality .

Noone knows except God and the Bible.