Global Warming Debunked!!! - Finally!

[HummBebe]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/11/05/warm-refs.pdf;jsessionid=CCUV4X10NS3PRQFIQMFCFFWAVCBQYI V0

[CO Hummer]

No matter how much information is provided on this subject, the treehuggers will never acknowledge it. Environmentalism is their religion. They PRE-SUPPOSE global warming (and a number of other things). You can't win an argument when two parties have differing fundamental presuppositions.

[HummBebe]

Well, at least someone has done the math.....

It gives those who oppose global warming a comprehensive source of information,though you will never see it published in the media....on any continent.

I'm keeping a copy with me at all times

[NEOCON1]

oh no will GLOBLWARMR have to change his name

[PARAGON]

Come on, you can't argue global warming. It's simply a fact that the world has been "warming."

But so the fck what? It does that. Has done that. And will always do that, no matter what WE do.

It will warm up some and then cool back off over years just like the tides move in and out. Oh well.

[HummBebe]

de?bunk (d-bngk)
tr.v. de?bunked, de?bunk?ing, de?bunks To expose or ridicule the falseness, sham, or exaggerated claims of: debunk a supposed miracle drug.
de?bunker n.

Not arguing, debunking.....different.

[SnakeH2]

Originally Posted by PARAGON

Come on, you can't argue global warming.

Ohhh, come on. I bet you could

[h2co-pilot]

Originally Posted by HummBebe

I'm keeping a copy with me at all times

Definitely a print job.

[Wisha Haddan H3]

Very interesting. I don't know if I would call it "debunked", but the paper sheds a lot of light on the process of global warming and really puts greenhouse emissions into perspective with other sources of climate change. Still, that's no reason to make cars less fuel efficient or more polluting overall. After all, if global warming occurs naturally, why add to the problem?

Besides, global warming is far from the only reason to make vehicles and factories more fuel efficient and less polluting. Poisons like carbon monoxide are still poisonous. The particulates in diesel and gas exhaust are known to cause or aggravate asthma and other respiratory diseases. There are good political arguments for fuel efficiency, like reducing dependence on foreign oil. Plus there are economic reasons like the high price of fuel, supply and demand fluctuations due to weather, terrorism and natural disasters.

etc, etc, etc

[PARAGON]

Originally Posted by Wisha Haddan H3

Very interesting. I don't know if I would call it "debunked", but the paper sheds a lot of light on the process of global warming and really puts greenhouse emissions into perspective with other sources of climate change. Still, that's no reason to make cars less fuel efficient or more polluting overall. After all, if global warming occurs naturally, why add to the problem?

Besides, global warming is far from the only reason to make vehicles and factories more fuel efficient and less polluting. Poisons like carbon monoxide are still poisonous. The particulates in diesel and gas exhaust are known to cause or aggravate asthma and other respiratory diseases. There are good political arguments for fuel efficiency, like reducing dependence on foreign oil. Plus there are economic reasons like the high price of fuel, supply and demand fluctuations due to weather, terrorism and natural disasters.

etc, etc, etc

About the only person that might care if you call it "anything" is Alec.

[HummBebe]

Originally Posted by Wisha Haddan H3

Very interesting. I don't know if I would call it "debunked", but the paper sheds a lot of light on the process of global warming and really puts greenhouse emissions into perspective with other sources of climate change. Still, that's no reason to make cars less fuel efficient or more polluting overall. After all, if global warming occurs naturally, why add to the problem?

Besides, global warming is far from the only reason to make vehicles and factories more fuel efficient and less polluting. Poisons like carbon monoxide are still poisonous. The particulates in diesel and gas exhaust are known to cause or aggravate asthma and other respiratory diseases. There are good political arguments for fuel efficiency, like reducing dependence on foreign oil. Plus there are economic reasons like the high price of fuel, supply and demand fluctuations due to weather, terrorism and natural disasters.

etc, etc, etc

Fuel efficiency and air pollution issues I agree are real. It would be socially irresponsible to deny it. However, Al Gores version of Global Warming is another way to create chaos in the world which is equally socially irresponsible.

It just pisses me off that so many people believe that sh1t.

Fuel efficiency - because there is a finite amount, we need alternatives.

Air Pollution - in metro areas where large cities lie in basins, ie L.A., Portland etc., is real.

BAD SCIENCE BRINGS THE SUCK

BUT FOR PEOPLE TO BELIEVE THAT OUR EMISSIONS ARE GOING TO CAUSE MORE HURRICANES MAKES ME ILL.

rant off.

[PARAGON]

Originally Posted by HummBebe

BUT FOR PEOPLE TO BELIEVE THAT OUR EMISSIONS ARE GOING TO CAUSE MORE HURRICANES MAKES ME ILL.

rant off.

It did this year, right?

[Wisha Haddan H3]

Originally Posted by HummBebe

Fuel efficiency and air pollution issues I agree are real. It would be socially irresponsible to deny it. However, Al Gores version of Global Warming is another way to create chaos in the world which is equally socially irresponsible.

It just pisses me off that so many people believe that sh1t.

Fuel efficiency - because there is a finite amount, we need alternatives.

Air Pollution - in metro areas where large cities lie in basins, ie L.A., Portland etc., is real.

BAD SCIENCE BRINGS THE SUCK

BUT FOR PEOPLE TO BELIEVE THAT OUR EMISSIONS ARE GOING TO CAUSE MORE HURRICANES MAKES ME ILL.

rant off.

I hate bad source data. Thanks for posting the article.

[BlueHUMMERH2]

Originally Posted by Wisha Haddan H3

Very interesting. I don't know if I would call it "debunked", but the paper sheds a lot of light on the process of global warming and really puts greenhouse emissions into perspective with other sources of climate change. Still, that's no reason to make cars less fuel efficient or more polluting overall. After all, if global warming occurs naturally, why add to the problem?

Besides, global warming is far from the only reason to make vehicles and factories more fuel efficient and less polluting. Poisons like carbon monoxide are still poisonous. The particulates in diesel and gas exhaust are known to cause or aggravate asthma and other respiratory diseases. There are good political arguments for fuel efficiency, like reducing dependence on foreign oil. Plus there are economic reasons like the high price of fuel, supply and demand fluctuations due to weather, terrorism and natural disasters.

etc, etc, etc

I agree pollution is probably a much larger problem right now than worrying about our creation of greenhouse gasses. I've always been for cleaning up pollution, ecological preservation, etc... I am definately not sold on the whole "we're causing the warming" thingy. As a geo guy, I know there have been wild fluctuations in the past, and they're nothing new.

And, now that I'm reading some of the article (), yes, there are some logical folks in academia that don't believe the hype. Dr. William Grey in Colorado is also a good example.

[westhillsat]

Glacier National Park might soon need a new name.

The Montana park has 26 named glaciers today, down from 150 in 1850. Those that remain are typically mere remnants of their former frozen selves, a new gallery of before and after images reveals.

All arguments about global warming aside, now is a time of clear retreat by age-old ice packs in many locations around the world. Some retreat just a few inches or feet per year, but others are melting faster than a snow cone in Texas.


http://www.livescience.com/environme...cier_melt.html

[h2co-pilot]

[KenP]

Originally Posted by CO Hummer

No matter how much information is provided on this subject, the treehuggers will never acknowledge it. Environmentalism is their religion. They PRE-SUPPOSE global warming (and a number of other things). You can't win an argument when two parties have differing fundamental presuppositions.

Limbaugh has been citing scientists for over 5 years on the lack of global warming.