Is global warming true?

  • Thread starter Thread starter valentino
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
my basic philosophy these days is that I hope not, but if it is, there’s not a darn thing I can do about it. So it’s just one more thing in the background to worry about, along with killer bees, flesh-eating bacteria, rogue asteroids, BPA, overfishing, Ebola virus, alien abductions, nuclear war, and terrorism.
 
Gwright: thanks for that.I was wondering about these glaciers that are talked about.
 
Check out what Michael Voris has had to say about global warming:

youtu.be/qwQEoCANZsQ

youtu.be/ZLr3ti5qGR8

youtu.be/6A6UBqEWRD8

youtu.be/WL-7XkC51Hw

If you are upset by the videos, let me point out that Jesse Ventura has been skeptical about global warming himself.

youtu.be/QRuzVbAODHw

I wonder what Mr. Voris has to say about global dimming.
Thanks, those were great videos. Found this one on their main site (Real Catholic TV), its everything a Catholic would ever want to know on the subject of Global Warming explained by Michael Voris:

realcatholictv.com/cia/04GlobalWarming

God Bless
 
I do believe that the world has been warming but that it is almost entirely natural and much politicized. The world is not as warm as it was during the Roman or Medieval Warming periods when grapes from Italy thrived in Britain and when the Norse established farms in Greenland.

The Roman and Medieval Warming periods were times when the living was easy. Food production increased, population increased, productivity increased, trade flourished, empire expanded, cities were founded, cathedrals were built and universities were established.

The cold periods that followed the Roman and Medieval Warming were, on the other hand, catastrophic. Snow fell during the summer in southern Europe. During the winter of 800 – 801 A.D., the Black Sea froze over. The year 829 A.D. saw the River Nile edged in ice. Throughout the cold Dark Ages, chaos, desperation, and continual warfare destroyed all but the remnant and recollection of Classical Civilization sequestered and nurtured in the monasteries of the Church. Growing seasons shortened, crops failed, people starved and disease decimated populations.

The current warm period began about 1850 and who can argue but that the human race has prospered and increased and multiplied as never before? Modern times are warm, comfortable and blessed with health and longevity to an unprecedented degree. We are on the verge of seeing this prosperity spreading even to the struggling populations of the less developed portions of the world. Optimism should be our byword.

Yet, on the left, the nattering nabobs of negativism are pessimistic. They see the prosperity and seek to sap it. They see the human population increase, multiply and strive for a share of the good life and seek to suppress it. This is exactly what the “carbon footprint” nonsense means. Call it “Cap and Trade” or whatever you wish but it will ultimately become a global tax on carbon, the physical basis of all living organisms, and the very stuff of life.
 
I do believe that the world has been warming but that it is almost entirely natural and much politicized. The world is not as warm as it was during the Roman or Medieval Warming periods when grapes from Italy thrived in Britain and when the Norse established farms in Greenland.

The Roman and Medieval Warming periods were times when the living was easy. Food production increased, population increased, productivity increased, trade flourished, empire expanded, cities were founded, cathedrals were built and universities were established.

The cold periods that followed the Roman and Medieval Warming were, on the other hand, catastrophic. Snow fell during the summer in southern Europe. During the winter of 800 – 801 A.D., the Black Sea froze over. The year 829 A.D. saw the River Nile edged in ice. Throughout the cold Dark Ages, chaos, desperation, and continual warfare destroyed all but the remnant and recollection of Classical Civilization sequestered and nurtured in the monasteries of the Church. Growing seasons shortened, crops failed, people starved and disease decimated populations.

The current warm period began about 1850 and who can argue but that the human race has prospered and increased and multiplied as never before? Modern times are warm, comfortable and blessed with health and longevity to an unprecedented degree. We are on the verge of seeing this prosperity spreading even to the struggling populations of the less developed portions of the world. Optimism should be our byword.

Yet, on the left, the nattering nabobs of negativism are pessimistic. They see the prosperity and seek to sap it. They see the human population increase, multiply and strive for a share of the good life and seek to suppress it. This is exactly what the “carbon footprint” nonsense means. Call it “Cap and Trade” or whatever you wish but it will ultimately become a global tax on carbon, the physical basis of all living organisms, and the very stuff of life.
I’m an Engineer and run several of the largest power generating facilities in the US. We have older power plants that were commissioned in around 1992 with LM6000PA Gas Turbine units that had air permits locked in at (nitrous oxide) Nox emission limits of 8.4 ppm (parts per million). As years went by the turbines in our older facilities were upgraded to the current LM6000PC Turbines that can be as frugal as 2 ppm. Since the air permit for those facilities is 8.4, we gain 6.4 Nox credits. These Nox credits are then sold on the Caps and Trade like stocks in the Stock Market to other facilities in the US, basically permitting them to pollute more, legally. We have accountants trading the ability to pollute all day.

We are currently commissioning one of the largest power plants in the world with a cache of GE Frame Sevens. The Nox limits in this permit are 2 ppm. We don’t ever anticipate making anything on Nox credits with these newer facilities. Basically this whole thing is an total joke. I’m an Electrical Engineer, I’ve studied Environmental Engineering, there is absolutely no truth whatsoever to this global warming. It is more likely that we would have an Ice Age first. This whole global warming scam is nothing but an idea to generate more tax revenue. If you want to find out what’s really going on, listen to Michael Voris from Real Catholic TV.

realcatholictv.com/cia/04GlobalWarming

God Bless
 
Scientists have shown a picture of a glacier taken in the arctic from about 1oo yrs ago maybe 70yrs ago not sure.Anyway it shows this site all cover in snow .Now they show a recent photograph and its just bare earth.it does look like the same area.It appears that this whole region has melted .I know that the global warming issue is said to be false and its motives are to promote a terrible agenda but how does one explain these photos?Now its possible that these could be fake in some way(im not a photographer)but has anyone else seen these and are they legitamate?
Probably the worse place to ask such a question, this place is full of anti warming crackpots. But the answer to your question is no the photos aren’t fake.
 
Global warming could be true, but I do not believe it is the result of man’s way of life. Rather, it is part of nature, specifically the sun. It is all part of God’s plan. Different life forms come and they go. New land appears all the time out of the ocean and some land disappears. The earth is in constant agitation. The sad part of this is some folks have made this whole thing into a religion, and a low carbon lifestyle is their main sacrament. For me, It’s just hang on and ride it out. Love God and keep the commandments and you’ll be alright.
 
Gwright: thanks for that.I was wondering about these glaciers that are talked about.
No problem. Here is a link explaining some of the background to the Himalayan Glacier controversy (some of the Glaciers are actually getting bigger, not melting at all, and others’ size is static).

timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7009081.ece

Of course, those responsible for the lies played it down as a “mix-up” or “misunderstanding” - the stock excuses when someone gets caught out.

And why would scientists willingly deceive the global community? From the link:
Dr Pacharui has also been accused of using the error to win grants worth hundreds of thousands of pounds.
 
ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS POPE BENEDICT XVI
TO THE MEMBERS OF THE DIPLOMATIC CORPS

How can we not mention the food crisis and global warming, which make it even more difficult for those living in some of the poorest parts of the planet to have access to nutrition and water?

INTERVENTION BY THE HOLY SEE
AT THE MEETING OF THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY
DEBATING ON THE THEME: “ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE:
THE UNITED NATIONS AND THE WORLD AT WORK”
(NEW YORK, 11 - 12 FEBRUARY 2008)

The ongoing debate on climate change has helped put into focus the inescapable responsibility of one and all to care for the environment, thereby building consensus around the common objective of promoting a healthy environment for present and future generations.
On a more practical side, the Holy See has already taken certain measures to reduce and offset the carbon emission of the Vatican City State, such as the use of solar panels and tree-planting. With its involvement in a reforestation project in Hungary, it will provide environmental benefits to the host country, assist in the recovery of an environmentally degraded tract of land, and provide local jobs.
 
Matters of Faith?

The Holy Father is the Vicar of Christ, and our sure guide in matters of faith and morals. However, the question is whether a scientific “consensus” is based upon vast sums of money and prestige, and also on a leftist ideology unfortunately entrenched in so many secular institutions. My use of the word “consensus” should be telling. Science should not be based on consensus because this leads to suppression of research not influenced by money and power. There are very many scientists who believe that carbon dioxide is a result of warming climate cycles rather than their cause. The money aspect of the problem is well demonstrated by the 100 million dollars Al Gore, who has no scientific credentials whatever, has made from this false anthropogenic global warming business. The ideological component of it is owned by extreme progressives who would like to see the population of the world reduced to 1 billion. Their position is diametrically opposed to our understanding of God and the world He created. Other scientists, not necessarily funded or associated with the UN are telling us things entirely different about climate and that we may be on the brink of another little ice age similar to the period experienced between the Fifteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. See the link to the story in the Washington Times. To those who worship the false god Gaia, anthropogenic global warming is a matter of faith and morals. For the rest of us, it should a matter for proper and unbiased scientific inquiry. The truth shall set you free. ~Bill1940

washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/27/an-inconvenient-cooling/
 
Well, people say there is a cycle of cold and hot on the earth. When it reaches the coldest, it’s like an ice age, when it reaches the hottest, it’s like a desert. We seem to be going toward hottest part of the cycle right now but it’s not our fault as many say. We produce barely anything compared to the other causes. It’s inevitable and natural.
 
styrgwillida as an environmental scientist who does global climate modelling and land-surface exchange of water vapour and atmospheric CO2, I’m going to have to make a few edits to what you have posted. I’ve highlighted just a few of the spots where you have failed to back up your ‘objective’ opinion with references to credible and peer reviewed research.
Well, as others have said, there is global warming and cooling which occurs naturally. Nothing, including the pictures of glaciers melting exceed known fluctuations in the past (Reference?).
Personally (you should actually be objective), I come down on that any man-made global warming is miniscule compared to the natural variations (Reference?).
The global warming models projecting warming have been shown to be false (Reference?), their predictions consistently fail to actually predict the temperatures actually occurring (The models don’t actually predict temperature per se, but changes in energy exchange at the earth’s surface. What is simulated are the effects OF increased air temperature, among other things.).
The models predict that warming should have continued during the last decade when it has remained constant/slight decrease (It is either constant or it decreases, it can not do both simultaneously and where is your reference?).
If the model is wrong, than the scientific hypothesis behind those models are wrong, failing to account for all the factors contributing to the climate.(You’ve actually got this around the wrong way, if the hypothesis is wrong then the model is wrong; the model is built from the hypothesis. Models never purport to be completely accurate of physical processes. They are mathematically developed to investigate philosophical questions that are either not (i) physically nor (ii) financially possible to measure. Generally though, the thousands of land-surface exchange models out there do reach a statistically significant convergence, despite operating on vastly different frameworks and number of parameters [Abramowitz et al. 2008 - Journal of Climate, V21].)
If you’re asking about it being caused by man, the data is worthless because it’s deeply flawed (Again, reference? You’ll have to explain why the experimental measurements are flawed.) and the majority of folks pushing it are doing so for political or financial reasons (Reference? What do they have to gain?).
For example, financiers have been funding research saying it is in order to get cap and trade systems in place. These only benefit the brokers who sell a commodity which has been created out of thin air. That is China says they have decided not to build a plant, or build it more efficiently which the creates a credit which can be sold by the brokers to some business needing the credit. No emissions are actually reduced in this system, it’s all on paper (Reference?).
Perfect for fraud, as the EU has found out during their experience with a cap/trade system (Reference?!?).
Or Al Gore, whose personal fortune is tied up in pushing ‘green’ technologies, or GE which stands to make a fortune off of this (Al Gore would be a bit of a hypocrite if he didn’t invest in what he believes in. Wouldn’t you say it gives his position greater conviction?).
The leader of the IPCC commission creating the UN report also had a huge personal financial interest in pushing this, and most of the data in the UN report has been shown to be deeply flawed or even created out of whole cloth. Glaciers the report said were shrinking in India are actually increasing (Reference?!?).
But… I won’t categorically deny it because no consistent methodology in measuring temperatures globally has been applied. Folks pushing it have in some years included hundreds of temperature stations in the arctic (Do you mean Antarctic?) circle, and in other years only used a handful. (This has been noted by both the Canadian and Russian governments) (Reference??). They’ve ‘assumed’ or ‘extrapolated’ (assumed and extrapolated are two completely different things) temperatures to these regions in some years while using actual temperatures in others- and oddly, they always bias it towards the warmest temp stations.
Okay, so it just goes into a mess from here, that doesn’t make much logical sense to me. Frankly I can’t be bothered to write a detailed retort to what you have essentially pasted together from wikipedia and opinion articles, instead of scientific peer reviewed papers. There are plenty of freely accessible articles on climate change from Nature or Science that you can look at to get a better idea of the facts. You need to remember that science isn’t on any pro-socialist or pro-green ‘side’, it’s about what the facts say.
It’s midnight now, so I’m going to bed. :rolleyes:
 
It’s referred to as climate change.

Let me explain; I’ve seen some people on this forum say because of seasonal change, that means we’ve always had climate change. That is actually change in weather. During the late fall, the earth tilts from the sun. This causes longer night, and shorter days, and it gets colder and colder

That’s weather, but climate works a bit differently. If we take the hypothesis of the earth warming up, such a thing is not disproved by a few snowstorms. Rather, it is something that gradually occurs. For example, if it is supposed to be -19 degrees celsius, it may be -18 degrees celsius because of the warming of the earth. You would still get cold weather and snow, but it does not mean the earth isn’t warming up.

Now, for climate change in its entirety, it is a confusing thing to deal with. Evaporation is accelerating and takes in more warm air, including H2o, which is water. More water in the air means more precipitation, which means more snow or more rain

That’s very basic, though
 
It’s referred to as climate change.

Let me explain; I’ve seen some people on this forum say because of seasonal change, that means we’ve always had climate change. That is actually change in weather. During the late fall, the earth tilts from the sun. This causes longer night, and shorter days, and it gets colder and colder

That’s weather, but climate works a bit differently. If we take the hypothesis of the earth warming up, such a thing is not disproved by a few snowstorms. Rather, it is something that gradually occurs. For example, if it is supposed to be -19 degrees celsius, it may be -18 degrees celsius because of the warming of the earth. You would still get cold weather and snow, but it does not mean the earth isn’t warming up.

Now, for climate change in its entirety, it is a confusing thing to deal with. Evaporation is accelerating and takes in more warm air, including H2o, which is water. More water in the air means more precipitation, which means more snow or more rain

That’s very basic, though
How do smog alerts work into the natural scheme of climate change?
 
Scientists have shown a picture of a glacier taken in the arctic from about 1oo yrs ago maybe 70yrs ago not sure.Anyway it shows this site all cover in snow .Now they show a recent photograph and its just bare earth.it does look like the same area.It appears that this whole region has melted .I know that the global warming issue is said to be false and its motives are to promote a terrible agenda but how does one explain these photos?Now its possible that these could be fake in some way(im not a photographer)but has anyone else seen these and are they legitamate?
… my dear friend ,

… god created this world and the climate on our planet , and climate change or global warming is perfectly natural , everyone no matter where they live / d knows the climate changes every day , climate change is natural and i love it , our climate has never been a stable constant in the cosmos , it’s nothing unnatural for the weather to change at all , the contribution by man that effects climate is so miniscule it’s not worth considering i’ve seen , but we must fight pollution whilst maintaining some common sense as we go about it , that’s my 2 cents on this ,

… may god bless and love you 👍🙂 ,

… john …
 
… my dear friend ,

… god created this world and the climate on our planet , and climate change or global warming is perfectly natural , everyone no matter where they live / d knows the climate changes every day , climate change is natural and i love it , our climate has never been a stable constant in the cosmos , it’s nothing unnatural for the weather to change at all , the contribution by man that effects climate is so miniscule it’s not worth considering i’ve seen , but we must fight pollution whilst maintaining some common sense as we go about it , that’s my 2 cents on this ,

… may god bless and love you 👍🙂 ,

… john …
And if you’re wrong, it won’t have a drastic impact, in our lifetimes…😦
 
And if you’re wrong, it won’t have a drastic impact, in our lifetimes…😦
… my dear friend ,

… all should just pray to god for everything , as god is in complete control of our climate and all , and only god can change man , i really hate all the pollution and this is a major problem , but man hardly influences our climate at all – it’s hardly even worth noting , perhaps jesus will return before we get any major trouble from all this , i think he will myself ,

… may god bless and love you 👍🙂 ,

… john …
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top