bluecon

The scientific evidence is mounting against the AGW theory. The MSM however with the scientists that still believe in the theory continue to play up every unusual bit of climate as proof of AGW.

I am trying to figure this out. A ten year period is to short and worthless? And your concerns are on a short human level? What are your exact parameters of the years we are allowed to use in this scientific discussion?

Walter Cunningham explains it. "The fearmongers of global warming base their case on the correlation between CO2 and global temperature, even though we cannot be sure which is cause and which is effect. Historically, temperature increases have preceded high CO2 levels, and there have been periods when atmospheric CO2 levels were as much as 16 times what they are now, periods characterized not by warming but by glaciation. You might have to go back half a million years to match our current level of atmospheric CO2, but you only have to go back to the Medieval Warming Period, from the 10th to the 14th Century, to find an intense global warming episode, followed immediately by the drastic cooling of the Little Ice Age. Neither of these events were caused by variations in CO2 levels.Even though CO2 is a relatively minor constituent of “greenhouse gases,” alarmists have made it the whipping boy for global warming (probably because they know how fruitless it would be to propose controlling other principal constituents, H2O, CH4, and N2O). Since human activity does contribute a tiny portion of atmospheric CO2, they blame us for global warming. Other inconvenient facts ignored by the activists: Carbon dioxide is a nonpolluting gas, essential for plant photosynthesis. Higher concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere produce bigger harvests." http://launchmagonline.com/index.php/Viewp...-not-Bliss.html

I am saying the response of the climate should be linear with the physics if the physics is right. That is what the models predicted. Very easy to change the prediction after the fact.

If the physics is right why has there been a huge increase in manmade CO2 and no resulting increase in temps for the last ten years? Obviously the physics is wrong. CO2 is likely a beneficial gas that makes the plants grow.

The children! If scientific fact doesn't work use the children! Your childrens future will be far more affected by the economic recession we are entering than any tiny increase in CO2. Pushing some far fetched AGW scheme with no factual basis to shutdown the economies of the west will have a great detrimental effect on your children. For the last ten years the Earth has shown no signs of warming while the manmade CO2 has greatly increased. Is that not proof enough?

Are you saying the human activity is affecting the climate but there is no actual evidence it affects climate? Manmade CO2 has seen a huge increase for ten years and there has been no increase in temps. Should we destroy are economy for this? And let the Chinese and Indians do whatever they want?

Right where I am sitting there was miles deep thickness of ice not to many thousands of years ago. Hundreds of thousands of square miles of that ice existed.(probably millions of square miles of the ice existed worldwide) It melted and life went on. And it wasn't the first time that happened. And you are predicting the end of the World when a 7 sq mile section breaks off? 3.5 by 2 miles of ice? There has been much greater climate events in the pre SUV history of the Earth.

So are you saying pre SUV the Arctic has never seen such a low level of ice? Or do you think the history of the Earth begins in the 1950's? This isn't the first time this has happened and won't be the last. Now enjoy the new cool spell the Earths climate is entering.

That is a few years into the past that agree with your theory. I find it hard to believe that you are trying to use the old hockey stick theory to prove the AGW theory. That was one of the first of the AGW myths to be discredited. Ten years of cooling and a huge increase in manmade CO2 emmissions. Kinda blows a large hole in the AGW theory.

The ice flow of a glacier is caused by the accumulation of snow and ice. It is a normal occurence and will not cause life on Earth to halt. Go out to Lake Louise in the Summer and watch the glacier. It routinely drops large chunks of old ice.

What I am saying is the Earth has been cooling for ten years the Arctic ice has greatly increased this year and the AGW crowd with the help of their allies in the MSM point out the loss of 7 square miles of ice as though it is the end of the world while ignoring reporting the truth about the huge increase in ice cover in the Arctic. The AGW argument is no longer put forward with science but is solely based on fear tactics.

The ice levels you extracted have nothing to do with the current climate and do nothing to show that the facts do not match up to the predictions of the AGW crowd. At this point all the AGW proponents are starting to look rather foolish. Huge increase in manmade CO2 and a cooling Earth. You need to be a real diehard to cling to the AGW theory. No thinking person would believe that such flimsy evidence could be used to tell what the level of the ice cover in the Arctic was back to 1870.

It is normal for the ice to break off and is why there are icebergs. The ice is like a plastic and flows, not a static solid.

What I think is going to happen is much simpler. The economy is going to go in the tank and the climate will be cold this year. Then people will start questioning why billions of taxpayer dollars are spent to perpetuate this fraud.