moonbattery logo

Dec 31 2014

Rising Carbon Dioxide Levels Are Great, but Unfortunately Are Not Making It Warmer

If there is anyone left (besides Obama and the Pope) who still takes the global warming hoax seriously, this story may prove helpful:

Global Sea Ice Breaks Record High For The Day – Antarctic Sea Ice Also Breaks Record High For the Day

Closer to home,

A storm has slammed parts of Southern California, unleashing snow and rain that will focus on the Southwestern states into 2015.

The storm will continue to usher in frigid air, bringing a frost and freeze to a large part of California into the end of the week. …

Temperatures are forecast to drop as low as the middle 20s to near 30 degrees for a couple of hours in agricultural areas of Southern California Thursday night into Friday night.

As for the skyrocketing carbon dioxide levels that according to global warming theory should have ruined the planet by now,

Tropical forests are growing faster than scientists thought due to rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

A Nasa-led study has found that tropical forests are absorbing 1.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide every year as they photosynthesise and grow. …

As emissions add more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, forests worldwide are using it to grow faster.

As some of us are old enough to have been taught in grade school, carbon dioxide is a good thing, because it makes plants grow — not just jungles, but also crops needed to feed people. After absorbing carbon dioxide, plants emit the oxygen we need for breathing.

But carbon dioxide emissions do have one shortcoming: they do not make the weather warmer.



104 Responses to “Rising Carbon Dioxide Levels Are Great, but Unfortunately Are Not Making It Warmer”

  1. Zachriel says:

    The first ten months of 2014 (January–October) were the warmest such period since record keeping began.

    The 12-month period, November 2013–October 2014, broke the record (just set in the previous month) for the all-time warmest 12-month period.

    The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the year-to-date (January–November 2014) was the warmest such period on record.

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/

  2. Zachriel says:

    The first ten months of 2014 (January–October) were the warmest such period since record keeping began.

    The 12-month period, November 2013–October 2014, broke the record (just set in the previous month) for the all-time warmest 12-month period.

    The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the year-to-date (January–November 2014) was the warmest such period on record.

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/

  3. Jon Sobieski says:

    Why aren’t the environmentalists going after the greenhouse farms that burn natural gas to increase carbon dioxide in their greenhouses increasing yields?

  4. Jon Sobieski says:

    Why aren’t the environmentalists going after the greenhouse farms that burn natural gas to increase carbon dioxide in their greenhouses increasing yields?

  5. Mr. Rational says:

    Global Sea Ice Breaks Record High For The Day – Antarctic Sea Ice Also Breaks Record High For the Day

    This is because Antarctica is losing ice shelves and its glacier flows have broken and re-broken all historical records.  That ice becomes sea ice for a while, until it melts.

    The only glaciers near the Arctic are in Greenland and Iceland, which are also losing ice but don’t have the bulk to make up for the loss of the floating ice.

    A storm has slammed parts of Southern California, unleashing snow and rain that will focus on the Southwestern states into 2015.

    Feast-or-famine rainfall is very disruptive to agriculture, forestry and every other human activity.  If it falls as rain, it runs off in a few weeks and you will still be in drought-crisis conditions come summer.  Slow-melting snow pack is the only thing that gives steady, reliable river flows into the summer.

    A Nasa-led study has found that tropical forests are absorbing 1.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide every year as they photosynthesise and grow. …

    China alone emitted an estimated 9.9 billion metric tons of CO2 in 2012.  1.5 billion tons is a drop in the bucket.

  6. Mr. Rational says:

    Global Sea Ice Breaks Record High For The Day – Antarctic Sea Ice Also Breaks Record High For the Day

    This is because Antarctica is losing ice shelves and its glacier flows have broken and re-broken all historical records.  That ice becomes sea ice for a while, until it melts.

    The only glaciers near the Arctic are in Greenland and Iceland, which are also losing ice but don’t have the bulk to make up for the loss of the floating ice.

    A storm has slammed parts of Southern California, unleashing snow and rain that will focus on the Southwestern states into 2015.

    Feast-or-famine rainfall is very disruptive to agriculture, forestry and every other human activity.  If it falls as rain, it runs off in a few weeks and you will still be in drought-crisis conditions come summer.  Slow-melting snow pack is the only thing that gives steady, reliable river flows into the summer.

    A Nasa-led study has found that tropical forests are absorbing 1.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide every year as they photosynthesise and grow. …

    China alone emitted an estimated 9.9 billion metric tons of CO2 in 2012.  1.5 billion tons is a drop in the bucket.

  7. 762x51 says:

    It is supposed to snow tonight . . . in Las Vegas!
    Global whaaaaaat?

  8. 762x51 says:

    It is supposed to snow tonight . . . in Las Vegas!
    Global whaaaaaat?

  9. 762x51 says:

    In Colorado, the marijuana grow houses not only inject CO2 into the growing areas, but they also consume up to $70,000.00 / month in electricity. MJ is, of course, a lefty libtard cause celeb. No carbon footprint there.

  10. 762x51 says:

    In Colorado, the marijuana grow houses not only inject CO2 into the growing areas, but they also consume up to $70,000.00 / month in electricity. MJ is, of course, a lefty libtard cause celeb. No carbon footprint there.

  11. 762x51 says:

    LOL, is that including the manipulated data where you hoaxers changed the dates/temps, so that you could make these ridiculous claims?

    That extra tenth of a degree over the next 100 years will make me take off my shirt for sure.

    “The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the year-to-date (January–November 2014) was the warmest such period on record.”
    During that same period, the ice caps increased to record levels. You are a total joke.

    What a maroon.

  12. 762x51 says:

    LOL, is that including the manipulated data where you hoaxers changed the dates/temps, so that you could make these ridiculous claims?

    That extra tenth of a degree over the next 100 years will make me take off my shirt for sure.

    “The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the year-to-date (January–November 2014) was the warmest such period on record.”
    During that same period, the ice caps increased to record levels. You are a total joke.

    What a maroon.

  13. Katya Kakhov says:

    Wait till they figure in the output of all those beer , whiskey , and wine fermenters and I didnt even mention all the carbonated drinks

  14. Katya Kakhov says:

    Wait till they figure in the output of all those beer , whiskey , and wine fermenters and I didnt even mention all the carbonated drinks

  15. Katya Kakhov says:

    Try this on for size . These cats are good http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbgcyW-MqtY

  16. Katya Kakhov says:

    Try this on for size . These cats are good http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbgcyW-MqtY

  17. KHarn says:

    “Global warming” has NOT been proven using the scientific method. All fools like you have are “computer simulations” which can be rigged. At the beginning of this con job, it was announced that if the current trend continues, the global temperature could rise as high as SIX DGREES by 2100. (Of course, that wasn’t SCARY enough, so they “adjusted” the results) The key phrase is “IF the current trend continues”; what if it DOESN’T?

    By The Way, a warm climate is GOOD, a cold climate is DEADLY.

    “China alone emitted an estimated 9.9 billion metric tons of CO2 in 2012.”

    Go talk to the Chi-Coms, quit bitching at us.

  18. KHarn says:

    “Global warming” has NOT been proven using the scientific method. All fools like you have are “computer simulations” which can be rigged. At the beginning of this con job, it was announced that if the current trend continues, the global temperature could rise as high as SIX DGREES by 2100. (Of course, that wasn’t SCARY enough, so they “adjusted” the results) The key phrase is “IF the current trend continues”; what if it DOESN’T?

    By The Way, a warm climate is GOOD, a cold climate is DEADLY.

    “China alone emitted an estimated 9.9 billion metric tons of CO2 in 2012.”

    Go talk to the Chi-Coms, quit bitching at us.

  19. Mr. Rational says:

    “Global warming” has NOT been proven using the scientific method.

    Wrong.  Up 1.5°C in the last 250 years:

    http://berkeleyearth.org/summary-of-findings

    All fools like you have are “computer simulations” which can be rigged.

    BEST wasn’t a simulation.  It compared the historical record to the present day.  All of that change HAS ALREADY HAPPENED.

    a warm climate is GOOD, a cold climate is DEADLY.

    Tell it to the Okies when all their crops failed.  Tell it to the people of Plainview, TX now that their livelihoods have evaporated along with the cattle and meatpacking work due to the heat.

    Just because some is good does not mean more is better.

  20. Mr. Rational says:

    “Global warming” has NOT been proven using the scientific method.

    Wrong.  Up 1.5°C in the last 250 years:

    http://berkeleyearth.org/summary-of-findings

    All fools like you have are “computer simulations” which can be rigged.

    BEST wasn’t a simulation.  It compared the historical record to the present day.  All of that change HAS ALREADY HAPPENED.

    a warm climate is GOOD, a cold climate is DEADLY.

    Tell it to the Okies when all their crops failed.  Tell it to the people of Plainview, TX now that their livelihoods have evaporated along with the cattle and meatpacking work due to the heat.

    Just because some is good does not mean more is better.

  21. hiram says:

    Was BEST comparing it to the historical historical record, or the revised historical record? You know, after the warmers “updated” historical data-sets downward so they’ll fit the narrative?

    And 250 years is mighty convenient, considering that you’re starting the “uptrend” in temperatures during the Little Ice Age. How about starting your timespan 1000 years ago? Oh, wait… that would show no warming. What was I thinking?

  22. hiram says:

    Was BEST comparing it to the historical historical record, or the revised historical record? You know, after the warmers “updated” historical data-sets downward so they’ll fit the narrative?

    And 250 years is mighty convenient, considering that you’re starting the “uptrend” in temperatures during the Little Ice Age. How about starting your timespan 1000 years ago? Oh, wait… that would show no warming. What was I thinking?

  23. KHarn says:

    The rain stopped falling in the mid-west during the ’30’s and that area has ALWAYS had little rainfall and a VERY DEEP aquifer. It was NEVER a good idea to farm there and over-production combined with poor farming practices caused the land to blow away. READ SOME HISTORY.

    It has NOT BEEN PROVEN SCIENTIFICLY. Data has been guessed in many cases at and UNAVAILABLE from stations behind the iron curtain during the cold war which lasted decades.

    If you’re going to keep up this panic-mongering, you should call yourself “mr. IRrational”.

  24. KHarn says:

    The rain stopped falling in the mid-west during the ’30’s and that area has ALWAYS had little rainfall and a VERY DEEP aquifer. It was NEVER a good idea to farm there and over-production combined with poor farming practices caused the land to blow away. READ SOME HISTORY.

    It has NOT BEEN PROVEN SCIENTIFICLY. Data has been guessed in many cases at and UNAVAILABLE from stations behind the iron curtain during the cold war which lasted decades.

    If you’re going to keep up this panic-mongering, you should call yourself “mr. IRrational”.

  25. DrSamHerman says:

    I might add that humans could not exist without Carbon Dioxide. It is one of the stimulating agents in our environment that makes us do a simple thing called BREATHING.

  26. DrSamHerman - Dr Deplorado says:

    I might add that humans could not exist without Carbon Dioxide. It is one of the stimulating agents in our environment that makes us do a simple thing called BREATHING.

  27. DrSamHerman says:

    Then explain the past 19 years with NO warming at all. That’s a phenomenon not even your precious IPCC can explain except to sputter it needs more money to come up with another excuse to spend billions on fraudulent garbage.

    And Texas has been through these drought and rain cycles for the entire time it has been part of the US, and prior to that when it was the Texas Republic.

  28. DrSamHerman - Dr Deplorado says:

    Then explain the past 19 years with NO warming at all. That’s a phenomenon not even your precious IPCC can explain except to sputter it needs more money to come up with another excuse to spend billions on fraudulent garbage.

    And Texas has been through these drought and rain cycles for the entire time it has been part of the US, and prior to that when it was the Texas Republic.

  29. rex freeway says:

    Now the Popes on board with king curtain rod.

  30. rex freeway says:

    Now the Popes on board with king curtain rod.

  31. Softly Bob says:

    Up 1.5 C in the last 250 years? Probably natural then and not man-made, in which case we can do nothing about it. Unless of course you believe that it was all the automobiles, and coal-fired power stations 250 years ago that started it all.

  32. Saxon Warrior says:

    Up 1.5 C in the last 250 years? Probably natural then and not man-made, in which case we can do nothing about it. Unless of course you believe that it was all the automobiles, and coal-fired power stations 250 years ago that started it all.

  33. Softly Bob says:

    You know that propaganda is good when it makes you disbelieve the evidence of your own eyes and your own ears. Because Global Warmist Moonbats prefer to listen to computer generated models instead of believing the evidence of their own senses just goes to show what gullible idiots they really are. Guess what Moonbats?, the polar bears are still here, Manhattan hasn’t sunk under the sea and the Earth still has ice-caps despite earlier prophecies made by the Green loonies that all these predictions would be fulfilled by the year 2012.

    Never take a Moonbat to see a hypnotist stage show, he’ll end up being the suggestible goon dragged onto the stage by the hypnotist – stripping his clothes off on stage, clucking like a chicken and barking like a dog while the audience sit there and laugh at him.

  34. Saxon Warrior says:

    You know that propaganda is good when it makes you disbelieve the evidence of your own eyes and your own ears. Because Global Warmist Moonbats prefer to listen to computer generated models instead of believing the evidence of their own senses just goes to show what gullible idiots they really are. Guess what Moonbats?, the polar bears are still here, Manhattan hasn’t sunk under the sea and the Earth still has ice-caps despite earlier prophecies made by the Green loonies that all these predictions would be fulfilled by the year 2012.

    Never take a Moonbat to see a hypnotist stage show, he’ll end up being the easily-suggestible goon dragged onto the stage by the hypnotist – stripping his clothes off on stage, clucking like a chicken and barking like a dog while the audience sit there and laugh at him.

  35. Softly Bob says:

    Leftists and would-be tyrants are very good at declaring the opposite of the truth to be the truth.
    That’s why the most violent religion on the Planet calls itself the Religion of Peace, why Obama calls himself the best POTUS in history when he’s actually the worst, why Leftists call themselves Liberals when they’re anything but, and why Muslims talk about liberating countries when they’re actually trying to enslave them.
    Narcissism and delusion makes people believe that they are the complete opposite to what they really are.
    It’s no surprise then that this fool would choose to call himself ‘Mr. Rational.

  36. Saxon Warrior says:

    Leftists and would-be tyrants are very good at declaring the opposite of the truth to be the truth.
    That’s why the most violent religion on the Planet calls itself the Religion of Peace, why Obama calls himself the best POTUS in history when he’s actually the worst, why Leftists call themselves Liberals when they’re anything but, and why Muslims talk about liberating countries when they’re actually trying to enslave them.
    Narcissism and delusion makes people believe that they are the complete opposite to what they really are.
    It’s no surprise then that this fool would choose to call himself ‘Mr. Rational.

  37. Zachriel says:

    762×51: During that same period, the ice caps increased to record levels.

    Um, no. They didn’t.

    Arctic sea ice in September 2014 was the sixth lowest since satellite observations began in 1979. The eight lowest sea ice extents since 1979 have occurred in the last eight years (2007-2014).

    http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/2014/12/asina_N_stddev_timeseries.png

  38. Zachriel says:

    762×51: During that same period, the ice caps increased to record levels.

    Um, no. They didn’t.

    Arctic sea ice in September 2014 was the sixth lowest since satellite observations began in 1979. The eight lowest sea ice extents since 1979 have occurred in the last eight years (2007-2014).

    http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/2014/12/asina_N_stddev_timeseries.png

  39. Zachriel says:

    Global sea ice anomaly is -1.1% with a trend of -1.28% per decade.
    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global-snow/2014/11

    This leaves aside the fact that increased sea ice extent in Antarctica is due to changes in wind patterns and fresh water melt off the continent.

  40. Zachriel says:

    Global sea ice anomaly is -1.1% with a trend of -1.28% per decade.
    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global-snow/2014/11

    This leaves aside the fact that increased sea ice extent in Antarctica is due to changes in wind patterns and fresh water melt off the continent.

  41. Zachriel says:

    DrSamHerman: Then explain the past 19 years with NO warming at all.

    The first ten months of 2014 (January–October) were the warmest such period since record keeping began.

    The 12-month period, November 2013–October 2014, broke the record (just set in the previous month) for the all-time warmest 12-month period.

    The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the year-to-date (January–November 2014) was the warmest such period on record.

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/

  42. Zachriel says:

    DrSamHerman: Then explain the past 19 years with NO warming at all.

    The first ten months of 2014 (January–October) were the warmest such period since record keeping began.

    The 12-month period, November 2013–October 2014, broke the record (just set in the previous month) for the all-time warmest 12-month period.

    The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the year-to-date (January–November 2014) was the warmest such period on record.

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/

  43. DrSamHerman says:

    Cherry-picked data that still does NOT explain 18 years of no warming.

  44. DrSamHerman - Dr Deplorado says:

    Cherry-picked data that still does NOT explain 18 years of no warming.

  45. bobdog19006 says:

    There was a time not too long ago when the Amazon rain forest was called “the lungs of the world”. They absorb carbon dioxide and, importantly, produce oxygen, which is in turn wasted by liberals all over the world.

    Look it up.

  46. bobdog19006 says:

    There was a time not too long ago when the Amazon rain forest was called “the lungs of the world”. They absorb carbon dioxide and, importantly, produce oxygen, which is in turn wasted by liberals all over the world.

    But we don’t talk about that any more. It’s become an inconvenient truth. It runs contrary to The Holy Narrative.

    One might logically condemn the EPA for repressing the production of oxygen. Hate to sound like a cut from Soylent Green, but carbon dioxide, far from being a “pollutant”, is plant food.

  47. Zachriel says:

    DrSamHerman: Cherry-picked data that still does NOT explain 18 years of no warming.

    It’s hard to argue that there’s been no warming when Jan-Nov have been the warmest such period on record.

  48. Zachriel says:

    DrSamHerman: Cherry-picked data that still does NOT explain 18 years of no warming.

    It’s hard to argue that there’s been no warming when Jan-Nov have been the warmest such period on record.

  49. DrSamHerman says:

    1/18.8 = ~5.1%

    In no scientific discipline is that considered to be a trend.

  50. DrSamHerman - Dr Deplorado says:

    1/18.8 = ~5.1%

    In no scientific discipline is that considered to be a trend.

  51. DrSamHerman says:

    I remember that phrase when it came into popular use during the envirocrazed 80s and 90s and the issue of the day was deforestation. Then we had research into phytoplankton and better information on how rain forests, phytoplankton and nearly every other bio-inhabitable niche on earth ultimately relied on the complexity of the oxygen/carbon dioxide cycle. Now carbon dioxide (which human life is impossible without also–in part, it stimulates us to breathe) is a villain and is blamed for everything from Ebola to lumbago. You are so correct when you use the phrasing “holy narrative”, because the AGW crowd is so religiously attached to their belief system and their philosophy that they resemble an emergent cult.

    I find it funny to ask a student or a resident with whom I worked if they knew anything about botany. A surprising number of didn’t even know the Calvin cycle (plant equivalent of the Krebs cycle) required carbon dioxide, some version of chlorophyll and sunlight for plants to manufacture carbohydrates to live. They didn’t seem to appreciate the fact that plants use carbon dioxide. It amazed the hell out of me that botany is not taught as part of basic biology. Wow.

  52. DrSamHerman - Dr Deplorado says:

    I remember that phrase when it came into popular use during the envirocrazed 80s and 90s and the issue of the day was deforestation. Then we had research into phytoplankton and better information on how rain forests, phytoplankton and nearly every other bio-inhabitable niche on earth ultimately relied on the complexity of the oxygen/carbon dioxide cycle. Now carbon dioxide (which human life is impossible without also–in part, it stimulates us to breathe) is a villain and is blamed for everything from Ebola to lumbago. You are so correct when you use the phrasing “holy narrative”, because the AGW crowd is so religiously attached to their belief system and their philosophy that they resemble an emergent cult.

    I find it funny to ask a student or a resident with whom I worked if they knew anything about botany. A surprising number of didn’t even know the Calvin cycle (plant equivalent of the Krebs cycle) required carbon dioxide, some version of chlorophyll and sunlight for plants to manufacture carbohydrates to live. They didn’t seem to appreciate the fact that plants use carbon dioxide. It amazed the hell out of me that botany is not taught as part of basic biology. Wow.

  53. Ron H Spins says:

    It’s not even computer generated it’s fabricated by moonbats

  54. Ron H Spins says:

    It’s not even computer generated it’s fabricated by moonbats

  55. IOpian says:

    As I recall many years ago the weeping willows of leftist environmentalism were lamenting the destruction of the Amazon Rain Forest. Our air supply would be in jeopardy. Trees can’t make oxygen without getting that oxygen out of CO2. So the more available CO2 there is the more trees have a source for carbon ( necessary for all ‘carbon’-based life ) and the more oxygen they expirate as a waste gas.

    Now these same people, who are really petrophobes, are telling us their ‘science’ has deemed CO2 to be a pollutant. We carbon-based life forms must reduce our carbon footprint. Now they want to starve the rain forest? What is their solution? Empty our pockets so they can plant some trees. Our problem is nothing that a little legislation and monetary offerings into the plate of Gaia won’t solve.

    If I wake up in the morning and read that all their scams have been unraveled by the realities of real science then I would be not the least surprised that they will tell us that what plants need are electrolytes and the best source of that is Brawndo.

  56. IOpian says:

    As I recall many years ago the weeping willows of leftist environmentalism were lamenting the destruction of the Amazon Rain Forest. Our air supply would be in jeopardy. Trees can’t make oxygen without getting that oxygen out of CO2. So the more available CO2 there is the more trees have a source for carbon ( necessary for all ‘carbon’-based life ) and the more oxygen they expirate as a waste gas.

    Now these same people, who are really petrophobes, are telling us their ‘science’ has deemed CO2 to be a pollutant. We carbon-based life forms must reduce our carbon footprint. Now they want to starve the rain forest? What is their solution? Empty our pockets so they can plant some trees. Our problem is nothing that a little legislation and monetary offerings into the plate of Gaia won’t solve.

    If I wake up in the morning and read that all their scams have been unraveled by the realities of real science then I would be not the least surprised that they will tell us that what plants need are electrolytes and the best source of that is Brawndo.

  57. Zachriel says:

    As it is a record, it suggests your original comment was incorrect. Here’s the longer trend.

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/global-land-ocean-mntp-anom/201101-201112.png

  58. Zachriel says:

    As it is a record, it suggests your original comment was incorrect. Here’s the longer trend.

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/global-land-ocean-mntp-anom/201101-201112.png

  59. DrSamHerman says:

    What I see in the curve, and being well versed in the statistical analyses of clinical trials, is that essentially you have flattened curve when averaged using a smoothing algorithm.

    And IPCC still can’t account for the 18 year lag, nor can its models.

  60. DrSamHerman - Dr Deplorado says:

    What I see in the curve, and being well versed in the statistical analyses of clinical trials, is that essentially you have flattened curve when averaged using a smoothing algorithm.

    And IPCC still can’t account for the 18 year lag, nor can its models.

  61. rex freeway says:

    I seems the more that Liberals push the Global warming agenda the harder nature pushes to prove they are lying. Even with temps not rising and growing ice caps, Obama policy is affecting me. It was announced on my local news that my electric bill was going up by 15.5% and they where asking for that amount again. Fuck Obama and the liberal race baiters who put him in office.

  62. rex freeway says:

    I seems the more that Liberals push the Global warming agenda the harder nature pushes to prove they are lying. Even with temps not rising and growing ice caps, Obama policy is affecting me. It was announced on my local news that my electric bill was going up by 15.5% and they where asking for that amount again. Fuck Obama and the liberal race baiters who put him in office.

  63. Mr. Rational says:

    It’s no surprise then that this fool would choose to call himself ‘Mr. Rational.

    You were doing so well, right up until you wrote that.

    It amuses me particularly because liberals call me much worse.  Both you and liberals show the amazing power of herd behavior and orthodoxy.

    While you’re sputtering over that, ponder this notion:  perhaps both the left and right orthodoxies have been engineered by the same interests to protect their interest from political damage.  One side insists that nothing needs to be done, the other screams it’s imperative… but rules out the one means that would actually be effective.  And maybe it’s been going on for a long time already, like:

    Climate change:  Right is fine with nuclear but says there’s no need, Left says it’s a matter of planetary survival but rules out nuclear.

    Minority dysfunction:  Left says it’s just White racism/privilege because all humans are actually equal so nothing needs to be done, Right says that people are different and law & order are essential but refuses to countenance e.g. sterilization and abortion for the unemployable and criminal because “pro-life”.

    When you think about it, you start seeing it all over.

  64. Mr. Rational says:

    It’s no surprise then that this fool would choose to call himself ‘Mr. Rational.

    You were doing so well, right up until you wrote that.

    It amuses me particularly because liberals call me much worse.  Both you and liberals show the amazing power of herd behavior and orthodoxy.

    While you’re sputtering over that, ponder this notion:  perhaps both the left and right orthodoxies have been engineered by the same interests to protect their interest from political damage.  One side insists that nothing needs to be done, the other screams it’s imperative… but rules out the one means that would actually be effective.  And maybe it’s been going on for a long time already, like:

    Climate change:  Right is fine with nuclear but says there’s no need, Left says it’s a matter of planetary survival but rules out nuclear.

    Minority dysfunction:  Left says it’s just White racism/privilege because all humans are actually equal so nothing needs to be done, Right says that people are different and law & order are essential but refuses to countenance e.g. sterilization and abortion for the unemployable and criminal because “pro-life”.

    When you think about it, you start seeing it all over.

  65. Softly Bob says:

    You’re rambling again. I’m fine with Nuclear but there is no man-made climate change anyway so why should we need to look for solutions to a problem that isn’t there?. Did I not make that clear in my last post?
    As for your pro-life statement, that’s just ridiculous and sterilizatiion for criminals and the unemployable is actually a fascist notion suited to the hard Left.

  66. Saxon Warrior says:

    You’re rambling again. I’m fine with Nuclear but there is no man-made climate change anyway so why should we need to look for solutions to a problem that isn’t there?. Did I not make that clear in my last post?
    As for your pro-life statement, that’s just ridiculous and sterilizatiion for criminals and the unemployable is actually a fascist notion suited to the hard Left.

  67. Zachriel says:

    DrSamHermann: What I see in the curve, and being well versed in the statistical analyses of clinical trials, is that essentially you have flattened curve when averaged using a smoothing algorithm.

    If it was body temperature, you would say the patient’s temperature has increasing over time, and is at its high point.

    However, climate science isn’t only a matter of resolving trends, but it is a causative model. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and the Earth’s surface is absorbing more heat than it is emitting. That is

  68. Zachriel says:

    DrSamHermann: What I see in the curve, and being well versed in the statistical analyses of clinical trials, is that essentially you have flattened curve when averaged using a smoothing algorithm.

    If it was body temperature, you would say the patient’s temperature has increasing over time, and is at its high point.

    However, climate science isn’t only a matter of resolving trends, but it is a causative model. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and the Earth’s surface is absorbing more heat than it is emitting. That is

  69. DrSamHerman says:

    Not looking at that graph. And that is an extremely bad example, because we know human body temperature varies naturally throughout the day by 0.5 degrees Celsius, or up to 1.5 degrees Celsius in some individuals and it is still considered normal depending on their clinical status.

  70. DrSamHerman - Dr Deplorado says:

    Not looking at that graph. And that is an extremely bad example, because we know human body temperature varies naturally throughout the day by 0.5 degrees Celsius, or up to 1.5 degrees Celsius in some individuals and it is still considered normal depending on their clinical status.

  71. Mr. Rational says:

    You’re rambling again.

    I didn’t expect you to see the connection even when I put it right in front of you; your membership in the herd requires that you NOT see it.  But other readers may not be so bound to orthodoxy.

    I’m fine with Nuclear but there is no man-made climate change anyway

    Good sheep!  You re-iterated exactly what I told you the red-jersey orthodoxy declared.  Because the blue-jerseys reflexively oppose everything red-jerseys like, they oppose nuclear energy despite it being the only proven way to accomplish the carbon cuts they claim are essential.  This stalemate locks in the incumbent interests, as it was designed to do.

    Actual climate scientists do not follow the blue-jersey agenda and their break is increasingly public.

    As for your pro-life statement, that’s just ridiculous and sterilizatiion for criminals and the unemployable is actually a fascist notion suited to the hard Left.

    It was once common sense that all character traits, including intelligence and criminality, were heritable just like physical traits.  This has been confirmed by science, and the very genes responsible for those traits are being uncovered.  Conservatives once valued this knowledge, e.g. for choosing mates (the notion of “from a good family”).

    Today?  You’re so afraid of the R-word and N-word that you’ll deny any association with any notion the National Socialists put into practice, or so much as advocated, despite those ideas having been put into law in the USA decades before they came to Germany.  It’s pretty much undeniable that the offspring of unemployable criminals tend to be unemployable criminals, but the threat of having the R-word and N-word applied to you keep you from saying so.  (This has been dubbed “Hitler’s revenge”.)  Had we prevented the academic and social failures from having children from the beginning of the 20th century, we would not have ghettos in the USA in the 21st.  Instead, we have legally mandated equality… and Newark, Gary and Detroit.

    Keep baaa-ing with the herd.  The authors of the orthodoxy need your support.

  72. Mr. Rational says:

    You’re rambling again.

    I didn’t expect you to see the connection even when I put it right in front of you; your membership in the herd requires that you NOT see it.  But other readers may not be so bound to orthodoxy.

    I’m fine with Nuclear but there is no man-made climate change anyway

    Good sheep!  You re-iterated exactly what I told you the red-jersey orthodoxy declared.  Because the blue-jerseys reflexively oppose everything red-jerseys like, they oppose nuclear energy despite it being the only proven way to accomplish the carbon cuts they claim are essential.  This stalemate locks in the incumbent interests, as it was designed to do.

    Actual climate scientists do not follow the blue-jersey agenda and their break is increasingly public.

    As for your pro-life statement, that’s just ridiculous and sterilizatiion for criminals and the unemployable is actually a fascist notion suited to the hard Left.

    It was once common sense that all character traits, including intelligence and criminality, were heritable just like physical traits.  This has been confirmed by science, and the very genes responsible for those traits are being uncovered.  Conservatives once valued this knowledge, e.g. for choosing mates (the notion of “from a good family”).

    Today?  You’re so afraid of the R-word and N-word that you’ll deny any association with any notion the National Socialists put into practice, or so much as advocated, despite those ideas having been put into law in the USA decades before they came to Germany.  It’s pretty much undeniable that the offspring of unemployable criminals tend to be unemployable criminals, but the threat of having the R-word and N-word applied to you keep you from saying so.  (This has been dubbed “Hitler’s revenge”.)  Had we prevented the academic and social failures from having children from the beginning of the 20th century, we would not have ghettos in the USA in the 21st.  Instead, we have legally mandated equality… and Newark, Gary and Detroit.

    Keep baaa-ing with the herd.  The authors of the orthodoxy need your support.

  73. Softly Bob says:

    Everything I said went completely over your head, I can see that now. I’ve already mentioned that gullible idiots can be fooled into not believing the evidence of their own eyes and ears (see my previous posts, the ones you haven’t read) and you’re still rambling on about scientists.
    You clearly are a buffoon. No, seriously you really,really are.

  74. Saxon Warrior says:

    Everything I said went completely over your head, I can see that now. I’ve already mentioned that gullible idiots can be fooled into not believing the evidence of their own eyes and ears (see my previous posts, the ones you haven’t read) and you’re still rambling on about scientists.
    You clearly are a buffoon. No, seriously you really,really are.

  75. Mr. Rational says:

    Everything I said went completely over your head

    Um, no.  You started with a bunch of name-calling and listed a bunch of examples, but then you tried to do guilt by association when I’m not associated with any of the things you listed.  I have an extensive comment history on SBPDL and AWD under this name, and you won’t find a single pro-Obama or pro-Islam comment.  Nor have I ever called myself a “liberal”.  So what WERE you talking about?

    Oh, right:  you were defending the current “conservative” orthodoxy from an analysis of its origins and errors.  The problem is, that orthodoxy has undergone radical changes in the last 50 years or so, and among the changes are bits of ideology which sacrifice the very people who made America possible.  There’s nothing the least bit “conservative” about that.  All you have to do to be thrown out of “conservative” circles is to say things that liberals consider “racist” (among other things).  “Conservatism” lets the left control its language and define the limits of what’s considered legitimate, and you’re on board with that too; anything to avoid being called “r—st” or “N–i”.

    As for climate change, we’ve already got increases in flooding that come from heat-driven sea-level rise.  Annapolis and Baltimore have had flooding events go up by a factor of 10.  This isn’t climate models, this is established fact.

    It’s simple to list major truths that left-orthodoxy flatly denies or deflects with ridiculous excuses.  Chief among these are facts about minority criminality and social dysfunction.  But right-orthodoxy is not pure in this area either.  If you really cared about this country in general and your grandchildren in particular, you’d spend some time digging into those errors and see who they benefit.  If it isn’t you, it’s your job to blow the whistle.

    But you can’t do that and remain a member of the herd.  Baaaaa!

  76. Mr. Rational says:

    Everything I said went completely over your head

    Um, no.  You started with a bunch of name-calling and listed a bunch of examples, but then you tried to do guilt by association when I’m not associated with any of the things you listed.  I have an extensive comment history on SBPDL and AWD under this name, and you won’t find a single pro-Obama or pro-Islam comment.  Nor have I ever called myself a “liberal”.  So what WERE you talking about?

    Oh, right:  you were defending the current “conservative” orthodoxy from an analysis of its origins and errors.  The problem is, that orthodoxy has undergone radical changes in the last 50 years or so, and among the changes are bits of ideology which sacrifice the very people who made America possible.  There’s nothing the least bit “conservative” about that.  All you have to do to be thrown out of “conservative” circles is to say things that liberals consider “racist” (among other things).  “Conservatism” lets the left control its language and define the limits of what’s considered legitimate, and you’re on board with that too; anything to avoid being called “r—st” or “N–i”.

    As for climate change, we’ve already got increases in flooding that come from heat-driven sea-level rise.  Annapolis and Baltimore have had flooding events go up by a factor of 10.  This isn’t climate models, this is established fact.

    It’s simple to list major truths that left-orthodoxy flatly denies or deflects with ridiculous excuses.  Chief among these are facts about minority criminality and social dysfunction.  But right-orthodoxy is not pure in this area either.  If you really cared about this country in general and your grandchildren in particular, you’d spend some time digging into those errors and see who they benefit.  If it isn’t you, it’s your job to blow the whistle.

    But you can’t do that and remain a member of the herd.  Baaaaa!

  77. Softly Bob says:

    We’re talking about man-made Global Warming and how it is a complete hoax and you’re still rabbiting on about other crap. But you keep on living among the fairies if you wish. Only the gullible and mentally retarded would believe in such climate change junk.
    I’m not really interested in minority criminality and social dysfunction either. Save it for another thread where it’s er….. relevant.
    As for Conservatism letting the Left control its language. Er yeah, sure…. Mr. Loopy.
    Oh yes and finally, I’m a member of the herd because I’m really down with this majority-believed Global Warming hoax. Yes I’m a member of the minority herd obviously……
    For the last time, “is there something wrong with you?”

  78. Saxon Warrior says:

    We’re talking about man-made Global Warming and how it is a complete hoax and you’re still rabbiting on about other crap. But you keep on living among the fairies if you wish. Only the gullible and mentally retarded would believe in such climate change junk.
    I’m not really interested in minority criminality and social dysfunction either. Save it for another thread where it’s er….. relevant.
    As for Conservatism letting the Left control its language. Er yeah, sure…. Mr. Loopy.
    Oh yes and finally, I’m a member of the herd because I’m really down with this majority-believed Global Warming hoax. Yes I’m a member of the minority herd obviously……
    For the last time, “is there something wrong with you?”

  79. Zachriel says:

    DrSamHerman: Not looking at that graph.

    You’re not very good at analogies. In any case, it’s clear there has been a warming trend. Ocean heat content is also increasing, so regardless of how the heat is being redistributed, the overall heat content has increased.

  80. Zachriel says:

    DrSamHerman: Not looking at that graph.

    You’re not very good at analogies. In any case, it’s clear there has been a warming trend. Ocean heat content is also increasing, so regardless of how the heat is being redistributed, the overall heat content has increased.

  81. DrSamHerman says:

    You’re not very good at reading comprehension. You wanted an example from medical practice, and that is it. If you fail to grasp the simple concept that a human body (with a lower life span) goes through cyclical temperature variations that are natural in origin (diurnal variation, age-related conditions, multiple factors) then it stands to reason that the cyclical nature of that graph (which I notice is conveniently truncated to exclude prior data) would say the earth does the same, just on a scale that is geological and not biological. You have to widen the scale to see the cyclic nature.

    Try harder next time. You are like most AGW religious zealots–you can’t think past the pap fed to you.

  82. DrSamHerman - Dr Deplorado says:

    You’re not very good at reading comprehension. You wanted an example from medical practice, and that is it. If you fail to grasp the simple concept that a human body (with a lower life span) goes through cyclical temperature variations that are natural in origin (diurnal variation, age-related conditions, multiple factors) then it stands to reason that the cyclical nature of that graph (which I notice is conveniently truncated to exclude prior data) would say the earth does the same, just on a scale that is geological and not biological. You have to widen the scale to see the cyclic nature.

    Try harder next time. You are like most AGW religious zealots–you can’t think past the pap fed to you.

  83. Mr. Rational says:

    We’re talking about man-made Global Warming and how it is a complete hoax

    A 10x increase in flooding events is no “hoax”, and it’s just the beginning.  You remind me of “progressives” claiming that Blacks don’t commit crime at grossly disproportionate rates.  It’s the same flat denial of reality at work.

    I’m not really interested in minority criminality and social dysfunction either.

    Then stop mirroring the reality-denial field that liberals use on it.  Pay attention to facts.

    The Larsen A and B ice shelves have vanished.  The entire West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) looks to be on an irreversible course to total collapse (several METERS of sea-level rise from that alone).  Greenland’s glaciers have retreated and their flows accelerated.  Most glaciers worldwide are in retreat.  Glacier National Park has gone from 150 glaciers over 25 acres in 1850 to just 25 today, and is on course to lose most of the remainder by 2030.

    Earth’s stratosphere is cooling while the surface is warming.  To get information on this, researchers are measuring stuff that you didn’t even know existed (that’s from 2009, BTW).  What they’re measuring is that more heat is radiating downward from the atmosphere than ever before (that’s the greenhouse effect).  We’ve got measurements of this going back to the pioneering work of John Tyndall in the 1860’s, a century and a half ago.

    All this work is published.  No hoax this big can possibly be kept from blowing up; conspiracies have to be kept small.  What you have is false claims of “hoaxes”, just like false claims of “racism” in the Trayvon Martin case.  It’s the same dynamic at work, protecting ideology from the truth.

    And what’s it to you if it’s true, anyway?  You go from “we don’t need to go nuclear” to “okay, we DO need to go nuclear so let’s do it.”  The Greenie left immediately loses the debate because nobody wants to go back to oxcarts and gathering sticks for firewood.  It means YOU WIN!  Why throw that away?

    You’re throwing it away because the coal, oil and gas interests are writing the orthodoxy for both sides.  They want a stalemate because it secures the status quo.

    I am with the get-off-carbon program.  I will drive about 50 miles in my 5-passenger car today.  It is charging up now, and I will charge it again before I go home.  I hope not to burn any gasoline today.  Friday I covered about 25 miles on a quart, plus power from the wall socket (it is equivalent to gasoline at about 75 cents a gallon).  If that power came from uranium the carbon issue would simply disappear.

    Why not call the Greenie bluff?  You’re guaranteed to win.

  84. Mr. Rational says:

    We’re talking about man-made Global Warming and how it is a complete hoax

    A 10x increase in flooding events is no “hoax”, and it’s just the beginning.  You remind me of “progressives” claiming that Blacks don’t commit crime at grossly disproportionate rates.  It’s the same flat denial of reality at work.

    I’m not really interested in minority criminality and social dysfunction either.

    Then stop mirroring the reality-denial field that liberals use on it.  Pay attention to facts.

    The Larsen A and B ice shelves have vanished.  The entire West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) looks to be on an irreversible course to total collapse (several METERS of sea-level rise from that alone).  Greenland’s glaciers have retreated and their flows accelerated.  Most glaciers worldwide are in retreat.  Glacier National Park has gone from 150 glaciers over 25 acres in 1850 to just 25 today, and is on course to lose most of the remainder by 2030.

    Earth’s stratosphere is cooling while the surface is warming.  To get information on this, researchers are measuring stuff that you didn’t even know existed (that’s from 2009, BTW).  What they’re measuring is that more heat is radiating downward from the atmosphere than ever before (that’s the greenhouse effect).  We’ve got measurements of this going back to the pioneering work of John Tyndall in the 1860’s, a century and a half ago.

    All this work is published.  No hoax this big can possibly be kept from blowing up; conspiracies have to be kept small.  What you have is false claims of “hoaxes”, just like false claims of “racism” in the Trayvon Martin case.  It’s the same dynamic at work, protecting ideology from the truth.

    And what’s it to you if it’s true, anyway?  You go from “we don’t need to go nuclear” to “okay, we DO need to go nuclear so let’s do it.”  The Greenie left immediately loses the debate because nobody wants to go back to oxcarts and gathering sticks for firewood.  It means YOU WIN!  Why throw that away?

    You’re throwing it away because the coal, oil and gas interests are writing the orthodoxy for both sides.  They want a stalemate because it secures the status quo.

    I am with the get-off-carbon program.  I will drive about 50 miles in my 5-passenger car today.  It is charging up now, and I will charge it again before I go home.  I hope not to burn any gasoline today.  Friday I covered about 25 miles on a quart, plus power from the wall socket (it is equivalent to gasoline at about 75 cents a gallon).  If that power came from uranium the carbon issue would simply disappear.

    Why not call the Greenie bluff?  You’re guaranteed to win.

  85. Softly Bob says:

    I’m quite happy to use nuclear power, I never once said that I wasn’t so stop using straw man arguments. There’s a lot of fiction in that head of yours.
    I also find it amusing how you keep calling me one of the herd when you yourself are one of the herd – the herd that believes in this climate hoax. Deniers like myself are actually in the minority, so how that puts me in a herd category, I’ve no idea.
    You clearly are irrational!
    Even if Global Warming is true there is no evidence that it is man made, so whether we go completely nuclear or not is completely irrelevant to the discussion. The Global Warming myth is a hoax designed by the Left. Not one of their forecasts has come true – not one- yet idiots like you keep on believing these false prophets. If somebody told you that the sky was made of purple polka-dots you’d probably believe it.
    As I have said I’m not interested in all your pseudo-scientific claptrap, yet you insist on keep throwing it at me. Your arguments have been refuted by others on here but you still insist on parroting on don’t you?

  86. Saxon Warrior says:

    I’m quite happy to use nuclear power, I never once said that I wasn’t so stop using straw man arguments. There’s a lot of fiction in that head of yours.
    I also find it amusing how you keep calling me one of the herd when you yourself are one of the herd – the herd that believes in this climate hoax. Deniers like myself are actually in the minority, so how that puts me in a herd category, I’ve no idea.
    You clearly are irrational!
    Even if Global Warming is true there is no evidence that it is man made, so whether we go completely nuclear or not is completely irrelevant to the discussion. The Global Warming myth is a hoax designed by the Left. Not one of their forecasts has come true – not one- yet idiots like you keep on believing these false prophets. If somebody told you that the sky was made of purple polka-dots you’d probably believe it.
    As I have said I’m not interested in all your pseudo-scientific claptrap, yet you insist on keep throwing it at me. Your arguments have been refuted by others on here but you still insist on parroting on don’t you?

  87. Zachriel says:

    Regardless of your inability to read a clear trend, climate science is not based on simple trends, but is a causative model. The fact is the Earth’s surface (atmosphere, cryosphere, hydrosphere) is absorbing more heat than it is emitting, and that means the surface is warming.

  88. Zachriel says:

    Regardless of your inability to read a clear trend, climate science is not based on simple trends, but is a causative model. The fact is the Earth’s surface (atmosphere, cryosphere, hydrosphere) is absorbing more heat than it is emitting, and that means the surface is warming.

  89. DrSamHerman says:

    I saw a very clear cyclical trend, and thus your inability to produce a valid reason for an 18 year gap. You can try to dance around the issue all you want, but it’s now coming up on almost two decades where the data just do not fit the suppositions imposed on it.

  90. DrSamHerman - Dr Deplorado says:

    I saw a very clear cyclical trend, and thus your inability to produce a valid reason for an 18 year gap. You can try to dance around the issue all you want, but it’s now coming up on almost two decades where the data just do not fit the suppositions imposed on it.

  91. Zachriel says:

    DrSamHerman: a valid reason for an 18 year gap

    The oceans have been soaking up the excess heat.

    http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/heat_content700m2000myr.png

  92. Zachriel says:

    DrSamHerman: a valid reason for an 18 year gap

    The oceans have been soaking up the excess heat.

    http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/heat_content700m2000myr.png

  93. Mr. Rational says:

    I’m quite happy to use nuclear power

    Nobody said you weren’t.  I said you weren’t willing to use it to call the Green bluff on carbon emissions.

    Either you are really obtuse, or you are really good at staying on-message.

    I also find it amusing how you keep calling me one of the herd when you yourself are one of the herd

    Ah, finally down to “I know you are but what am I?”.  Sorry, but wrong again.  I’m with the climate scientists, who are increasingly pro-nuclear when the leftist herd is anti-nuclear.  I’m also a strong proponent of the truth of human biological diversity (HBD), which is so abhorrent to the equalitarians of the left that it gives them the vapors (also a surprising number outside the left-herd too, such as orthodox Libertarians, some so-called conservatives and even orthodox Objectivists).

    I don’t have a herd.  I’m the cougar, picking off sheep one by one.  Only instead of eating them, I show them the superior honesty of being a cougar.

    Being a sheep means ignoring any evidence that challenges the herd orthodoxy.  In your case, that evidence includes the disappearing glaciers and ice shelves.  You didn’t even mention them despite two direct challenges (the first 5 days ago).  It’s denied by your orthodoxy, so to you they don’t exist… or any mention of them takes you off-message that warming is a hoax, which means you lose.  That is one issue you dare not address.

    Just keep letting those contradictions and evasions pile up, eventually the weight will crush the denialist side.

  94. Mr. Rational says:

    I’m quite happy to use nuclear power

    Nobody said you weren’t.  I said you weren’t willing to use it to call the Green bluff on carbon emissions.

    Either you are really obtuse, or you are really good at staying on-message.

    I also find it amusing how you keep calling me one of the herd when you yourself are one of the herd

    Ah, finally down to “I know you are but what am I?”.  Sorry, but wrong again.  I’m with the climate scientists, who are increasingly pro-nuclear when the leftist herd is anti-nuclear.  I’m also a strong proponent of the truth of human biological diversity (HBD), which is so abhorrent to the equalitarians of the left that it gives them the vapors (also a surprising number outside the left-herd too, such as orthodox Libertarians, some so-called conservatives and even orthodox Objectivists).

    I don’t have a herd.  I’m the cougar, picking off sheep one by one.  Only instead of eating them, I show them the superior honesty of being a cougar.

    Being a sheep means ignoring any evidence that challenges the herd orthodoxy.  In your case, that evidence includes the disappearing glaciers and ice shelves.  You didn’t even mention them despite two direct challenges (the first 5 days ago).  It’s denied by your orthodoxy, so to you they don’t exist… or any mention of them takes you off-message that warming is a hoax, which means you lose.  That is one issue you dare not address.

    Just keep letting those contradictions and evasions pile up, eventually the weight will crush the denialist side.

  95. Softly Bob says:

    No the weight won’t crush down on the denialist’s side. THERE IS NO MAN-MADE CLIMATE CHANGE – get it?
    I don’t care about ice shelves. I don’t care if the temperatures rise. I don’t care if polar bears have less ice.
    THERE IS ZERO EVIDENCE THAT IT IS MAN-MADE.
    THERE IS NO REASON FOR US TO PUT OUR HANDS IN OUR POCKETS AND PAY TAX FOR ALL THIS HOCUS-POCUS.
    You talked about the temperatures rising 1.5 degrees in the last 250 years and were rebuked when you were told that data started in correspondence with the mini-ice age. All your other arguments were refuted.
    Remember they told us all sorts of things were predicted to happen by the year 2012 but they DIDN’T HAPPEN. They even changed the name from Global Warming to Climate Change. Any village idiot could see through the hoax by then. Well obviously not all village idiots. Even Al Gore himself recently bought seafront property, a bad business decision surely for a man who is worried about rising sea levels.
    If they don’t even believe their own lies…… why should anybody else?
    So blab on about nuclear power, sheep etc. as much as you like.
    The truth is – the Green millionaires saw people like you coming a mile away.
    Guess what?
    I also have a bridge in London that’s for sale if you’d like to buy it!

  96. Saxon Warrior says:

    No the weight won’t crush down on the denialist’s side. THERE IS NO MAN-MADE CLIMATE CHANGE – get it?
    I don’t care about ice shelves. I don’t care if the temperatures rise. I don’t care if polar bears have less ice.
    THERE IS ZERO EVIDENCE THAT IT IS MAN-MADE.
    THERE IS NO REASON FOR US TO PUT OUR HANDS IN OUR POCKETS AND PAY TAX FOR ALL THIS HOCUS-POCUS.
    You talked about the temperatures rising 1.5 degrees in the last 250 years and were rebuked when you were told that data started in correspondence with the mini-ice age. All your other arguments were refuted.
    Remember they told us all sorts of things were predicted to happen by the year 2012 but they DIDN’T HAPPEN. They even changed the name from Global Warming to Climate Change. Any village idiot could see through the hoax by then. Well obviously not all village idiots. Even Al Gore himself recently bought seafront property, a bad business decision surely for a man who is worried about rising sea levels.
    If they don’t even believe their own lies…… why should anybody else?
    So blab on about nuclear power, sheep etc. as much as you like.
    The truth is – the Green millionaires saw people like you coming a mile away.
    Guess what?
    I also have a bridge in London that’s for sale if you’d like to buy it!

  97. Zachriel says:

    DrSamHermann: I saw a very clear cyclical trend

    Energy is conserved. The surface is absorbing more energy than it is emitting. That means its overall heat content is increasing, mostly by the oceans.

  98. Zachriel says:

    DrSamHermann: I saw a very clear cyclical trend

    Energy is conserved. The surface is absorbing more energy than it is emitting. That means its overall heat content is increasing, mostly by the oceans.

  99. Mr. Rational says:

    I don’t care about ice shelves. I don’t care if the temperatures rise. I don’t care if polar bears have less ice.

    You don’t care that the stratosphere is cooling while the surface is warming.  You don’t care that the atmosphere’s CO2 content rises by about 2.5 ppmv per year.  You don’t care that Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, California, etc. may go into drought conditions with no farming or ranching possible for a time on the scale of human civilizations.

    Quick math lesson:  The mass of the atmosphere is about (101300 N/m²/9.81 m/sec²)= 10.3 metric tons per square meter.  Multiplied by the 6.38 million meter radius of the earth squared, times 4 pi, yields 5.27 times ten-to-the-fifteenth tons of air total.  The average molecular weight of air is about 29 vs. 44 for CO2, so 1 ppm of CO2 by volume is (5.27e9 * 44/29) = 8 billion tons.  2.5 ppmv is 20 billion tons, so about half of the annual 40 billion tons of human CO2 emissions is going somewhere else than the atmosphere.

    THERE IS NO MAN-MADE CLIMATE CHANGE – get it?

    You don’t know anything about what’s happening or where all that carbon is going, but you’re ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN it’s not doing anything to the climate.

    <golf clap>  Wonderful statement of faith, my friend.  You are right up there with the fundamentalists who are certain that evolution is a fraud, the gay-rights activists who are certain that AIDS is a threat to everyone, and the equalitarians who are certain that human biodiversity is a racist lie.

    You talked about the temperatures rising 1.5 degrees in the last 250 years and were rebuked when you were told that data started in correspondence with the mini-ice age. All your other arguments were refuted.

    The LIA ended around 1850.  However, about half of the warming since then (roughly 0.8°C) has occurred since 1960.  We’ve seen no increase in solar activity that would account for that (it’s actually been on a downswing lately).

    Richard Muller, co-founder of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, was a climate skeptic when he began.  But as of 2012 he was quoted as saying “Call me a converted skeptic…. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.”

    The world eventually crushes major misconceptions.  You’ll be crushed sooner rather than later.  Enjoy your certainty while it lasts.

  100. Mr. Rational says:

    I don’t care about ice shelves. I don’t care if the temperatures rise. I don’t care if polar bears have less ice.

    You don’t care that the stratosphere is cooling while the surface is warming.  You don’t care that the atmosphere’s CO2 content rises by about 2.5 ppmv per year.  You don’t care that Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, California, etc. may go into drought conditions with no farming or ranching possible for a time on the scale of human civilizations.

    Quick math lesson:  The mass of the atmosphere is about (101300 N/m²/9.81 m/sec²)= 10.3 metric tons per square meter.  Multiplied by the 6.38 million meter radius of the earth squared, times 4 pi, yields 5.27 times ten-to-the-fifteenth tons of air total.  The average molecular weight of air is about 29 vs. 44 for CO2, so 1 ppm of CO2 by volume is (5.27e9 * 44/29) = 8 billion tons.  2.5 ppmv is 20 billion tons, so about half of the annual 40 billion tons of human CO2 emissions is going somewhere else than the atmosphere.

    THERE IS NO MAN-MADE CLIMATE CHANGE – get it?

    You don’t know anything about what’s happening or where all that carbon is going, but you’re ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN it’s not doing anything to the climate.

    <golf clap>  Wonderful statement of faith, my friend.  You are right up there with the fundamentalists who are certain that evolution is a fraud, the gay-rights activists who are certain that AIDS is a threat to everyone, and the equalitarians who are certain that human biodiversity is a racist lie.

    You talked about the temperatures rising 1.5 degrees in the last 250 years and were rebuked when you were told that data started in correspondence with the mini-ice age. All your other arguments were refuted.

    The LIA ended around 1850.  However, about half of the warming since then (roughly 0.8°C) has occurred since 1960.  We’ve seen no increase in solar activity that would account for that (it’s actually been on a downswing lately).

    Richard Muller, co-founder of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, was a climate skeptic when he began.  But as of 2012 he was quoted as saying “Call me a converted skeptic…. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.”

    The world eventually crushes major misconceptions.  You’ll be crushed sooner rather than later.  Enjoy your certainty while it lasts.

  101. Softly Bob says:

    I don’t need maths or science lessons.
    I’m a scientist – get it?
    HAVE I NOT ALREADY TOLD YOU TOLD YOU THAT I’M SICK OF YOU THROWING STATS, SCIENCE AND MATHS AT ME?
    If I wanted to discuss science I’d go to a science forum.
    THERE IS NO PROOF THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS MAN-MADE.
    Even if it is there’s nothing we can do about it while China and other industrial nations are doing as they wish so why should we pay for it?
    I don’t want to be taxed by Leftist idiots to pay for Windmills that don’t work and to prop up their lavish lifestyles. What’s the worse that will happen if Global Warming is true? We’ll adapt. That’s what.
    There are far more problems in this World such as Islamization, wars and Leftist politics.
    But man-made Global Warming isn’t true anyway. IT’S A HOAX!
    PLEASE STOP BLABBING ON ABOUT SCIENCE. I’M NOT INTERESTED. I GET ENOUGH OF THAT AT WORK.
    My God, you’re tiresome and stupid! Do you never listen?
    Shut up. Stop preaching your Leftist crap at me.

  102. Saxon Warrior says:

    I don’t need maths or science lessons.
    I’m a scientist – get it?
    HAVE I NOT ALREADY TOLD YOU TOLD YOU THAT I’M SICK OF YOU THROWING STATS, SCIENCE AND MATHS AT ME?
    If I wanted to discuss science I’d go to a science forum.
    THERE IS NO PROOF THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS MAN-MADE.
    Even if it is there’s nothing we can do about it while China and other industrial nations are doing as they wish so why should we pay for it?
    I don’t want to be taxed by Leftist idiots to pay for Windmills that don’t work and to prop up their lavish lifestyles. What’s the worse that will happen if Global Warming is true? We’ll adapt. That’s what.
    There are far more problems in this World such as Islamization, wars and Leftist politics.
    But man-made Global Warming isn’t true anyway. IT’S A HOAX!
    PLEASE STOP BLABBING ON ABOUT SCIENCE. I’M NOT INTERESTED. I GET ENOUGH OF THAT AT WORK.
    My God, you’re tiresome and stupid! Do you never listen?
    Shut up. Stop preaching your Leftist crap at me.

  103. Mr. Rational says:

    HAVE I NOT ALREADY TOLD YOU TOLD YOU THAT I’M SICK OF YOU THROWING STATS, SCIENCE AND MATHS AT ME?

    Don’t you have any to throw back?  I guess that would be a problem for you.

    I don’t need maths or science lessons.
    I’m a scientist – get it?

    Oh, you’re a scientist now?  (I have a STEM degree, but I don’t claim to be a scientist.)

    Since you’re so completely certain that anthropogenic climate change is a hoax AND you’re a scientist, you must have your finger on the data.  You must have reviewed many papers of the working climate scientists you claim are hoaxers.  You must have submitted reams of evidence of academic misconduct to the institutions where these people are employed.  There must be a bunch of your letters in the journals like Nature showing just how the hoaxers cooked their data.  You must have a list of scalps you’ve collected, people who’ve been fired and are effectively blackballed from academia like Michael Bellesiles and Ward Churchill.

    Where are they?

    If I wanted to discuss science I’d go to a science forum.

    It’s your job and you DON’T want to talk about it?  That’s not like any scientist I’ve ever met.

    THERE IS NO PROOF THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS MAN-MADE.

    Ah, we’ve gone from “it’s a hoax” to “it’s real but humans aren’t doing it”.  Baby steps.

    Even if it is there’s nothing we can do about it while China and other industrial nations are doing as they wish so why should we pay for it?

    That, my friend, is an issue of policy and politics rather than science.

    In the 1960’s, nuclear plants were cheaper to build and much cheaper to run than coal plants.  New policy turned that upside-down:  the brand-new NRC escalated costs without any regard for cost-effectiveness or overall safety.

    The NRC policy was established with the stroke of a pen.  It can be changed the same way.

    There are a bunch of nuclear technologies in the starting gate, just waiting to be turned loose.  One near-term technology is supercritical water reactors, targeting $900/kW plant cost.  That happens to be similar to the cost of combined-cycle natural gas plants, only with fuel costing around a tenth as much.  Oh, also no air emissions of any kind.

    When Ontario restarted its last refurbished CANDU plant and shut down its remaining coal-fired generator, Toronto suddenly had zero smog action days.  Would you pay something for that, especially if it meant lower prices later?

    Would you be willing to stand up and advocate for a $900/kW nuclear plant with 90% capacity factor instead of a $1500/kW wind farm with 35% capacity factor?  I’ll stand up for Vogtle even at the current price tag because I know that uranium isn’t going to have 5:1 price swings like natural gas has lately.

    The USA invented nuclear power.  If we so desired, we could do it better and cheaper than anyone.  We could use it to undercut the wanna-bes in China and India.  We don’t because our coal, oil and gas interests have captured government.  If you cared about bringing power and prestige back to America, you’d be all about making those also-rans look like the intellectual and innovative backwaters they truly are—by unleashing US ingenuity.

    There are far more problems in this World such as Islamization, wars and Leftist politics.

    Islamization:  fed by oil money.  Electrify your car to attack it.
    Wars:  fought over scarce resources, especially oil.  Same solution.
    Leftist politics:  you’ve got a golden opportunity to drive a wedge between the Marxists and real environmentalists, and you’re just going to ignore it?  WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU?!

    Stop preaching your Leftist crap at me.

    If you think I’m anything like a Lefist, there is something seriously wrong with your brain.

  104. Mr. Rational says:

    HAVE I NOT ALREADY TOLD YOU TOLD YOU THAT I’M SICK OF YOU THROWING STATS, SCIENCE AND MATHS AT ME?

    Don’t you have any to throw back?  I guess that would be a problem for you.

    I don’t need maths or science lessons.
    I’m a scientist – get it?

    Oh, you’re a scientist now?  (I have a STEM degree, but I don’t claim to be a scientist.)

    Since you’re so completely certain that anthropogenic climate change is a hoax AND you’re a scientist, you must have your finger on the data.  You must have reviewed many papers of the working climate scientists you claim are hoaxers.  You must have submitted reams of evidence of academic misconduct to the institutions where these people are employed.  There must be a bunch of your letters in the journals like Nature showing just how the hoaxers cooked their data.  You must have a list of scalps you’ve collected, people who’ve been fired and are effectively blackballed from academia like Michael Bellesiles and Ward Churchill.

    Where are they?

    If I wanted to discuss science I’d go to a science forum.

    It’s your job and you DON’T want to talk about it?  That’s not like any scientist I’ve ever met.

    THERE IS NO PROOF THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS MAN-MADE.

    Ah, we’ve gone from “it’s a hoax” to “it’s real but humans aren’t doing it”.  Baby steps.

    Even if it is there’s nothing we can do about it while China and other industrial nations are doing as they wish so why should we pay for it?

    That, my friend, is an issue of policy and politics rather than science.

    In the 1960’s, nuclear plants were cheaper to build and much cheaper to run than coal plants.  New policy turned that upside-down:  the brand-new NRC escalated costs without any regard for cost-effectiveness or overall safety.

    The NRC policy was established with the stroke of a pen.  It can be changed the same way.

    There are a bunch of nuclear technologies in the starting gate, just waiting to be turned loose.  One near-term technology is supercritical water reactors, targeting $900/kW plant cost.  That happens to be similar to the cost of combined-cycle natural gas plants, only with fuel costing around a tenth as much.  Oh, also no air emissions of any kind.

    When Ontario restarted its last refurbished CANDU plant and shut down its remaining coal-fired generator, Toronto suddenly had zero smog action days.  Would you pay something for that, especially if it meant lower prices later?

    Would you be willing to stand up and advocate for a $900/kW nuclear plant with 90% capacity factor instead of a $1500/kW wind farm with 35% capacity factor?  I’ll stand up for Vogtle even at the current price tag because I know that uranium isn’t going to have 5:1 price swings like natural gas has lately.

    The USA invented nuclear power.  If we so desired, we could do it better and cheaper than anyone.  We could use it to undercut the wanna-bes in China and India.  We don’t because our coal, oil and gas interests have captured government.  If you cared about bringing power and prestige back to America, you’d be all about making those also-rans look like the intellectual and innovative backwaters they truly are—by unleashing US ingenuity.

    There are far more problems in this World such as Islamization, wars and Leftist politics.

    Islamization:  fed by oil money.  Electrify your car to attack it.
    Wars:  fought over scarce resources, especially oil.  Same solution.
    Leftist politics:  you’ve got a golden opportunity to drive a wedge between the Marxists and real environmentalists, and you’re just going to ignore it?  WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU?!

    Stop preaching your Leftist crap at me.

    If you think I’m anything like a Lefist, there is something seriously wrong with your brain.


Alibi3col theme by Themocracy