 |
 |
 |
 |
#159451 - 07/25/05 09:17 AM
Re: There Is NO Man-Made Global Warming
|
aaahz
Member
Registered: 07/15/01
Posts: 1265
Loc: CORYDON,IN
|
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/200
------------------------------------------------
Ice ages linked to galactic position
Study finds Earth may be cooled by movement through Milky Way's stellar clouds
It might sound preposterous, like astrology, to suggest that galactic events help determine when North America is or isn't buried under immense sheets of ice taller than skyscrapers. But new research suggests the coming and going of major ice ages might result partly from our solar system's passage through immense, snakelike clouds of exploding stars in the Milky Way galaxy.
Resembling the curved contrails of a whirling Fourth of July pinwheel, the Milky Way's spiral arms are clouds of stars rich in supernovas, or exploding stars. Supernovas emit showers of charged particles called cosmic rays.
Theorists have proposed that when our solar system passes through a spiral arm, the cosmic rays fall to Earth and knock electrons off atoms in the atmosphere, making them electrically charged, or ionized. Since opposite electrical charges attract each other, the positively charged ionized particles attract the negatively charged portion of water vapor, thus forming large droplets in the form of low-lying clouds.
In turn, the clouds cool the climate and trigger an ice age -- or so theorists suggest.
In that regard, researchers are finding correlations between the timing of Earth's ice ages and epochs when our solar system passed through galactic spiral arms.
The latest evidence appears in the June 20 issue of Astrophysical Journal. The article is the result of an unusual collaboration between an astronomer, Professor Douglas Gies of Georgia State University's Center for High Angular Resolution Astronomy, and a 16-year-old student at Grady High School in Atlanta, John Helsel. They report the results of their effort to determine how the sun has moved through the galaxy over the last half-billion years.
Difficult to map
By making a variety of assumptions about the rate of solar motion and the distribution of spiral arms in the galaxy -- which are difficult to map because galactic dust and foreground stars get in the way -- Gies and Helsel conclude that "the sun has traversed four spiral arms at times that appear to correspond well with long-duration cold periods on Earth."
"This," they continue, "supports the idea that extended exposure to the higher cosmic-ray flux associated with spiral arms can lead to increased cloud cover and long ice age epochs on Earth."
Gies and Helsel's article is the long-term result of a project that Helsel began working on "as a science fair project," Gies says. Gies, 50, is a neighbor of Helsel's. Gies had previously "developed a scheme to model the motion of some massive stars in the galaxy," and when Helsel approached him for guidance on the science fair project, their "conversation quickly focused on studying the sun's motion and encounters with spiral arms in the galaxy."
A veteran investigator of the galaxy-ice age hypothesis is astrophysicist and assistant professor Nir Shaviv, 33, of Racah Institute of Physics at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, who was previously a postdoctoral researcher at the California Institute of Technology. He has reanalyzed other scientists' previously published data on meteorites, which contain mildly radioactive isotopes -- fragments of atoms that were altered by cosmic-ray bombardments over millions of years while the meteorite was still hurtling through space. Based on the ages of different isotopes, he concludes the cosmic-ray bombardments were most intense during past epochs when Earth is believed to have passed through known spiral arms.
Another hypothesis
An alternate but related hypothesis of ice ages suggests that Earth occasionally passes through huge interstellar clouds of hydrogen gas. Such clouds are common in the spiral arms. According to this hypothesis, the interstellar clouds chemically soak up oxygen molecules in Earth's atmosphere, dramatically lowering the levels of the gas ozone.
Because ozone normally heats the atmosphere by trapping infrared radiation, a decline in ozone could cool Earth and "may trigger an ice age of relatively long duration," the astrophysicists Ararat Yeghikyan of Armenia and Hans Fahr of Germany proposed last year in the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics.
Many other factors involved
Galaxy-ice age theorists caution that their findings are only tentative and that many other factors also affect the timing of ice ages.
Still, their research probably has long-term practical value. That's because it could eventually help scientists to better distinguish between "normal" global climate change caused by Mother Nature's whims, such as the passage through a spiral arm, and climate change caused by humans -- such as drivers whose fossil-fuel-burning cars contribute to global warming.
Various versions of the galaxy-ice age hypothesis have kicked around the peripheries of the climatological and astronomical communities since at least the 1970s. Until recently, though, such hypotheses have received relatively scant scientific attention.
One reason for the neglect is that climate change is a dauntingly complex topic, one in which causes of any event -- even a simple rain shower in downtown San Francisco -- have innumerable short-term and long-term causes.
Another likely reason is that climatologists and astronomers are two scientific communities that rarely interact because their interests, background, training and funding sources are so different. Like most scientists, they hesitate to tread on unfamiliar intellectual turf for fear of making naive mistakes.
But climatologists and galactic astronomers have at least one thing in common: a grand sense of time. Both deal with events -- such as the comings and goings of ice ages and the slow spinning of the Milky Way -- that require them to use clocks timed in hundreds of thousands or millions of years. This gives them a common language of discourse, like a tourist to France who doesn't speak French but can crudely communicate with a chef via their common knowledge of French cuisine.
Relevant to ozone thesis
Although Yeghikyan and Fahr's proposed ozone explanation for certain ice ages differs from the cosmic-ray thesis, "I take the idea presented by Gies and Helsel as absolutely serious" and relevant to the ozone thesis, Fahr said in an e-mail. That's because passage through a spiral arm would increase Earth's exposure to the dense interstellar clouds, which are common within the arms, Fahr noted.
Other scientists view the galaxy-ice age hypothesis with cautious interest.
On the one hand, astrophysicist Erik Leitch of Caltech says the Gies and Helsel paper is "a suggestive result." It "is not unreasonable" to infer that the solar system, while passing through a spiral arm, would experience more intense cosmic ray bombardment because "the spiral arms seem to be the main sites of star formation in the galaxy, and the massive stars which become supernovae don't live long enough to travel very far out of the arms before they explode."
Therefore, Leitch said, "if you're in a spiral arm, you're much more likely to be near a massive star about to explode than if you're not" -- and hence, in turn, likelier to be exposed to intense bursts of cosmic rays.
On the other hand, Leitch warns, just because Earth occasionally passes through unusually intense showers of cosmic rays doesn't mean those showers will trigger ice ages. Regarding the Gies and Helsel paper, the proposed connection between cosmic-ray surges and cooling periods "seems more tenuous to me. ... Cosmic rays may 'seed' more cloud cover, but it's not clear to me that increased cloud cover will always lead to cooling."
According to some computer models, he explained, clouds can act not only like a sunshade but also like a blanket -- that is, clouds not only shield Earth from solar rays but also trap infrared heat radiated by the ground. It's anyone's guess whether the net effect of increased cloud cover would cool or warm the climate.
Shaviv disagrees: He is confident that low-altitude clouds "have a clear cooling effect."
Karen Aplin of the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in Oxford, England, who has studied links between atmospheric ionization and cloud formation, observed: "The climate system is extremely complex, with many feedbacks, and it is not at all straightforward to establish that these (links between cosmic rays and clouds) exist."
In a 2001 article co-written with R.G. Harrison, Aplin "showed that ions formed by cosmic rays can make small particles, condensation nuclei, in the atmosphere," she said. There's a catch, though: "These particles are too small to act as cloud condensation nuclei. ... To trigger cloud formation, they would have to live for quite a while and grow many times bigger."
Whether they do so -- and if so, how -- remains an open question.
"The assumption that an increase in cosmic rays causes an atmospheric response, which, in turn, causes ice ages is a large one, although it's not impossible," her colleague Harrison told The Chronicle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blueprint of the Milky Way galaxy
A sketch of our disc-shaped galaxy as seen from above. The "spiral arms" are vast, arc-shaped clouds of stars. As our sun orbits the galaxy, it occasionally passes through a spiral arm. Inside a spiral arm, some theorists believe, our solar system is exposed to unusually intense showers of cosmic rays that trigger cloud formation and, perhaps, ice ages on Earth. Our solar system is presently located in a small "spur" of clouds called the Orion Arm, located between two larger arms known as the Perseus and Carina-Sagittarius spiral arms.
E-mail Keay Davidson at kdavidson@sfchronicle.com.
_________________________
Rodney Harrison
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
#159452 - 07/27/05 06:13 AM
Re: There Is NO Man-Made Global Warming
|
Lazarus Starr
Moderator
Registered: 02/23/03
Posts: 1656
Loc: MO. USA
|
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1451458/posts
quote:
Global warming is always a hot topic in liberal media circles, where the political and scientific consensus is that global climate change is occurring, it is a danger, it is caused by mankind and we need to start doing something serious about reversing it.
For a little balance, we called up Fred Singer, aka "the godfather of global warming denial." An expert on global climate change and a pioneer in the development of rocket and satellite technology, he holds a Ph.D. in physics from Princeton and happens to be the guy who devised the basic instrument for measuring stratospheric ozone. Now president of the Science & Environmental Policy Project research group (sepp.org), his dozen books include "Hot Talk, Cold Science: Global Warming's Unfinished Debate." I talked to him by telephone from his offices in Arlington, Va.:
Q: Here’s a line from a recent Mother Jones article: "There is overwhelming scientific consensus that greenhouse gases emitted by human activity are causing global average temperatures to rise." Is that true? A: It’s completely unsupported by any observation, but it’s supported by computer climate models. In other words, the computer models would indicate this. The observations do not.
Q: What’s the best argument or proof that global warming is not happening? A: The best proof are data taken of atmospheric temperature by two completely different methods. One is from instruments carried in satellites that look down on the atmosphere. The other is from instruments carried in balloons that ascend through the atmosphere and take readings as they go up. These measurements show that the atmospheric warming, such as it is, is extremely slight -- a great deal less than any of the models predicts, and in conflict also with observations of the surface.
Q: An epic New Yorker series said unequivocally that the permafrost, the Arctic sea ice and the Greenland glaciers are all melting. Is that true and is it because of global warming? A: The Arctic temperatures have been now measured for a long time. They vary cyclically. The warmest years in the Arctic were around 1940. Then it cooled. And it’s warming again, but it hasn’t reached the levels of 1940. It will continue to oscillate. That’s the best prediction.
Q: What is the most dangerous untrue "fact" about global warming that’s out there in the media-sphere? A: The rise in sea level. Again, the observations show that sea level has risen in the last 18,000 years by about 400 feet and is continuing to rise at a uniform rate, and is not accelerating, irrespective of warming or cooling. In fact, sea level will continue to rise at a slow rate of 8 inches per century, as it has been for the last few thousand years.
Q: If you had a 12-year-old grandkid who was worried about global warming, what would you tell him? A: I would tell them that there are many more important problems in the world to worry about, such as diseases, pandemics, nuclear war and terrorism. The least important of these is global warming produced by humans, because it will be insignificant compared to natural fluctuations of climate.
Q: How did you become "the godfather of global warming denial"? A: That’s easy. Age. I organized my first conference on global warming in 1968. At that time I had no position. It was a conference called "The global effects of environmental pollution." At that time I remember some of the experts we had speaking thought the climate was going to warm and some thought it was going to cool. That was the situation.
Q: Climate is extremely complicated -- is that a true statement? A: Immensely complicated. Which is a reason why the models will never be able to adequately simulate the atmosphere. It’s just too complicated.
Q: Give me a sample of how complicated just one little thing can be. A: The most complicated thing about the atmosphere that the models cannot capture is clouds. First of all, clouds are small. The resolution of the computer models is about 200 miles; clouds are much smaller than that. Secondly, they don’t know when clouds form. They have to guess what humidity is necessary for a cloud to form. And of course, humidity is not the only factor. You have to have nuclei -- little particles -- on which the water vapor can condense to form droplets. They don’t know that either. And they don’t know at what point the cloud begins to rain out. And they don’t know at what point -- it goes on like this.
Q: Is this debate a scientific fight or a political fight? A: Both. I much support a scientific fight, because I’m pretty sure we’ll win that -- because the data support us; they don’t support the climate models. Basically it’s a fight of people who believe in data, or who believe in the atmosphere, versus people who believe in models.
Q: Is it not true that CO2 levels have gone up by about a third in the last 100 years? A: A little more than a third, yes. I accept that.
Q: Do you say that’s irrelevant? A: It’s relevant, but the effects cannot be clearly seen. The models predict huge effects from this, but we don’t see them.
Q: Why is it important that global warming be studied in a balanced, scientific, depoliticized way? A: It’s a scientific problem. The climate is something we live with, and we need to know what effect human activities are having on climate. I don’t deny that there’s some effect of human activities on climate. We need to learn how important they are.
Q: Why is it important that global warming be studied in a balanced, scientific, depoliticized way? A: It’s a scientific problem. The climate is something we live with and we need to know what effect human activities are having on climate. I don’t deny that there’s some affect of human activities on climate. Cities are warmer now than they used to be. We have changed forests into agricultural fields. That has some affect on climate. We irrigate much of the Earth. That affects climate. And so on. We are having some influence on climate, at least on a small scale. So we need to know these things. We need to how important they are.
Q: And global warming is something we should study but not get panicky about? A: The thing to keep in mind always is that the natural fluctuations of climate are very much larger than anything we can ascribe – so far – to any human activity. Much larger. We lived through a Little Ice Age just a few hundred years ago. During the Middle Ages the climate was much warmer than it is today. So the climate does change all the time. We need to understand the scientific reasons for natural climate change. Most of us now think it’s the sun that is the real driver of climate. It has something to do with sun spots, but the mechanism is not quite clear. That’s what’s being studied now.
-Laz
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#159453 - 08/12/05 07:59 AM
Re: There Is NO Man-Made Global Warming
|
Star*Man
Member
Registered: 07/13/01
Posts: 607
Loc: Lexington, KY
|
While I will try not to be insulted by being called stupid for even having an open mind and understanding that politics is driving both sides of this debate as it does with all things in America. Here is a story just out about errors detected by an independent study and may even sway some doubters. Although I don't think it will sway anyone who believes this is a vast left wing conspiracy to take america down.
Pay close attention to last paragraph. More to come I am sure.
False data is found ...doesn\'t support the big money side.
quote:
Satellite and weather-balloon research released Friday removes a last bastion of scientific doubt about global warming, researchers say.
Surface temperatures have shown small but steady increases since the 1970s, but the tropics had shown little atmospheric heating - and even some cooling. Now, after sleuthing reported in three papers released by the journal Science, revisions have been made to that atmospheric data.
Climate expert Ben Santer of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, lead author of one of the papers, says that those fairly steady measurements in the tropics have been a key argument "among people asking, 'Why should I believe this global warming hocus-pocus?' "
After examining the satellite data, collected since 1979 by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration weather satellites, Carl Mears and Frank Wentz of Remote Sensing Systems in Santa Rosa, Calif., found that the satellites had drifted in orbit, throwing off the timing of temperature measures. Essentially, the satellites were increasingly reporting nighttime temperatures as daytime ones, leading to a false cooling trend. The team also found a math error in the calculations.
"Our hats are off to (them). They found a real source of error," says atmospheric scientist John Christy of the University of Alabama at Huntsville, whose team produced the lower temperature estimates.
When examining the balloon data, Yale University researchers found that heating from tropical sunlight was skewing the temperatures reported by sensors, making nights look as warm as days.
Once corrected, the satellite and balloon temperatures align with other surface and upper-atmosphere measures, as well as climate change models, Santer says.
Global warming's pace over the past 30 years has actually been quite slow, a total increase of about 1 degree Fahrenheit. It is predicted to accelerate in this century.
Mark Herlong of the George C. Marshall Institute declined to comment. The group, financed by the petroleum industry, has used the data disparities to dispute the views of global-warming activists. In recent years, however, the institute has softened its public statements, acknowledging that the planet is indeed getting warmer but still maintaining that the change is happening so slowly that the impact is minimal.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#159454 - 09/15/05 12:03 PM
Re: There Is NO Man-Made Global Warming
|
Rick Donaldson
Time Traveler
Senior Investigator
Registered: 05/04/01
Posts: 6973
Loc: Colorado Springs
|
quote:
Rick.
You are wrong.
Global Warming is occuring and is unavoidable right now.
First of all, I am not wrong. I am 100% RIGHT.
Global warming is a MYTH. I have stated the case for this over and over. You're simply ignoring the FACTS.
quote:
The Planet will warm by about half a degree centigrade in the next 95 years or so if the trend continues.
Show me the data. Where is it? In which chart? Who determined this? Under what research grant was this information obtained?
You are making a blantant statement which is a lie. Show me the exact data from which you pulled this remark above.
quote:
This will have the devestating effect of almost an entire inch rise in global sea levels. Global beaches will be pushed back by almost 3-8 inches.
Oh really? Again I ask you to CITE YOUR SOURCES. Damn it.
You people simply are ignorant of how this works. If you're going to make some kind of statement I expect you to back it up. Call me wrong all you like, but you need to PROVE ME WRONG.
I've already proved YOU wrong. Now, show me precisely HOW I am WRONG. Make any statements you wish, but BACK IT UP WITH REAL, HARD DATA. Put up or shut up.
quote:
The further effects of this, ignored by you eco-villians will be that entire sea-fairing people will have to move an extra foot or so to toss their nets into the sea
Eco-Villian? Shut up you Eco-Nazi.  Two can play that game.
Show me ONE PIECE OF DATA that isn't on one of the damned sites screaming about global warming. Show me ONE PIECE of FACTUAL data.
quote:
One foot movement for half a million people per hour means that almost half a billion man hours will have to be used deal with this issue per day. The American Capitalist pigs should pay for this.
American Capitalist pigs?
SOOOOOOO we get to the MEAT of your argument then. That Americans are at fault. Well, why the **** didn't you say so in the first place? Why in God's name do we suffer those pigs to live?
Same reason we suffer the leftist-commie-pinko-fascist-****birds to whine about a nonexistent problem.
Apparently Mal, you've converted to those things (LOL).
All joking aside.
I'm really, honestly awaiting someone to really show me how I am wrong.
quote:
Study finds Earth may be cooled by movement through Milky Way's stellar clouds
This is a VERY LONG standing theory, which has YET to be proved actually.
quote:
While I will try not to be insulted by being called stupid for even having an open mind and understanding that politics is driving both sides of this debate as it does with all things in America.
Don't be "stupid", the only politics driving this "issue" is LEFTIST, anti-Capitalist motivation. Every single individual claiming "facts" and screaming "Global Warming" is connected directly or indirectly with the leftist movement in most countries. There is a "Green" leaning contingent which screamed the LOUDEST about the Kyoto Accords, which were nothing more than a Leftist/Anti_Capitalist movement obfuscated by fakery, misplaced and misstudied chart data which was WRONG and was a GLITCH on ONE chart. These people PUSHED and PUSHED to shut down the US in some way, ANY way.
Even Russia at the end said it was a lot of NONSENSE (please read the WHOLE thread before you try to tell me I'm wrong).
quote:
Mark Herlong of the George C. Marshall Institute declined to comment. The group, financed by the petroleum industry, has used the data disparities to dispute the views of global-warming activists. In recent years, however, the institute has softened its public statements, acknowledging that the planet is indeed getting warmer but still maintaining that the change is happening so slowly that the impact is minimal.
yeah, pay REAL close attention to the last paragraph... let me quote something for you.
quote:
financed by the petroleum industry
And.. precisely WHICH "petroleum" groups "financed" this "study"?
See this is nothing more than POLITICS. Let's make a statement, lie about it, and the blame it on the "bad guy" (which happens in this case to be Big Business, Big Petrol Guys, etc) because that is WHO the Greenies want to GET RID OF.
Who started this mess again? The GREENIES.
Damn people
_________________________
Ad astra per aspera
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#159455 - 09/16/05 01:13 PM
Re: There Is NO Man-Made Global Warming
|
ExpandedMInd
Member
Registered: 03/22/02
Posts: 1633
Loc: Denver, Colorado
|
Rick: No need to worry, according to these "experts" it's too late anyway:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_technology/article312997.ece
Global warming 'past the point of no return'
By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Published: 16 September 2005
A record loss of sea ice in the Arctic this summer has convinced scientists that the northern hemisphere may have crossed a critical threshold beyond which the climate may never recover. Scientists fear that the Arctic has now entered an irreversible phase of warming which will accelerate the loss of the polar sea ice that has helped to keep the climate stable for thousands of years.
They believe global warming is melting Arctic ice so rapidly that the region is beginning to absorb more heat from the sun, causing the ice to melt still further and so reinforcing a vicious cycle of melting and heating.
The greatest fear is that the Arctic has reached a "tipping point" beyond which nothing can reverse the continual loss of sea ice and with it the massive land glaciers of Greenland, which will raise sea levels dramatically.
Satellites monitoring the Arctic have found that the extent of the sea ice this August has reached its lowest monthly point on record, dipping an unprecedented 18.2 per cent below the long-term average.
Experts believe that such a loss of Arctic sea ice in summer has not occurred in hundreds and possibly thousands of years. It is the fourth year in a row that the sea ice in August has fallen below the monthly downward trend - a clear sign that melting has accelerated.
Scientists are now preparing to report a record loss of Arctic sea ice for September, when the surface area covered by the ice traditionally reaches its minimum extent at the end of the summer melting period.
Sea ice naturally melts in summer and reforms in winter but for the first time on record this annual rebound did not occur last winter when the ice of the Arctic failed to recover significantly.
Arctic specialists at the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre at Colorado University, who have documented the gradual loss of polar sea ice since 1978, believe that a more dramatic melt began about four years ago.
In September 2002 the sea ice coverage of the Arctic reached its lowest level in recorded history. Such lows have normally been followed the next year by a rebound to more normal levels, but this did not occur in the summers of either 2003 or 2004. This summer has been even worse. The surface area covered by sea ice was at a record monthly minimum for each of the summer months - June, July and now August.
There's more at the link, including disagreement from other scientists.
I'm just glad I don't have to worry about it anymore. Though, according to another thread, we can "control" the weather now (no sources given, as usual), so this will all be fixed anyway.
One way or the other, we're OK!
_________________________
Question for my Socialist friends: Why are others bound to do for you what you won't do for yourselves?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#159456 - 09/20/05 04:02 PM
Re: There Is NO Man-Made Global Warming
|
HERMES
Member
Registered: 03/01/04
Posts: 255
Loc: North East England
|
Well... wether it is global warming ( or cooling ) , man made or natural , the weather in my part of the North of England has become rather peculier in the last few years.
In august we suffered a number of Funnel Clouds ( Official Definition ) , but as they did tear part of the roof of our local high school , I think the term mini tornado is justified. These incidents may be minor compared to the Tornados of the USA , but seem to be becoming more common and stronger every year , and are as out of place in North Yorkshire as a White Christmas would be in Florida!
Link
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northyorkshire/weather/2005/06/tornado/01.shtml
We have also had the second bout of serious flash flooding- which caused quite a lot of damage , but no deaths - despite assurances that the new flood prevention measures put in place since the 2001 floods were adequate.
Links
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northyorkshire/news/2005/flood/gallery/01.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northyorkshire/news/2005/flood/stories/devastation.shtml
We also have new species of Wild Birds and Insects visiting the area , to either admire , or contend with... depending on your point of view !
Certainly , something is happening to our climate... but who or what to blame is uncertain.
The last great floods were in 1947 and 1953. There was then a substantial gap until November 2001 , August 2002 , and then again this year.
The following links re the 2001/2 floods fails to mention the hundreds of homes damaged , and the fact that some residents were in temporary accomadation for up to a year afterwards. Some moved back , only to be flooded out again. Many have found their homes and businesses to be uninsurable after November 2001.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northyorkshire/weather/2005/01/floods/index.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northyorkshire/weather/story/flood_gallery/index.shtml
The government here plays it down , but has quitely introduced a tax - The Climate Change Levy - in order to provide aditional funds to cope with these ' non existant ' problems.
I post these links , because News of what happens ' Up North' in the UK, does not always make it to the National Media. Civilization ends at the Watford Gap - according to most Londoners and Southeners!! 
_________________________
" I'm an agnostic insomniac dyslexic ,who lies awake at night , wondering if there really is a dog? :-)
P.S. How can you tell when a politician is lying?
Easy... his lips are moving!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#159457 - 09/25/05 04:55 PM
Re: There Is NO Man-Made Global Warming
|
Joey Bagadonuts
Member
Registered: 12/28/02
Posts: 392
Loc: Venice, Florida
|
...but...but...but Babs says there IS. HAHAHAHA
Drudge homered with this piece. It's priceless!
====================================================
http://drudgereport.com/flash4bar.htm
[img]http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/...R551iF0D8j4bw--[/img]
XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX SUN SEPT 25, 2005 16:44:05 ET XXXXX
STREISAND DECLARES 'GLOBAL WARMING EMERGENCY'
THE SUPERSTAR SONGSTRESS SERENADED SAWYER WITH STORM SEASON ASSERTIONS. BUT TO SOME SHE'LL SOUND MORE LIKE A WINDSOCK SINGING LIBERALISM'S GOLDEN OLDIES!
NEW YORK -- This summer's back to back superstorms are proof positive we have entered a new period of "global warming emergency," artist/citizen Barbra Streisand warns.
Streisand is back on the scene to promote her reunion disc with Barry Gibb.
As hellstorm "Rita" churned in the Gulf, Streisand sat down for a promotional interview with ABCNEWS's Diane Sawyer.
"We are in a global warming emergency state, and these storms are going to become more frequent, more intense," Streisand urgently declares.
But Sawyer did not remind Streisand that a Category 5 hurricane struck the Bahamas with 160 mph winds -- when the singer was five years old, in 1947!
And when Streisand was 8 years old, a Cat 5 hurricane -- named "Dog" -- packing 185 mph churned-away in the Atlantic.
When she was 9, a Cat 5 storm named "Easy" ripped the seas with 160 mph sustained winds.
Streisand was 13 years old when "Janet" hit Mexico with 150 mph winds.
Streisand was celebrating her sweet sixteen as "Cleo" formed with 140 mph.
At 18, Streisand read news about "Donna" AND "Ethel" -- both storms carried 140 mph winds and formed 9 days apart in 1960!
One year later, when Streisand was 19, it happened again: Two Category 5 storms scared the world: "Carla" and "Hattie!"
"Carla" maxed out at 175 mph winds the year Streisand made her television debut on "The Jack Paar Show."
And who could forget Hurricane "Camille" -- which smashed into the United States with 190 mph, just as "Funny Girl" garners eight Academy Award nominations, including one for Best Picture and one for Barbra as Best Actress.
Up next on the weather warning watch, Streisand says to ABC: "There could be more droughts, dust bowls. You know, it's amazing to hear these facts."
Developing...
_________________________
...that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#159458 - 11/17/05 01:12 PM
Re: There Is NO Man-Made Global Warming
|
INVICTUS
Member
Registered: 03/29/04
Posts: 3112
Loc: USA
|
No pun intended, but Babs is a big time liberal boob.
See the new book by Tom Bethell for facts regarding this political "Global Warming" nonsense from the Left.
Bethell's book is appropriately entitled:
"The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science"
Science topics covered in the book run the whole gamut.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#159460 - 12/29/05 09:27 AM
Re: There Is NO Man-Made Global Warming
|
ExpandedMInd
Member
Registered: 03/22/02
Posts: 1633
Loc: Denver, Colorado
|
http://www.junkscience.com/july04/Daily_Mail-Bellamy.htm
Some snips:
“Whatever the experts say about the howling gales, thunder and lightning we've had over the past two days, of one thing we can be certain. Someone, somewhere - and there is every chance it will be a politician or an environmentalist - will blame the weather on global warming.
------------------------
“But they will be 100 per cent wrong. Global warming - at least the modern nightmare version - is a myth. I am sure of it and so are a growing number of scientists. But what is really worrying is that the world's politicians and policy makers are not
------------------------
“As a result of their ignorance, the world's economy may be about to divert billions, nay trillions of pounds, dollars and roubles into solving a problem that actually doesn't exist. The waste of economic resources is incalculable and tragic.
----------------------
“Let me quote from a petition produced by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, which has been signed by over 18,000 scientists who are totally opposed to the Kyoto Protocol, which committed the world's leading industrial nations to cut their production of greenhouse gasses from fossil fuels.
“They say: 'Predictions of harmful climatic effects due to future increases in minor greenhouse gasses like carbon dioxide are in error and do not conform to experimental knowledge.'
-------------------
“Ah, ice ages... those absolutely massive changes in global climate that environmentalists don't like to talk about because they provide such strong evidence that climate change is an entirely natural phenomenon.
-----------------------
“It was round about the end of the last ice age, some 13,000 years ago, that a global warming process did undoubtedly begin.
“Not because of all those Stone age folk roasting mammoth meat on fossil fuel camp fires but because of something called the 'Milankovitch Cycles,' an entirely natural fact of planetary life that depends on the tilt of the Earth's axis and its orbit around the sun.
“The truth is that the climate has been yo-yo-ing up and down ever since. Whereas it was warm enough for Romans to produce good wine in York , on the other hand, King Canute had to dig up peat to warm his people. And then it started getting warm again.
---------------
“Up and down, up and down - that is how temperature and climate have always gone in the past and there is no proof they are not still doing exactly the same thing now. In other words, climate change is an entirely natural phenomenon, nothing to do with the burning of fossil fuels.
“In fact, a recent scientific paper, rather unenticingly titled 'Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentrations Over The Last Glacial Termination,' proved it.
Much more at the link...
EM 
_________________________
Question for my Socialist friends: Why are others bound to do for you what you won't do for yourselves?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator: Ryan Ruck, Rick Donaldson
|
|
|
|
|
0 registered
and 5 anonymous users online.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
