jmog wrote: Here you go Derek, non-partisan look at the sun vs CO2 caused GW.

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/sun_output_030320.html

Someone willing to say "the sun looks like it 'matches' up pretty well with climate cycles, but we just don't know for sure yet if its the sun or CO2".

This!!!

He needed the "time off" to fix those emails that were doctored.

jmog wrote:

derek bomar wrote: http://drake.marin.k12.ca.us/academics/rock/bears_files/polar-ice-caps-melting.jpg

i don't get the people who think global warming isn't happening...

No one is saying that the Earth wasn't warming from roughly the turn of the century (1900) until about 1995-2000.

What some of us are saying is that this has nothing or little to do with human CO2 emissions as we have all be led to believe. Its caused by the sun and earth's natural heating/cooling cycles.

Follow the sun data, for that period of warming the sun had a larger output than it does now and we are not warming anymore (staying about the same or slightly cooler).

Who would ever guess the sun (our source of energy) has anything to do with the earth's climate. There is very little mention of similar warming trends on other planetary bodies in our solar system.

Mars for example.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

It all boils down to this. If human activity is shown to have little or no effect on climate change. Governments will not be able to convince their citizens to voluntarily turn over regulation of their activities to them.

14 days of silence from the major networks ---- incredible!! (But there is no media bias)

http://mrc.org/press/releases/2009/20091204124643.aspx

And the left-stream media continues to be complicit in the climate change hoax:

14 days of silence thus far --

http://mrc.org/press/releases/2009/20091204124643.aspx

ts1227 wrote: As Gore is foolish for thinking the info he has outright proves anything, and you all are just as foolish for thinking anything you know proves anything the other way.

There's a lot of info out there, but no one in their right mind can yet tie it all together and definitively say that global warming is real or fake (unless they are a partisan hack and it helps their cause). Those of us that engage in actual science know better.

Don't disagree with pretty much all of this -- BUT the big difference between the two parties is one is making craploads of money by selling the fear and the other is not. Which do you think has the most incentive to lie?

majorspark wrote:

Who would ever guess the sun (our source of energy) has anything to do with the earth's climate. There is very little mention of similar warming trends on other planetary bodies in our solar system.

Mars for example.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

It all boils down to this. If human activity is shown to have little or no effect on climate change. Governments will not be able to convince their citizens to voluntarily turn over regulation of their activities to them.

I forgot to mention this, but yes, every planet we can measure its temperature, has been seeing similar warming trends over the same time period.

The Martians and Jupiterians(?) must be spewing tons of CO2 into their atmosphere too. All those UFOs have to get off the surface SOMEHOW?

The 12 Days Of Global Warming

The global warming being caused by man theory is on a hot oven.

not surprised

Thanks Al!!!!

They don't care. The EPA just declared "greenhouse gases" a public health threat this week. Now they can do the ol' back door routine and try to shove Cap & Tax down our throats without actually passing the bill. Asked about the impact of leaked e-mails between scientists surrounding the "climategate" scandal, EPA administrator Lisa Jackson said evidence of global warming comes from a much wider pool of research after "decades of sound, peer-reviewed" scientific data.

Unbelievable.

why did boatshoes get teh banhamma?

I love what the EPA did this week, that is classic...I hope you are noticing the sarcasm.

My favorite part of the Copenhagen conference this week is they are all arriving in private jets and limos.

Then you have myself who doesn't believe in the hogwash of man made GW, but does believe in conservation of resources and I drive around in a Ford Focus getting 35+ MPG.

The ones who are GW activist flying in private jets and arriving in limos, me, the scientist who calls man made GW hogwash drives and economy car...PRICELESS.

derek bomar wrote: why did boatshoes get teh banhamma?

See the self ban request thread.

jmog wrote: I love what the EPA did this week, that is classic...I hope you are noticing the sarcasm.

My favorite part of the Copenhagen conference this week is they are all arriving in private jets and limos.

Then you have myself who doesn't believe in the hogwash of man made GW, but does believe in conservation of resources and I drive around in a Ford Focus getting 35+ MPG.

The ones who are GW activist flying in private jets and arriving in limos, me, the scientist who calls man made GW hogwash drives and economy car...PRICELESS.

That is because their motives are power and money.

^^^ thanks

majorspark wrote:

jmog wrote: I love what the EPA did this week, that is classic...I hope you are noticing the sarcasm.

My favorite part of the Copenhagen conference this week is they are all arriving in private jets and limos.

Then you have myself who doesn't believe in the hogwash of man made GW, but does believe in conservation of resources and I drive around in a Ford Focus getting 35+ MPG.

The ones who are GW activist flying in private jets and arriving in limos, me, the scientist who calls man made GW hogwash drives and economy car...PRICELESS.

umm...2+2=6 apparently to you

majorspark wrote: That is because their motives are power and money.

Sadly, I realized the EPA was no longer an objective scientific body and had become political when they cherry-picked and rigged data to reach preconceived conclusions on second-hand smoke.

ts1227 wrote:but no one in their right mind can yet tie it all together and definitively say that global warming is real or fake

Well, here's the funny thing about scientific conclusions. There is no requirement to "prove" global warming doesn't exist, but rather it's the default assumption until proven otherwise. Just because a fantastic assertion cannot be conclusively disproven does not give the premise further merit.

You don't turn the economy upside down on the whims of some politically motivated tree huggers. Sweeping changes require hard data, conclusive proof.

Writerbuckeye wrote: Don't disagree with pretty much all of this -- BUT the big difference between the two parties is one is making craploads of money by selling the fear and the other is not. Which do you think has the most incentive to lie?

Well, I guess since the Republicans already have the Big Oil market cornered , Dems have to change the game if they want a cut of the action.

derek bomar wrote:

majorspark wrote:

jmog wrote: I love what the EPA did this week, that is classic...I hope you are noticing the sarcasm.

My favorite part of the Copenhagen conference this week is they are all arriving in private jets and limos.

Then you have myself who doesn't believe in the hogwash of man made GW, but does believe in conservation of resources and I drive around in a Ford Focus getting 35+ MPG.

The ones who are GW activist flying in private jets and arriving in limos, me, the scientist who calls man made GW hogwash drives and economy car...PRICELESS.

umm...2+2=6 apparently to you

No, as a scientist not motivated by power and greed, I can actually do the math.

If you truly believe in the hogwash of man made GW, then please explain to me how every planet in our solar system that we can measure the temperatures of, has also been warming over the same period of time as our own planet?

Are the man made CO2 emissions somehow finding their way to all the other planets?

Also take a look at my previous post either on this thread or the Al Gore one that relates the sun radiation output to our current global temperature cycle.

I believe my 3 science degrees trumps your math/science background (but I'm willing to be wrong on that), so please don't try the "2+2=6" BS.

The difference between you and I is that you just believe what you are told by the media, the GW scientists with an agenda, and Al Gore, while I actually know how to do the calcs and understand the science behind it to question their assertations.

jmog wrote:Are the man made CO2 emissions somehow finding their way to all the other planets?

Cow farts travel well.

gut wrote:

Well, here's the funny thing about scientific conclusions. There is no requirement to "prove" global warming doesn't exist, but rather it's the default assumption until proven otherwise. Just because a fantastic assertion cannot be conclusively disproven does not give the premise further merit.

You don't turn the economy upside down on the whims of some politically motivated tree huggers. Sweeping changes require hard data, conclusive proof.

Someone who understands the Scientific Method and where the burden of proof lies.

If only our politicians could understand this.

Oh, I forgot to mention that I've also worked in Research and Development with industrial combustion emission gases, closing working with the EPA on several projects for the last 5 years.