Glenn_Richards's Blog

Why does global warming occur and for how long?? If you ask me that must be why we are always so hot here in Florida and we always have to run the air, I mean we have not really had a winter this year and the last couple of weeks it's been in the upper 70's to 80.... So my question is will this global warming thing go away or will it just keep getting hotter & hotter??

Michelle

Oh out today is another report on Global Warming that pretty much crushes Gore's ridiculous fleecing of enviromental nuts!

Solar Heating tends to be the cause of most, and the Sun goes through stages too. The Warming hippys of course only want to look at the last 30 years of data collected. (much collected from sites that incorrectly placed the equipment)

Turns out that a rise in temps will solve alot of world hunger too! Keep your Hybrid! I'm going out in my retro modified 79 vette and fill up the tank that feeds the new engine a whopping 8 miles to the gallon!!

Where do you pull these facts out of the air regarding "cooling"...and that the earth has not been warming? I agree that earth fluctuations are normal...heck we used to have a mile of ice over Chicago at one time. However, everything I've seen over the years indicates warming....maybe not a constant warming every year...but definite warming over the last 200 years. Now our warming is increasing rapidly over the last 100 years. I'd love to see where your info. comes from. Pass along a website or two or three so I can look into it objectively...

And where do you get THAT from?

First of all, we don't have reliable criteria for the last 200 years - not any that anyone agrees on.

As for the last 100 years and the so-called 1 degree increase - you understand that that comes from a computer model for which the creators refuse to give up the software, don't you?

Don't you have a problem with that? Ok - they say that the software is their on proprietary code, however if I don't have to release the algorythms, I'll have a computer model for you that shows you that, the more of your paycheck you give to me, the more likely you are to live over 110 and win Lotto three times.

Antartica is getting colder, not warmer: http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0118/p02s01-usgn.html


Scientists Respond to Al Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth': http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm>
400 Scientists Refute Global Warming: http://www.circvsmaximvs.com/showthread.php?t=36695


Global Warming is the Biggest Scam in History (from the founder of the Weather Channel): http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/11/07/w
eather-channel-founder-global-warming-greatest-scam-his
tory

Global Warming - Explanation of the Alleged Consensus: http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv15n2/reg15n2g.h
tml

The hottest years on record: http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1880

You'll notice, these people (unlike Al Gores) name themselves, show how they come by their facts, and can be studied.

I know you love this, because it makes weather interesting, but as I've told you MANY times in the past, in less than five years we're all goi

"Everything I've read and heard concerning the warming trend is that it will not be constant every year. We will actually have some cooler years mixed in too. We will have wilder fluctuations in weather...hotter highs...and at times colder lows...and strong storm systems due to the extremes feeding these storms."

OK - tell me, when in human history has this NOT been a description of normal weather?

So you're saying normal weather for twenty or so years, and THEN after we've spent TRILLIONS of dollars and given up our economic advantages to the Chinese and Indians and Mexicans (who aren't bound by Kyoto like we are) - what, we're screwed anyway?

Tell you what - I'm going to start selling carbon credits. How many can I sign you up for?

If you don't like Christian Science Monitor, here are other links for Antartica getting colder, not warmer:

http://motls.blogspot.com/2007/09/antarctic-sea-ice-at-
record-high.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1363818
.ece

http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/esthag-w/2002/ja
n/science/ws_antarctic.html

By the way, Glen - I recommend you practice what you preach, especially when you want to turn your nose up at CSM and then try to pass off NCAR as non-partisan because it receives money from the government (NSF). The ACLU receives money from the government - do you think they're non-partisan, too?

The Head of the Climate Analysis Section of NCAR is none other than Kevin E. Trenberth. Trenberth is a firm and specific partisan who's been convinced that fossil fuels cause global warming for years and has been accused of misrepresenting his facts to present his agenda on numerous occaisions.

Chris Landsea actually withdrew her name from one of his reports because it was so severely slanted:

http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/landsea.htm
l

Face it, Glen - you don't care about the facts. You want this to be real and you're going to ignore anything that says otherwise. If you attended an international symposium where the math was actually calculated from beginning to end to demonstrate why carbon emissions have nothing to do with global warming, and afterwards you went to the men's room and saw 'global warming is real' scrawled on the bathroom wall, you'd come back saying you saw the nay-sayers, and their theories were refuted r

Well I guess we'll agree to disagree on this one. I agree that there is a bias with everyone! It's up to each of us to sift through all the information and decide how much of it is truth. I know what I've read and heard and learned over the years....so I'll still side with the warming scenario, and that we can possibly still minimize the impact. In the end it'll bring about new industries, new science and hopefully a cleaner planet.

"Well I guess we'll agree to disagree on this one. I agree that there is a bias with everyone! It's up to each of us to sift through all the information and decide how much of it is truth. "

Oh my God.

You know, without introspection, your personal growth is stalled. You should really embrace that philosophy before you call yourself a part of an industry labelled as 'news.'

I mean - look how you've run this discourse.

1. You present an opinion without facts to back it, and I call you on it.

2. You demand that I back myself up, because you disagree with me, and I provide you with six factual articles

3. You look at one of them, disagree with the source without reading it, and then believe you've invalidated my point.

4. THEN you misquote the same source and try to pass off an op-ed piece as evidence that the CSM now supports your opinion

5. Meanwhile you present your own position as superior because it comes from an unbiased source and, when you find out that that source is specifically biased, your argument is "well, everyone's biased."

And you believe that your whole position is valid because YOU DO YOUR RESEARCH? If there is ANYTHING that this discourse proves, it is that you have no interest what-so-ever with research and, in fact, research just gets in your way.

If you DID research, you'd have the same opinion as I do, which is of course why you refuse to do it, because in fact you want YOUR opinion.

When the guy who used to run the Weather Channel calls Man-Made Global Warming 'the biggest scam in history', and people who REPORT the