Thread: Oh My God Global Warmingis Causing Snow

Originally Posted by USA-1

So since 1900 there has been warming, but it slowed down the last 15 years?
And it might not be man made? So it might be man made?

From the 1880's to 95 the average temperature raised by about 1.5 deg far. Since 1995 the termperature stopped raising. It actually went down. That's the problem the global warming gurus were all fired up about in their e-mails.

Originally Posted by Dutch

From the 1880's to 95 the average temperature raised by about 1.5 deg far. Since 1995 the termperature stopped raising. It actually went down. That's the problem the global warming gurus were all fired up about in their e-mails.

So you agree that there was global warming up until '95?


The website[1] of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration contains detailed data of the annual land and ocean temperature since 1880.[2]

Each of the last 12 years (1997-2008) was one of the warmest on record. These years could be the warmest years for the last several thousand years according to the temperature record, not just since 1880, but the most recent data is the most accurate

Originally Posted by USA-1

So you agree that there was global warming up until '95?


The website[1] of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration contains detailed data of the annual land and ocean temperature since 1880.[2]

Each of the last 12 years (1997-2008) was one of the warmest on record. These years could be the warmest years for the last several thousand years according to the temperature record, not just since 1880, but the most recent data is the most accurate

I really don't know. there have been questions concerning the accuracy of the data, the placement of the temperature stations and the data itself. The raw data from the east anglia research center has, apparently, been lost/destroyed.

Concerning the data from the noaa, I don't know. Assuming the data is correct, and assuming the data is accurate, two big unknowns, that would give us an average temperature increase of something like 1 deg far in the last century. It also means the computer simulations which mann bases his hockey stick predictions didn't predict the stall in temperature increase in the last 15 years or so. I find that significant.

Originally Posted by Dutch

It also means the computer simulations which mann bases his hockey stick predictions didn't predict the stall in temperature increase in the last 15 years or so. I find that significant.

The NOAA holds the position that the last twelve years were some of the warmest on record. I do believe NASA supports that position too.

Originally Posted by USA-1

The NOAA holds the position that the last twelve years were some of the warmest on record. I do believe NASA supports that position too.

Would that be the same NASA that is no longer exploring space but following Obama's directive to concentrate on global warming? Is that the NASA you are refering to?

source

Obama Is No Kennedy: Redefines NASA’s Mission As Global Warming
Posted January 27th, 2010 at 4:11pm in Ongoing Priorities with 11 comments Print This Post

Today, the Orlando Sentinel reports that President Obama will introduce a budget next week which will cut future exploration funding from NASA, including the planned missions to the Moon and Mars set in motion following the Columbia disaster. On first glance, this may appear to be a budget cutting move to fall in line with the drop-in-a-bucket spending freeze Obama has proposed. But it isn’t. In fact, NASA’s budget is increasing. So if NASA’s budget is increasing, why are exploration plans being put on hold? Obama is halting America’s exploration of the unknown so we can explore…global warming............

Originally Posted by Dutch

Would that be the same NASA that is no longer exploring space but following Obama's directive to concentrate on global warming? Is that the NASA you are refering to?

source

NASA was a proponent of Global warming long before anyone even knew who Obama was.
Global warming could indeed be the greatest threat to mankind. If it is then don't you think we should star addressing it, instead of wasting money on going to the moon again?

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/...023esuice.html

Originally Posted by USA-1

NASA was a proponent of Global warming long before anyone even knew who Obama was.
Global warming could indeed be the greatest threat to mankind. If it is then don't you think we should star addressing it, instead of wasting money on going to the moon again?

NASA - Top Story - RECENT WARMING OF ARCTIC MAY AFFECT WORLDWIDE CLIMATE - October 23, 2003

I'm not willing to give up on space much less trash what's left our economy over the (possible) rise of 1 to 1.5 deg far over the space of one century. On this we are simply going to have to agree to disagree, once again, usa-1.

Originally Posted by Dutch

I'm not willing to give up on space much less trash what's left our economy over the (possible) rise of 1 to 1.5 deg far over the space of one century. On this we are simply going to have to agree to disagree, once again, usa-1.

Where in the constitution does it say our government can use our taxdollars for space?
I don't think we should trash our economy either. I believe the answer is not with carbon taxes but with technology and innovation. The money wasted for space could help solve the global climate change problem. Ignoring the problem or denying that it exists will accomplish nothing.


Why do you people assume that just because we believe in global warming, we agree with the policies to address it?

Originally Posted by Dav

Wow, three strawmen in one post.

It's difficult to find anything else in the deniers' "arguments"

Global warming is a farce all so the government can fool gullible people so they won't feel so bad paying out taxes to save the planet. Screw the planet.