17 yrs. no warming?

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

17 yrs. no warming?

Postby Indawoods » Sun Jun 16, 2013 5:50 pm

great read for those scientifically conversant enough to follow the article, cited sources, links, and comments.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/13/no-significant-warming-for-17-years-4-months/


from global warming to climate change to stasis. lolicopter.
assateague wrote:I'm not THAT cheap.


-on the viability of Pabst Blue Ribbon as a thirst quenching barley pop.
User avatar
Indawoods
hunter
 
Posts: 6446
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 10:08 pm
Location: Gonzales, LA


Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby beretta24 » Mon Jun 17, 2013 12:12 am

Wait just one minute here. If you want to address this subject there's clearly no room for real data. Next you're going to expect a reasoned debate. You must be lost.
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5481
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby vincentpa » Mon Jun 17, 2013 6:28 am

We're in need of a 10,000 word post from spinner.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby ScaupHunter » Mon Jun 17, 2013 8:19 am

I am sorry but you have me confused Inda. Are you trying to say that the global warming theory is bunk, and that the billions we have spent trying to fix it was unnecessary. Or perhaps that Al Gore is a fat blowhard who lied to us all and then recieved a Nobel Peace Prize for something that isn't real.

Thanks for bursting our bubble! :thumbsup:
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6478
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Mon Jun 17, 2013 10:56 am

The fact that everyone could not see the logical conclusion to this hoax without a study, sickens me.

No one with half a brain thought we could actually affect climate, to do so we would have to overcome forces far greater than we can conceive.

It was all a vote pandering and money grabbing scheme.
There are only two types of people in the world, those who love duck hunting and those who never have duck hunted.
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 8029
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby vincentpa » Mon Jun 17, 2013 12:49 pm

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:The fact that everyone could not see the logical conclusion to this hoax without a study, sickens me.

No one with half a brain thought we could actually affect climate, to do so we would have to overcome forces far greater than we can conceive.

It was all a vote pandering and money grabbing scheme.



You're wrong. Lots of smart people believed it, and still do.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Mon Jun 17, 2013 12:51 pm

vincentpa wrote:
WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:The fact that everyone could not see the logical conclusion to this hoax without a study, sickens me.

No one with half a brain thought we could actually affect climate, to do so we would have to overcome forces far greater than we can conceive.

It was all a vote pandering and money grabbing scheme.



You're wrong. Lots of smart people believed it, and still do.


I disagree on the smart part in your statement...
There are only two types of people in the world, those who love duck hunting and those who never have duck hunted.
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 8029
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby High Sierras » Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:19 pm

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:
vincentpa wrote:
WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:The fact that everyone could not see the logical conclusion to this hoax without a study, sickens me.
No one with half a brain thought we could actually affect climate, to do so we would have to overcome forces far greater than we can conceive.
It was all a vote pandering and money grabbing scheme.

You're wrong. Lots of smart people believed it, and still do.

I disagree on the smart part in your statement...

Why? Are smart people not allowed to 'believe in something' on blind faith?
High Sierras
hunter
 
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:34 pm
Location: above the snow line most of the year

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:25 pm

High Sierras wrote:
WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:
vincentpa wrote:
WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:The fact that everyone could not see the logical conclusion to this hoax without a study, sickens me.
No one with half a brain thought we could actually affect climate, to do so we would have to overcome forces far greater than we can conceive.
It was all a vote pandering and money grabbing scheme.

You're wrong. Lots of smart people believed it, and still do.

I disagree on the smart part in your statement...

Why? Are smart people not allowed to 'believe in something' on blind faith?


You can believe what ever you want, but you should not make policy and shove it down the rest of our throats on blind faith...
Faith belongs in a a religious realm and not on the political pulpit.

And those who do not make that distinction have no place making statements/policy based on pseudoscience
There are only two types of people in the world, those who love duck hunting and those who never have duck hunted.
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 8029
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby dudejcb » Mon Jun 17, 2013 7:00 pm

ScaupHunter wrote:I am sorry but you have me confused Inda. Are you trying to say that the global warming theory is bunk, and that the billions we have spent trying to fix it was unnecessary. Or perhaps that Al Gore is a fat blowhard who lied to us all and then recieved a Nobel Peace Prize for something that isn't real.

Thanks for bursting our bubble! :thumbsup:
If anyone anywhere near this issue is a blowhard, it's Chrissy Monckton. Just cuz he sings a tune you like (not you personally so much as you and all those who agree with you and lord monkey) doesn't mean anything ... scientifically speaking. It's all emotion when you hear and believe that which comports with your preference/slant.

woodywiffingmg wrote:No one with half a brain thought we could actually affect climate, to do so we would have to overcome forces far greater than we can conceive.
Really? Who'd a think we could kill all the passenger pigeons just by shooting a few?

Okay, one more time. Riddle me this: why are glaciers receding worldwide? Cuz it's getting colder? nyet
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5243
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Mon Jun 17, 2013 7:25 pm

dudejcb wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:I am sorry but you have me confused Inda. Are you trying to say that the global warming theory is bunk, and that the billions we have spent trying to fix it was unnecessary. Or perhaps that Al Gore is a fat blowhard who lied to us all and then recieved a Nobel Peace Prize for something that isn't real.

Thanks for bursting our bubble! :thumbsup:
If anyone anywhere near this issue is a blowhard, it's Chrissy Monckton. Just cuz he sings a tune you like (not you personally so much as you and all those who agree with you and lord monkey) doesn't mean anything ... scientifically speaking. It's all emotion when you hear and believe that which comports with your preference/slant.

woodywiffingmg wrote:No one with half a brain thought we could actually affect climate, to do so we would have to overcome forces far greater than we can conceive.
Really? Who'd a think we could kill all the passenger pigeons just by shooting a few?

Okay, one more time. Riddle me this: why are glaciers receding worldwide? Cuz it's getting colder? nyet


Okay, I've explained this before but for you Dude I will once again...

We are still exiting an ice age!

The ice will continue to melt and the rate at which it does will accelerate, until we reach equilibrium.
Also the average temperature does not have to increase for the ice to recede more from one year to the next.
It's all about currents and how they transport warm water to the polar ice caps.

I'm not denying the earth has warmed on average since the industrial revolution, but that does not make the two connected.
Using the same science... It has been warming for the last 500 years.

Dude, please explain how in the 70s people (Liberals) freaked out about global cooling and in the late 90s they started freaking out about global warming?

Hint their are multiple reasons... Some of them are stupid/gullible, some of them want power/votes, and some of them want money.
There are only two types of people in the world, those who love duck hunting and those who never have duck hunted.
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 8029
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby assateague » Mon Jun 17, 2013 8:04 pm

dudejcb wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:I am sorry but you have me confused Inda. Are you trying to say that the global warming theory is bunk, and that the billions we have spent trying to fix it was unnecessary. Or perhaps that Al Gore is a fat blowhard who lied to us all and then recieved a Nobel Peace Prize for something that isn't real.

Thanks for bursting our bubble! :thumbsup:
If anyone anywhere near this issue is a blowhard, it's Chrissy Monckton. Just cuz he sings a tune you like (not you personally so much as you and all those who agree with you and lord monkey) doesn't mean anything ... scientifically speaking. It's all emotion when you hear and believe that which comports with your preference/slant.

woodywiffingmg wrote:No one with half a brain thought we could actually affect climate, to do so we would have to overcome forces far greater than we can conceive.
Really? Who'd a think we could kill all the passenger pigeons just by shooting a few?

Okay, one more time. Riddle me this: why are glaciers receding worldwide? Cuz it's getting colder? nyet



One more time, riddle me this: how did the mile-thick sheet of ice that used to sit over my house disappear 14,000 years ago? Sort of hard to blame that one on SUVs, ain't it?
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby Glimmerjim » Mon Jun 17, 2013 10:36 pm

vincentpa wrote:We're in need of a 10,000 word post from spinner.

:lol3: Love ya spinner but we all know it's on the horizon! :lol3:
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10724
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby Glimmerjim » Mon Jun 17, 2013 10:44 pm

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:
vincentpa wrote:
WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:The fact that everyone could not see the logical conclusion to this hoax without a study, sickens me.

No one with half a brain thought we could actually affect climate, to do so we would have to overcome forces far greater than we can conceive.

It was all a vote pandering and money grabbing scheme.



You're wrong. Lots of smart people believed it, and still do.


I disagree on the smart part in your statement...

Really? You believe all those who are concerned about this are just stupid? Really? And those on the other side of the aisle are blessed with wisdom that transcends popular sentiment? Really? And the ones promulgating this theory are so powerful compared to the poor schmucks in the oil and coal industry that want you to believe that all is fine.....keep pumping and burning.....keep fracking and burning.....keep mining and burning....everything is fine. But of course those poor schmucks have no influence. They're just trying to make an honest living and help America become free of foreign dependence on energy. Really? :eek: :no:
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10724
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby Indawoods » Mon Jun 17, 2013 10:55 pm

dudejcb wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:I am sorry but you have me confused Inda. Are you trying to say that the global warming theory is bunk, and that the billions we have spent trying to fix it was unnecessary. Or perhaps that Al Gore is a fat blowhard who lied to us all and then recieved a Nobel Peace Prize for something that isn't real.

Thanks for bursting our bubble! :thumbsup:
If anyone anywhere near this issue is a blowhard, it's Chrissy Monckton. Just cuz he sings a tune you like (not you personally so much as you and all those who agree with you and lord monkey) doesn't mean anything ... scientifically speaking. It's all emotion when you hear and believe that which comports with your preference/slant.

woodywiffingmg wrote:No one with half a brain thought we could actually affect climate, to do so we would have to overcome forces far greater than we can conceive.
Really? Who'd a think we could kill all the passenger pigeons just by shooting a few?

Okay, one more time. Riddle me this: why are glaciers receding worldwide? Cuz it's getting colder? nyet


expanding in the antarctic. try again, with facts this time.
assateague wrote:I'm not THAT cheap.


-on the viability of Pabst Blue Ribbon as a thirst quenching barley pop.
User avatar
Indawoods
hunter
 
Posts: 6446
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 10:08 pm
Location: Gonzales, LA

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby beretta24 » Mon Jun 17, 2013 11:04 pm

Bingo...if i remember correctly the university of Illinois or Indiana has a good study on this. It is absolute junk science to point to half of a data set and ignore the other.
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5481
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby Glimmerjim » Mon Jun 17, 2013 11:05 pm

beretta24 wrote:Bingo...if i remember correctly the university of Illinois or Indiana has a good study on this. It is absolute junk science to point to half of a data set and ignore the other.

Please point to references with this. Everything I can ascertain from an internet search says precisely the opposite. Not that it would matter to you.
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10724
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby beretta24 » Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:03 am

Glimmerjim wrote:
beretta24 wrote:Bingo...if i remember correctly the university of Illinois or Indiana has a good study on this. It is absolute junk science to point to half of a data set and ignore the other.

Please point to references with this. Everything I can ascertain from an internet search says precisely the opposite. Not that it would matter to you.

Got a bug up your rear today?
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5481
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby Glimmerjim » Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:11 am

beretta24 wrote:
Glimmerjim wrote:
beretta24 wrote:Bingo...if i remember correctly the university of Illinois or Indiana has a good study on this. It is absolute junk science to point to half of a data set and ignore the other.

Please point to references with this. Everything I can ascertain from an internet search says precisely the opposite. Not that it would matter to you.

Got a bug up your rear today?

:lol3: No buddy. Just asking. The "you" wasn't directed at you. Just the general "you" of naysayers. My clerical mistake and my apologies. :thumbsup:
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10724
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby beretta24 » Tue Jun 18, 2013 2:55 am

From the university of illinois:

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.antarctic.png

You can decide if it's statistically relevant to you but the net change (increase) from the 1979-2008 average is roughly comparable to the net change (decrease) in the Artic coverage, epcially considering the land coverage is vastly different in the regions, which I assume has some impact on the results, and I haven't seen any study that attempts to quantify the volume change. for reference the Artic change is estimated at roughly .92 some off millions of sq. kilometers
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5481
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby Glimmerjim » Tue Jun 18, 2013 3:01 am

beretta24 wrote:From the university of illinois:

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.antarctic.png

You can decide if it's statistically relevant to you but the net change (increase) from the 1979-2008 average is roughly comparable to the net change (decrease) in the Artic coverage, epcially considering the land coverage is vastly different in the regions, which I assume has some impact on the results, and I haven't seen any study that attempts to quantify the volume change. for reference the Artic change is estimated at roughly .92 some off millions of sq. kilometers

Thanks brother. Too tired to research tonight but will tomorrow! :thumbsup:
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10724
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Tue Jun 18, 2013 6:25 am

Glimmerjim wrote:
WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:
vincentpa wrote:
WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:The fact that everyone could not see the logical conclusion to this hoax without a study, sickens me.

No one with half a brain thought we could actually affect climate, to do so we would have to overcome forces far greater than we can conceive.

It was all a vote pandering and money grabbing scheme.



You're wrong. Lots of smart people believed it, and still do.


I disagree on the smart part in your statement...

Really? You believe all those who are concerned about this are just stupid? Really? And those on the other side of the aisle are blessed with wisdom that transcends popular sentiment? Really? And the ones promulgating this theory are so powerful compared to the poor schmucks in the oil and coal industry that want you to believe that all is fine.....keep pumping and burning.....keep fracking and burning.....keep mining and burning....everything is fine. But of course those poor schmucks have no influence. They're just trying to make an honest living and help America become free of foreign dependence on energy. Really? :eek: :no:

Jim,
You know better!
"transcends popular sentiment?" Popular does not mean correct!
The side of the isle has absolutely nothing to do with it!

The oil companies?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?
REALLY!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?
What about...
General Electric ($3 Billion Amount received in GOV funds directly tied to Green E)
Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
Solyndra ($535 million)*
Beacon Power ($43 million)*
Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
SunPower ($1.2 billion)
First Solar ($1.46 billion)
Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
Amonix ($5.9 million)
Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
Abound Solar ($400 million)*
A123 Systems ($279 million)*
Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
Johnson Controls ($299 million)
Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
ECOtality ($126.2 million)
Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
Range Fuels ($80 million)*
Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
GreenVolts ($500,000)
Vestas ($50 million)
LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
Navistar ($39 million)
Satcon ($3 million)*
Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)
?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!!??!

God Damn those evil gas companies.... Effin... ExxonMobil (Income tax expense: $31.05 billion), Chevron ($20.00 billion), ConocoPhillips ($7.94 billion)...

Yeah Eff them they are evil and make things up for free money and pay no taxes.
There are only two types of people in the world, those who love duck hunting and those who never have duck hunted.
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 8029
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby aunt betty » Tue Jun 18, 2013 6:29 am

Where did all the ice go?
Glacier National Park has none.
How the? What the?

Latent heat...y'all non sciency guys need to understand where all the energy to melt that ice came from.
It is a LOT of heat.

I dont believe in climate change. There is some evidence however...
Where did the heat for melting the ice come from. AND...
Now that the ice is gone...that heat has to go somewhere.

It is possible we are wrong and climate is changing.
There is nothing we can do about it other than...adapt.
Govt. Invented a 2000 pound gorilla to fight and arent sure it exists.
Happens all the time.
INTERNET CREDIBILITY is...an OXYMORON. :moon:
User avatar
aunt betty
hunter
 
Posts: 10459
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:09 pm
Location: Go HOGS!

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Tue Jun 18, 2013 6:50 am

aunt betty wrote:Govt. Invented a 2000 pound gorilla to fight and aren't sure it exists.


I disagree... the smart ones, the ones who started the movement, they know damn well it does not exist!

2000 lb gorilla is more like a 2000 billion-dollar Gorilla
There are only two types of people in the world, those who love duck hunting and those who never have duck hunted.
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 8029
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: 17 yrs. no warming?

Postby RustyGunz1960 » Tue Jun 18, 2013 7:29 am

Many posts on this subject are made by people who cannot tell the difference between fact and opinion. Some are even ignorant enough as to define smart and stupid opinions based on whether they are on the same or opposite side. While I do not know the qualifications of anyone here I'd be willing to bet that none are scientists specializing in the field of climatology, including myself. I have worked in the environmental field for close to thirty years, but it is one unrelated to climate so my opinions are still merely my opinions, no matter what argument I may make for them. Anyone can post any individual study or source they want, but they usually cite sources that support their opinions (most often based on their politics) and ignore those which contradict them. Conflicting data is always present in science. Trying to accurately sort and interpret it is incredibly difficult unless one is without bias. Bias can stem from one's religion, politics or even a predetermined hypothesis. If you can find an unbiased scientific source listen to it/him/her very closely. They are exceedingly rare. Everyone else is merely blowing smoke out their ass.
RustyGunz1960
hunter
 
Posts: 258
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 7:16 pm
Location: Little Egg Harbor

Next

Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests