Yep, no Global Warming happening because someone was talking about global cooling over 40 years ago. That's intelligent logic. Yea, you definitely went to a top law school, lmao!!! Some people's kids.
Earth has been around 4.5 billion years. This graph shows a super microscopic 140 years and is missing the last 14 years. Anyone looking at this chart and believing there is "global warming" lacks intelligence *and* logic. There have been much worse spikes in global temps than this useless, cherry picked graph shows. I know it doesn't suit the liberal argument that we're doomed to die in a raging global inferno unless we tax the living daylights out of everyone and spend zillions on unproven solutions. We're at the mercy of our natural place in the solar system, not a bunch of people burning fossil fuels. We're in between ice ages, enjoy it.
3 things that make you really dumb.
1) Humans weren't burning fossil fuels for billions of years so how old the Earth is, is pretty meaningless
2) Most documented changes in climate (which ironically are only known because the same climate scientists who say there is global warming, say so) span over thousands if not millions of years. So the rate at which we are warming is strongly correlated with the massive increase of CO2
3) Most drastic changes to weather resulted in mass extinctions of species and significant destruction of the environment. Not sure why conservatives want to create that themselves, lol.
Nice try though. Please don't have children.
10 Ways to Stop Producing Carbon Dioxide and Save the Planet
Stop breathing - When you exhale you release carbon dioxide
Dont drive - We all know how bad driving is
Don't live in a house/apartment/condo or any building that uses gas or electricity - Homes produce 2-3 times as much carbon as cars.
Don't wear shoes or any sort of clothing produced in a factory. Grow a cotton field and make your own clothes by hand.
Quit school - Those school buildings produce more carbon in a year then you do in 20 years.
Eat meat raw - Whether you're using gas or electric both produce carbon dioxide.
Turn off this monitor and computer - You hypocrite.
Don't use toilets, urinate or poo in your back yard.- The water to your house is cleaned and sent to your house using pumps that use electricity.
Stop exercising - Increasing your heart rate increases the amount of oxygen you take in and turn into carbon dioxide.
Die - Dying younger means you will do all of the above less. Living one year less means you will save the earth 8.4 tons of carbon dioxide every year you're not here!
Stop breathing - When you exhale you release carbon dioxide
Dont drive - We all know how bad driving is
Don't live in a house/apartment/condo or any building that uses gas or electricity - Homes produce 2-3 times as much carbon as cars.
Don't wear shoes or any sort of clothing produced in a factory. Grow a cotton field and make your own clothes by hand.
Quit school - Those school buildings produce more carbon in a year then you do in 20 years.
Eat meat raw - Whether you're using gas or electric both produce carbon dioxide.
Turn off this monitor and computer - You hypocrite.
Don't use toilets, urinate or poo in your back yard.- The water to your house is cleaned and sent to your house using pumps that use electricity.
Stop exercising - Increasing your heart rate increases the amount of oxygen you take in and turn into carbon dioxide.
Die - Dying younger means you will do all of the above less. Living one year less means you will save the earth 8.4 tons of carbon dioxide every year you're not here!
CLIMATE COMPUTER MODELS ARE PROVEN WRONG
Global warming hysteria is based on climate computer models that don't work. If outgoing radiation from the atmosphere is reduced to less than the incoming radiation from the Sun, heat energy will accumulate in the climate system causing rising temperatures. The models assume CO[SUB]2[/SUB] emissions will cause water vapour, the strongest greenhouse gas, to increase in the upper atmosphere, trapping the radiation. They also assume clouds will trap more radiation. But satellite and weather balloon data shows just the opposite of the climate model predictions.
The chart below compares the model predicted change of outgoing radiation to the actual satellite measured change of outgoing radiation, both in response to changing sea surface temperatures.
Satellite Observed vs Predicted Outgoing Radiation
The red lines show the eleven climate models prediction of decreasing outgoing radiation as temperatures rise.
The green line in the middle of the chart shows the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment Satellite (ERBE) observed response. It shows that more outgoing radiation escapes to space as temperatures rise, rather than being trapped as the UN computer modellers believe. CO[SUB]2[/SUB] emissions do not trap much heat and do not cause significant global warming.
The models predict a distinctive pattern of warming - a hot spot of enhanced warming in the upper troposphere over the tropics, shown as the large red spot in the diagram below. Radiosonde data from weather balloons show no such "hot spot" pattern. If it was there we would have easily detected it.
Model Predicted Warming
Actual Radiosonde Measured Warming
The predicted hot-spot is entirely absent from the observational record. This shows that most of the global temperature change cannot be attributed to increasing CO[SUB]2[/SUB] concentrations.
The models fail because they assume both water vapour and clouds strongly increase the CO[SUB]2[/SUB] induced temperature changes, whereas recent research shows both water vapour and clouds greatly reduce the temperature changes.
The following graph by Dr. Spencer compares the Levitus observations of ocean warming trends during 1955-1999 to 15 IPCC 4AR climate model runs.
The climate models exhibit wildly different trends, with the deep ocean cooling just as often as warming. The green curve is the Levitus actual observation to a depth of 700 m. Most of the models produce too much warming in the layer to 700 m. Many models produce unexpected ocean cooling below 100 m while the surface warms. None of the models even remotely match the observations.
For more information, see Climate Science >> Climate Models section here and our Climate Change Science Essay here.
Click HOME to return to the home page.
- See more at: http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?id=458#sthash.xxde3eJE.dpuf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"greenhouse gas effect"
ointer:
climate change: the religion of the stupid
Global warming hysteria is based on climate computer models that don't work. If outgoing radiation from the atmosphere is reduced to less than the incoming radiation from the Sun, heat energy will accumulate in the climate system causing rising temperatures. The models assume CO[SUB]2[/SUB] emissions will cause water vapour, the strongest greenhouse gas, to increase in the upper atmosphere, trapping the radiation. They also assume clouds will trap more radiation. But satellite and weather balloon data shows just the opposite of the climate model predictions.
The chart below compares the model predicted change of outgoing radiation to the actual satellite measured change of outgoing radiation, both in response to changing sea surface temperatures.
Satellite Observed vs Predicted Outgoing Radiation
The red lines show the eleven climate models prediction of decreasing outgoing radiation as temperatures rise.
The green line in the middle of the chart shows the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment Satellite (ERBE) observed response. It shows that more outgoing radiation escapes to space as temperatures rise, rather than being trapped as the UN computer modellers believe. CO[SUB]2[/SUB] emissions do not trap much heat and do not cause significant global warming.
The models predict a distinctive pattern of warming - a hot spot of enhanced warming in the upper troposphere over the tropics, shown as the large red spot in the diagram below. Radiosonde data from weather balloons show no such "hot spot" pattern. If it was there we would have easily detected it.
Model Predicted Warming
Actual Radiosonde Measured Warming
The predicted hot-spot is entirely absent from the observational record. This shows that most of the global temperature change cannot be attributed to increasing CO[SUB]2[/SUB] concentrations.
The models fail because they assume both water vapour and clouds strongly increase the CO[SUB]2[/SUB] induced temperature changes, whereas recent research shows both water vapour and clouds greatly reduce the temperature changes.
The following graph by Dr. Spencer compares the Levitus observations of ocean warming trends during 1955-1999 to 15 IPCC 4AR climate model runs.
The climate models exhibit wildly different trends, with the deep ocean cooling just as often as warming. The green curve is the Levitus actual observation to a depth of 700 m. Most of the models produce too much warming in the layer to 700 m. Many models produce unexpected ocean cooling below 100 m while the surface warms. None of the models even remotely match the observations.
For more information, see Climate Science >> Climate Models section here and our Climate Change Science Essay here.
Click HOME to return to the home page.
- See more at: http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?id=458#sthash.xxde3eJE.dpuf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"greenhouse gas effect"
ointer:climate change: the religion of the stupid
Oh, so now Co2 is suddenly poison? (Wait, the Marxist climate nutters at the EPA agree with you!) face)(*^%
EPA Formally Declares CO2 a Dangerous Pollutant
http://dailysignal.com/2009/12/07/epa-formally-declares-co2-a-dangerous-pollutant/
Because there's like totally "tons of poison" in the atmosphere or something.
You really have to be a special kind of gullible idiot to believe their laughable BS.
Oh, so now Co2 is suddenly poison? (Wait, the Marxist climate nutters at the EPA agree with you!) face)(*^%
EPA Formally Declares CO2 a Dangerous Pollutant
http://dailysignal.com/2009/12/07/epa-formally-declares-co2-a-dangerous-pollutant/
Because there's like totally "tons of poison" in the atmosphere or something.
You really have to be a special kind of gullible idiot to believe their laughable BS.
They were just analogies of how man can affect the Earth. Don't get your panties in a bunch because people think too much CO2 is harmful, lol. You conservatives are funny. But in the laugh at you kind of way.
