Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- ProudMan on Too many exemptions
451 Comments
On this date, Jun 15th, record setting temperatures for Wichita Kansas
High: 109 °F (1953)
Low: 53 °F (2001)
Iranians I have known are intelligent, involved, personable. The mess in Iran this week is very disheartening.
It appears that Pres. Obama needs some history lessons! I can just imagine all hell breaking loose in the media had Pres Bush made such inaccurate statements. The media powers that be would have laughed him out of the White House!!!!!
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/13/capitulation-in-cairo/?feat=article_top10_read
The Thermostat Hypothesis
The Thermostat Hypothesis is that tropical clouds and thunderstorms actively regulate the temperature of the earth. This keeps the earth at a equilibrium temperature.
Several kinds of evidence are presented to establish and elucidate the Thermostat Hypothesis – historical temperature stability of the Earth, theoretical considerations, satellite photos, and a description of the equilibrium mechanism.
Historical Stability
The stability of the earth’s temperature over time has been a long-standing climatological puzzle. The globe has maintained a temperature of ± ~ 3% (including ice ages) for at least the last half a billion years during which we can estimate the temperature. During the Holocene, temperatures have not varied by ±1%. And during the ice ages, the temperature was generally similarly stable as well.
In contrast to Earth’s temperature stability, solar physics has long indicated (Gough, 1981; Bahcall et al., 2001) that 4 billion years ago the total solar irradiance was about three quarters of the current value. In early geological times, however, the earth was not correspondingly cooler. Temperature proxies such as deuterium/hydrogen ratios and 16O/18O ratios show no sign of a 30% warming of the earth over this time. Why didn’t the earth warm as the sun warmed?
This is called the “Faint Early Sun Paradox” (Sagan and Mullen, 1972), and is usually explained by positing an early atmosphere much richer in greenhouse gases than the current atmosphere.
However, this would imply a gradual decrease in GHG forcing which exactly matched the incremental billion-year increase in solar forcing to the present value. This seems highly unlikely.
A much more likely candidate is some natural mechanism which has regulated the earth’s temperature over geological time…..
….Conclusions and Musings
1. The sun puts out more than enough energy to totally roast the earth. It is kept from doing so by the clouds reflecting about a third of the sun’s energy back to space. As near as we can tell, this system of cloud formation to limit temperature rises has never failed.
2. This reflective shield of clouds forms in the tropics in response to increasing temperature.
3. As tropical temperatures continue to rise, the reflective shield is assisted by the formation of independent heat engines called thunderstorms. These cool the surface in a host of ways, move heat aloft, and convert heat to work.
4. Like cumulus clouds, thunderstorms also form in response to increasing temperature.
5. Because they are temperature driven, as tropical temperatures rise, tropical thunderstorms and cumulus production increase. These combine to regulate and limit the temperature rise. When tropical temperatures are cool, tropical skies clear and the earth rapidly warms. But when the tropics heat up, cumulus and cumulonimbus put a limit on the warming. This system keeps the earth within a fairly narrow band of temperatures.
6. The earth’s temperature regulation system is based on the unchanging physics of wind, water, and cloud.
7. This is a reasonable explanation for how the temperature of the earth has stayed so stable (or more recently, bi-stable as glacial and interglacial) for hundreds of millions of years.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/14/the-thermostat-hypothesis/#more-8500
————
A very well designed system. How lucky.
Global Cooling Wreaking Havoc on World’s Crops
As the administration moves forward with contracting reviews and begins efforts to bring back in-house several job functions, at least one acquisition reform group is urging caution.
In a new report, the Federal Acquisition Innovation and Reform Institute, or FAIR, said agencies must be careful about insourcing to ensure the government doesn’t lose the skills and core competencies contractors currently bring to the table.
“We support the position of insourcing, but we’re proposing that we not simplify it,” said FAIR President Raj Sharma. “We want to make sure that all agencies across the board, and management, understand that this is a long-term process. The last thing anyone would want is for us to rush through this process … and have even more program failures than we had before. That is something we cannot afford.”
President Obama has vowed to review federal contracting practices, clarify the definition of “inherently governmental” and strengthen the federal workforce. In a March 4 memo, Obama directed the Office of Management and Budget to issue guidance on outsourcing. But the FAIR report notes that changing the status quo will not be easy.
Contractors now are performing tasks that require specialized skills, as well as mission critical functions and daily program management and support roles, the report stated. At the Defense Department alone, the number of contractors has jumped from 21 percent of the Pentagon’s workforce to 39 percent during the last eight years. Govexec.com
Again Obama rushes through change – without regard of the consequences. Obama also issued directives that “diversity” and “equal opportunity” race based hiring
practises be reinstituted. Quality is not job one with this president.
And here is the rest of the story: Notice the government is going to be dumbing down the job application process. The applications, job requirements, and descriptions have to brought down to public education standards.
“Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag told agencies in a Thursday memo to fast-track federal management reforms, including those related to hiring, and to use the budget process to target potential savings.
“The federal hiring process needs to be reformed,” Orszag wrote, criticizing agency efforts to implement the end-to-end hiring roadmap announced by the Office of Personnel Management in September 2008, which directed agencies to reduce hiring time to 80 days. “To date, there has been sporadic effort, at best, applied to making this initial first step in our overall hiring reform a reality.”
Orszag said he and OPM Director John Berry expected agencies to accomplish four specific goals within the next six months, and set a Dec. 15 deadline for them to report on their efforts. First, agencies must use the roadmap guidelines associated with the end-to-end hiring process to create an outline of their hiring processes. Agencies also are required to revise the job descriptions for the 10 most common positions they hire for and rewrite them in plain language; put in place plans to inform candidates through USAJobs about the status of their applications throughout the entire hiring process; and demonstrate that they have involved hiring managers in every step of the process.
Berry previously said hiring reforms were among his top priorities, and assigned a team at his agency to examine ways to simplify federal hiring.” Govexec.com
It is now more than 200 years since the great astronomer William Herschel observed a correlation between wheat prices and sunspots. When the latter were few in number, he noted, the climate turned colder and drier, crop yields fell and wheat prices rose. In the past two years, sunspot activity has dropped to its lowest point for a century. One of our biggest worries is that our politicians are so fixated on the idea that CO2 is causing global warming that most of them haven’t noticed that the problem may be that the world is not warming but cooling, with all the implications that has for whether we get enough to eat.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5525933/Crops-under-stress-as-temperatures-fall.html
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
….and for all of you putzheads who advocate .gov policies that drive up the cost of energy in the name of stopping global warming, I will be burning the schiite out of firewood this winter for heat. And pumping out as much phuqueing CO2 as humanly possible. Hell I might even leave a window or two open just so I have an excuse to burn more wood.
Heckler,
Burn some green wood, it ticks off the enviro-wackos something fierce.
Be sure and keep your chimney clear of build-up though! :)
If you drink beer and beans you will increase
your signature on the earth too.
Farts for our future.
Uhm, “Heckler” –
Burn coal, instead.
Y’see, burning wood is basically a carbon-neutral affair. (There are plenty of other pollutants associated with burning wood, but CO2 isn’t one of them.)
Trees, y’see, are plants which take carbon out of the environment and store it in wood.
When you exhale CO2 you’re basically returning that carbon dioxide into the the atmosphere the plants you ate and the critters you ate that ate those plants. Carbon neutral.
Now, when massive factory farms strip rain forests in Brazil to provide McBurger with hamburger, the difference between a jungle’s ability to absorb CO2 vs. additional cud-chewers’ output.
If you burn wood, you’re putting a lot of other pollutants in the air, but you’re really close to being carbon-neutral. On the other hand, if you burn coal, you’re digging up million-year-old captured carbon and spewing it into the air. Same with oil. Same with natural gas.
“Regular’s” advice — to burn green wood — is (as with most of “Regular’s” posts — pretty much meaningless.
‘NOAA: U.S. Temperature Warmer than Average for May ‘
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090610_maystats.html
How’s that Obama loooooove working for the market today?
Thanks for the link cosmos.
Based on NOAA’s Residential Energy Demand Temperature Index (REDTI), the contiguous U.S. temperature-related energy demand was 1.0 percent below average in May.
Also, I noticed that the majority of the 48 states were near normal or below normal temperatures in May.
BTW cosmos, just how does one justify averaging temperatures of the Mojave desert and far North Eastern Maine, two different climate regions?
eh?
Monkeyhawk,
They are AGW science deniers — you can’t expect them to understand the obvious difference between carbon-neutral firewood, and long-time sequestered carbon in fossil fuels.
Monkeyhawk,
They also can’t understand that an average can be calculated for data over an area.
Monkey”boy”
I don’t have any coal on my property. At least not at a depth that could be reached with a shovel.
And I have a question for you and the other genius cosmo.
You think burning wood is carbon neutral? So converting something into CO2 in a matter of minutes that would have taken 5-10 years to be converted by nature is carbon neutral? If you are saying that difference will have no effect on global warming then neither one of you knows jack about science.
Mid-June in California: Oakland’s Jason Giambi blames hitting woes on cold weather
Wheat board says cold winter and spring taking toll on western grain farmers
Swimming: Phelps flies to victory in chilly Santa Clara
“It’s cold out here, I’m freezing,” Phelps said. “It’s windy and chilly.”
So far, June’s chill is one for the records
Chicago – The cloudy, chilly and rainy open to June here has been the talk of the town. So far this June is running more than 12 degrees cooler than last year,
Canada to Chicago to California – all below normal.
—————————————————————–
‘NOAA: U.S. Temperature Warmer than Average for May ‘
—————————————————————-
Hmmmm. About that…
Record low June temperatures around the world, again
Record low temperatures in 18 states – 6 Jun 09
Record low temperatures in 15 states – 5 Jun 09
Record low max temperatures in 24 states – 5 Jun 09
Record low temperatures in 11 states – 4 Jun 09
Record low max temperatures in 20 states – 4 Jun 09
Record low temperatures in seven states – 3 Jun 09
Record low max temperatures in 10 states – 3 Jun 09
Australia: Cold weather smashes records
ZIMBABWE:
With the country at the beginning of the winter season that always experiences an increase in the demand of power due to the cold weather, Zimbabweans are headed for the worst winter in the history of the country.
NEW ZEALAND: Ski resorts gear up for action
Across the ocean at New Zealand, favourable cold weather, consistent snowfalls and plenty of snowmaking opportunities resulted in superb snow conditions for the opening of Coronet Peak on the Queen’s birthday weekend, in Queenstown.
Billings, MT – More record-setting cold
THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SAYS THAT A RECORD LOW MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE OF 47 DEGREES WAS SET AT THE BILLINGS AIRPORT YESTERDAY. THIS BREAKS THE OLD RECORD FOR A JUNE SEVENTH OF 48 SET IN 1974.
Lack of global warming hits Finland
Aatos Kantanen, who lives in Kyyjärvi in Central Finland, rubbed his eyes when he took a look at his outdoor thermometer at 3.00 a.m. during the night between Saturday and Sunday. The reading was – 10°C. Yes, minus 10.
“Heckler” poses –
“So converting something into CO2 in a matter of minutes that would have taken 5-10 years to be converted by nature is carbon neutral?”
Yeah.
Pretty much, in climatological terms.
Which makes all you CONs’ “It was chilly today! So what about ‘global warming?’” posts entirely irrelevant to the macro-dynamics of climate change.
Go ahead.
Cut down all the trees on your lot and burn it all winter.
Nothing quite compensates, I’d imagine, like a long rigid roaring chain saw thrust from your waist against nature. So enjoy yourself.
Heckler continues to prove that s/he doesn’t understand the term carbon-neutral.
soldevvb continues to stupdily insist that temperatures in a few selected regions = the average temperature of a much larger region.
But many Democrats, particularly in the Senate, have balked at the idea, saying they prefer a tax that has some hope of winning Republican support. In legislation that could be unveiled as early as this week, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) is expected to propose a new tax on the health benefits that millions of Americans currently receive tax-free through employers.
Economists say taxing employer-sponsored benefits would help trim runaway health costs and force society to broadly share the burdens of reform. The idea also has bipartisan appeal. Former president George W. Bush and John Mc Cain (Ariz.), the 2008 GOP presidential candidate, championed a form of the tax; so did Obama advisers Jason Furman and Ezekiel Emanuel before they joined the administration.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/14/AR2009061402769_pf.html
The thought of this is an outrage, if the issue is affordable health care and to suggest taxing health care benefits? That is totally unreasonable, shall we be taxed after lung replacement on the air that is newly taken in? How about a tax on free speech, we do not have to pay to have the right of free speech so should that too be taxed? It would appear to be a Bi-partisan idea more though a Washington idea and the thought of someone so in a bubble that reality is created with Crayons and colored paper!
This is a idea of everyone having to share the cost? NO it is punishing those who have what you want everyone to have. I was once told that Colorado has a “View tax” if you own or buy land that has a scenic view you are taxed on the view. Idiotic! The Government does not have a RIGHT to tax everything in the name of the people. Nor is there a duty to do some as a form of punishment or atonement.
A tax should be a fair matter for all not singular for some, it falls into the age old argument of taxing the have because their are the have. In this case those who do already have health care would be taxed for having health care! Costello’s answer “How stupid do you want me to be?”.
Well you know that employers also provide toilet paper for the restroom used by the employees why not tax that too? Then there are the lights and the air conditioning least we forget there is also safety equipment for the safety of the employees. IDIOTIC!!!
The NOAA Climate Prediction Center 8-14 day forecast says it is already shaping up to be a cold June:
“They are AGW science deniers — you can’t expect them to understand the obvious difference between carbon-neutral firewood, and long-time sequestered carbon in fossil fuels.”—cosmos
cosmos doesn’t understand the obvious fact that the earth itself is carbon-neutral. The earth is a closed vessel so to speak, other than energy from the sun and the occasional space interloper there are the same number of atoms of carbon today as yesterday as hundreds or thousands or millions of years ago. They just get moved around a little over time, but time also balances it out.
In a happy distraction from ongoing grief, disspiriting news stories (there’s only so much I can take of Shelley “The Warthog” Shannon and “Rev.” Spitz(er Swallows) these days….so….
My big bro’s 55th birthday is comin’ up soon, so I’m gonna be nice and send him a lil’ present.
During our phone conversation, I asked him straight off, “How’s the music scene in Seattle? Is it true that Cobain was cremated and Courtney shoved the ashes up her #$%^?”
OK, OK – I didn’t ask that last part – but this much is clear: My brother lived, breathed and strummed music – for decades. That was his ostensible purpose for moving Northwestward, so….I wasn’t really prepared for his monosyllabic answer (the first of many):
“No.”
“What?……(little sister sort of stuttering) – Do you still play guitar? Are you still into music?”
“No.”
(Lil’ sis sort of nonplussed by now)..”Do you still listen to music?”
“No – just classical.”
Oh, my jay-suzth..
Now, dig this:
This was a man who, in 1991, became downright dogmatic about a certain moral issue (and, no, it wasn’t abortion)…on his last phone conversation with his youngest sibling.
“It’s never right! It’s WRONG! You can’t do it! Think of a song! That’s what gets ME through the day! That’s what compels ME to get up in the morning!”
This is a dude who teared up every time The Byrds sang the line about “A Time for Peace”..in their 1965 nugget “Turn! Turn! Turn”.
Oh, my lawsie.
Suffice it to say, little sister bit her tongue nearly in two and carried on as if he had just said, “It’s raining in B-mf–kEgypt today.” Because there’s just certain things you don’t discuss with your brother…..
boxlock20,
Thank you for proving my 10:02 am post is accurate.
soldevvb,
Is Texas having a “cold June”?
And soldevvb, please explain how you calculate a global average temperature using only a few record temperatures, from a few selected regions.
I can’t share thangs with my bro’ that I have hilariously shared with a couple gay foke at one of my jobs.
I can’t tell him the residual effects of The Phelpses on his youngest sibling. I can’t tell him he hasn’t seen anything funnier than a six-foot songbird walking on her tippy-toes. (Oh well, I always wanted to be a ballerina; I’ll be ballet-ed right in half if now ain’t my chance….)
I can’t tell him I’ve been reborn for the first time since that scorchin’, sizzlin’ summer of 1986 when I was struck by the Thunderbolt – as famously described by Mario Puzo in “The Godfather”.
None of that s–t can be discussed – so little sister sort of has to keep the conversation centered. On he, himself and him.
But what the f— – I still love him. And I just wanna send him a present. He says he’s still into classical music – so I’m gonna send him a certain CD that I’ve loved for six years now. I sort of hate to part with it – but what the heck.
I’ve parted with my serenity recently – and not even St. Francis’s admonitions seem to be a palliative. They make me cry – but they don’t cure what sometimes ails me.
Only Freddie’s fatboy could do that…..
#
cosmos_originally
Posted June 15, 2009 at 11:12 am | Permalink
soldevvb,
Is Texas having a “cold June”?
And soldevvb, please explain how you calculate a global average temperature using only a few record temperatures, from a few selected regions.
—————————-
cosmos does not understand tropospheric temperatures and climate regions.
“Australia: Cold weather smashes records
NEW ZEALAND: Ski resorts gear up for action
Across the ocean at New Zealand, favourable cold weather, consistent snowfalls and plenty of snowmaking opportunities resulted in superb snow conditions for the opening of Coronet Peak on the Queen’s birthday weekend, in Queenstown.”
Ummmmmmmm Yea, and it’s WINTER down there… Global Warming(Climate Change) has always maintained that weird spikes in temperatures(not climate) are to be anticipated in the climate change models…
Post some REAL stuff for a change… This hesaid/hesaid stuff is getting old… on both sides of the argument…
Australia: Cold weather smashes records
Hmmmm, what about the above makes it important?
Dipschit chazz can’t figure it out.
chazz does not understand English.
“This week, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., is expected to unveil a controversial plan to tax at least some of the health benefits that millions of Americans receive from their employers. Two-thirds of Americans under age 65 get coverage through an employer — more than 158 million people, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. But while Obama officials reject the idea of taxing benefits, they’re not ruling out accepting a bill that includes the mechanism. [WTFO?] “We’ll have to see what the whole bill says,” Biden said Sunday.
Obama’s new openness to the idea stands in contrast to what he said six months ago as a presidential candidate, when he harshly criticized his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain, for proposing that employer-provided benefits should be taxed.
Scolding McCain in their debate on Oct. 15, Obama said, “This is your plan, John. For the first time in history, you will be taxing people’s health-care benefits.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31106408/
Obama will have broken two campaign promises with one stroke: Not to raise taxes on 95% of Americans, and not to tax employer-provided benefits.
Beat that drum!
SOL — It’s WINTER, you fool!! That has nothing to do with Globalk Climate Change… It has to do with regional phenomena!!! Cant you get that through your minimal gray matter??
“The Government does not have a RIGHT to tax everything in the name of the people. Nor is there a duty to do some as a form of punishment or atonement.
A tax should be a fair matter for all not singular for some, it falls into the age old argument of taxing the have because their are the have.”
Writerdog? You are a conservative?
Can I hear an “Amen, brothers and sisters. Amen!”
(and after that I’d sorta like to apply your speech to the UNearned Income Credit. Start there.)
AmWay — Baucus is an idiot… I called McCain an idiot when HE proosed something similar during the Campaign… Just because Baucus is a democrat, doesnt make the plan somehow any smarter… Just a different slant on the same stupid plan… IMHO, it isnt a slam either party… just a slam on a pizz poor idea….
#
Chas
Posted June 15, 2009 at 11:33 am | Permalink
SOL — It’s WINTER, you fool!! That has nothing to do with Globalk Climate Change… It has to do with regional phenomena!!! Cant you get that through your minimal gray matter??
———————
Chas,
Record cold temperatures are well, you know, record cold temperatures. Doesn’t matter if it’s winter.
Wake up and smell reality, Froschgehirne.
It’s WINTER, you fool!!
LMFAO. It is a record breaking cold winter you dense idiot.
And it is cold across the globe. Thus the posts to various global regions that are cold.
Damn you’re dumb.
Film Fan, I can’t tell you how much I enjoy your posts.
They truly brighten my day.
For my brother’s birthday, I got him a farting b-day card. He loved it because whenever he had to do the real thing, he just blamed the card.
AmWay, I’m sure Obama will NOT tax health care benefits for the poor.
Those earning less then $30,000/year I’m sure will pay no taxes at all, on anything.
You did point out 2 Obama lies above though. He’s gonna raise taxes on 50% of Americans, not 5%.
And HE is gonna tax health benefits, for most people.
I wonder, will you pay a tax on the Government health care plan, if that’s the coverage you get stuck with?
#
JimJohnson
Posted June 15, 2009 at 11:37 am | Permalink
Film Fan, I can’t tell you how much I enjoy your posts.
They truly brighten my day.
For my brother’s birthday, I got him a farting b-day card. He loved it because whenever he had to do the real thing, he just blamed the card.
———————
I blame mice practicing illegal ventriloquism.
SOL — Dont you know that these strange WEATHER patterns are being caused by the Global Elitists and the Bildebergers flkying around in their stealth black helicopters, doing funny things with weather control??
You mean you arent reading enough news from the Illuminati sources?? Damn, boy, you are way behind there, eh??
“And it is cold across the globe. Thus the posts to various global regions that are cold.” [SOL]
Yea, it’s so cold that the Greenland Ice Sheet is melting much faster than anticipated… You forget that “region” on your list??
Illegal ventriloquism?
They have a law for everything now!
soldevvb posted June 15, 2009 at 11:37 am
It’s WINTER, you fool!!
LMFAO. It is a record breaking cold winter you dense idiot.
And it is cold across the globe. Thus the posts to various global regions that are cold.
Damn you’re dumb.
——————————-
soldevvb,
Explain how you calculate the global average temperature from posts like Billings MT having a record low max temperature of 47 F (versus 48 F in 1975).
soldevvb insists: “And it is cold across the globe.”
Nope!
http://forecast.weather.gov/showsigwx.php?warnzone=TXZ239&warncounty=TXC479&firewxzone=TXZ239&local_place1=3+Miles+ESE+Laredo+TX&product1=Special+Weather+Statement
Yea, it’s so cold that the Greenland Ice Sheet is melting much faster than anticipated…
LMFAO. You just can’t fix stooopid.
03 February 2008 : latest Greenland Ice Extent.
With still 2 months of winter to go! More ice and thicker then since the past 15 years.
Greenland ice tipping point ‘further off than thought’
Previous studies have misjudged the so-called Greenland tipping point at which the ice sheet is certain to melt completely, expert claims
Western Greenland Ice Growing
Wrong thread earlier:
Obama’s plan appears to be more of the same. Can you believe this editorial?
Naive, Hypocritical and Dishonest
By Robert Samuelson
WASHINGTON — It’s hard to know whether President Obama’s health care “reform” is naive, hypocritical or simply dishonest. Probably all three. The president keeps saying it’s imperative to control runaway health spending. He’s right. The trouble is that what’s being promoted as health care “reform” almost certainly won’t suppress spending and, quite probably, will do the opposite.
The one certain consequence of expanding insurance coverage is that it would raise spending. When people have insurance, they use more health services. That’s one reason why Obama’s campaign proposal was estimated to cost $1.2 trillion over a decade (the other reason is that the federal government would pick up some costs now paid by others). Indeed, the higher demand for health care might raise costs across the board, increasing both government spending and private premiums.
No doubt the health program that Congress fashions will counter this reality by including some provisions intended to cut costs (”bundled payments” to hospitals, “evidence-based guidelines,” electronic record keeping). In the past, scattershot measures have barely affected health spending. What’s needed is a fundamental remaking of the health care sector — a sweeping “restructuring”– that would overhaul fee-for-service payment and reduce the fragmentation of care.
The place to start would be costly Medicare, the nation’s largest insurance program serving 45 million elderly and disabled. Of course, this would be unpopular, because it would disrupt delivery patterns and reimbursement practices. It’s easier to pretend to be curbing health spending while expanding coverage and spending. Presidents have done that for decades, and it’s why most health industries see “reform” as a good deal. “ Realclearpolitics (from WashPost)
Lot’s of talk by Obama, but doesn’t look to me like any change.
Obama’s plan appears to be more of the same. Can you believe this editorial?
Naive, Hypocritical and Dishonest
By Robert Samuelson
WASHINGTON — It’s hard to know whether President Obama’s health care “reform” is naive, hypocritical or simply dishonest. Probably all three. The president keeps saying it’s imperative to control runaway health spending. He’s right. The trouble is that what’s being promoted as health care “reform” almost certainly won’t suppress spending and, quite probably, will do the opposite.
The one certain consequence of expanding insurance coverage is that it would raise spending. When people have insurance, they use more health services. That’s one reason why Obama’s campaign proposal was estimated to cost $1.2 trillion over a decade (the other reason is that the federal government would pick up some costs now paid by others). Indeed, the higher demand for health care might raise costs across the board, increasing both government spending and private premiums.
No doubt the health program that Congress fashions will counter this reality by including some provisions intended to cut costs (”bundled payments” to hospitals, “evidence-based guidelines,” electronic record keeping). In the past, scattershot measures have barely affected health spending. What’s needed is a fundamental remaking of the health care sector — a sweeping “restructuring”– that would overhaul fee-for-service payment and reduce the fragmentation of care.
The place to start would be costly Medicare, the nation’s largest insurance program serving 45 million elderly and disabled. Of course, this would be unpopular, because it would disrupt delivery patterns and reimbursement practices. It’s easier to pretend to be curbing health spending while expanding coverage and spending. Presidents have done that for decades, and it’s why most health industries see “reform” as a good deal. “ Realclearpolitics (from WashPost)
Lot’s of talk by Obama, but doesn’t look to me like any change.
soldevvb,
Explain how you calculate the global average temperature from posts like Billings MT having a record low max temperature of 47 F (versus 48 F in 1975).
Even Billings could have a significant amount of warming during 2009, despite that one day “record”.
Explain how you calculate the global average temperature from posts like Billings MT having a record low
LMFAO, from cosmo’s link…
INCLUDING THE CITIES OF…LAREDO…FREER…BENAVIDES…ALICE…
SAN DIEGO…KINGSVILLE…CORPUS CHRISTI
South Texas? You couldn’t even find a whole state? South Texas is hot in the summer. Does that come as a shock to anyone here?
http://www.weather.gov/forecasts/graphical/sectors/southplains.php
soldevvb posted June 15, 2009 at 12:08 pm
You just can’t fix stooopid.
——————–
soldevvb posted that comment about himself.
soldevvbcosmo,Explain how you calculate the global average temperature from posts like
Billings MTCorpus Christi having arecord low maxrelitively normal temperature of47 F (versus 48 F in 1975)[oh, you link doens't give the temperature does it, let's go look it up...] 93 F.Even
BillingsCorpus Christi could have a significant amount ofwarmingcooling during 2009, despite that one day“record”normal.“Relatively” for the spelling cops.
“03 February 2008 : latest Greenland Ice Extent.
With still 2 months of winter to go! More ice and thicker then since the past 15 years.” [Sol]
Apparently your data is outdated… by nearly a year and a half… Wanna try again?? I just heard the new report last night… The current figures say the ice is melting at a faster rate than previously anticipated….
soldevvb posted:
And it is cold across the globe.
———————
What’s the matter soldevvb? Can’t you post a link to a credible data set that supports your claim?
All that soldevvb has is some scattered temperatures from drudge, watts, or similar science denier sites.
And soldevvb is too immature to admit that he made a claim that he can’t support.
Do some more “strike-thru” posts to prove my point, sol.
soldevvb,
Come on. . . tell us how you calculate the global monthly & yearly average temperatures, from posts like Billings MT having a record low max temperature of 47 F (versus 48 F in 1975).
“Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak blasted Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s speech on Sunday saying “Netanyahu’s demand that Palestinians recognize Israel as the Jewish state is ruining the chance for peace,” Egyptian news agencies reported on Monday.
Mubarak: not Egypt, nor any other Arab country would support Netanyahu’s approach
Mubarak further added that “not Egypt, nor any other Arab country would support Netanyahu’s approach.”
————
Guess the messiah apology tour to the mid east missed it’s mark. Or maybe it hit it’s mark.
Regardless this shows the world what the mid east think of Isreal and maybe Obama and Hillary will get off the mantra of calling for Isreal to give even more.
So chass post this new report for all of us to see. Chicago is have the coolest spell in recorded history.
http://www.longrangeweather.com/global_temperatures.htm
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/hadcrut-jan08-520.png
Source: Global ?T °C
HadCRUT – 0.595
GISS – 0.750
UAH – 0.588
RSS – 0.629
Average: – 0.6405°C
soldevvb insists: “And it is [present tense] cold across the globe.”
And soldevvb posts a very dubious graph of future temperatures to support his claim?
Thanks for again proving my point, soldevvb.
2008, and some undated averages?
Thanks for again proving my point, soldevvb.
And soldevvb posts a very dubious graph of future temperatures to support his claim?
A graph of a couple thousand years was too difficult for cosmo to figure out. You should take some science classes cosmo.
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Temp_Blend.jpg
Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling
A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C — a value large enough to wipe out most of the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year’s time. For all four sources, it’s the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.
HERE OKIE >>>>
To better understand why carbon dioxide is important, you have to look at the absorption lines for each of the molecules (water vapor and CO2). There are about a hundred of thousand cataloged lines for each asymmetric molecule that is sensitive to bending or rotation. Water vapor has a broad strong absorption spectra (made up of thousands of lines) in the infrared (which is what keeps the earth habitable). These lines come about by the quantum mechanical absorption of a photon of a specific wavelength causing bending and/or rotation in the molecule. However, there are holes in the water vapor absorption spectra (as there are in all gas spectra). If there were not, then the trace gases would not make a difference. Since there are holes in the spectra it becomes important to understand which molecules have absorption lines in those holes. The most important molecules that do are CO2 and CH4.
The bottom line is that CO2 absorption is relatively independent of H2O because the lines do not overlap in some important areas (or are much stronger for CO2 at a specific line than for H2O). Don’t misunderstand, there are overlaps in many areas and there are complicating issues like line broadening that enhance overlap. However, water vapor is not 100% effective in absorbing infrared in the range the earth radiates at. CO2, CH4, and other gases are also not 100% effective. Instead, the trace gases pick up a bit of the energy that H2O misses. Those lines that are picking up missed energy are what makes CO2 and CH4 important even though H2O is the clearly stronger absorber. If you do not understand this very important issue then you need to get a good book on radiative heat transfer. I recommend “Thermal Radiation Heat Transfer” by Siegel and Howell.
http://www.physorg.com/news162647903.html
Starting the 8th year of globally declining temperatures. cosmo is lost.
AND ONE MORE REVIEW — FROM MIT >>>
http://beta.technologyreview.com/blog/post.aspx?bid=362&bpid=23676
AND ONE MORE REVIEW — FROM MIT
Guess the stroke finger took over.
cosmos_originally
Posted June 15, 2009 at 1:10 pm | Permalink
And soldevvb posts a very dubious graph of future temperatures to support his claim?
=====================================
cosmos posts only “sanitized” temperatures, rinsed and washed by IPCC directed computer models, not actual temperatures.
Sea Ice Extent Now Normal in Arctic
Posted by jennifer, June 8th, 2009
NOTHING seems to be going to plan for those who believe in anthropogenic global warming and an imminent climate crisis. According to thermometer and satellite data global surface temperatures are not increasing, the oceans aren’t warming, and now it seems not even the Arctic is melting.
The latest satellite data on Arctic sea ice extent suggests that there is now a normal amount of sea ice in the Arctic – normal is defined as about average for the period 1979 – 2007.
And when all is said and done, if the climate system is not accumulating heat, the AGW hypothesis is invalid.
#
cosmos_originally
Posted June 15, 2009 at 9:54 am | Permalink
‘NOAA: U.S. Temperature Warmer than Average for May ‘
______________
Does a Global Temperature Exist?
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/globaltemp/GlobTemp.JNET.pdf
It appears that the “Global Temperature” was invented by the AGW alarmists to manipulate the data in order make their fraudulent claims.
DJIA took a beating. Where is the obama looooooove?
And the AGW alarmists have a very dubious answer to why they think ” A Global Temperature Exists” by a political blog.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/does-a-global-temperature-exist/
Chas
Posted June 15, 2009 at 1:22 pm | Permalink
“Based on new computer modeling, shows that sea level rise may be an additional 10 centimeters (4 inches) higher by populated areas in northeastern North America than previously thought. Extreme northeastern North America and Greenland MAY experience even higher sea level rise.”
_____________________
Not on actual temps.
At the other end of the earth.
SYDNEY: New analysis has indicated that contrary to the belief that there is large-scale melting of ice over most of Antarctica, ice is actually
expanding in a large portion of the continent.
Antarctica has 90 per cent of the Earth’s ice and 80 per cent of its fresh water. Extensive melting of Antarctic ice sheets would be required to raise sea levels substantially, and ice is melting in parts of west Antarctica.
The destabilization of the Wilkins ice shelf generated international headlines this month.
However, according to a report in the Australian, the picture is very different in east Antarctica, which includes the territory claimed by Australia.
East Antarctica is four times the size of west Antarctica and parts of it are cooling. The Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research report noted that the South Pole had shown “significant cooling in recent decades”.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Global-Warming/Antarctic-ice-growing-not-shrinking-/articleshow/4418558.cms
AGW? Again?
http://umbra.nascom.nasa.gov/images/
LOL! (I rest my case)
Things that make you go ‘hmmm’ or at least yum!
Amazing Cake Art from Russia
http://urbanvault.ca/dskrib/?p=175
soldevvb cannot support his earlier claim about current temperatures.
Max Bacus wants to “tax health care benefits” because he wants to kill real health care reform.
He knows it can’t pass, nor should it.
Max Bacus is a steaming 340 pound pile O S.
‘Melting Greenland Ice Sheets May Threaten Northeast United States, Canada ‘
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090527121055.htm
Cosmo–
Soldevo thinks that reposting CONnie CON’s Junk Science Bloggette is the same as the Goddard Space Institute.
It’s how you deal with the reality that all the facts are against you.
#
CapnAmerica
Posted June 15, 2009 at 3:59 pm | Permalink
Cosmo–
Soldevo thinks that reposting CONnie CON’s Junk Science Bloggette is the same as the Goddard Space Institute.
It’s how you deal with the reality that all the facts are against you.
——————————
James Hansen, Director at Goddard, is not a Climatologist – he is a physicist pretending to be a Climatologist and doing very poorly at it.
CapnAmerica,
soldevvb seems to believe that today is January 2008.
soldevvb also believes the twisted logic(sic) that CO2 can’t be a factor in Earth’s climate, because it isn’t the only factor in Earth’s climate.
cosmos_originally
Posted June 15, 2009 at 4:16 pm | Permalink
CapnAmerica,
soldevvb seems to believe that today is January 2008.
soldevvb also believes the twisted logic(sic) that CO2 can’t be a factor in Earth’s climate, because it isn’t the only factor in Earth’s climate
=====================
cosmos is in favor of a ‘plate tectonics’ tax. Earthquakes caused by man-made sonic disturbances(’warmer rhetoric’) from Hansen and the Goracle.
Speaking of the Goracle, when is that toad going to get his reporters out of N. Korea?
No doubt on this one, Obama dirty
Grassley protests, demands information, including any role of First Lady
The White House’s decision to fire AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin came amid politically-charged tensions inside the Corporation for National and Community Service, the organization that runs AmeriCorps. Top executives at the Corporation, Walpin explained in an hour-long interview Saturday, were unhappy with his investigation into the misuse of AmeriCorps funds by Kevin Johnson, the former NBA star who is now mayor of Sacramento, California and a prominent supporter of President Obama. Walpin’s investigation also sparked conflict with the acting U.S. attorney in Sacramento amid fears that the probe — which could have resulted in Johnson being barred from ever winning another federal grant — might stand in the way of the city receiving its part of billions of dollars in federal stimulus money. After weeks of standoff, Walpin, whose position as inspector general is supposed to be protected from influence by political appointees and the White House, was fired.
Walpin learned his fate Wednesday night. He was driving to an event in upstate New York when he received a call from Norman Eisen, the Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform. “He said, ‘Mr. Walpin, the president wants me to tell you that he really appreciates your service, but it’s time to move on,’” Walpin recalls. “Eisen said, ‘You can either resign, or I’ll tell you that we’ll have to terminate you.’”
The method of Walpin’s firing could be a violation of the 2008 Inspectors General Reform Act, which requires the president to give Congress 30 days’ notice, plus an explanation of cause, before firing an inspector general. Then-Sen. Barack Obama was a co-sponsor of that legislation. In the case of Walpin, Eisen’s efforts to force Walpin to resign could be seen as an effort to push Walpin out of his job so that the White House would not have to go through the 30-day process or give a reason for its action. When Walpin refused to quit, the White House informed Congress and began the 30-day countdown.
http://www.washingtonexaminer
This law breaking action, directly by the white house of Obama will scare every other inspector general – that they better toe the Obama line and do NOT investigate Obama’s minions.
And libs cried about Bush firing the AG’s under his constitutional rights.
#
ANTI
Posted June 15, 2009 at 4:27 pm | Permalink
Speaking of the Goracle, when is that toad going to get his reporters out of N. Korea?
——————–
It will be awhile. He’s scheduled for ‘chin reduction surgery’ to rid himself of the third and fourth chins.
soldevvb also believes that average global temperatures can be accurately calculated from just a few broken temperature records, in a few regions.
Amway…is that what is meant by ‘hope and change’? We HOPE that the president will obey existing law, and see that he plans to change that hope??
Hey Amway…any bets that if any libs do try to respond to that they will either:
a) deny/deflect/change the subject
b) blame Bush for something else
c) launch personal attacks on you for bringing it up.
which will it be? Obviously they will NEVER admit that their messiah could ever do anything wrong…
#
cosmos_originally
Posted June 15, 2009 at 4:30 pm | Permalink
soldevvb also believes that average global temperatures can be accurately calculated from just a few broken temperature records, in a few regions.
________________
cosMo actually believes there is such a thing as “average global temperatures”.
Nancy Armstrong addresses the crowd at the Wichita Tea Party protest, February 27, 2009.
Nancy, a former democrat helped organize the second Tea Party which was attended by over 2,000 Americans from all political parties.
Many have emailed, called, or snail mailed regarding the next event and complaining about lack of publicity on the first two. People WANT to know so they can participate.
http://wichitaliberty.org/politics/wichita-tea-party-nancy-armstrong/
Raptor
Posted June 15, 2009 at 4:51 pm | Permalink
Hey Amway…any bets that if any libs do try to respond to that they will either:
a) deny/deflect/change the subject
b) blame Bush for something else
c) launch personal attacks on you for bringing it up.
———————-
That pretty much describes duh Lib modus operandi Raptor. :)
Raptor,
“D”, all the above.
Hope and change is really just more of the same.
Why, if Obama broke the law, IMPEACH HIM!
“He said, ‘Mr. Walpin, the president wants me to tell you that he really appreciates your service, but it’s time to move on,’” Walpin recalls. “Eisen said, ‘You can either resign, or I’ll tell you that we’ll have to terminate you.’”
Anywhere in that statement that puts any time limitsd on Mr. Walpin’s job??? I sure see none… Also, allows for resignation…
Chas
Posted June 15, 2009 at 4:57 pm | Permalink
“He said, ‘Mr. Walpin, the president wants me to tell you that he really appreciates your service, but it’s time to move on,’” Walpin recalls. “Eisen said, ‘You can either resign, or I’ll tell you that we’ll have to terminate you.’”
Anywhere in that statement that puts any time limitsd on Mr. Walpin’s job??? I sure see none… Also, allows for resignation
—————————
Of course he wants him to resign, because wrongful termination when trying to obscure illegal activity would be grounds for impeachment.
donndublin
Posted June 15, 2009 at 3:14 pm | Permalink
===============================================
Donnie, how terribly typical of you… I post something about Greenland… And your response??? Some stuff about Sydney, and the Antarctic??? Can you at least keep your gegraphy straight??? Huh???
Regular, that wasnt the point of the original post, dippschittt…. It was about not allowing enough time for his dismissal… Can you stay on point for any exchange, or is shifting the focus built into your genes??
More on Walpin, Inspector General firing
The method of Walpin’s firing could be a violation of the 2008 Inspectors General Reform Act, which requires the president to give Congress 30 days’ notice, plus an explanation of cause, before firing an inspector general. Then-Sen. Barack Obama was a co-sponsor of that legislation. In the case of Walpin, Eisen’s efforts to force Walpin to resign could be seen as an effort to push Walpin out of his job so that the White House would not have to go through the 30-day process or give a reason for its action. When Walpin refused to quit, the White House informed Congress and began the 30-day countdown.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Gerald-Walpin-speaks-the-inside-story-of-the-AmeriCorps-firing-48030697.html
“Anywhere in that statement that puts any time limitsd on Mr. Walpin’s job??? I sure see none…”
It’s a threat Chas. Walpin today said he refused to quit because he feels it is very wrong. Whether he is still on the payroll or not, I do not know. He made it appear that he is already gone.
Regardless, don’t the circumstances of his dismissal beg any other questions from you Chas?
” It was about not allowing enough time for his dismissal…”
Chas that is part of it.
But Johnson is a supporter and close to the Obama family. Played BBall together. Then, there is the misuse of federal funds which was the investigative report.
None of that bothers you at all?
#
Chas
Posted June 15, 2009 at 5:04 pm | Permalink
Regular, that wasnt the point of the original post, dippschittt…. It was about not allowing enough time for his dismissal… Can you stay on point for any exchange, or is shifting the focus built into your genes??
—————
Careful Chas, you’ll pop a vein.
I do belive it would be appropriate to wait and see WHAT and WHY the change is to be made… There was no threat… “time to move on” or “resign” — REMEMBER… Obama was involved in the law requiring such constraints on the subject matter… Just wait and see what falls off the tree next… And stop the damned stupid speculations…
I havent heard or seen anything today that even suggests that firing has taken place… However, I believe there is an investigation of the Americorps fund usage…
Just wait and see the outcome….
The person leading an investigation of possible misuse of federal funds (involving a friend of bho)is being forced to resign. and chas calls these FACTS “stupid speculation”?
sheesh….
#
Chas
Posted June 15, 2009 at 5:08 pm | Permalink
I do belive it would be appropriate to wait and see WHAT and WHY the change is to be made… There was no threat… “time to move on” or “resign” — REMEMBER… Obama was involved in the law requiring such constraints on the subject matter… Just wait and see what falls off the tree next… And stop the damned stupid speculations…
————————–
Chas,
By the very definition of the job, Inspector General, they are paid to make impartial investigations.
I’m very sure that O’Bama knows this and ignored the impartial investigation and wanted to terminate Walpin, so there would be no further investigation.
– in order for O’Bama to illegally protect his friend in an active investigation.
Walpin cannot be fired without a 30 dday notice to Congress, accompanied by a full listing of the circumstances… Have either of those two requirements been met??? If not, then all of this wild speculation is just that… and nothing more…
#
Chas
Posted June 15, 2009 at 5:15 pm | Permalink
Walpin cannot be fired without a 30 dday notice to Congress, accompanied by a full listing of the circumstances… Have either of those two requirements been met??? If not, then all of this wild speculation is just that… and nothing more…
===========================
O’Bama is in deep feces.
interesting…if GW had done anything like this, the libs here would have been foaming at the mouth and demanding immediate impeachment. But…since it is bho, the only response is to ‘wait and see’….
such transparency…..such partisan blindness. And the sad part, the libs can’t see how ridiculous that really is…
“if GW had done anything like this, the libs here would have been foaming at the mouth and demanding immediate impeachment.”
As I mentioned, remember Bush firing the AG’s?
Hmmm libs?
“Did they become doctors to help people?
Or was it just to make money?” Bluejay on yesterdays open thread.
————–
The going concern for all business is to make a profit Bluejay. Doctors in private practise have the same requirement. They have overhead, employees to pay, malpractise insurance and all the bills any business has.
Doctors set their rates to allow for expenses and a profit.
Medicare/medicaid come along and tell the doctor, “Sorry, we are not going to pay you enough to make a profit. Further, we are not even going to pay you enough to pay your expenses.” Further, the government requires certain forms and paperwork (software) which the doctor is obligated to complete. This takes more of his/her resources.
Doctors have no choice but to either stop taking government patients – or increase their rates on the rest of their patients, in order to keep the business in the black.
It’s not the “evil rich” doctor Bluejay. These men and women work hard to get through medical school, pay their bills, and work long hours (It’s not a 9-5 job) to help their patients and keep the business going.
Even applies to your hero Tiller.
Youre right Regular… and all that deep feces is being left all over the place by the wild ruminations of crazy right wing bozos… A BIG bunch of right wing clowns… and all because you right wing nuts cant stand it that we have black man who is now President… get over it… you all LOST… and change is finally happening all over the country…. What a bunch of arm flailing…. You guys are all the scourge of this great nation…
Why do you people hate this nation??
Course, Amway..Bush removed 8 AG’s, Clinton fired 93. But…according to the libs, GW should have been impeached for that as well.
#
Chas
Posted June 15, 2009 at 5:25 pm | Permalink
Youre right Regular… and all that deep feces is being left all over the place by the wild ruminations of crazy right wing bozos… A BIG bunch of right wing clowns… and all because you right wing nuts cant stand it that we have black man who is now President… get over it… you all LOST… and change is finally happening all over the country…. What a bunch of arm flailing…. You guys are all the scourge of this great nation…
Why do you people hate this nation??
————————–
Try and maintain Chas, I’m sure there will be more to come.
Don’t wear out your brain in one session.
No surprise here.
Poll shows 77% of Americans believe it was a mistake for Obama to order the closure of GITMO without a plan.
Poll shows 60% of Americans still believe it is wrong to bring the terrorists into the US from GITMO.
And 3 of the terrorist transported to their own home on the beach in Bermuda has stated, “We went from prison to paradise. We cannot believe this beautiful home.”
Nuts
what a ridiculous statement, this latest tactic of “why do you hate (fill in the blank).” Just because I do not bow at the altar of your messiah doesn’t mean I hate this country.
that, of course, can be turned around on you, chas. Your ongoing and perpetual hatred of bush could have me asking, ‘why do you hate this country?
It is a stupid, childish and meaningless accusation.
Leading democrat takes on Obama
On his HBO show Friday night, Bill Maher complained about President Obama’s frequent public outings. He compared the president to Lindsay Lohan: in the papers a lot but not doing very much. “This is not what I voted for,” Maher said.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWulnfog20c&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ehuffingtonpost%2Ecom%2F2009%2F06%2F14%2Fbill%2Dmaher%2Dtakes%2Don%2Dobama%5Fn%5F215338%2Ehtml&feature=player_embedded
American_Way
Posted June 15, 2009 at 5:35 pm | Permalink
Leading democrat takes on Obama
On his HBO show Friday night, Bill Maher complained about President Obama’s frequent public outings. He compared the president to Lindsay Lohan: in the papers a lot but not doing very much. “This is not what I voted for,” Maher said.
——————
LMAO!
My favorite line was “There’s a teleprompter in President O’Bama’s bedroom in front of his bed. It says, “Who’s your daddy!”
heh heh
More bad news: The Kennedy Healthcare Plan will cost 1 trillion dollars – but only cover 16 million Americans.
What about the other “so called” 36 million?!?!?!
So much for every American heh?
donndublin actually believes there is not such a thing as “average global temperatures”.
Well, it had to happen. It was inevitable – just like taxes, the law of gravity, and two things no-longer-very-near-and-dear-to-my-heart observing 14 years of bad luck.
My mother and I had a (very) heated conversation about Dr. Tiller last night. Now, I didn’t yell, swear or curse out the woman who brought me into the world. I still remember hearing “The Lord’s Prayer” sung to me by a certain maternal majesty fifty years ago. So-o-o-o-o, there’s only so much acrimony Big Bertha can muster.
I won’t repeat everything that was said, but this much was said: In cases in which fetal death is CERTAIN upon birth, I regard these procedures as more defensible than my own abortion. Through the ages, we have not taken care of pregnant women – and birthing women – as we should. My beautiful mother’s own mournful childbirths were proof negative of that (and I reminded her of same).
Not only that……
cosmos_originally
Posted June 15, 2009 at 4:30 pm | Permalink
soldevvb also believes that average global temperatures can be accurately calculated from just a few broken temperature records, in a few regions.
#
cosmos_originally
Posted June 15, 2009 at 9:54 am | Permalink
‘NOAA: U.S. Temperature Warmer than Average for May ‘
(Removed link)
————–
If local temperature aren’t relevant, I’m not sure why Cosmos is posting them unless he doesn’t want to post global temps. Since we are talking about global temps, this is what went on last month.
“May 2009 saw another drop in the global average temperature anomaly, from +0.09 deg. C in April to +0.04 deg. C in May, originating mostly from the Northern Hemisphere and the tropics.”
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2009/06/may-2009-global-temperature-update-004-deg-c/
#
Chas
Posted June 15, 2009 at 5:01 pm | Permalink
donndublin
Posted June 15, 2009 at 3:14 pm | Permalink
===============================================
Donnie, how terribly typical of you… I post something about Greenland… And your response??? Some stuff about Sydney, and the Antarctic??? Can you at least keep your gegraphy straight??? Huh???
____________
Charlie boy, how terribly typical of you… The subject was about GLOBAL sea level. And your response??? You “post something about Greenland”.
Typical of the libs to not see the big picture.
Regarding the pending termination of the IG…
where is the law-breaking by the Obama administration?
They offered the guy the opportunity to resign which is basically SOP, he declined, so they started the 30 day countdown and notified Congress.
Weather almanac…
Place: California
Year: 1896
Event: Temperature at For Mohave soared to 127 degrees Fahrenheit — highest ever temperature recorded in U.S. in June
Over 100 years ago…man, this ‘global warming’ sure is horrid, isn’t it?? A 100+ year old record still stands…
“Thank you for proving my 10:02 am post is accurate.”—cosmos
I understand it well, what you don’t seem to understand is that hardly an atom of carbon, for all practical purposes, has been added to this earth since it was formed. We live on a sealed ’spaceship’. No total carbon is being added to the earth as a whole.
Wake up.
I still am annoyed (and sometimes downright revolted) by intermittent arrogance surrounding this issue.
Please – if you’re on the winning side of a PBS debate, don’t sully it by making sweeping generalizations. Moreover, where in the hellola is the FATHER’S responsibility in this woeful litany of horror you cite? To wit:
My ex has never suffered from depression; he has never been suicidal; he appears to have no conscience; his history of drugs far preceded his first impregnation. Of course, he’s a f–king cripple, but what the heck. The poor little fellow slipped on the ice in 1987 after an all-night bacchanale, so I’m not sure that really counts.
So….I guess my next question is: How can someone who caused six abortions (and maybe more) escape all this agony while someone with one abortion in her past does not? Doesn’t compute – not to me.
Depression is an illness; suicidal ideation is a facet of that illness. Depression can ensue from a myriad of factors. I know myself very, very well – and it sort of sticks in my craw when right-to-life folks tell me where all my pain comes from.
Daniel…perhaps you missed the part about his firing follows an investigation of an bho buddy?
I don’t know if this has been touched on yet or not.
“Conservatives” Are Single-Largest Ideological Group
Percentage of “liberals” higher this decade than in early ’90s
by Lydia Saad
PRINCETON, NJ — Thus far in 2009, 40% of Americans interviewed in national Gallup Poll surveys describe their political views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 21% as liberal. This represents a slight increase for conservatism in the U.S. since 2008, returning it to a level last seen in 2004. The 21% calling themselves liberal is in line with findings throughout this decade, but is up from the 1990s.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/Conservatives-Single-Largest-Ideological-Group.aspx
#
Regular
Posted June 15, 2009 at 5:14 pm | Permalink
#
Chas
Posted June 15, 2009 at 5:08 pm | Permalink
By the very definition of the job, Inspector General, they are paid to make impartial investigations.
I’m very sure that O’Bama knows this and ignored the impartial investigation and wanted to terminate Walpin, so there would be no further investigation.
- in order for O’Bama to illegally protect his friend in an active investigation.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
I believe it would be up to the US Attorney in Sacramento to bring criminal charges against Mr. Johnson. I wonder why he didn’t bring charges?
Maybe the investigation wasn’t so impartial, maybe there wasn’t sufficient evidence to bring charges, maybe there are other reasons…
I’m sure Senator Grassley will get to the bottom of this.
#
Raptor
Posted June 15, 2009 at 6:15 pm | Permalink
Daniel…perhaps you missed the part about his firing follows an investigation of an bho buddy?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Yeah, I read that. An investigation which resulted in a negotiated settlement and no criminal charges.
Heat From Earth’s Magma Contributing To Melting Of Greenland Ice
ScienceDaily (Dec. 18, 2007)
Scientists have discovered what they think may be another reason why Greenland ’s ice is melting: a thin spot in Earth’s crust is enabling underground magma to heat the ice.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071212103004.htm
_______________
We’d better start taxing the magma too.
A reason Daniel?
How about this one?
Walpin, a New York attorney, was appointed by then-President George W. Bush and sworn into office in January 2007 after being confirmed by the Senate, according to a news release on AmeriCorps’ Web site.
Wasn’t there a big ruckus when Bush supposedly fired some Attorneys for political reasons? :)
outlander,
Here’s the global analysis for May, just posted today.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2009/may/global.html
Raptor,
Are you arguing that “Mohave” California = “global”?
“so they started the 30 day countdown and notified Congress”
Do you have a source for that remark?
Mr. Walpin himself appeared on television just now and said he was already let go. He is not working. He was notified by telephone last Wednesday night. He seems to believe that the law was broken, since he has been fired.
Would really like to read your source.
“Yeah, I read that. An investigation which resulted in a negotiated settlement and no criminal charges.”
So that makes everything honky-dory? Everything groovy?
#
Regular
Posted June 15, 2009 at 6:30 pm | Permalink
A reason Daniel?
How about this one?
Walpin, a New York attorney, was appointed by then-President George W. Bush and sworn into office in January 2007 after being confirmed by the Senate, according to a news release on AmeriCorps’ Web site.
Wasn’t there a big ruckus when Bush supposedly fired some Attorneys for political reasons? :)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
I remember that….the Whitehouse response was the the US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president. I don’t know but I’m going to presume that Inspectors General are in the same boat based upon the lack of hollering about the termination itself. Senator Grassley seems to be concerned about the way the termination is being carried out.
I’m still not seeing where Obama is not in compliance with the law that was passed last Spring.
It sort of annoys me, as well, when people try to claim they know the truth about ALL late-term abortions. They don’t – nor do I. And that, basically, was the crux and crucible of my argument with my Mother last night.
Whether you’re a retired schoolteacher or winnin’ PBS debater or a Ms. Magazine contributor or a song-singin’ spinster, you don’t know it all.
That’s what annoys me. It will continue to annoy me.
boxlock20,
The issue is not about Earth’s “total carbon”.
It’s about the location of the carbon — safely sequestered underground, versus in the atmosphere causing higher radiative forcing.
American_Way
Posted June 15, 2009 at 6:35 pm | Permalink
“so they started the 30 day countdown and notified Congress”
Do you have a source for that remark?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Of course.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-615-2/comment-page-4/#comment-602730
not arguing a thing, cosmos. I thought that “GLOBAL warming” should affect, oh, I dunno…the GLOBE? Like, the entire planet? Or…is it named incorrectly?
#
American_Way
Posted June 15, 2009 at 6:36 pm | Permalink
“Yeah, I read that. An investigation which resulted in a negotiated settlement and no criminal charges.”
So that makes everything honky-dory? Everything groovy?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
It indicates to me the possibility that there may have been something lacking in the investigation.
What other motivation would the US Attorney’s Office in Sacramento have for not pursuing criminal charges if they were warranted?
Then again, I don’t have all the answers neither. If abortion enacts such a withering toll on sinners, then why hasn’t my impregnator exuded any beads of sweat and/or wisdom over this issue?
How can someone who caused six abortions get off unscathed while his one-abortion exes are among The Damned? Don’t make much sense to me.
Then again, I guess I should count my blessings here. We’ve had identical back injuries, but the similarities sort of end there. He’s crippled from an all-night bacchanale in 1987 after slippin’ on the ice; I’ve got intermittent issues after minor surgery in 2001.
He needs two reform school dropouts to help him make water; I command the respect and awe of colleagues half my age for my disco-era, “Soul Train” throw-downs.
Ah yes – life is good when you’re old, bold and given to scold…..
“What other motivation would the US Attorney’s Office in Sacramento have for not pursuing criminal charges if they were warranted?”
How about the possible loss of millions of dollars from the Economic Recovery Act? Motive?
““so they started the 30 day countdown and notified Congress”
The law requires the executive branch to provide a reason – justification for the firing.
Where is it? The IG fired hasn’t seen it and doesn’t know it. He was not told why.
American_Way
Posted June 15, 2009 at 6:48 pm | Permalink
How about the possible loss of millions of dollars from the Economic Recovery Act? Motive?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
I don’t recall the US Attorneys Office in any jurisdiction being slated to receive stimulus funds. I was under the impression that most of that money was headed to the states.
The US Attorney’s Office is a Federal Agency.
Amway – here’s the link to the original story by Byron York, on Mr. Walpin.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Whats-behind-Obamas-sudden-firing-of-the-AmeriCorps-inspector-general-47877797.html
#
American_Way
Posted June 15, 2009 at 6:49 pm | Permalink
““so they started the 30 day countdown and notified Congress”
The law requires the executive branch to provide a reason – justification for the firing.
Where is it? The IG fired hasn’t seen it and doesn’t know it. He was not told why.
-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
If I’m understanding the law correctly, the Administration is obligated to inform Congress of the reasons, not the IG, and has to do so within the 30 day period which, by my calculation, has not expired.
Wow, judging by the radar, central Kansas is due for some interesting weather. I love this time of the year.
http://www.intellicast.com/National/Radar/Current.aspx?location=USKS0523&enlarge=true&animate=true
Raptor,
Global refers to the global total — it does not mean that all locations will warm by the same amount.
#
cosmos_originally
Posted June 15, 2009 at 7:10 pm | Permalink
Raptor,
Global refers to the global total — it does not mean that all locations will warm by the same amount.
———————————-
So you’re saying that North West Antarctica warms at the same rate as South Easter Antarctica?
Interesting science cosmos – not.
Some tornado warnings have been issued,
http://www.weather.gov/
Regular,
Do you need to have your vision checked? Are you having another stroke?
I guess that makes sense, cosmos. But…this whole sky is falling hysteria because the incestuous hollywood community gave al gore an award doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense to me. I do not pretend to be a climotologist and cannot speak from any scientific basis.
But…I also don’t believe that an award from hollywood makes al gore’s movie any more factual.
Forget the movie — stick with the science… You right wing goons would argue with Gore if he said coal is black… LOL
cosmos_originally
Posted June 15, 2009 at 7:15 pm | Permalink
Regular,
Do you need to have your vision checked? Are you having another stroke?
================================================
Cosmos, possibly both?? L-)
Ooooops :-)
#
Chas
Posted June 15, 2009 at 7:45 pm | Permalink
Forget the movie — stick with the science… You right wing goons would argue with Gore if he said coal is black… LOL
———————
Because not all forms of coal are black. :)
Anyone know why the NOAA Radar is not working in Wichita?
right wing goons? Oh puhleeze…I am not allowed to express an opinion without being called names? grow up, will you?
it is a shame your ‘debating skills’ are rooted in 3rd grade behavior.
#
ANTI
Posted June 15, 2009 at 7:56 pm | Permalink
Anyone know why the NOAA Radar is not working in Wichita?
———————–
Dunno…
I know when radar went down when I was in the Air Force, the first thing out of the repair workers mouth, was ‘oh cr@p’. I’m guessing that they don’t break down much. :D
like I said upthread…it seems the libs only have one of 3 possible means of ‘expressing themselves’, and the most popular one seems to be to cast asperions on anyone who DARES to express an opinion that is different from theirs. horrors…! obviously, anyone who does not agree with their holy opinion is targeted for gratuitous insults and all manner of childish insults.
pathetic that they cannot express themselves without resorting to those juvenile crutches.
#
ANTI
Posted June 15, 2009 at 7:56 pm | Permalink
Anyone know why the NOAA Radar is not working in Wichita?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=
From http://forecast.weather.gov/
000
NOUS63 KICT 152356
FTMICT
Message Date: Jun 15 2009 23:56:57
APPARENTLY THE MOTOR HAS FAILED ON THE KICT RADAR. THE RADAR WILL BE DOWN UNTIL
FURTHER NOTICE.
Hell of a time for a motor failure!
Thanks Daniel.
I guess I will have to listen to Jay’s jabbering now.
#
ANTI
Posted June 15, 2009 at 8:13 pm | Permalink
I guess I will have to listen to Jay’s jabbering now.
–=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-==-=
Here’s a link to local radar if it helps.
http://www.intellicast.com/National/Radar/Current.aspx?location=USKS0523&enlarge=true&animate=true
The NOAA radar is back up.
Hey Hank and Nathan,
While this guy may not be a brother in arms or ideology, he might be your brother in delusions…
http://dancingfromgenesis.wordpress.com/about/
Hey Raptor,
When are you going to start calling out your side on name-calling? Hmmm? Please take care of that log in your eye, dude, okay?
deflect, Steven. Yep…turn it around and ignore the valid points I raised. typical…sadly typical.
who has been doing the name calling on this blog tonight, Steven? I am not speaking to the entire history of this blog, just the personal slam from one who claims to be a preacher.
care to respond directly to that, steven? Or would you rather continue to deflect/deny and change the subject??????
steve….the “he started it” defense works much better in grade school than among people who purport to be adults. let’s not go there for once, ok?
Raptor posted June 15, 2009 at 7:21 pm
But…I also don’t believe that an award from hollywood makes al gore’s movie any more factual.
——————
Al Gore’s movie was based on, and supported by climate science.
“t’s about the location of the carbon — safely sequestered underground, versus in the atmosphere causing higher radiative forcing.”
Well there, we have an admission there is NO more carbon than there every has been, ‘cept’ a few meteors, etc.
And as I have said all alone, the earth will take care of itself, like it or not, and without asking you permission cosmos.
I’m comfortable with that.
Yes boxlock20. . . you are comfortable with your ignorance, and denial of science.
Didn;t Clinton fire all the AGs? Didn’t the Bushies apply political litmus tests, violating the political independence of the Justice Department.. needed to keep it from being taken over by political hacks… like the Bushies .. like this Bradley Schlozma who now is a Wichita attorney:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/opinion/15thu2.html
Dave? Dude?
WHY would you apologize to the hillbilly Palin clan again? The people who called for you to are not your audience.
Cons go to evictions for laughs. They don’t GET humor outside of the suffering of others.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
“BlueJay” –
I kinda like Dave’s class.
Back when Limbaugh called Chelsea Clinton “the White House dog,” and John S. (it stands for sneer) McCain said Chelsea was “…the love child of Bill Clinton and Janet Reno” the CONs weren’t all that upset, were they?
This past weekend a South Carolina Repubic Party official called Michelle Obama a gorilla, a prominent Tennessee Repubic Party list-serve featured this image –
http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/presidentobabma.jpg
…and then another South Carolina Repubic Party twittered this “joke” –
“OBAMA HAS ISSUED A 40% TAX ON ASPIRIN. BECAUSE IT’S WHITE AND IT WORKS.”
Letterman told a crude joke — one of 10 in a bit that requires 10 jokes to be effective — and I’d bet you all the coins in my pocket the one that really got to the Moose-Dresser was the “s|utty airline hostess look” line.
So Letterman stepped over the fine line of funny and good taste. (What comedian hasn’t?) He’s owned as much.
The case should be closed with the Palins accepting his apology.
But I betcha they won’t.
Letterman never apologized, he danced around the issue and interpreted the joke, but never apologized.
Perhaps Dave Letterman should learn to ‘man up’ and apologize.
I stand corrected – just read where Letterman apologized.
No doubt in fear of his ratings…
“Regular” lies –
“Letterman never apologized…”
Here’s the transcript.
A link to both the words and the video follows.
“So I would like to apologize, especially to the two daughters involved, Bristol and Willow, and also to the Governor and her family and everybody else who was outraged by the joke. I’m sorry about it and I’ll try to do better in the future.”
Video and transcript here –
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/15/letterman-apologizes-to-p_n_215927.html
Took Letterman long enough to apologize. He should have done it right on the first try, instead of waiting on pressure from ‘above.’
First, “Regular” gives us at 12:04 am –
“Letterman never apologized….”
Then, “Regular” whimpers at 12:25 am –
“Took Letterman long enough to apologize.”
You’re not real are you, “Regular?”
You’re turning into self-parody.
You forgot to mention the 12:11 post, primate boy.
You’re kinda short on smug little “chortles” tonight, “Regular” –
Maybe you and “Boxlock20″ can lick each other’s…wounds.
cosmos_originally
Posted June 15, 2009 at 9:25 pm | Permalink
Al Gore’s movie was based on, and supported by climate science.
LMFAO!!!
This is your science cosmo? What a joke!
Schools must warn of Gore climate film bias
Al Gore’s film An Inconvenient Truth has been called unfit for schools because it is politically biased and contains serious scientific inaccuracies and ’sentimental mush’.
Schools will have to issue a warning before they show pupils Al Gore’s controversial film about global warming, a judge indicated yesterday.
The move follows a High Court action by a father who accused the Government of ‘brainwashing’ children with propaganda by showing it in the classroom.
Stewart Dimmock said the former U.S. Vice-President’s documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, is unfit for schools because it is politically biased and contains serious scientific inaccuracies and ’sentimental mush’.
Sounds like you too, cosmo, have been a victim of brainwashing with propaganda.
soldevvb,
Dimmock lost his case. The judge only required guidance notes.
The judge only required guidance notes.
That sounds like some real settled science.
_______________________________________________________
Al Gore’s award-winning climate change documentary was littered with nine inconvenient untruths, a judge ruled yesterday.
…
…but said that some of the claims were wrong and had arisen in “the context of alarmism and exaggeration”.
…
Mr Justice Barton was at pains to point out that the “apocalyptic vision” presented in the film was politically partisan and not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change.
soldevvb,
Yes, the main points of AGW science are basically settled. And you help prove it by attacking a film that Justice Barton said was “broadly accurate”.
Why did al-Gore feel the need to lie? Why do you continue to support those lies?
soldevvb,
Why do you lie about the issue?
Why did Judge Burton require clarification on only 9 points of AIT, after your science denier Lord Monckton said he had “identified three dozen scientific errors in it”?
S/B Justice Barton
Why did Judge Burton require clarification on only 9 points of AIT
Why did al-Gore lie?
soldevvb,
Why do you lie about the issue?
al-Gore lied and you still support him to the end.
Praise be.
#
cosmos_originally
Posted June 16, 2009 at 10:39 am | Permalink
soldevvb,
Why do you lie about the issue?
Why did Judge Burton require clarification on only 9 points of AIT, after your science denier Lord Monckton said he had “identified three dozen scientific errors in it”?
___________
cosMo, Justice Burton is not a climate scientist.
Why does cosMo attack “Lord Monckton” but bows down to “Judge Burton”?
Would that be because the “Judge” is a politician?
PRAISE BE TO SOCIALISM.
It’s climate science that “attacks” Lord Monckton.
And despite the attempts by science deniers, children are learning about AGW science, by watching Al Gore’s AIT film.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton,_3rd_Viscount_Monckton_of_Brenchley
“He was educated at Harrow School, Churchill College, Cambridge where he read classics and University College, Cardiff, where he obtained a diploma in journalism.[1]“
Why can’t cosmo address the issue?
Al-Gore lied.
cosmo proves she can’t face facts.
I addressed the issue.
“And despite the attempts by science deniers, children are learning about AGW science, by watching Al Gore’s AIT film.”
Thank you for admiting that al-Gore is a liar cosmo.
soldevvb,
Thank you for proving that you make baseless attacks, and also lie about other posters say.
Justice Barton said AIT was “broadly accurate”.
“And despite the attempts by science deniers, children are learning about AGW science, by watching Al Gore’s AIT film.”
Why did Judge Burton require clarification on only 9 points of AIT
Nine lies that the judge reviewed and found to be lies.
Poor cosmo, her hero has fallen and she can’t face facts.
So you have proven, cosmo, that even after a judge rules that the lies are lies, that you can not face the facts that al-Gore lied. No attacks, just facts.
How about the last seven years of falling temperatures? You going to deny that as well?
You faith is getting weaker and weaker cosmo.
“Thank you for proving that you make baseless attacks, and also lie about other posters say.”
LOL. What exactly is it that you think you do?
Pot meet kettle…
#
cosmos_originally
Posted June 16, 2009 at 12:04 pm | Permalink
soldevvb,
Thank you for proving that you make baseless attacks, and also lie about other posters say.
Justice Barton said AIT was “broadly accurate”.
“And despite the attempts by science deniers, children are learning about AGW science, by watching Al Gore’s AIT film.”
____________
cosMo thinks children, are judges(politians)are the ones to decide on the AGW theory. He calls real scientists deniers if they question the theory or won’t accept the dogma of AGW.
PRAISE BE.
I bet the AGW alarmists offer candy to the children who watch the AIT propaganda. cosMo has the job of handing out candy to the kiddies.
“Hey widdle girl, do you want some candy?”
cosMo thinks children, AND judges(politians)are the ones to decide….
donndublin, you’re wrong.
I believe that scientific methodology determines science.
From reading your posts donndublin, I’d say that most children are much more capable of understanding science than you.
And people who insist that their opinion refutes widely accepted science, without providing any credible supporting science, are not “real scientists”.
Here is yet another one of those personal attacks from Cosmos:
“From reading your posts donndublin, I’d say that most children are much more capable of understanding science than you.”
And people(scientists) who insist (speak out) that their (educated) opinion refutes widely accepted (according to the politcians) science, without providing any credible supporting (censored) science, are not “real scientists” (believers).
PRAISE BE
#
Nathaniel
Posted June 16, 2009 at 12:41 pm | Permalink
Here is yet another one of those personal attacks from Cosmos:
“From reading your posts donndublin, I’d say that most children are much more capable of understanding science than you.”
_________________
That’s because I don’t like the kind of candy cosMo tries to hand out.
re: cosmo’s scietific method and the AGW farce:
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1779594/posts
I’ve heard the cosMo likes it when the “widdle boys”, reaches in his front trouser pockets to get the candy.
cosMo’s Reverse Scientific Method:
1)Draw your conclusion.
2)Select data, no matter how flawed, to support your conclusion.
3)Discard or censor any data, no matter how valid, which does not support your conclusion.
4) Personally attack those who question your conclusion, i.e. call them “deniers”.
wait I forgot a few.
5) Bribe politicians to publicly support your conclusions to shut down the debate.
6) Propagandize the naive and children to believe without question that only the AGW can save the world.
7) Offer the children candy to watch Algore’s AIT.
to believe without question that only the AGW alarmists can save the world.
Nathaniel posted June 16, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Here is yet another one of those personal attacks from Cosmos:
“From reading your posts donndublin, I’d say that most children are much more capable of understanding science than you.”
——————–
Nathaniel,
That’s my opinion, based on donndublin’s posts.
If you disagree with my opinion, then copy/paste the part(s) of donndublin’s post(s) that proves that he understands the process of scientific methodology.
understands the process of scientific methodology.
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1779594/posts
Cosmos,
Calling something your opinion doesn’t change it from being a personal attack.
I think you are a lying, immature, idiot, who can’t do anything to actually defend yourself or your ideas except for posting links. When it comes to an actual discussion you have nothing but insults and lies.
Hey, that is just my opinion though… not a personal attack.
So, next time someone gives you their “opinion” of you, don’t cry about it being a personal attack.
and lies
She takes after her idol, al-Gore
“Nathaniel” posts –
“…next time someone gives you their “opinion” of you, don’t cry about it being a personal attack.”
Words to live by, boy.
Oh, wait…
Nathaniel,
So you don’t want to try to defend your friend donndublin, by copy/pasting the part(s) of his post(s) that proves that he understands the process of scientific methodology?
BTW: Here’s how Nathaniel’s “professional engineer” friend defends himself, and his ideas.
donndublin posted June 16, 2009 at 12:57 pm
I’ve heard the cosMo likes it when the “widdle boys”, reaches in his front trouser pockets to get the candy.
Will Widespread Global Cooling Reports Freeze Al Gore Media Credibility?
It is “an inconvenient truth” for Al Gore that the world is currently experiencing some of the coldest weather in decades. Just how cold? How about snow in Saudi Arabia in May according to this report?
June 15, 2009
Oops, global cooling, not global warming, threatens crops
There are obviously various reasons for this concern as to whether the world can continue to feed itself, but one of them is undoubtedly the downturn in world temperatures, which has brought more cold and snow since 2007 than we have known for decades.
Unexpected Global Cooling Threatening Food Supply
For the second time in little over a year, it looks as though the world may be heading for a serious food crisis, thanks to our old friend “climate change”. In many parts of the world recently the weather has not been too brilliant for farmers. After a fearsomely cold winter, June brought heavy snowfall across large parts of western Canada and the northern states of the American Midwest. In Manitoba last week, it was -4°C. North Dakota had its first June snow for 60 years.
There was midsummer snow not just in Norway and the Cairngorms, but even in Saudi Arabia. At least in the southern hemisphere it is winter, but snowfalls in New Zealand and Australia have been abnormal. There have been frosts in Brazil, elsewhere in South America they have had prolonged droughts, while in China they have had to cope with abnormal rain and freak hailstorms, which in one province killed 20 people.
Global Cooling? Coldest June on Record in Chicago
The cloudy, chilly and rainy open to June here has been the talk of the town. So far this June is running more than 12 degrees cooler than last year, and the clouds, rain and chilly lake winds have been persistent. The average temperature at O’Hare International Airport through Friday has been only 59.5 degrees: nearly 7 degrees below normal and the coldest since records there began 50 years ago.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2009/may/global.html
“Based on preliminary data, the globally averaged combined land and sea surface temperature was the fourth warmest on record for May, . . .”
globally averaged temperature
roflmao!
“A given temperature field can be interpreted as both “warming” and “cooling” simultaneously,
making the concept of warming in the context of the issue of global warming physically
ill-posed.”
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/globaltemp/GlobTemp.JNET.pdf
______________
As Einstein would say; (paraphrased)
“Your mathematics is sound, but your physics is flawed”.
Because we don’t think about future generations, they will never forget us. – Henrik Tikkanen
‘The Discovery of Global Warming‘
Timeline (Milestones)
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/timeline.htm
cosMo continues to entice the children with more candy.
Oceans are cooling according to NASA
Two separate studies through NASA confirm that since 2003, the world’s oceans have been losing heat. In the peak of the recent warming trend, 1998 actually ranked 2nd to 1934 as the warmest year on record.
_________________________________________________
Let’s recap shall we? We have the oceans cooling since 2003, record low temperatures from several global locations, unseasonably cooler temperatures from several locations (COUNTRIES) across the globe, and the brainwashed cosmo thinks we should believe that this may was
THE FOURTH WARMEST ON RECORD
cosmo, think about hansen’s track record as per quality control of his data. The non-peer reviewed black box he uses to fudge his numbers. The fact that hansen’s model was used to predict global cooling in the 70’s.
I know you are pretty slow on the uptake, but think about it. Think about the crop damage and losses that have occurred thus far due to COLD temperatures. The looming food crisis this fall. Think about how absolutely absurd you are going to look screeching away about HOTTEST MONTH ON RECORD as the world scrambles for food.
dondublin and soldevvb,
Whatever. . .
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/OceanCooling/page1.php
‘Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States‘
http://www.globalchange.gov/publications/reports/scientific-assessments/us-impacts
I’m going to laugh my a$s off this fall cosmo. HOTTEST MONTH ON RECORD while the world scrambles for food due to COLD weather.
You’ll look even more foolish than you do today.
NCDC updates database for Dec08 – NCDC’s own graphic shows decadal cooling trend
The funny thing about the ‘Warmers’ is that they try to attribute everything back to man-made warming.
– Excessive rainfall or drought – Global Warming
– Lower or Rising Sea levels – Global Warming
– Growth or Reduction of Ice Sheets and Glaciers – Global Warming
The list goes on as the ‘Henny Penny’ ‘Warmers’ flail their arms, tilting at windmills.
Let the WARMongers bite on this.
New record low may cause crop damage
Published: Monday, May 18, 2009
June Crop Production Report
First look at summer fruit crop prospects, most are down from 2008.
By: Compiled by staff
Published: Jun 15, 2009
…
Freezing temperatures hit California in early March, resulting in frost damage in some areas. Frost damage, along with a decrease in the bearing acres, has resulted in an estimated lower production for the 2009 crop.
Crop Conditions as of May 21, 2009
The recent cool weather conditions, including snow and frost, have hindered seeding operations in the province.
Farmers assessing crop damage after freeze beats up Plains wheat
Jeff Caldwell
Agriculture Online Multimedia Editor
4/22/2009, 12:00 AM CDT
Whatever. . . . . . . .
Whatever. . . . . . . .
That there is some science fer ya.
LMFAO.
You get weaker by the day.
About that decadal cooling trend…
You better tell those science denying farmers that wasn’t frost on their crops before harvest!
LMFAO, what a tool.
soldevvb,
Crop failure due to frost damage is a very serious issue.
Since soldevvb is an expert on that issue, he can quickly provide a link to a map showing how much of the Northern hemisphere had crop failures due to frost this Spring.
Since soldevvb is an expert on that issue, he can quickly provide a link to a map showing how much of the Northern hemisphere had crop failures due to frost this Spring.
You have shown you are a complete and total idiot. Thank you for that cosmo. As if we didn’t already know.
Look at the thread. Many examples of frost damage. Here are some more. Have an adult explain it to you if you can’t understand these either.
—————————————————————–
Department Press Release
01-22-2009
TALLAHASSEE – Agricultural producers as far south as Lake Okeechobee are assessing crop damage caused by the frigid temperatures
Brazil May Cut Corn Output Forecast More on Frost (Update1)
By Katia Cortes
June 8 (Bloomberg) — Brazil may cut this year’s corn output forecast for a third consecutive time in July as a frost in Center South states damaged the beans
US: MI: Cherry farmers assess crop damage
Published 05/13/2009 by Fresh Plaza
A cold spell has cherry growers on alert since an overnight frost caused some damage.
Evaluating Frost Damage To Corn
May 19, 2009
Cold spring, dry fields lower 2009 crop prospects in Western Canada
June 11, 2009
AFGHANISTAN: Uphill struggle for potato farmers in Bamyan Province
BAMYAN, 17 June 2009 (IRIN) – Farmers in Afghanistan’s top potato-producing province are complaining about declining profits, mainly because of cold weather
Long cold spell is to blame for lack of shellfishBy Jess Stevenson
GUERNSEY fisherman are struggling to make a living after a reduction in crab stocks.It is thought that this year’s cold spell, which lasted longer than in previous years, might have something to do with the poor amount of shellfish being caught
First Ever Ice Wine in Brazil
The temperatures had fallen well below-freezing and the thermometers had marked – 7.5 C.
#
cosmos_originally
Posted June 17, 2009 at 9:40 am | Permalink
Whatever. . . . . . . .
___________
cosMo ignores the empirical data and bows down to the computer model predictions.
Praise Be to the computer model.
Sol, how dare you blasphemy the computer model with the empirical evidence.
soldevvb,
So you can’t provide a map that shows how widespread the frost damage was this Spring? Why not?
And your copy/pastes do not prove a trend, unless you compare frost damage this Spring to frost damage during previous Springs — say for the last few decades. There may have actually been fewer acres with frost damage in Spring 2009 than during earlier years.
Cosmos,
Can’t you explain:
1. How much CO2 can the Earth absorb?
2. How much CO2 does the Earth produce?
3. How much CO2 does man produce?
4. How much CO2 “cap and trade” will actually reduce?
5. What the margin of error is on numbers 1 and 2 and 3?
cosmo,
You have been given many samples from across the globe. It is not my fault you can not understand the declining temperatures. It is not my fault you can not understand science and empirical evidence.
soldevvb,
It’s not my fault that you claim 2009 was colder than recent previous years, without comparing 2009 to those recent previous years.
Your 2009 “samples” alone prove nothing. There may have been more acres, and/or more severe frost damage in earlier years.
Nathaniel,
Humans have been adding more CO2 (and CH4) than nature can absorb — that has caused levels in Earth’s atmosphere to rise sharply.
The amount of CO2 reduced by ‘cap and trade’ depends on how the policies are implemented, what technological advances it triggers, and other factors.
Your 2009 “samples” alone prove nothing. There may have been more acres, and/or more severe frost damage in earlier years.
Prove it.
You love those wishy-washy words. Back something up for a change.
Cosmos,
“If” what you say is true, then you should be able to answer the questions.
You claim man has been adding more CO2 than nature can absorb.
To make such a claim you need to know:
1. How much CO2 nature can absorb
2. How much CO2 nature is producing
3. How much CO2 man is producing
And if you are going to claim that cap and trade will “solve” this:
4. How much CO2 cap and trade will reduce.
soldevvb posted June 17, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Prove it.
You love those wishy-washy words. Back something up for a change.
——————–
soldevvb, have you already forgotten that it’s your global-cooling frost damage claim?
Try to show a little “Ron Paul” personal responsibility, and back up your own claim.
Cosmos,
Try to show a little personal responsibility, and back up your own claim.
If it was the 4th hottest may on record, as you claim, you should be able to refute me post haste. Unless you are truly that impotent without realclimate feeding you.
Swallow hard cosmo, it is a bitter pill.
You are so pathetically weak you aren’t even interesting anymore.
Hey cos, maybe the first ever ice wine produced in Brazil will give you your first clue.
soldevvb,
You can’t understand that Brazil can have colder than usual weather, while other areas are warmer than usual?
Again, you need to prove your frost damage point by comparing previous years.
2009 — acres, severity
2008 — acres, severity
2007 — . . .
2006 –
. . .
Nathaniel,
My claims are backed up, by science. You should try to read and understand the carbon cycle, instead of endlessly repeating your copy/paste questions.
I’ve given you many global examples. Apparently you are that impotent.
Praise be.
cosmos_originally
Posted June 17, 2009 at 12:42 pm | Permalink
Nathaniel,
My claims are backed up, by science.
________________________________________________________________
And you still can’t answer the question. Im-Po-Tent.
Praise be.
Cosmos,
Then science should be able to answer my questions.
You don’t have a link for that?
soldevvb posted June 17, 2009 at 12:44 pm
I’ve given you many global examples.
——————
Really? What percent of the total surface of Earth do all of your examples add up to, for each specific time period? Less than a few percent?
And show your work.
BTW: A city/region can have record cold temperatures for a few days, and still have a warmer than normal monthly average.
Pa
The
Tic
Tell you what, I showed you the cold, you show me the hot. What made May the 4TH HOTTEST ON RECORD?
Ready? Go!
soldevvb,
So you don’t even know how much significantly less than global your examples upthread were?
You should not call them “global examples”.
And month of May temperatures?
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2009/may/global.html
SolDevVB
Posted June 17, 2009 at 8:49 am | Permalink
Oceans are cooling according to NASA
That covers ~70%.
Your turn.
You should not call them “global examples”.
Samples from around the globe. And I covered the oceans.
So, record cold from several samples around the globe and the oceans. Gotcha covered there cos.
THE REASON FOR DELETING THE SATELLITE DATA FROM THE ERSST.v3 DATA
Reynolds, Smith, and Liu gave the reasons for removing the satellite data from ERSST.v3 data as, “In the ERSST version 3 on this web page WE HAVE REMOVED SATELLITE DATA from ERSST and the merged product. The addition of satellite data caused problems for many of our users. Although, the satellite data were corrected with respect to the in situ data as described in reprint, there was a residual cold bias that remained as shown in Figure 4 there. The bias was strongest in the middle and high latitude Southern Hemisphere where in situ data are sparse. THE RESIDAL BIAS LED TO A MODEST DECREASE IN THE GLOBAL WARMING TREND AND MODIFIED GLOBAL ANNUAL TEMPERATURE RANKINGS.”
By the way cosmo, why did al-Gore lie?
Why did they take out the data showing a cold bias?
Hmmm. Seems to me you’ve got some cooked books on your hands cosmo.
soldevvb posted June 17, 2009 at 8:49 am
Oceans are cooling according to NASA
—————-
Post the link to that NASA report.
“Although, the satellite data were corrected with respect to the in situ data as described in reprint, there was a residual cold bias that remained as shown in Figure 4 there. The bias was strongest in the middle and high latitude Southern Hemisphere where in situ data are sparse.”
——————–
The satellite data was flawed.
Where is your science at Cosmos?
You can’t answer those simple questions?
The satellite data was flawed.
Of course the data was flawed. It showed cooling. Can’t have that now can we silly rabbit? Cook those numbers or just throw them out.
Why can’t you answer Nat’s simple questions?
Why did al-Gore lie?
Why did hansen’s model predict global cooling in the 70’s and global warming in the 80’s?
Why can’t you accept the fact that the earth has cooled for the past ~8 years?
You just keep getting weaker and weaker.
Glacier Accused of Global Warming Denies Allegation
Jun 17, 2009, 08:40
This past week Klaus Klunt, climatology correspondent for the Tortoise Polishers Gazette, received an astounding report from Yakutat, Alaska, concerning the Hubbard Glacier.
The glacier, in total denial of global warming, is advancing toward Gilbert Point near Yakutat at the astonishing rate of two meters (seven feet) per day, according to leading conspiracy theorists and climate change deniers!
“The Army Corp of Engineers special Web site for the Hubbard Glacier – http://www.glacierresearch.com – contains some absolutely amazing photos of the advancing glacier,” says Klunt. “One can easily see the expanding wall of ice – and it is huge – with a big capital H.”
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Global Cooling Is Impacting Agriculture
soldevvb,
Post your NASA link.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-615-2/#comment-604581
Look it up yourself. Google is your friend. Got get it girl.
Answer Nat’s questions. Answer my questions.
You’re a pretty demanding for a girl that can’t back up her claims or answer simple questions.
soldevvb,
You made the claim.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-615-2/#comment-604581
It’s your responsibility to back that claim up. Post your NASA link.
Doesn’t your hero Ron Paul believe in “personal responsibility”?
Doesn’t your hero Ron Paul believe in “personal responsibility”?
A) Why does your hero al-Gore lie?
B) Have I restricted your access to google? Go get it girl!
C) Why are you affraid to answer Nat’s questions?
Batter UP!!!
soldevvb,
So you don’t have the NASA link you need to prove your claim upthread? Do you admit that your claim was invalid?
BTW: Re your 2:22 pm post — ocean temperatures do not represent the air temperatures above the oceans.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-615-2/comment-page-7/#comment-604558
Dang. First cosmo can’t understand a chart covering a few thousand years, now she can’t even use the google. Does realclimate call you so you can spout their propaganda?
Why did al-Gore lie?
Why can’t you answer NAt’s simple questions?
Why do you have to lie and deny the last ~8 years of cooling?
Cold May
May 2009 finished 3.6 degrees below average making it our sixth straight month with cooler than normal temperatures. The long-term average May temperature is 57.4 degrees and this past month the average temperature finished at 53.8 degrees making it the 49th coolest May since 1881.
Record cold in May and more chill to come
Published: 10:01AM Wednesday June 03, 2009
Much of New Zealand shivered last month in the lowest recorded May temperatures.
The national average temperature of nine degrees was 1.6 degrees below the long-term average for May.
Record cold may hit the mountains tonight
ASHEVILLE – With temperatures expected to dip to record cold for mid-May overnight,
Cold May days on a sub-tropical barrier island aren’t right
By Terry Dickson Story updated at 6:36 AM on Wednesday, May. 20, 2009
ST. SIMONS ISLAND, Ga. – Shouldn’t somebody be playing football?
For the second day in a row Tuesday, the thermometer didn’t make it past 60 degrees on this – as it is often described – subtropical barrier island. That temperature is Fahrenheit by the way. I’m thinking it’s more of a sub-arctic barrier island.
Canada Has a Frigid May after a Cold Winter
27/05/2009 By Joseph D’Aleo, CCM, ICECAP
May has been frigid slowing the planting and emergence of the summer crops in Canada. Late freezes and even snows are still occurring regularly and can be expected the rest of the month.
BTW: Re your 2:22 pm post — ocean temperatures do not represent the air temperatures above the oceans.
Before I bookmark this post, are you stating that ocean temperature does not affect global temperature?
soldevvb,
Re the cold May temperatures in Canada and New Zealand, see the anomaly map at,
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2009/may/global.html
cosmos thinks temperatures are “well mixed” around the globe and can be averaged by using ‘means’ to determine a global temperature.
Tell me cosmos, what does it mean when it’s 120 degrees Fahrenheit in the Sahara and -30 degrees Fahrenheit in Antarctica?
Could it be that locations, geographically separated and in unique natural environments are distinct climate regions that have minimal interaction?
Yet, you and the ‘warmers’ want to keep displaying a global mean temperature as if it significant on the reality of physics taking place in the various parts of the world.
Mathematical gamesmanship with temperatures is not the same as physical measurement of temperature per location. Averaging them by way of using ‘means’ is well, meaningless.
soldevvb,
Are you completely unable to think? Not “represent” doesn’t mean not “affect”.
Regular,
You forget to include the areas associated with the temperatures.
Are you completely unable to think? Not “represent” doesn’t mean not “affect”.
So then your post was complete rhetorical nonsense. Gotcha. Thank you for admitting that cosmo.
Re the cold May temperatures in Canada and New Zealand, see the anomaly map at,
Is that reflective of “scrubbed” data like the following:
“Although, the satellite data were corrected with respect to the in situ data as described in reprint, there was a residual cold bias that remained as shown in Figure 4 there. The bias was strongest in the middle and high latitude Southern Hemisphere where in situ data are sparse.”
#
cosmos_originally
Posted June 18, 2009 at 11:37 am | Permalink
Regular,
You forget to include the areas associated with the temperatures.
———————
I didn’t forget. You and your warmers are denying basic Physics when you claim that temperatures can be mixed together regardless of specific climate regions.
That is pure hokum.
To give you an analogy, look at the average stove. It usually have four burners on it. Each burner is capable of independent temperature control.
To take the temperature of each burner at a setting, one has to measure each burner. There is no average temperature in between the burners that is meaningful because those those areas are not used to cook or warm food.
Besides, the range of ambient temperature in air is short range and affected by many factors.
A hot day in Arizona will have zero effect on the temperature in Juneau, Alaska. There is simply too much distance, too many geographical, moisture, wind and other factors that will keep the temperature isolated to a specific region.
This is even more true in upper parts of the troposphere as sea level elevation is relative to partial pressure of atmospheric gases availability and water vapor content available in the region. Rising columns of temperatures are gradation from one climate region to the next.
Global temperature means is akin to averaging location numbers just like trying to averaging telephone numbers. It is simply meaningless when trying to determine the effect of climate physics has on climate regions.
LOL!
Regular believes that temperature data from specific areas of Earth’s surface is like telephone numbers.
Regular, why don’t you and soldevvb argue for a while? soldevvb believes that cool temperature anomalies in Canada and New Zealand (shown clearly on this NCDC map) prove that the NCDC results are invalid.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2009/may/map-blended-mntp-200905-pg.gif
Hey cos, I gave you many postings from around the globe with colder than average temps. Record breaking even. Why don’t you post some of the record breaking warm temps from around the globe for May 2009?
NOAA PROVES AN OUTLIER AGAIN IN MAY
By Joseph D’Aleo, CCM
NOAA proclaimed May 2009 to be the 4th warmest for the globe in 130 years of record keeping. Meanwhile NASA UAH MSU satellite assessment showed it was the 15th coldest May in the 31 years of its record. This divergence is not new and has been growing. Just a year ago, NOAA proclaimed June 2008 to be the 8th warmest for the globe in 129 years of record keeping. Meanwhile NASA satellites showed it was the 9th coldest June in the 30 years of its record.
We have noted in the last year that NOAA has often become the warmest of the 5 major data sets in their monthly global anomalies. They were second place until they introduced a new ocean data set to be discussed later.
NOAA and the other ground based data centers would have more credibility if one of the changes resulting in a reduction of the warming trend and not an exaggeration which has been the case each time.
Obama Climate Report quotes six times scientist infamous for saying, ‘we have to offer up scary scenarios…and make little mention of any doubts we might have’
soldevvb posted June 18, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Hey cos, I gave you many postings from around the globe with colder than average temps. Record breaking even. Why don’t you post some of the record breaking warm temps from around the globe for May 2009?
——————
soldevvb,
Why don’t you explain why you keep incorrectly insisting that a “record” temperature for a day, or a few days, determines the average temperature for the entire month.
http://rpuchalsky.home.att.net/sci_env/sch_quote.html
5 years of oceans cooling – observed.
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/NOAAMAY.pdf
So then cos, you can’t show any record or abnormally high temps as I have shown for abnormally cool temps?
soldevvb cannot explain why s/he keeps incorrectly insisting that a “record” temperature for a day, or a few days, determines the average temperature for the entire month.
soldevvb also does not seem to know how to read an anomaly map.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-615-2/comment-page-7/#comment-605115
The NOAA? LMAO. Figures that would be your data source.
cosmo can not explain why she uses a known flawed heat biased data source.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-615-2/comment-page-7/#comment-605153
Swing and a miss.
Batter UP!
soldevvb cannot explain why s/he keeps incorrectly insisting that a “record” temperature for a day, or a few days, determines the average temperature for the entire month.
cosmo can not find even anecdotal evidence of a warmer May 2009. Instead she relies on a known flawed heat biased dataset.
How many stations has NOAA dropped out cosmo? 2/3rds?
Funny how the bulk of the drop outs are in the coldest regions.
Why did the NOAA drop the UHI from their datasets?
Is this why you chose the NOAA cosmo? Because they lie and manipulate their data in your favor?
cosmo’s faith is too weak to answer Nat’s questions. Cosmo does not understand climate science enough to answer very simple questions.
cosmo proves she does not understand that the oceans do effect “global temperature.”
cosmo’s faith is too weak to admit the global cooling over the last ~8 years.
cosmo’s faith is too weak to understand the oceans have cooled since ~2003.
cosmo can not understand empirical data.
Cosmos,
I am still waiting for you to answer the questions.
You claim that man made CO2 is causing global warming and you can’t even answer simple questions regarding CO2 emissions.
Why is that?
Cosmos,
“If” what you say is true, then you should be able to answer the questions.
You claim man has been adding more CO2 than nature can absorb.
To make such a claim you need to know:
1. How much CO2 nature can absorb
2. How much CO2 nature is producing
3. How much CO2 man is producing
And if you are going to claim that cap and trade will “solve” this:
4. How much CO2 cap and trade will reduce.
Well Cosmos, you made the claim. Back it up.
soldevvb and Nathaniel,
Sorry, but I cannot provide answers to your ignorance, confusion, false interpretations, failure to understand science, etc.
Regular gives us a perfect example of the “false analogy”– you can’t take the “average” of the burners of a stove because they are all independent of each other . . .
But you CAN take an average of the maximum heat generated by each burner over time.
That’s what the ice core samples do. And what do the ice core samples show? More CO2 equals hotter temps.
And less CO2 equals cooling.
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/wethring.htm
cosmos_originally
Posted June 18, 2009 at 3:20 pm | Permalink
soldevvb and Nathaniel,
Sorry, but I cannot provide answers to your ignorance, confusion, false interpretations, failure to understand science, etc.
cosmo proves she can not answer the most basal elements of her faith.
cosmo can not understand climate science.
cosmos_originally
Posted June 18, 2009 at 3:51 pm | Permalink
And less CO2 equals cooling.
Really? Because the global CO2 level has increased over the last ~8 years while the temperatures have cooled.
Go figure. cos can’t even get that right.
Praise be.
soldevvb,
Sorry, but I cannot fix your inability to read.
And I cannot provide answers to your ignorance, confusion, false interpretations, failure to understand climate science, etc.
cosmos_originally
Posted June 18, 2009 at 4:34 pm | Permalink
soldevvb,
Sorry, but I cannot fix your inability to read.
And I cannot provide answers to your ignorance, confusion, false interpretations, failure to understand climate science, etc.
____________________________________________________________________
Ahhhhh, poor cos still can’t answer basic questions about her faith.
Is it that you are ignorant of the facts? That you can’t inderstand climate science? Or is it that the answers are too bitter of a pill for you to swallow cosmo?
Poor thing. The roots of her faith are weak.
cosmos inability to explain anything pertaining to climate science is quite apparent.
This is akin to someone making a claim in a sentence and when asked to explain what they meant, they point to a dictionary.
cosmos is unable to explain what he links to and mimics because cosmos is not a scientist.
Run away Cosmos…. run away….
LOL
What a complete and total fraud you are.
Run away?
From a thread that is four days old and a debate that is already over? Except for a few cranks?
Continue to deny and ignore science Nathaniel. . .
Let Dennis Avery, Steven Milloy, et al tell you what to think(sic).
Cosmos,
How is your refusal or inability to answer such simple questions my ignorance and denial?
Coward.
Where did the coward go?
Run away from the questions Cosmos! Run away!
Nathaniel,
Your ignorance and denial is proven by the questions that you ask, and your sources, like Dennis Avery.
Cosmos,
Your ignorance and denial is proven by the fact that you either can’t answer such simple questions or refuse to.
Run away coward. Run away.
Nathaniel,
Prove your scientific knowledge — post your theory on what caused well-mixed atmospheric CO2 levels to rise by about 100 ppm recently.
Prove your scientific knowledge — post your theory on what caused well-mixed atmospheric CO2 levels to rise by about 100 ppm recently.
LMFAO —
Deflect deny. Atta girl cosmo. Prove that you can not understand climate science nor answer Nat’s very basic questions.
How pathetic.
soldevvb,
Are you suggesting that Nathaniel is too ignorant to answer my simple question?
Are you suggesting that Nathaniel is too ignorant to answer my simple question?
I am suggesting you are too ignorant to answer his. How many days have you dodged those questions cos?
Is it that you can not understand climate science or that the foundation of your faith is too weak to withstand the light of day?
I’ve already answered Nathaniel’s question. If Nathaniel disagrees with my answers, he can explain why he disagrees, by answering my question.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-615-2/comment-page-8/#comment-606124
cosmo’s link:
cosmos_originally
Posted June 19, 2009 at 1:23 pm | Permalink
Nathaniel,
Prove your scientific knowledge — post your theory on what caused well-mixed atmospheric CO2 levels to rise by about 100 ppm recently.
_____________________________________________________________
Uhm, about that. It didn’t answer a single one of NAt;s questions.
Swing. Miss. Batter UP!
I’ve already answered Nathaniel’s questions earlier. If Nathaniel disagrees with my answers, he can explain why he disagrees, by answering my question here.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-615-2/comment-page-8/#comment-606124
Cosmos,
1. That link doesn’t go to any location where you answered my questions.
2. Why don’t you back up your claim by actually answering my questions?
Go ahead, prove your scientific knowledge. Answer my questions.
Uh yeah.
Nathaniel believes that the Earth is only a few thousand years old and was literally created in six days.
You may as well talk to someone who believes in the tooth fairy.
BlueJay,
The difference is that I can logically defend my beliefs with well reasoned and thoughtful argument.
You on the other hand? Well, you can’t even figure out how to take care of your own kid.
Whats wrong BlueJay? Is that why you became Pro-Choice, because you couldn’t convince your wife to abort your own son?
Trying to make up for that so others are not “punished” like you are?
I became pro choice for many reasons.
Not the least of which was realizing that parenthood is an awesome responsibility that you cannot inflict on someone.
And then there were all the dishonest hypocrites like you who soured me on the movement as I came to know it was not truly pro life at all.
And as far as fatherhood goes, I seem to be doing better than your father OR your Father.
“because you couldn’t convince your wife to abort your own son?”
There’s some Nathaniel math for you.
I’m a single parent by my own choice of a child I wanted aborted?
BlueJay,
Expecting the government to take care of your son is hardly doing better than my father.
I guess we will have to wait and see just how scewed up your son is once he leaves home.
BlueJay,
You pretend to be a willing parent only after the fact.
Lord only knows why your wife left you and doesn’t want anything to do with her son or how much you probably resent being left to deal with him.
You can’t even take care of him and you claim to be a single parent by choice?
When do you plan on choosing to provide for your son?
I guess we’ll have to wait and see if you EVER leave home!
BlueJay posted June 19, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Uh yeah.
Nathaniel believes that the Earth is only a few thousand years old and was literally created in six days.
You may as well talk to someone who believes in the tooth fairy.
————————
Yep.
Nathaniel seems to believe that the carbon cycle is flawed, but does not have an alternative theory.
When did your dad start the dad game with you there Nathaniel?
Nathaniel seems to believe that the carbon cycle is flawed, but does not have an alternative theory.
And cos can’t answer simple questions. Go figure.
Cosmos,
And you seem to believe that Man is producing too much CO2, more than the Earth can absorb, but you can’t say how much:
-CO2 man is producing
-The Earth is absorbing
-The Earth is producing
How can you believe such a thing and not know the answers to those questions?
BlueJay,
When do you plan on starting?
#
SolDevVB
Posted June 19, 2009 at 4:17 pm | Permalink
Nathaniel seems to believe that the carbon cycle is flawed, but does not have an alternative theory.
And cos can’t answer simple questions. Go figure.
======================
cosmos, Mr. Hyperlink, is unable and incapable answering questions regarding science.
“When do you plan on starting?”
Parenting you mean? I’m almost done.
I know he was late. When does your dad plan on stopping?
Boy.
BJ,
You mean, the government is almost done? That was not the question.
The question was when do YOU plan on starting?
I’m reasonably sure the Government has had more in YOUR raising than my son’s there Nathaniel. In fact, from what I’ve been told, I’m certain of it.
BlueJay hates our military.
What a sick fuq.
The difference is that I can logically defend my beliefs with well reasoned and thoughtful argument.
Except for that 10,000 year old Earth thing . . .
Now, now…
Doesn’t everyone realize “Nathaniel” is WE Blog’s resident expert on parenting?
SOME in the Christian faith have come to realize that their faith mandates good stewardship of the Earth.
And then there are the folks like Nathaniel.
The part I don’t get? I have almost no interest this “next world” that they are so focused on.
Why are they so determined to ruin this world when they are convinced they are going to get carried away from here anyway?
CapnAmerica posted June 19, 2009 at 4:32 pm
The difference is that I can logically defend my beliefs with well reasoned and thoughtful argument.
Except for that 10,000 year old Earth thing . . .
——————-
And Earth’s recent, rapid, 100 ppm CO2 level rise thing. . .
The part I don’t get?
==========================
There isn’t enough pages on this Earth to record what you don’t get, BlueJay.
CapnAmerica,
Actually, I can explain my beliefs better than you can.
You believe in some hybrid quasi evolution/God combo. I just believe in God.
BlueJay,
You still have yet to explain any of your assertions.
My carrying concealed into a National Park is not bad stewardship of the Earth.
Cosmos,
And yet you STILL can’t answer the questions…
Monkeyhawk posted June 19, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Now, now…
Doesn’t everyone realize “Nathaniel” is WE Blog’s resident expert on parenting?
—————–
Nathaniel is also the WE Blog’s resident climate science expert.
Nathaniel is certain that humans did not cause Earth’s recent 100 ppm CO2 level rise — but he cannot explain what did cause it.
Cosmos,
And you are certain man did cause it, but can’t answer simple questions you should know to believe such a thing.
Nathaniel,
Again. . . I have answered your questions. You just did not like my answers.
And Nathaniel cannot answer the basic question — what caused the 100 ppm level rise?
I just believe in God.
Really?
I was just reading Judges this afternoon.
When are you going to get many wives and a concubine like Gideon?
Cosmos,
Ok. I answered your question too! You just don’t like the answers…
“My carrying concealed into a National Park is not bad stewardship of the Earth.”
Why don’t I believe that?
Your denial of solid science that proves human caused global warming qualifies as poor stewardship of the Earth.
CapnAmerica,
Why would I?
BlueJay,
There is no “solid” science proving AGW.
CapnAmerica,
Since you believe in God, why don’t you do it either?
Because I don’t believe a bunch of mythical stories written in the Iron Age about people who supposedly lived in the Bronze Age are factually true.
You, idiotically, claim that every word is true, even the parts that can’t be true because they contradict each other.
The story of Noah’s Ark, for instance, would be the silliest thing I’ve ever read–if taken as literal fact. It has “fairy tale” written all over it.
Nathaniel posted June 19, 2009 at 4:47 pm
Ok. I answered your question too! You just don’t like the answers…
————–
Nathaniel, I don’t recall seeing your theory that replaces the widely accepted carbon cycle theory.
Let us know here when you get it accepted for publishing.
There is no “solid” science disproving AGW.
Science is based on theories. The AGW theories are solid, and have not been refuted.
CapnAmerica,
You are the one who presents the assertion that there are parts of the Bible which contradict each other, not I.
And I have yet to see you provide one example which can’t be true either.
Why don’t you tell us what parts of the Bible, as a Christian, you do believe to be true then?
Do you even believe that Christ rose from the dead or was that just another one of those fairy tales you don’t believe?
Cosmos,
You must have missed it then. I addressed all your concerns and questions in the post right after where you actually answered mine.
Because we don’t think about future generations, they will never forget us.” – Henrik Tikkanen
Cosmos,
LOL, this is what Mr science has resorted to? Mr I have a link for everything?
All you have is quotes now?
LOL
The Tikkanen quote accurately describes the AGW science deniers on this blog.
“Global warming is indeed a scam, perpetrated by scientists with vested interests, but in need of crash courses in geology, logic and the philosophy of science.”
MARTIN KEELEY
The Tikkanen quote accurately describes Martin Keeley.
The Keeley quote accurately describes you.
“Most meteorological research is funded by the federal government. And boy, if you want to get federal funding, you better not come out and say human-induced global warming is a hoax because you stand the chance of not getting funded.”
WILLIAM GRAY
“Global warming — at least the modern nightmare vision — is a myth. I am sure of it and so are a growing number of scientists. But what is really worrying is that the world’s politicians and policy makers are not.”
DAVID BELLAMY
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10722-Orlando-Science-Policy-Examiner~y2009m6d16-Earth-we-have-a-problem
Dr Martin Keeley, is Visiting Professor in Petroleum Geology, at University College London, UK. :
“To expect permanent stability in climate patterns displays a fundamental lack of understanding of the complexity and instability of weather.”
————————
Nathaniel,
Since you agree with Dr. Keeley’s “viewpoint”, name the AGW scientists who “expect permanent stability in climate patterns”.
AGW scientists seem to expect climate unstability, due to solar fluctuations, aerosols in the the atmosphere (volcanoes, human-caused, . . .) changes in GHG levels, changes in albedo (ice, snow, land use. . .), etc.
WTF is “unstability” cosmos.
“We have many advantages in the fight against global warming, but time is not one of them. Instead of idly debating the precise extent of global warming, or the precise timeline of global warming, we need to deal with the central facts of rising temperatures, rising waters, and all the endless troubles that global warming will bring. We stand warned by serious and credible scientists across the world that time is short and the dangers are great. The most relevant question now is whether our own government is equal to the challenge.”
JOHN MCCAIN
Regular,
Name the AGW scientists who “expect permanent stability in climate patterns”.
Cosmos,
Since you claim that man is producing more CO2 than the Earth can absorb why don’t you tell us:
1. How much CO2 man produces?
2. How much CO2 the Earth produces?
3. How much CO2 the Earth can absorb?
4. The margin of error on your numbers?
5. BONUS: How much CO2 the “cap and trade” system will reduce?
What a stupid question cosmos.
Of course, I can expect nothing but from you as you cannot seem to answer anyone questions.
Nathaniel quickly runs away from his source, Dr. Keeley, and reposts his old questions that prove he doesn’t understand the carbon cycle.
Nathaniel, what caused Earth’s atmospheric well-mixed CO2 levels to rapidly rise by about 100 ppm?
Why are you keeping your answer a secret? Don’t you want to stop Al Gore, and carbon taxes?
Poor old Regular.
He can’t name any AGW scientists who match Dr. Keeley’s claim. . .
Cosmos,
I see how quickly you run away from actually supporting your claim about AGW by answering such simple questions.
Why are you keeping your answer a secret?
Don’t you want to stop AGW, and save the world?
Poor old Cosmos,
Can’t answer questions to support his claim.
Nathaniel,
My answers are definitely not a “secret” — they’re published in IPCC’s Chapter 7, in the many papers referenced in that chapter, and many other places.
So why are you keeping your answer a secret, Nathaniel?
Why don’t you post your science that refutes the carbon cycle theory?
Nathaniel,
Here’s a link to the report, in case you’re unable to find it.
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm
The carbon cycle is also in the faq report.
Cosmos,
Sorry, but I don’t see the answers to the questions there.
The link you provided doesn’t take me to the answers either.
Care to try again?
Why are you trying to hide coward?
Nathaniel,
Why don’t you post your science that refutes the carbon cycle theory?
Cosmos,
Why don’t you post your science which can answer my questions?
Run away coward… run away…
Nathaniel,
Exact answers to your CO2 questions can’t be given because:
* Natural carbon sinks/sources are dynamic, and have been changed by AGW.
* The data has varied by season, region, local climate variations, and other factors, during the last few hundred years.
* The great “experiment” run by humans did not setup a “control” Earth centuries ago.
Exact answers aren’t needed, because the carbon cycle theory best answers the question of what caused CO2 to recently rise by about 100 ppm.
If you disagree with my last point Nathaniel, then post your alternative theory.
Or, if you don’t have a better alternative theory, continue your 8th grade name-calling.
Cosmos,
If exact answers can’t be given how do you know that:
Natural carbon sinks/sources are dynamic, and have been changed by AGW?
What “data” has varied by season and how do you know? (Since you can’t be exact….)
If you don’t know hom much CO2 either the Earth or Man is producing how do you know it was man? How much man is to blame? How much man needs to reduce to help?
Exact answers are needed when you make claims about how man is producing too much CO2.
You need to know how much is “too much”
I don’t need to post an alternative theory to question the absurdity of yours.
You need to provide answers to support yours first.
And I am not doing any “8th grade name calling” either.
It is simply my opinion that you are a coward. Remember that Cosmos? If it is my opinion it isn’t name calling…
Coward.
Coward can’t answer the questions so you claim that AGW isn’t exact….
What a complete and total intellectual fraud you are.
Nathaniel posted June 21, 2009 at 10:13 am
I don’t need to post an alternative theory to question the absurdity of yours.
——————–
Nathaniel doesn’t want to post an alternative theory, because his alternatives are much more absurd than the scientific theory based on the carbon cycle and isotopes.
What caused the 100 ppm level rise, Nathaniel? An imbalance in a large undetected natural carbon source, that just happened to have fossil fuel isotopes? That coincidentally started at the same time humans started burning fossil fuels, and changing the land?
Or maybe alien space ships hidden behind cloaking devices?
Go learn the basics about climate science, and the carbon cycle, Nathaniel.
Your “opinion”, and your repeatedly calling me a “coward” do not refute AGW science.
Cosmos doesn’t want to answer the questions because he knows that they will show how absurd his stance is.
Go learn the basics about CO2 emissions and math Cosmos.
Your being a coward sure doesn’t help you to support pushing AGW here…
Nathaniel,
In science, the best theory wins.
AGW science won, and you’ve lost.
Cosmos,
LOL… the best theory wins?
How about the theory which is true, can be tested~observed~has evidence?
That is the best you can do? That is your argument?
Because I don’t present a counter theory you claim AGW is true?
That is not science. Hell, that isn’t even a logical argument.
Try again coward.
Try again.
Nathaniel,
The carbon cycle/isotopes is based on data and observations.
Ignorance and denial is not science.
Question: What caused CO2 levels to rise by about 100 ppm?
Nathaniel: Duuuuuuhh. . . I don’t know. . . but I don’t think humans caused it.
Nathaniel posted June 21, 2009 at 11:26 am
Because I don’t present a counter theory you claim AGW is true?
That is not science. Hell, that isn’t even a logical argument.
——————–
Actually, that’s both science and logical.
The observed warming cannot be explained without including anthropogenic factors.
You need to provide a “counter theory” to the anthropogenic factors.
Cosmos,
Ok, how do you know humans caused CO2 levels to rise if you don’t know how much CO2 the Earth produces, man produces, or the Earth can absorb?
Simple Question…
Cosmos: Duuuuuuhh. . . I don’t know. . . but I think humans caused it.
Cosmos,
Actually, it is neither scientific nor logical.
I do not need to provide any counter theory to prove your wrong or to expect you to actually prove it right.
Nathaniel posted June 21, 2009 at 11:51 am
Cosmos,
Ok, how do you know humans caused CO2 levels to rise if you don’t know how much CO2 the Earth produces, man produces, or the Earth can absorb?
Simple Question…
Cosmos: Duuuuuuhh. . . I don’t know. . . but I think humans caused it.
———————-
Nathaniel,
Thank you for lying about climate science.
Or are you just unable to understand the carbon cycle, and data?
Earth’s CO2 levels rose at about 1/2 the rate that would have been caused by humans, if nature had not absorbed about 1/2 the CO2.
What caused Earth’s CO2 levels to rise by about 100 ppm, Nathaniel?
Cosmos,
Thank you for lying about logic and science.
Or are you just unable to answer simple questions?
What amount of CO2 can the Earth absorb naturally?
How much CO2 does the Earth produce naturally?
How much CO2 does man produce?
If you don’t know the answers to those questions how will you know how much man needs to reduce his CO2 emmissions by?
How can you support cap and trade and say it will help?
How can you say that man is causing global warming when you don’t even know how much CO2 man is adding vs the Earth vs what can be absorbed?
That is not science. That is why you are an idiot.
Nathaniel posted June 21, 2009 at 11:52 am
Cosmos,
I do not need to provide any counter theory to prove your wrong or to expect you to actually prove it right.
———————–
Of course you don’t need to, Nathaniel. . . that’s called not trying.
Cosmos,
You are the one claiming that AGW is real and we must act now.
So, just how do you know how much we have to act if you can’t even tell us how much CO2 we are producing more than the Earth can absorb?
Nathaniel,
Again. . . try to learn some basic climate science.
The amount of CO2 that the Earth can sink decreases as the Earth warms. Plus the future warming will release additional natural GHG’s.
Cosmos,
Again… try to learn some basic science and logic.
You still have not answered the questions…
Coward.
And the amount of CO2 that comes from man is what percentage of the overal CO2 emissions from all sources?
And the amount of CO2 that comes from man is what percentage of the overal CO2 emissions from all sources?
The answer is:
A Whopping 3% of all CO2 is made by Humans.
(And man can save the world?!?)
cosmos_originally
Posted June 20, 2009 at 12:37 pm | Permalink
Regular,
Name the AGW scientists who “expect permanent stability in climate patterns”.
——————————-
When has their EVER been Permanent Stability in climate patters?
And MAN is going to somehow keep the planet at exactly the same temperature?
JimJohnson posted June 21, 2009 at 12:57 pm
A Whopping 3% of all CO2 is made by Humans.
—————
And the CO2 stays in the atmosphere for a century, or longer.
A small percentage can add up over time — like the observed 100 ppm increase.
JimJohnson posted June 21, 2009 at 1:00 pm
When has their EVER been Permanent Stability in climate patters?
——————
Thank you JJ, for helping to point out that Nathaniel’s oil geologist made an very absurd claim about AGW scientists.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-615-2/comment-page-9/#comment-606793
BTW: The point is that man should not be adding GHG’s to Earth’s atmosphere, which is causing “climate patterns” to change.
cosmos_originally
Posted June 21, 2009 at 1:16 pm | Permalink
JimJohnson posted June 21, 2009 at 1:00 pm
When has their EVER been Permanent Stability in climate patters?
——————
Thank you JJ, for helping to point out that Nathaniel’s oil geologist made an very absurd claim about AGW scientists.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-615-2/comment-page-9/#comment-606793
BTW: The point is that man should not be adding GHG’s to Earth’s atmosphere, which is causing “climate patterns” to change.
——————————
No, the point is that you think all of mankind should die.
That’s the only way to stop emissions from mankind.
Cosmos,
If the CO2 stays in the atmosphere for a centry or longer… then how is man responsible for what is happening now when this would be the alleged effect from what man was doing more than 100 years ago?
Cosmos,
If you can’t give us any numbers then how do you know how much man needs to reduce his GHG emissions by?
Nathaniel
Posted June 21, 2009 at 1:34 pm | Permalink
Cosmos,
If you can’t give us any numbers then how do you know how much man needs to reduce his GHG emissions by?
———————–
TRILLION. SEVERAL TRILLION IS THE ANSWER.
(Cosmos & his kink, their motivation is $$$$)
http://cei.org/news-release/2009/05/22/energy-rationing-bill-passes-house-committee
Energy Rationing Bill Passes House Committee
Plan Would Take Trillions from Consumers, Transfer to Big Business Special Interests
Nathaniel
Posted June 21, 2009 at 1:33 pm | Permalink
Cosmos,
If the CO2 stays in the atmosphere for a centry or longer… then how is man responsible for what is happening now when this would be the alleged effect from what man was doing more than 100 years ago?
———————–
Oh I’m sure Cosmos can link to the exact emission source going back 400 or 500 years.
An elephant fart from the year 1504 is still floating in the air somewhere.
So lets see what Cosmos argument is so far…
-Man is causing Global Warming, but Cosmos can’t tell us by how much.
-Man needs to reduce GHG. Cosmos can’t tell us how much.
-Mans GHG’s can’t be absorbed but the Earths can. But Cosmos can’t tell us how much the Earth produces and absrobs or how much man produces and the Earth can’t absorb.
Then Cosmos has the nerve to call that science?
Now both Nathaniel and JimJohnson are lying about me, and climate science.
Oh well. . . they can’t debate with facts, so they call scientists “cowards”, and post lies.
Cosmos,
Give us the facts and answer the questions then.
Stop being a coward. I am calling YOU a coward, not scientists.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-615-2/comment-page-9/#comment-606842
” Prior to 1750, the atmospheric concentration of CO2 had been relatively stable between 260 and 280 ppm for 10 kyr (Box 6.2). Perturbations of the carbon cycle from human activities were insignificant relative to natural variability. Since 1750, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has risen, at an increasing rate, from around 280 ppm to nearly 380 ppm in 2005 (see Figure 2.3 and FAQ 2.1, Figure 1). The increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration results from human activities: primarily burning of fossil fuels and deforestation, but also cement production and other changes in land use and management such as biomass burning, crop production and conversion of grasslands to croplands (see FAQ 7.1).
Frequently Asked Question 7.1
Are the Increases in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Other Greenhouse Gases During the Industrial Era Caused by Human Activities?
Yes, the increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases during the industrial era are caused by hu-man activities. In fact, the observed increase in atmospheric CO2 concentrations does not reveal the full extent of human emissions in that it accounts for only 55% of the CO2 released by human activity since 1959. The rest has been taken up by plants on land and by the oceans.”
Cosmos,
Spouting off random things still doesn’t answer the questions.
Nathaniel,
Your calling climate scientists “cowards” does not refute their research.
Post your theory of what caused the 100 ppm rise.
“Over millions of years, CO2 is removed from the atmosphere through weathering by silicate rocks and through burial in marine sediments of carbon fixed by marine plants (e.g., Berner, 1998). Burning fossil fuels returns carbon captured by plants in Earth’s geological history to the atmosphere. New ice core records show that the Earth system has not experienced current atmospheric concentrations of CO2, or indeed of CH4 for at least 650 kyr – six glacial-interglacial cycles. During that period the atmospheric CO2 concentration remained between 180 ppm (glacial maxima) and 300 ppm (warm interglacial periods) (Siegenthaler et al., 2005).”
——————-
Ice core update: for at least 800 kyr.
My How CO2 Varies Up and Down Over 450,000 YEARS!
Prior to 1750 CO2 was anything BUT stabe.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/co2-temperatures-and-ice-ages.html
————————————
cosmos_originally
Posted June 21, 2009 at 2:29 pm | Permalink
” Prior to 1750, the atmospheric concentration of CO2 had been relatively stable between 260 and 280 ppm for 10 kyr
Cosmos,
I am calling you a coward.
I don’t have to give an alternative theory because you can’t prove yours.
Nathaniel,
You’re also calling the scientists “cowards”, because you’re attacking their theory.
Again, explain what caused the 100 ppm rise, after being relatively stable for about 10 kyr?
What “natural” mechanism is supposed to absorb unlimited amounts of CO2 from mechanical coal-fired plants, cement plants, vehicles, etc?
CO2 is CO2.
Earth would absorb man-made CO2 the same as it would absorb natural CO2.
Isn’t man part of nature?
JimJohnson posted June 21, 2009 at 2:41 pm
My How CO2 Varies Up and Down Over 450,000 YEARS!
—————
Thank you JJ, for confirming my earlier post, but with old data.
“New ice core records show that the Earth system has not experienced current atmospheric concentrations of CO2, or indeed of CH4 for at least 650 kyr – six glacial-interglacial cycles. During that period the atmospheric CO2 concentration remained between 180 ppm (glacial maxima) and 300 ppm (warm interglacial periods) (Siegenthaler et al., 2005).”
——————-
Ice core update: for at least 800 kyr.
————————
CO2 is now well above 300 ppm, and still rising.
So CO2 was unstable 10,000 years ago?
I thought you said before 1750 it was unchanged?
What caused the instability 10,000 years ago?
No, CO2 was higher then 300 ppm 4 times in the last 450,000 years.
Nathaniel,
Re “What “natural” mechanism is supposed to absorb unlimited amounts of CO2 from mechanical coal-fired plants, cement plants, vehicles, etc?”
Also list the “natural” mechanisms that were/are supposed to automatically replace the natural carbon sinks that were lost by land use changes.
Does anyone besides me find it alarmingly odd, that the computer generated co2 and temperature data used by IPCC, go up mathematically linear with little deviation?
Cooking the books…
Regular posted June 21, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Does anyone besides me find it alarmingly odd, that the computer generated co2 and temperature data used by IPCC, go up mathematically linear with little deviation?
Cooking the books…
——————
Normal people realize that the projections do not include the unknown future “deviations”.
Just checking to see if the coward Cosmos has answered any question to support his claim yet…
Nope.
I’ve answered your question, Nathaniel.
“. . .the observed increase in atmospheric CO2 concentrations does not reveal the full extent of human emissions in that it accounts for only 55% of the CO2 released by human activity since 1959. The rest has been taken up by plants on land and by the oceans.”
——————-
Now provide your data to refute the above.
And provide your theory that explains the 100 ppm (and still climbing) CO2 level rise.
Cosmos,
That is not an answer to my questions.
Keep trying coward.
1) Is it the case that CO2 increased by 5 per cent since 1998 whilst global temperature cooled over the same period? If so, why did the temperature not increase; and how can human emissions be to blame for dangerous levels of warming?
2) Is it the case that the rate and magnitude of warming between 1979 and 1998 (the late 20th century phase of global warming) were not unusual as compared with warmings that have occurred earlier in the Earth’s history? If the warming was not unusual, why is it perceived to have been caused by human CO2 emissions; and, in any event, why is warming a problem if the Earth has experienced similar warmings in the past?
3) Is it the case that all GCM computer models projected a steady increase in temperature for the period 1990-2008, whereas in fact there were only eight years of warming were followed by ten years of stasis and cooling?
Just checking to see if the ignorant denier Nathaniel has made even a feeble attempt to support his claims yet. . .
Nope. . . he just denies, attacks, and runs away.
Those lying scientists. Cooked books:
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=6346
Should radical extremists be allowed to head divisions at NASA?
This is who we get our climate data from? What idiot would believe him?
Dr. Jim Hansen gets ready to deliver his message at the Washington DC power plant protest on March 2nd 2009. On February 22nd, WUWT covered Hansen’s announcement that he was endorsing civil disobedience.
No longer content to be a scientist, and apparently now a full time protesting advocate, Dr. James Hansen of the NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies joins forces with deep thinker Darryl Hannah.
soldevvb posted June 22, 2009 at 11:16 am
——————-
Bob Carter really should learn some basic climate science.
1) 1998 had a warm spike aided by a record El Nino. La Ninas, and solar reduction since then have caused some (temporary) cooling.
2) The magnitude/rate of the warming compared to past events is not the issue — the issue is the warming is not caused by natural factors.
3) See # 1.
and solar reduction since then have caused some (temporary) cooling.
Prove it.
the issue is the warming is not caused by natural factors.
Prove it.
See # 1.
Weak. The models have been and still are wrong. Wrong wrong wrong.
soldevvb,
Nothing can be proven to a person like you.
While it takes many decades for the heat buildup portion of these solar cycles as was seen in the past period of Sun-caused global warming, the plunge into the cold on the down side phases of these cycles takes relatively little time. My most recent calculations, just completed, indicate that global temperatures approaching 100 year cold weather records will begin to set in any year now but certainly between 2012 and 2017. The lower troposphere temperature anomaly range during this time frame will be between -0.2C and -0.75C. Further, between 2020 and 2025, if not before, we will begin to see 200 year cold temperature records routinely being broken with a temperature anomaly range between -0.75C and -1.20C. The coldest and most destructive years will be during the decade of the 2030’s with temperature ranges between -1.0C and -1.5C. These global temperature changes are keyed to the mean global temperature for the past one hundred years and while they may not seem like much, they translate to potentially massive agricultural losses world wide especially in the decades of the 2020’s and 2030’s.
http://www.spaceandscience.net/id16.html
cosmos_originally
Posted June 22, 2009 at 11:37 am | Permalink
soldevvb,
Nothing can be proven to a person like you.
____________________________________________________
That is the best you have? That defines the word “pathetic”.
soldevvb,
“Pathetic” is your not understanding that the record El Nino in 1998 caused a warm spike that would take time for the gradual AGW trend to match, and then exceed.
“Pathetic” is your not understanding that La Ninas and solar reductions since 1998 have helped offset the warming caused by AGW.
“Pathetic” is your use of SSRC as a source.
http://www.issuepedia.org/Space_and_Science_Research_Center
Nothing can be proven to a person like you.
“Pathetic” defined.
soldevvb,
Yes, you are “pathetic” defined.
ESQO0, I really like your site! http://www.uhsijvgwer.com vp5hw
jYzyQ, I really like your site! http://www.pnbv7mxq94.com zvvxx
Looking for the way to purloin filthy rich on the internet rakishly and easy? Here is what I got to perceive you – there is one.
If you thirst for, you can become coins for living sitting at current in, and in point of fact working one hour a day.
All you privation is find out my new website – where you can establish all the infomation.
[url=http://askmewhere.org]ASk [/url]