Antarctic sea ice refutes global warming hoax

[Running Gator]

1 hour ago, ayin jade said:

At one time greenland supported a community of viking explorers. Now greenland cant support such a community. In other words, the weather was warmer then. There was less ice. 

There was also a time when there was a lot more glaciers in the us. 

Which is the normal climate? Global warming folks have never said which is normal, and if we are warming now, then what caused the warming during the time of the vikings? Its not man made. 

I look at the expensive extremes in which the us tries to reduce pollution, then look at other countries like china where its people are taking pollution selfies because the visibility is so bad there. Like mexico city where americans in the embassy there are told they will lose 5 yrs off their lives just from living there because of the pollution. Yet somehow america is demonized for pollution. Its just a scheme to redistribute wealth.

The idea behind climate change/global warming is not that there is a "normal climate", but that there is a normal pattern to change in the climate and that pattern has been disrupted.  The most likely culprit is the influence of mankind since many other factors (i.e. volcanos, the sun, etc) have been ruled out as having influenced the change in the pattern.

[Omegaman 3.0]

4 minutes ago, Out of the Shadows said:

The idea behind climate change/global warming is not that there is a "normal climate", but that there is a normal pattern to change in the climate and that pattern has been disrupted.  The most likely culprit is the influence of mankind since many other factors (i.e. volcanos, the sun, etc) have been ruled out as having influenced the change in the pattern.

"The most likely culprit is the influence of mankind since many other factors (i.e. volcanos, the sun, etc) have been ruled out as having influenced the change in the pattern."

Really? I must have missed that one!

[Running Gator]

16 minutes ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

"The most likely culprit is the influence of mankind since many other factors (i.e. volcanos, the sun, etc) have been ruled out as having influenced the change in the pattern."

Really? I must have missed that one!

Have you spent much time looking at the data and the research?  I spent months upon months looking at it as part of my job a few years back.  The data and research is all readily available online for anyone who wants to take the time to look at it for themselves. 

[HAZARD]

There is approximately 1.3 to 1.5 billion cows grazing, sleeping, and chewing their cud at any given time on planet Earth. And these 1,300 pound (average weight for both a beef and dairy cow) animals eat a lot. Much like humans, when they eat, gas builds up inside of their bodies and has to be expelled.  Cows pass wind and burp… a lot. The result is a large amount of methane being introduced into the atmosphere. Livestock is the largest source of methane gas emissions worldwide, contributing over 28 percent of total emissions. Wetlands, leaks from oil refineries and drills, and landfills also contribute methane gas to the atmosphere. In fact, unlike the ratios on a global scale, in the United States livestock is the third largest contributor, behind the mining and transportation of natural gas and rotting landfill waste.

[Running Gator]

3 minutes ago, HAZARD said:

There is approximately 1.3 to 1.5 billion cows grazing, sleeping, and chewing their cud at any given time on planet Earth. And these 1,300 pound (average weight for both a beef and dairy cow) animals eat a lot. Much like humans, when they eat, gas builds up inside of their bodies and has to be expelled.  Cows pass wind and burp… a lot. The result is a large amount of methane being introduced into the atmosphere. Livestock is the largest source of methane gas emissions worldwide, contributing over 28 percent of total emissions. Wetlands, leaks from oil refineries and drills, and landfills also contribute methane gas to the atmosphere. In fact, unlike the ratios on a global scale, in the United States livestock is the third largest contributor, behind the mining and transportation of natural gas and rotting landfill waste.

Methane in the atmosphere is taken into account in climate change data.  While methane is more of a potent greenhouse gas than CO2, there is also 200 times more CO2 in the air than methane so it's impact is lessened. 

[Omegaman 3.0]

21 minutes ago, Out of the Shadows said:

Have you spent much time looking at the data and the research?  I spent months upon months looking at it as part of my job a few years back.  The data and research is all readily available online for anyone who wants to take the time to look at it for themselves. 

Yes, actually I have, since I read Climate and the Affairs of Men, by Iben Browning, back in the late 80's, I have paid a lot of attention to it. I have poured over quite a bit of the research from u.n. intergovernmental panel on climate change, and have read a lot form that NASA guy, Hansen. 

It just happens that I find the research interesting, but the conclusions faulty and misleading, almost as if the have an agenda, instead of an interest in science.

Mind you, I am not convinced that climate is not changing, it alway has and will continue to do so I suspect. What I am not convinced of, so far, is that mankind has significantly contributed to it, or that climate change is even a bad thing, if it is occuring or in the way that it is occuring. If, and I think it is and IF, we are affecting it, I am not sure that is even bad at this point. I think more study and understanding it advised, before we start throwing a lot of resources and effort at a problem that may not even exist!

[Omegaman 3.0]

26 minutes ago, Out of the Shadows said:

Methane in the atmosphere is taken into account in climate change data.  While methane is more of a potent greenhouse gas than CO2, there is also 200 times more CO2 in the air than methane so it's impact is lessened. 

And water vapor makes both of the pale, by comparison, but I guess there is little to be done about that.

The data is al very fine and interesting, but the fact that the computer models keep failing, and needing frequent and major revisions, tells me that these interactions are not well understood yet.

[Running Gator]

17 minutes ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

Yes, actually I have, since I read Climate and the Affairs of Men, by Iben Browning, back in the late 80's, I have paid a lot of attention to it. I have poured over quite a bit of the research from u.n. intergovernmental panel on climate change, and have read a lot form that NASA guy, Hansen. 

It just happens that I find the research interesting, but the conclusions faulty and misleading, almost as if the have an agenda, instead of an interest in science.

Mind you, I am not convinced that climate is not changing, it alway has and will continue to do so I suspect. What I am not convinced of, so far, is that mankind has significantly contributed to it, or that climate change is even a bad thing, if it is occuring or in the way that it is occuring. If, and I think it is and IF, we are affecting it, I am not sure that is even bad at this point. I think more study and understanding it advised, before we start throwing a lot of resources and effort at a problem that may not even exist!

Then you know that phenomena like solar flares, volcanoes and the rest have been looked at extensively for their influence on the climate.  They have not just been ignored as some suggest. 

I do not think there is any question the climate is changing, the question is if it is off the previous warming/cooling pattern and if so why.  

But I do agree that there are two separate issues to look at, IS it happening and then WHAT to do about it if it is.  I haven't really found any of the answers from the government to be sufficient, in fact I am not even sure it should be "stopped" as it were, but instead used to our advantage if possible. 

[ayin jade]

1 hour ago, Out of the Shadows said:

The idea behind climate change/global warming is not that there is a "normal climate", but that there is a normal pattern to change in the climate and that pattern has been disrupted.  The most likely culprit is the influence of mankind since many other factors (i.e. volcanos, the sun, etc) have been ruled out as having influenced the change in the pattern.

Many scientists have said the changes in the sun are affecting climate, but then the man made climate change folks have gotten them silenced. There is quite a big change in the pattern to the sun (according to astronomers), where the usual 11 yr cycle to it has changed. That coincides with the changes seen in climate. Yet that is being ignored.

[Omegaman 3.0]

Robert, there was a picture of a penguin on a beach. It was a duplicate posting, I deleted one of them now they are both gone, perhaps yo delete the other at the same time?

In any case, I was wondering hat the point was, it is not as though penguins are limited to antacrtic ice, so, I was did I miss the point?