Co2 not main trigger for ice age.

Global warming is nothing but a political ruse concocted by the liberal looney left that wants to control your life more than the raging radical right.

The data of the last 8 years have already falsified the global warming predictions based on computer models with VERY limited degrees of freedom modeled. The % rise in C02 has been far less than 1% of the total atmospheric CO2...ever wonder why the global warming zealots never talk about % change? Now you know.

Any "scientist" who continues to buy into the global warming hype should be forced to give up whatever credentials they earned in science.

RMT
 
Thank you RMT for your educated opinion. It is said in the link I shared that C02 is not the main trigger for global warming. What you just said seems to me if I am correct would agree with that. If not then please elighten us. So, if co2 is not the main trigger we all may be in for a ice age sooner or later.
 
So, if co2 is not the main trigger we all may be in for a ice age sooner or later.
Click to expand...

Yes, indeed. This is actually what a large contingent of climatologists who DO NOT buy-into the Global Warming scam are telling us. The last major cooling cycle of mother Earth occurred during what has come to be called the "Maunder Minimum". That Maunder Minimum was a time where the sunspot output of the sun was not even as low as it has been over the past year+. These climatologists are basically saying they believe there is a correlation between low sunspot activity and the onset of a new cooling period (too soon to say it is another "ice age"). So far, the data coming in is far more in support of these climatologists than it in any way supports the bogus claims of the Global Warming religious zealots.

I do not have time to find the links right now on this, but I have them on my computer at home and when I find the time I will post them.

RMT
 
"If" C02 really is such a culprit, and the liberal camp that hypes this stands by it;
why worry?
We have the chemical procedures to convert C02 into 0.

I'm sure there's alot of plants in China that could churn something out.
(Wasn't there an oxygen "pop machine" in Spaceballs?
- Hey RMT, might be some marketing future there lol... kinda like SPF protection that is beyond 97% but has a "safer higher number", saw a show on the scam in with this whole global warming scare).
 
As someone who wasted a lot of time in Chemistry lab washing silicone grease off of glassware, I would like to congratulate you for using the proper term CO2 rather than co2.

That is all. Carry on. Smoke 'em if you've got 'em (CO doesn't trigger global warming either).
 
Here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum#Little_Ice_Age

<font color="red"> "The Maunder Minimum coincided with the middle — and coldest part — of the Little Ice Age, during which Europe and North America, and perhaps much of the rest of the world, were subjected to bitterly cold winters. Whether there is a causal connection between low sunspot activity and cold winters is the subject of ongoing debate (e.g., see Global Warming)." [/COLOR]

Given that the editors of Wikipedia have been known to show a very strong bias towards the Global Warming scam, the above is a very big statement indeed, even if it does not seem that way. The facts are that the warming trends that were predicted by the UN IPCC with their (incomplete and possibly incorrect) climate models have not manifested at all, and rather, there has been no net warming since 2001 as shown in global temperature averages.

If these trends continue (and last winter's lows and even this summer's lows so far are more indications) then this might be an indication we are beginning the next cooling cycle.

RMT
 
Angleo:

"If" C02 really is such a culprit, and the liberal camp that hypes this stands by it;
Click to expand...

One of the aspects of how the UN IPCC have chosen to model the earth's climate is one that I am uniquely qualified to have a say about: positive vs. negative feedback effects of CO2. Feedback is a fundamental concept of dynamical systems, as well as the human-made control systems we use to control systems.

While it may seem counter-intuitive to the words, "negative feedback" is actually stabilizing form of feedback for any closed-loop system. By "negative" we mean that the feedback subtracts from the feedforward (forcing function) that drives the system. When we say "positive" feedback, we are talking about a de-stabilizing characteristic because the feedback adds to the feedforward forcing function input, and this causes the input to the controlled item (in this case, climate temperature) to diverge away from the value prescribed by the forcing function. With "negative feedback" it acts like a corrector, thereby stablizing the system.

So the UN IPPC models assume POSITIVE FEEDBACK for CO2 with respect to climate temperature. This means that what we should see in the historical records of ice core samples and tree rings is that ANY times in the past when CO2 naturally increased, we should see a corresponding (and highly divergent) increase in temperatures. The fact is, we have not seen this in the data. And a great many climate scientists have pointed out that the existing historical climate data that we have already falsifies the UN IPCC presumption in their models that CO2 feedback is positive (destabilizing). But, of course, since their quest is really more a religious one than a scientific one, they are given a free pass to ignore this falsifying data... just exactly like HDRKID and others on this forum ignore data that falsifies their claims.

RMT
 
If sunspots activity is related to the cooling of the earth and from the link you posted it seems to be then somewhere the sunspots tell us how much solar energy is reaching the earth. If sunspots are not very active then this seems to suggest the sun itself is in a cooling period and that the earths ice ages are in relation to the suns own warming or cooling periods. Anyway that is what sunspots seem to suggest. As I read there is a debate about this.
 
If sunspots are not very active then this seems to suggest the sun itself is in a cooling period and that the earths ice ages are in relation to the suns own warming or cooling periods.
Click to expand...

Yes, indeed. I would hope that this fact is exceedingly obvious. I mean, even a student with an 8th grade education knows that Sol is the primary "forcing function" of energy in our solar system, and therefore the largest impact on our world. With the gaseous nature of our atmosphere (it has a high heat conductivity with respect to free space), it should be obvious that Sol is the single largest contributor to the temperature cycling of our planet.

While this is blatantly obvious to most, it is interesting to note how little the Anthropocentric Global Warming crowd addresses the sun's impact on our climate. Whenever anyone asks their "experts" something like "but doesn't the sun dominate our climate", they either ignore the question altogether, or they give a mumbo-jumbo, technical-sounding non-answer as to why the sun is not as important as their hallowed "positive feedback CO2 loop" (which is wrong, BTW).

I have pointed you and others here to Dr. Roy Spencer in past threads about AGW. I encourage you to keep tabs on him, as he is the most experienced climatologist who is not afraid to take on the religious AGW zealots who are compromising science and lying to us as a means to control us.

http://www.drroyspencer.com/

As the earth continues to cool, the general public MUST speak out, and speak out loudly about all the pseudo-scientific nonsense that you have been asked to believe by idiots like Al Gore. There is a revolution going on in Iran. We can have a revolution here, although given the nature of our society, it need not be ugly or violent. We can make it a revolution in science much like the Orange Revolution in Ukraine or the Rose Revolution in Georgia.

But YOU must make your voice known in order for this scientific revolution to have feet.
RMT
 
Yes, indeed. I would hope that this fact is exceedingly obvious. I mean, even a student with an 8th grade education knows that Sol is the primary "forcing function" of energy in our solar system, and therefore the largest impact on our world. With the gaseous nature of our atmosphere (it has a high heat conductivity with respect to free space), it should be obvious that Sol is the single largest contributor to the temperature cycling of our planet.

While this is blatantly obvious to most, it is interesting to note how little the Anthropocentric Global Warming crowd addresses the sun's impact on our climate. Whenever anyone asks their "experts" something like "but doesn't the sun dominate our climate", they either ignore the question altogether, or they give a mumbo-jumbo, technical-sounding non-answer as to why the sun is not as important as their hallowed "positive feedback CO2 loop" (which is wrong, BTW).

I have pointed you and others here to Dr. Roy Spencer in past threads about AGW. I encourage you to keep tabs on him, as he is the most experienced climatologist who is not afraid to take on the religious AGW zealots who are compromising science and lying to us as a means to control us.

http://www.drroyspencer.com/

As the earth continues to cool, the general public MUST speak out, and speak out loudly about all the pseudo-scientific nonsense that you have been asked to believe by idiots like Al Gore. There is a revolution going on in Iran. We can have a revolution here, although given the nature of our society, it need not be ugly or violent. We can make it a revolution in science much like the Orange Revolution in Ukraine or the Rose Revolution in Georgia.

But YOU must make your voice known in order for this scientific revolution to have feet.
Click to expand...

Well from what I know about the sun it can fry us or freeze us to death at any time. As the sun ages it is suppose to get hotter till eventually the oceans boil away and our biosphere is blown away. When they talk about global warming you don,t hear much about that. The one thing I do like about global warming and the gas prices going up is that hopefully it would lead to free energy but I know that is a pipe dream. (No not a crack pipe.) Anyway chief I think you made some good points.
 
Anyway chief I think you made some good points.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Dude. And I really mean it about a revolution. Coincidentally enough, Anthony Watts made the following post today as a "call to arms" for We The People to let our elected reps know what we think about the AGW legislation they are crafting... and it will have a VERY large negative impact on all of our lifestyles... all because of bad science and those irresponsible enough to proseletyze it to us:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/23/pushback-on-waxman-markey-now-is-the-time-for-all-good-citizens-to-come-to-the-aid-of-their-country/

<font color="red"> House to Vote on Climate Bill By Friday

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090622-716255.html

If you have not contacted your legislator yet, consider doing so after reading this. – Anthony

Left Pushback on Waxman-Markey: Is It Time to Start Over?

(snip)

But given that Waxman-Markey is climatically inconsequential, a fact that Romm does not dispute ( “well, duh“, he said), the hard Left is understandably getting restless, even rebelling against the pseudo climate bill. After all, who really wants an Enronesque cap-and-trade bill that enriches lawyers and corporate types at the expense of everyone else? [/COLOR]

Write your Congressmen and Senators TODAY! Tell them what you think!
RMT
 
The one thing I do like about global warming and the gas prices going up is that hopefully it would lead to free energy but I know that is a pipe dream.
Click to expand...

Innovation requires education. Desperation alone leads only to "rigging". Being intelligent hasn't been "cool" in decades, so we're in trouble.
 
Innovation requires education. Desperation alone leads only to "rigging". Being intelligent hasn't been "cool" in decades, so we're in trouble.
Click to expand...

Most of society could care less about education. Give them their ipods, laptops, cable or sat. tv and their happy. I know full well it only takes 1 or 2 smart people to set up an assembly line making sure the machines are programmed and set correctly then 10 or 11 stupid people can make product all day with supervision of course. Then the stupid people with their ipods and stuff will buy it not caring how it was made. Most of society is consumers. Not college educated or at least not technically educated people. So, as far as desperation as you seem to call it consumers buy what is in demand. Now when it comes to energy now days that is gas or deisel. But, if it ran on its own or some other fuel or power the consumer would not care as long as it was what they demanded. Well I was going to disagree with you but when it comes to survival yes we are in trouble. Right now it only takes a few smart people and some workers to keep society going.
In the future if the ice age comes back it will take society some time to adjust which when that happens a lot of people may not survive.
 
Well I was going to disagree with you but when it comes to survival yes we are in trouble. Right now it only takes a few smart people and some workers to keep society going.
In the future if the ice age comes back it will take society some time to adjust which when that happens a lot of people may not survive.
Click to expand...

Survival isn't the greatest risk. People survived the middle ages.
 
Survival isn't the greatest risk. People survived the middle ages.
Click to expand...

Sure they did. After 3/4 of them died off from famine and sickness. Also, the middle ages was a survival based society. Right now this is a capitalist consumer based society. If the middle ages came back tomorrow the people that lived in the middle ages would have more of an advantage than the people that are alive today and 3/4 of them died during the middle ages so where does that put the people of today? Most of mans evolution has been a survival based system. Only in the last few hundred years has it tried to change from that. This is a test for us. If it does not work out we all or at least our children will be back to a survival based society.
 
The one thing I do like about global warming and the gas prices going up is that hopefully it would lead to free energy but I know that is a pipe dream.
Click to expand...
"Free" energy to me is sort of like saying "cheap hydro".

If the billionaires and Govt' would wake up and realize nothing is free, and this existing large scale tech could make them fortunes beyond their dreams, then things will change.
How?
You have a choice here;
Small expensive scale private unit purchases -
or
Large installations owned by private corp or Gov't, that run the lines to your home like...hydro, cable, telecommunications, etc.

If the Hoover Dam helped the great depression, on a scalability side, why not build huge wind, solar, etc installations - THAT GENERATE PROFIT !

T. Boone Pickens realizes it.

Once the extremely wealthy realize they can build these installations and make cash off them, forget the ethanol funding
 
mr. reactor your post above

"If sunspots activity is related to the cooling of the earth and from the link you posted it seems to be then somewhere the sunspots tell us how much solar energy is reaching the earth. If sunspots are not very active then this seems to suggest the sun itself is in a cooling period and that the earths ice ages are in relation to the suns own warming or cooling periods. Anyway that is what sunspots seem to suggest. As I read there is a debate about this."

When the earth becomes cold ,beyond normal, for whatever reason be prepared for the solar flare. you can make a cauchy surface field to protect you and others. may God be with you and with me.
 
mr. reactor your post above

"If sunspots activity is related to the cooling of the earth and from the link you posted it seems to be then somewhere the sunspots tell us how much solar energy is reaching the earth. If sunspots are not very active then this seems to suggest the sun itself is in a cooling period and that the earths ice ages are in relation to the suns own warming or cooling periods. Anyway that is what sunspots seem to suggest. As I read there is a debate about this."

When the earth becomes cold ,beyond normal, for whatever reason be prepared for the solar flare. you can make a cauchy surface field to protect you and others. may God be with you and with me.
Click to expand...

Ok, I am probably only going to live another 5 to 20 years according to statistics based on my health. More if am lucky. This likely will have more meaning for future generations than it will me but who knows.
 
Back
Top