|
DrDave953 (September 5, 2008 at 8:08 pm)
This should be viewed with an open mind by the warmists, however, I'm not sure they have minds to be opened.Dave.
ellwyn (August 13, 2008 at 1:28 am)
that's because they're leftists with an agenda against free market nations. you won't hear them complain about damages to the environment in undeveloped or communist nations. the rest are useful idiot liberals who will parrot the leftists just to be trendy, to show they care.then there is gore, accurately parodied on south park as a megalomaniac on a quest to style himself as the savior of not only humanity but for all life on the planet.
soreronicam (August 5, 2008 at 7:30 pm)
Thank god for some straight no nonsense, aussie speak. Could do with a bit more here in the UK.Congrats, excellent series of videos.
capemall (August 2, 2008 at 11:38 am)
I think too many people would be embarrassed for the somersaults they have put the world through for them to ever admit they were wrong at this point
frithwks (August 2, 2008 at 5:54 am)
Thanks Capemall...It's funny but deep down I knew this, thanks for reminding me....In spite of scientific institutions worldwide acknowledging AGW as real science. They seem unwilling to explain their case in simple enough terms for many to comprehend. I am not convinced either way but I am frustrated at getting to the truth. It seems we are to left to trust in fake polar-bear predicaments and jargon!I think Bobs theory of political bias and accumulative error has some merit!
capemall (August 2, 2008 at 4:26 am)
clouds will cause less long wave radiation to leave the earth..they also increase the albedo of the causing more radiation to get reflected right back into space..so they change the composition of the energy leaving the earth...they also change the amount..which way is subject to argument
frithwks (August 2, 2008 at 12:21 am)
Can any one here account for satellite measurements that show a decrease of long wave radiance leaving the atmosphere in line with IPCC predictions?As far as i can see this is the strongest argument for AGW.....Please no Archybabble!
TheRealArchAngel (August 1, 2008 at 6:29 pm)
*Please 'stop' and let this discussion become relevant*Okay,In the end all my babbling & all this discussion means nothing cause the UN scam to get taxing powers and establish a global Carbon tax using the IPCC report to convince world leaders failed.Why?In the Case of Bush voting no, even the "moron in the white house" asked the EPA if all those emmision claiming to be released were true and they said no,then asked Meteorologist in NAS if CO2 drives weather and climate & they said no
TheRealArchAngel (August 1, 2008 at 6:22 pm)
**Arch..Man is there no end to the babble?**lol**In all your calculations you allow no numbers for the natural uptake of C02**No, I am just pointing out the flaw in the assumptions of how much CO2 humans are causing....it it were true,burning fossil fuels doesn't even make anywhere near how much CO2 is spueing into the maunaloa Weather station from the Volcano...er.."up there" in the air
frithwks (August 1, 2008 at 6:21 am)
Arch..Man is there no end to the babble?In all your calculations you allow no numbers for the natural uptake of C02 by plants and sprout numbers and conclusions that relate to nothing!Please 'stop' and let this discussion become relevant. |
