Global Warming SOLAR-made not MAN-made

[Curval]

I, Curval, do hereby promise not to make any more posts in any thread based on determining if GW is manmade or a naturally occuring cycle.

Sorry lazs...a promise is a promise.

[lazs2]

curval.. perhaps I have missed it but...

I don't recall you ever saying if you thought it was man made or natural or... even if it was a combination.    I don't recall you ever saying that it was a man made event that would reach disaster proportions if we didn't so something.

lazs

[pengu146]

terror i ageree with u on this. man made global warming is a bunch of ********

[Angus]

Originally posted by Toad
Angus, would you agree the basic argument, local or global, has been whether or not the warming is attributable to mankind?

If so, I think you'd agree that question will not be settled here.

It has been debated whether there is a global warming at all, and recently claimed that the S-Pole gains a lot of mass while the N-Pole is now considered to be melting along with the majority of glaciers on the N-Hemisphere.
(in our country all but 2 small ones)
Hence my teaser, which would be nice to see you thinkers respond to:
"I will leave it as a teaser for you to ponder on why the N-Pole can melt away as NOW, while the S-Pole cannot be gaining mass. Very simple solution actually....."

[Hap]

I'm wondering if all those who vociferously nay say global warming will publicly admit their error when the time comes?

[lazs2]

angus... what people are saying is that the globe warms and cools no matter what we do but that it is not warming at the alarming rate that the hand wringing, "will hoax for dollars" grant chasers have said..

seems that every month.. they have some excuse as new data comes out... seems that the globe is not warming in the last seven years... seems that the sun actually does lead the rise and fall... seems that the hottest years in recent history were in the 30's... seems that the oceans aren't rising 30' any time soon..

The only difference between their long range and short range predictions is that the short range ones are proven wrong that much faster.

lazs

[FBBone]

Originally posted by Hap
I'm wondering if all those who vociferously nay say global warming will publicly admit their error when the time comes?

How will we know when that time is?  Let me know and I'll mark it on my calender.

[lazs2]

hap... we have had 7 years of no warming.   isn't it about time to admit that co2 (which has not gone down) is not doing all the work here?

How many years of the hoaxers bad predictions will it take before you admit that they were.... at least.... greatly overstating their case?

lazs

[AKH]

No warming for seven years

[JBA]

I'm all in favor of supporting global warming.

[Angus]

Lasz, - I find nothing correct in your post. Here is the bulk of it:
(numbers to make points more seperable)


"angus... what people are saying is that the globe warms and cools no matter what we do but that it is not warming at the alarming rate that the hand wringing, "will hoax for dollars" grant chasers have said..

seems that every month.. they have some excuse as new data comes out... seems that the globe is not warming in the last seven years... seems that the sun actually does lead the rise and fall... seems that the hottest years in recent history were in the 30's... seems that the oceans aren't rising 30' any time soon.."

1. What people?
2. N-Hemisphere warming seems to come at an alarming speed and well superceeding the predictions of your stinkingly rich hand wringers. (never met one BTW. The only money in global warm issue that I know of is signing up for one of the oil companies)
3. "seems that the globe is not warming in the last seven years".
Hmmm. Well, 25% of the northern icecap just kissed goodbye last year, breaking all known records from millions of years. That was just last year. I would like to see data of your seven years, as well as you trying to use your brain instead of cut&paste or beliefs on my riddle
As well as that, there has been a question shortly above on this thread of whether anyone was at all doubting the occurence of global warming. So here you go
4: Just for the fun Lazs...."we have had 7 years of no warming"
Who are "we"? Because the most had 7 years of quite some warming....

[Jackal1]

SSDD    

[Angus]

Good to see, Jacka1, that your day is good

[lazs2]

angus... Oh wait... we are now saying that local climate is the same as global temp?    You gotta keep me straight on the rules if you are going to change em all the time.

The best I can tell.... within the limits of margin of error... the average global temp has not risen in the last 7 years and has even dipped a little.

2 billion dollars a year is handed out for "computer models" of the man made global warming hoax... this is only the tip of the grant iceberg.

and... as was pointed out... more and more of the published peer reviewed scientific papers are getting sensible and fewer and fewer are saying that man is causing global warming with only 6% saying we are causing it enough to be a catastrophe.    

basicly... if we are helping it.. we aren't doing enough to matter... one way or the other.

lazs

[Angus]

Gimme a link on that. Because massive Ice melting does not occure during cooling. Air temps are up, ocean temps are up, and Ice is melting faster than predicted. That is the whole sum.
As for Antarctica gaining a lot, why is SL rising?