GRANDPA NICOLAI

Paradise, CA

#21 May 10, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
At what point is CO2 bad for the planet? The amounts are increasing yet the globe is not warming.
>
>
Poor SAM...he read somewhere that "the globe is not warming", and in spite of SAM's claims, this is shaping up to be the warmest period on record according to NASA scientists...

But what do NASA scientists know compared to SAM the man...????
A Toad Roady

Lincoln, CA

#22 May 10, 2013
While running errands yesterday I was listening to kfbk and heard tush bimbo make the statement that if you listen to him he would "tell you what you need to know". sam listens to the talking heads!

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#23 May 10, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
Poor SAM...he read somewhere that "the globe is not warming", and in spite of SAM's claims, this is shaping up to be the warmest period on record according to NASA scientists...
But what do NASA scientists know compared to SAM the man...????
Show me your data comrade. Show me the science that proves AGW.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features...

Speaking of NASA:

"A paper published today by James Hansen has some startling admissions, including

* the effect [forcing] of man-made greenhouse gas emissions has fallen below IPCC projections, despite an increase in man-made CO2 emissions exceeding IPCC projections

* the growth rate of the greenhouse gas forcing has “remained below the peak values reached in the 1970s and early 1980s, has been relatively stable for about 20 years, and is falling below IPCC (2001) scenarios (figure 5).”

* the airborne fraction of CO2 [the ratio of observed atmospheric CO2 increase to fossil fuel CO2 emissions] has decreased over the past 50 years [figure 3], especially after the year 2000

* Hansen believes the explanation for this conundrum is CO2 fertilization of the biosphere from “the surge of fossil fuel use, mainly coal.”

*“the surge of fossil fuel emissions, especially from coal burning, along with the increasing atmospheric CO2 level is ‘fertilizing’ the biosphere, and thus limiting the growth of atmospheric CO2.”

*“the rate of global warming seems to be less this decade than it has been during the prior quarter century”

http://www.thegwpf.org/james-hansen-admits-gl...

You people that bought into the whole AGW scam must feel like such dupes. No wonder you keep defending it, no matter the data that proves you wrong. I really feel bad for you Comrade.

Send me an email, we can meet for a coffee, I will try to console you some, after all,everyone is fooled at some point in their lives.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Paradise, CA

#24 May 11, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
Show me your data comrade. Show me the science that proves AGW.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features...
Speaking of NASA:
"A paper published today by James Hansen has some startling admissions, including
* the effect [forcing] of man-made greenhouse gas emissions has fallen below IPCC projections, despite an increase in man-made CO2 emissions exceeding IPCC projections
* the growth rate of the greenhouse gas forcing has “remained below the peak values reached in the 1970s and early 1980s, has been relatively stable for about 20 years, and is falling below IPCC (2001) scenarios (figure 5).”
* the airborne fraction of CO2 [the ratio of observed atmospheric CO2 increase to fossil fuel CO2 emissions] has decreased over the past 50 years [figure 3], especially after the year 2000
* Hansen believes the explanation for this conundrum is CO2 fertilization of the biosphere from “the surge of fossil fuel use, mainly coal.”
*“the surge of fossil fuel emissions, especially from coal burning, along with the increasing atmospheric CO2 level is ‘fertilizing’ the biosphere, and thus limiting the growth of atmospheric CO2.”
*“the rate of global warming seems to be less this decade than it has been during the prior quarter century”
http://www.thegwpf.org/james-hansen-admits-gl...
You people that bought into the whole AGW scam must feel like such dupes. No wonder you keep defending it, no matter the data that proves you wrong. I really feel bad for you Comrade.
Send me an email, we can meet for a coffee, I will try to console you some, after all,everyone is fooled at some point in their lives.
>
>
SAM, SAM, SAM,

First off, Your posts would have some credibility if you were to obtain your facts from the lion's mouth, in this case Dr Hansen, rather than glean regurgitated barf from anti- AGW sites like GWPF or the "hockey shtick" where the opinion you posted came from....

Second, read carefully, "a slow down" in global warming is not the same thing as "no global warming..."

Third, if you read carefully what Dr Hansen himself wrote, the apparent slowdown in global warming is due to the enormous release of aerosols brought on by the coal burning in China's power plants...

In other words, we are polluting the air our progeny breathes in order to slow down global warming, you can say we are masking CO2 pollution with aerosol pollution....

Or to put it in a way folks of your persuasion could possibly understand ... it's like masking a severe tooth ache with pain killing narcotics rather than have a root canal and be done with it...

Climatologist Dr James Hansen wrote an article titled "Doubling down on our Faustian bargain" addressing the same issues you brought up in your post, you can read it here...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-james-hansen...

FYI, Dr Hansen is retiring from NASA in order to pursue his AGW crusade in a much more unfettered way...

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#25 May 11, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>

Second, read carefully, "a slow down" in global warming is not the same thing as "no global warming..."
Are we now talking about climate change, global warming or AGW? The important point to take away from all of this is that the AGW crowd has for the the last 20 years predicted ever increasing temperatures, we should be fried or flooded by now, yet all of their models have failed to predict any of what is happening now. Remember, the Arctic was supposed to be ice free a few years ago, there was supposed to be an increase of hurricanes. None of these predictions came to fruition. Your ideology is based on bad science and false predictions. Anybody who believes that they can predict the climate 20 years from now with any accuracy is a fool and anyone who believes them....well.

http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Paradise, CA

#26 May 11, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
Are we now talking about climate change, global warming or AGW? The important point to take away from all of this is that the AGW crowd has for the the last 20 years predicted ever increasing temperatures, we should be fried or flooded by now, yet all of their models have failed to predict any of what is happening now. Remember, the Arctic was supposed to be ice free a few years ago, there was supposed to be an increase of hurricanes. None of these predictions came to fruition. Your ideology is based on bad science and false predictions. Anybody who believes that they can predict the climate 20 years from now with any accuracy is a fool and anyone who believes them....well.
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
>
>
AGW, I am always talking AGW on these type of threads.....

The temperature HAS been increasing for the last 20, years, maybe not at the rate predicted by some models, but the temperature trend has been upwards.. once again, AGW deals with long term trends...

If you carefully study temperature record charts from the beginnings of the industrial revolution , you will note that the temperature constantly seesaws up and down, but the trend is upwards and seems to pretty much coincide with the increase of man made CO2...(look up definition of trend)

Furthermore, what difference does it make wether the arctic was supposed to be ice free years 5 years ago or wether it will be ice free 5 or 10 years from now...???

I think that people of your persuasion should flat out come out and admit that you do not care as much about your progeny as you care about paying ˘25 per gallon of gas and your Exxon shares hit $900....

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#27 May 11, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
The temperature HAS been increasing for the last 20, years, maybe not at the rate predicted by some models, but the temperature trend has been upwards......
The temperature was trending upward, it hasn’t in a decade.
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
If you carefully study temperature record charts from the beginnings of the industrial revolution , you will note that the temperature constantly seesaws up and down, but the trend is upwards and seems to pretty much coincide with the increase of man made CO2...(look up definition of trend)
It also coincides with the increase in human population, leisure time, increase in pet ownership, communications advances, life expectancy. That does not mean that any of these are responsible for GW.
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
Furthermore, what difference does it make wether the arctic was supposed to be ice free years 5 years ago or wether it will be ice free 5 or 10 years from now...???
Because if the predictions are wrong, the science is wrong.
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
I think that people of your persuasion should flat out come out and admit that you do not care as much about your progeny as you care about paying ˘25 per gallon of gas and your Exxon shares hit $900....
I know, I know. Save the children. Why are you not so concerned about women killing their children?
Save the whales, save the polar bears, save the ……



White bourgeois liberals trying to save the planet. Give me a break.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Paradise, CA

#28 May 11, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
The temperature was trending upward, it hasn’t in a decade.
>
>
If that is the case, why then is it widely accepted that the last 12 years (2001-2012) are some of the 14 warmest years on record...?
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Paradise, CA

#29 May 11, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>

It also coincides with the increase in human population, leisure time, increase in pet ownership, communications advances, life expectancy. That does not mean that any of these are responsible for GW.
.
>
>
If you think about it very carefully you could see how every one of those points you listed can contribute to AGW, for instance, an increased population and more leisure time definitely contribute to pollution and an increase in CO2, so does pet ownership and a longer life expectancy...
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Paradise, CA

#30 May 11, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>

Because if the predictions are wrong, the science is wrong.
>
>
Not so...

It is all a matter of degree...

If in the old days astronomers said the average distance from the Earth to the moon was 384, 400 Km and new measurement refinements prove the distance to be 384,403 Km, that does not mean that the science of Astronomy is wrong....

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#31 May 11, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
If you think about it very carefully you could see how every one of those points you listed can contribute to AGW, for instance, an increased population and more leisure time definitely contribute to pollution and an increase in CO2, so does pet ownership and a longer life expectancy...
Really? How much more CO2 is emitted by someone engaging in leisure activities compared to someone working?

Are you saying that we should outlaw people? I know some on your side of the aisle feel that mankind is a blight on the planet. Babies must be vast emitters of CO2. With all that crying and all. Ban babies. Sorry, you guys are already working on that.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Paradise, CA

#32 May 11, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>

I know, I know. Save the children. Why are you not so concerned about women killing their children?
Save the whales, save the polar bears, save the ……
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =7W33HRc1A6cXX
White bourgeois liberals trying to save the planet. Give me a break.
>
>
I think that Instead of confusing unborn children with fetuses conservatives would do better to make sure no existing child goes to bed hungry and that every sick child has access to affordable health care and a good education...

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#33 May 11, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
Not so...
It is all a matter of degree...
If in the old days astronomers said the average distance from the Earth to the moon was 384, 400 Km and new measurement refinements prove the distance to be 384,403 Km, that does not mean that the science of Astronomy is wrong....
But AGW science is completely wrong. None of the predictions are even close. The scientists still haven't proven that CO2 could cause the earth to warm.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Paradise, CA

#34 May 11, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? How much more CO2 is emitted by someone engaging in leisure activities compared to someone working?
Are you saying that we should outlaw people? I know some on your side of the aisle feel that mankind is a blight on the planet. Babies must be vast emitters of CO2. With all that crying and all. Ban babies. Sorry, you guys are already working on that.
>
>
Leisure activities might include power boating, flying airplanes, skydiving, driving to a casino or skiing resort....etc...etc...

Keeping the population down is not a bad idea....and yes, there are some people out there who are a "blight on the planet," namely those who are out to make a buck no matter how much harm they cause the planet...
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Paradise, CA

#35 May 11, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
But AGW science is completely wrong. None of the predictions are even close. The scientists still haven't proven that CO2 could cause the earth to warm.
>
>
Main and most important prediction is that the planet is warming...just the melting glaciers and icecaps should be proof enough for a sentient homo sapiens...

CO2 has been proven to be a green house gas almost a century ago, could it be you are not clear on what a green house gas is...???

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#36 May 12, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
Main and most important prediction is that the planet is warming...just the melting glaciers and icecaps should be proof enough for a sentient homo sapiens...
CO2 has been proven to be a green house gas almost a century ago, could it be you are not clear on what a green house gas is...???
I do know what a green house gas is, even have a fairly good idea how the green house effect works. The question is whether or not the amount of CO2 we have put in the atmosphere has caused the
globe to warm up. The science has not proven that point.

"A paper published in Quaternary Science Reviews reconstructs Arctic temperatures in Kamchatka, USSR over the past 4,500 years and finds the highest reconstructed temperatures were about 3.8°C warmer than modern temperatures. The authors find "the highest reconstructed temperature reaching 16.8 °C between 3700 and 2800 years before the present," about 3.8°C above "modern temperatures (&#8764;13 °C)." In addition, the data shows temperatures between 2500 - 1100 [during the Medieval and Roman warming periods] were about 1-2°C above modern temperatures of ~13°C." [Larisa Nazarova, Verena de Hoog, Ulrike Hoff, Oleg Dirksen, Bernhard Diekmann 2013: Quaternary Science Reviews]"
http://www.c3headlines.com/2013/03/latest-res...
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Paradise, CA

#37 May 12, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
I do know what a green house gas is, even have a fairly good idea how the green house effect works. The question is whether or not the amount of CO2 we have put in the atmosphere has caused the
globe to warm up. The science has not proven that point.
"
>
>
CO2 levels today are over 400PPM, the highest they have been in human history, and the last decade has been the warmest decade since they begun keeping records, so unless you can come with a more plausible and "scientifically proven" reason we will have to scratch the temperature rise to the rising CO2 levels...
A Toad Roady

Lincoln, CA

#38 May 12, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
CO2 levels today are over 400PPM, the highest they have been in human history, and the last decade has been the warmest decade since they begun keeping records, so unless you can come with a more plausible and "scientifically proven" reason we will have to scratch the temperature rise to the rising CO2 levels...
I'm waiting for sam to try and prove that too much h2o isn't un -healthy by showing us all that he can live just fine under water without SCUBA gear or some other aid.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Paradise, CA

#39 May 13, 2013
A Toad Roady wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm waiting for sam to try and prove that too much h2o isn't un -healthy by showing us all that he can live just fine under water without SCUBA gear or some other aid.
>
>
SAM probably could live just fine under water, he is a cold blooded amphibian, just like the rest of the T Publicans....

But seriously, hell, even drinking too much H20 could kill someone...

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#40 May 13, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
CO2 levels today are over 400PPM, the highest they have been in human history, and the last decade has been the warmest decade since they begun keeping records, so unless you can come with a more plausible and "scientifically proven" reason we will have to scratch the temperature rise to the rising CO2 levels...
Yes! And we are all still here, the planet has not melted! How much of that 400 parts per million has mankind produced?
Actually the extra CO2 is helping plant life thrive. Do you realize that industrialization has helped green up the planet? There are more trees now then there has been in some many centuries.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Richvale Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Fort Bragg Salmon Festival 11 hr Middle of the road 1
Lib and Con Americans Hate Each Other 11 hr Middle of the road 47
Are wally -mart store closings and worker layof... 12 hr Middle of the road 11
Bruce Jenner after coming out as a trangender s... 12 hr Middle of the road 11
Lots of people haven't signed up for policies u... 14 hr Middle of the road 3
Democrats refuse to enroll in Obamacare Sat Local 1
Harry Reid Got Beat Up By His Bro Larry Sat Nice job libtards 17
More from around the web

Richvale People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]