Skull Valley lawmaker wants both side...

Skull Valley lawmaker wants both sides of climate change taught to students

There are 1632 comments on the Verde Independent story from Feb 5, 2013, titled Skull Valley lawmaker wants both sides of climate change taught to students. In it, Verde Independent reports that:

Saying students are getting only one side of the debate, a state senator wants to free teachers to tell students why they believe there is no such thing human-caused "global warming.' The proposal by Sen.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Verde Independent.

LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#775 Apr 8, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
Global climate models may be overstating the warming properties of black carbon particles, according to new research led by the University of California, Davis. The study will be published online Aug. 31 in the journal Science.
Why do the Alarmist have to lie so much?
One paper introduces the POSSIBILITY that the VERY SMALL effect of black carbon may be slightly more than we currently assess. Putting a decimal point in the estimate might be a big thing to you but the fact is that it doesn't change the overall picture.
RiccardoFire wrote:
Why do the Alarmist have to lie so much?
Actually those you call 'alarmist' are the ones promoting reading ALL the science papers. The 'denialists' like you are the ones doing most of the distortion and spin based on very small bits of the picture blown up out of all proportions.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#776 Apr 8, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
One paper introduces the POSSIBILITY that the VERY SMALL effect of black carbon may be slightly more than we currently assess. Putting a decimal point in the estimate might be a big thing to you but the fact is that it doesn't change the overall picture.
<quoted text>
Actually those you call 'alarmist' are the ones promoting reading ALL the science papers. The 'denialists' like you are the ones doing most of the distortion and spin based on very small bits of the picture blown up out of all proportions.
Temperatures have not risen nearly as much as almost all of the climate models predicted. Their predictions have largely failed, four times in a row... what that means is that it's time for them to re-evaluate. It is evidence that CO2 is not nearly as strong a climate driver as the IPCC has been assuming. CO2 is not nearly as strong a climate driver as the IPCC has been assuming.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#777 Apr 8, 2013
Global Warping : New term to describe the twisting and distortion of the climate to fit agenda driven drivel

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#778 Apr 8, 2013
Why do the Alarmist have to lie so much?

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#779 Apr 8, 2013
the models are wrong, the assumptions were wrong, the predictions were wrong, So why do you have to lie?

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#780 Apr 8, 2013
A wild storm will bring plunging temperatures and heavy snow from Colorado to Minnesota during the middle of the week.

Areas from Denver to Rapid City, S.D., Casper, Wyo., and Scottsbluff, Neb., will have blizzard conditions in store spanning Monday night and Tuesday.

What is scary is not that AlGore says that Global Warming causes extreme cold weather, but that SO many people actually believe it. Orwell was right, 2+2 does equal 5.

More global warming hits mid-west. In other news, Al Gore has finally agreed to use the term "climate change" instead of "global warming," as the reports of record cold throughout the world have caused some skeptics to wonder if his claims may be suspect. "There has been scientific consensus regarding global warming, but many uneducated folks think that widespread cooler temperatures contradict the overwhelming evidence we have built up, so it's a perception thing,' Gore explained. In other news, a consensus now exists in the fashion industry that the emperor has new clothes, though some fashion skeptics are not on board.

LOL

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#781 Apr 8, 2013
you have got to understand whom your dealing with. Liberals/Alarmists are not the brightest bulbs in the chandelier, in fact their intelligence is equivalent to the burned out bulbs, and they will believe anything that makes mankind look bad and anything that will make mankind stay on Earth more miserable than it is. that's why they hate freedom and love tyranny so much. It keeps man in a constant state of slavery.
Tyler in Wonderland

Avondale, PA

#782 Apr 8, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>We are more populated now, of course more will die. How did the media report them 200 years ago?
I would love to tell you, but it seems there wasn't a record breaking disaster every other week 200 years ago. Funny, that.
Tyler in Wonderland

Avondale, PA

#783 Apr 8, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Really? I guess you don't remember what happened in Japan, FL, etc.
Re CO2, have you not researched high CO2 poisoning?
Sorry. It strikes me that that was a thing a particularly reality-challenged individual might have said. I shall remember the [sarcasm] tags next time.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#784 Apr 8, 2013
Tyler in Wonderland wrote:
<quoted text>
I would love to tell you, but it seems there wasn't a record breaking disaster every other week 200 years ago. Funny, that.
I would love to tell you, but it seems there isn't a record breaking disaster every other week right now, plus 200 years ago we didn't have CNN and Fox covering every rain storm. Funny, that you buy into that...LOL.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#785 Apr 8, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Really? I guess you don't remember what happened in Japan, FL, etc.
Re CO2, have you not researched high CO2 poisoning?
Prove that CO2 causes Tsunami's...LOL...Now global warming causes earthquakes....LOL...What's next? And Florida? Are you saying it's unusual for Florida to have hurricanes? LOL
Tyler in Wonderland

Avondale, PA

#786 Apr 8, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>I would love to tell you, but it seems there isn't a record breaking disaster every other week right now, plus 200 years ago we didn't have CNN and Fox covering every rain storm. Funny, that you buy into that...LOL.
Hmm... I'd hate to offend by pointing out mere logic, but it seems that five of the ten most intense hurricanes between 1930 and today occurred... within the last decade..?

Curious, curious...
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#787 Apr 8, 2013
Tyler in Wonderland wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry. It strikes me that that was a thing a particularly reality-challenged individual might have said. I shall remember the [sarcasm] tags next time.
Well, well that's what these deniers are/do.

Sarcasm in this environment? LOL.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#788 Apr 8, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Prove that CO2 causes Tsunami's...LOL...Now global warming causes earthquakes....LOL...What's next? And Florida? Are you saying it's unusual for Florida to have hurricanes? LOL
Hmmmm ... you are a reality challenged poster aka a denier!

Did you stop name calling?

Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#789 Apr 8, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
The draft of a U.N. climate change report due to be published in 2014 has been leaked, and it shows that the four temperature models the U.N. used from 1990 to 2012 vastly overestimated the warming of the earth during that time.http://www.breitbart.com/ Big-Peace/2013/01/28/U-N-Repor t-Says-Global-Warming-Predicti ons-Overstated-The-Problem
Wrong- it shows temperatures within the range of the models, at the lower end.

http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/fig...

Temperatures are only expected to be somewhere within the range of the models.

They would have to be outside the range of the models to suggest the models are wrong.

Natural variation means that temperatures can be anywhere within the range of the models- and if they are in the low end one decade, they can be in the high end the next.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#790 Apr 8, 2013
Tyler in Wonderland wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmm... I'd hate to offend by pointing out mere logic, but it seems that five of the ten most intense hurricanes between 1930 and today occurred... within the last decade..?
Curious, curious...
There were 21 tropical storms in 1933. Was that global warming too? They have only been keeping records for 150 years. 2006 North Atlantic hurricane season had a normal level of activity. The Alarmist forecast a very active season, but the number of storms fell far short of initial predictions. With 10 tropical storms, 5 hurricanes, and 2 major hurricanes, the North Atlantic 2006 season was near normal. The Alarmist like to predict bad storms, the alarmist hope for bad storms, the alarmist need something to make them happy in a false belief. Stop your global whining! We are all for clean air, green energy, but not your global whining and whining making people rich.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#791 Apr 8, 2013
Despite 2009’s “Climategate” that revealed that global warming is a hoax, many still believe it exists. Why do you think Gore changed it to "climate change"?“The National Hurricane Center (NHC) provides information on major U.S. hurricanes during the past 100-plus years. According to the NHC, 70 major hurricanes struck the United States in the 100 years between 1911 and 2010. That is an average of seven major hurricane strikes per decade.”

In all the decades back to 1961, the 100-year average remained intact with major hurricanes ranging from as few per decade as four and as many as seven. Not a single decade varied from this.

In the decades since the 1980s when alarmists began warning of a major increase in the overall temperature of the Earth, claiming it would trigger major weather events like hurricanes, nothing changed. In the decades in which carbon dioxide emissions were said to be the cause, the average remained the same.

Despite the global warming claims “during the past four decades, the time period during which global warming alarmists claim human-induced global warming accelerated rapidly and became incontrovertible, the fewest number of major hurricanes struck during any 40-year period since at least the 1800s.”

In the first two years of this current decade “exactly zero major hurricanes struck the United States.”

Despite this, the calls for carbon taxes are being heard; taxes that would affect all industry and businesses nationwide. Such a tax, already in place in California, would drive large scale manufacturing out of the nation and take with them hundreds of thousands of jobs. It would impact the nation’s utilities and drive up the cost of electricity, the life blood of the nation.

If Americans do not wake up to this threat, do not realize that hurricane activity has not increased, and realize, too, that the Earth has been in a cooling cycle since 1998, they will fall victim to the vast matrix of environmental organizations, government agencies, and the mainstream media that continues to spread alarm in the name of global warming and climate change.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#792 Apr 8, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Hmmmm ... you are a reality challenged poster aka a denier!
Did you stop name calling?
Calling you an Alarmist is not name calling. Isn't there a wall street protest coming up where you radicals can crap on police cars? Or you losers protesting the keystone pipeline?
Tyler in Elsewhere

Battle Creek, MI

#793 Apr 8, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>There were 21 tropical storms in 1933. Was that global warming too? They have only been keeping records for 150 years. 2006 North Atlantic hurricane season had a normal level of activity. The Alarmist forecast a very active season, but the number of storms fell far short of initial predictions. With 10 tropical storms, 5 hurricanes, and 2 major hurricanes, the North Atlantic 2006 season was near normal. The Alarmist like to predict bad storms, the alarmist hope for bad storms, the alarmist need something to make them happy in a false belief. Stop your global whining! We are all for clean air, green energy, but not your global whining and whining making people rich.
Estimates actually place the number of tropical storms in 1933 at ~24, the most active hurricane season on record... until 2005's 'never-ending hurricane season' smashed that record with a confirmed 28 storms, several of them the most violent storms in Atlantic history.

I am a bit confused as to why you would point to 2006's hurricane season, however. It was a nearly normal hurricane season, after all... approximately half a century ago. These days a season like 2006's seems to be considered positively tame by today's standards. Curious, curious. Were you trying to point out that a relatively inactive hurricane season today is equivalent to the norm in the 1940s?

Not to offend, but that seems to go directly against whatever it is you're trying to prove. Perhaps you should instead point to a hurricane season we've had recently that was inactive by the standards of... 1960, say, so there's no question of missing data like in the 1930s. That seems like it would be more beneficial to your cause.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#794 Apr 8, 2013
Tyler in Elsewhere wrote:
<quoted text>
Estimates actually place the number of tropical storms in 1933 at ~24, the most active hurricane season on record... until 2005's 'never-ending hurricane season' smashed that record with a confirmed 28 storms, several of them the most violent storms in Atlantic history.
I am a bit confused as to why you would point to 2006's hurricane season, however. It was a nearly normal hurricane season, after all... approximately half a century ago. These days a season like 2006's seems to be considered positively tame by today's standards. Curious, curious. Were you trying to point out that a relatively inactive hurricane season today is equivalent to the norm in the 1940s?
Not to offend, but that seems to go directly against whatever it is you're trying to prove. Perhaps you should instead point to a hurricane season we've had recently that was inactive by the standards of... 1960, say, so there's no question of missing data like in the 1930s. That seems like it would be more beneficial to your cause.
Exactly, so did global warming in 1933 from all the suv's cause those hurricanes fool? You are confused because of your religion of green, ask your preacher the Rev Al to explain it better. Are you slow or something, Did you read the whole post? The alarmist predicted in 2006 a very active season, but the number of storms fell far short of initial predictions. 2006 was not a half a century ago, are you on something tonight?

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.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 4 hr u196533dm 79,743
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 15 hr Agents of Corruption 222,728
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 17 hr Science 163,695
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) Sun Dogen 32,575
Life started in Tennessee proof. Sep 15 Science4life 1
What's your religion? Sep 8 Ateesiks 1
Science News (Sep '13) Sep 8 Ricky F 4,001
More from around the web