Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.
#32225 Aug 24, 2012
'It's fascinating to take a detailed look at what Time mag told us about global cooling in 1974: It's been happening for three decades; it shows no signs of reversing; it's causing bizarre and unpredictable weather, including drought in Africa; it may be caused by fuel burning, it could be catastrophic for food supplies, etc'
From the Jun 24, 1974, Time Magazine, entitled: "Another Ice Age?"
" As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations are actually part of a global climatic upheaval. However widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age.
Telltale signs are everywhere from the unexpected persistence and thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland to the southward migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the Midwest.Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7° F. "
#32226 Aug 24, 2012
You mean a 2 person judgement(at least one who was a Pres. Bush appointment).
#32227 Aug 24, 2012
PHD..... I disagree with you. Rehab can't correct 'steenking piddling diddling middling mudling mudslinger dirtling', who is a slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig.
#32228 Aug 24, 2012
New paper finds no evidence of increased humidity in US, contradicts global warming theory
"Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology finds, contrary to global warming theory, that "little change has occurred in dewpoint and specific humidity" in the U.S. over the 80 year period from 1930 to 2010. The paper also finds "trends in relative humidity show little change for the period 1947 2010." Thus, the paper contradicts the theory of a runaway greenhouse effect allegedly due to positive feedback from increased atmospheric water vapor and specific humidity."
Yeah, yeah, warmies, you can save your hot air [response]. We all know you will just cry "unreliable source" or a variation of the same theme.
#32229 Aug 24, 2012
Get over it.
Bush isn't there anymore.
Grownups accept accountibility and responsibility.
Bozo is not a savior who is just 'fixing' what Bush did.
Naw. I think it's really George Washington's fault. Why not. I could spin that one. Sad thing is, a percentage of people would believe it.
#32230 Aug 24, 2012
The bray is actually,'heehawheehaw'. I'd think you've been too long away from other mules, but you've been close to all the topix AGW deniers.
While you snuck reads from the local newsstand, you should have enrolled at university, reading the engineering, chemistry, geology, astronomy, & mathematics journals in the college libraries. 44 Science Papers were published in Science Journals in the 70's & 80's about global warming, while only 7 papers were published about global cooling.
But that's right. Mules can't count too high!
#32231 Aug 24, 2012
“Denying those who deny nature”
Since: Jun 07
#32232 Aug 24, 2012
Did it? Or did it result in more people being hungry. The difference back then is that until the New Deal no one had ever considered the idea of asking the government to help feed the poor. That was usually done on the local level. Groups such as churches would feed those who needed it. It may not be much but it is something churches have been doing for centuries. Something religious organizations are still doing in other places.
As for the New Deal keeping the country from going Communistic or Socialistic, the New Deal was something a socialist or communist would of recommended. If anything the New Deal did the exact opposite of what you claimed. It was some of the reason why the US waited to become involve with WWII. Now if the US had reacted in say 1939 they would of been dealing with Hitler while the Nazi's were still grabbing countries and could kept the body count lower. Japan would of viewed the US in a different light and seen the US as more powerful military as a reason why not to attack. Instead the US turned isolationist and the gas chambers incinerated jews and the Japanese military saw the US as weak and unable to defend it's possessions. A country that could be bullied.
#32233 Aug 24, 2012
Yeah, like you did all that. Sorry, not believable. Your ignorance on the matter is all too clear.
You have no idea what education background I have or know who I am. Nor will I divulge. noyb.
IF you have any type of edjoomuhkashun, perhaps you should apply some wisdom to it. It's not too late.
BTW...a mule is stubborn animal. The only stubborn I can see are the warmies beliefs in blatant veneer [already proven] lies.
That spells gullible.
Please show us the obscure 44 papers you say were published in the 70's and 80's on global warming as a major belief at that time. Not just one obscure theory from an unreliable source.[And not your thesis from high school]
Please show us and include all the concern for a mmcc WARMING crisis at that same time, all the while MOST others were crapping their pants mainly about cooling, attempting to whip up a frenzy about it to scare and make it believeable.
Warmies think that they can say anything about their cemented beliefs without any proof. All your edjoomuhkashun and you didn't learn to include references yet? lol.
FACT is, a great effort was to make people believe it was cooling, not warming.
Oh, the irony.
#32234 Aug 24, 2012
WOW I do believe we have another case of useless babble. On the bright side the Less than a Box of Rocks actually well not really might have learned something in its absence from the topics at hand. Stop your Less than a Box of Rocks ideas youre scarring the children of the world.
#32236 Aug 24, 2012
If you take this country alone, the NRC says it's small.
I came up with about 2 percent of the US CO2. Is that small or large?
P.S. For the present portfolio and without defense stuff.
#32237 Aug 24, 2012
Blah blah blah.
Didn't think you or anyone could prove anything.
Remember that when someone in your deluded & deceived warmie believing crowd asks for proof and references for anything when they give no credible references ever.
Oh wait, any valid references given are automatically dismissed as 'not credible' and even known written history...marked as 'disagree' & 'spam'.
Ignorance gone viral.
YOU have NO AUTHORITY to tell me what I can and cannot request on a lame ass Topix forum.
Someone makes a statement, others can question it.
This thread is like 'Groundhog Day'.
Everything has been discussed over & over & over & over one million different ways.
So what's your problem?
All this over a Time article from the wayback machine? No response when your warmie bud makes statements and lame accusations about any education I may have, acting like a 12 yr old?
Pull up your big boy pants.
If you don't like it, don't read it.
#32238 Aug 24, 2012
Don't worry. The AGW scientists don't ever read your words. Even your topix AGW denier buds make short work of your posts.
Your macho duck fingertaps isn't reminiscent of anything I remember in my aero engineering classes. However, we talked about the Viet Nam protestors & said they wouldn't take over any of the engineering buildings. The demonstrators, would always go to upper campus to make their protests, tho the engineering buildings were right next to the HUB demonstrator gathering point. Just too many military people in the engineering classes.
Since: Feb 07
#32239 Aug 24, 2012
Remaining climate blame believers rubber neck car accidents, tattletale at school, get beat up by their sisters, drop roses in elevators, have AOL accounts, PBS bumper stickers, PalmPilots, pagers and disco pants.
#32240 Aug 24, 2012
Data. Good. Thanks.
#32241 Aug 24, 2012
When we combine this data (thanks again) with the CO2 generation rates for the other commercially viable base-load generation technologies available, we get an interesting result.
According to DOE in their report on the subject here:
... CO2 generation rates for other base load generation technologies are:
Coal: 2.10 lbs CO2/kWh
Oil: 1.92 lbs CO2/kWh
Natural Gas: 1.31 lbs CO2/kWh
Note these figures are the direct CO2 emissions from combustion only, and do not include the total carbon footprint of the fuel cycle, which would of course add to these figures considerably.
The figure you so helpfully unearthed from NRC for the nuclear fuel cycle is 850,000 tonnes CO2 annually for a Fermi 3-size nuke (net capacity 1520 MWe operating at 80% capacity). This can be taken for practical purposes as the total carbon footprint, since CO2 emissions from the plant itself are negligible.
This calcs out to 0.176 lbs CO2/kWh for the nuke - i.e., a TENTH of the carbon footprint of the other proven commercially viable base-load generation options available to us, even WITHOUT considering the considerable additional carbon footprint associated with the front-end and back-end fuel cycles for the fossil-fueled options.
The conclusion is obvious - if, as we are urged to believe, AGW presents the most serious risk to life on the planet short of a killer comet impact, building nukes as fast as possible to replace all fossil fuel electric power generating stations is the single most effective action we as a society can take to save the planet.
We know how to do this. Let's roll.
“Happy, warm and comfortable”
Since: Oct 10
Mountain retreat, SE Spain
#32242 Aug 25, 2012
Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/articl...
“Happy, warm and comfortable”
Since: Oct 10
Mountain retreat, SE Spain
#32243 Aug 25, 2012
Not quite, it's stuck here at Topix.
The whole forum is like that.
Going right back to year one, the questions and answers are the same.
And so it will continue.
He's over 50, it's too late for that.
#32244 Aug 25, 2012
Well for the entire world wishful thinking is better than the dirtlings useless babble tainted with hate.
Since: Mar 09
#32245 Aug 25, 2012
Are you, Big_Goof, and Cricket siblings?
Add your comments below
|Trump bounces into the lead||14 min||WasteWater||58|
|Polls: Young voters seek a 'reset button' on 2016||Jul 22||WeTheSheeple||91|
|Column: In bashing Donald Trump, some say, Ruth...||Jul 12||Synque||6|
|Al Gore's Daughter in Court After Arrest at Pip...||Jul 1||Nu Wor Order||2|
|Vice President's Daughter Karenna Gore Arrested...||Jul 1||Anita Bryant s Jihad||12|
|Why Don't Jews and Asian-Americans Like the Rep...||Jun '16||USidiotRaceMAKEWO...||5|
|After 10 Years, 'An Inconvenient Truth' Is Stil...||Jun '16||Into The Night||205|
Find what you want!
Search Al Gore Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC