Global Warming - Page 14

Fish freezing to death.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/nova-scotia-aquaculture-fish-killed-by-superchilled-water-1.2980172

And?  You keep posting disconnected stories and provide nothing else.  WHAT is you point ML?  You imply but you never connect the dots. 

On Sept. 11, 1972, Cronkite cited scientists’ predictions that there was a “new ice age” coming. He called that prediction from British scientist Hubert Lamb “a bit of bad news.” - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/julia-seymour/2015/03/05/and-thats-way-it-was-1972-cronkite-warned-new-ice-age#sthash.HmKiC9KN.dpuf

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/julia-seymour/2015/03/05/and-thats-way-it-was-1972-cronkite-warned-new-ice-age

30  Years ago government Scientists said N.Y. City would resemble Daytona Beach...

They must have confused sand with SNOW!

http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/05/new-york-city-global-warming/

It doesn't really matter because we all know that rising CO2 levels lead to warming temperatures. It is a proven fact. What really matters is what we can do to lower CO2 levels. If you ask me - for some it is all about politics, if party A says global warming party B is going to wet their pants trying to disprove it. Screw science and facts but blindly follow those who you vote for. I have always been taught to be proactive rather than trying to react after the fact so isn't it better all the way around to be on the safer side and try and reduce CO2 and a host of other things we pour into the air everyday. Nope, instead you have a bunch of factless morons clamoring that this will cost business. What is more important - the cost to business or the cost to society. If we are wrong what was the big hurt? And if they are wrong what was the big hurt?

So, soldier up and ignore the facts and keep following those who say it isn't happening even though privately and publically more and more of those saying it isn't true are now saying that it is.

You're really not too good at this ML, are you?  You are so used to rushing to a right wing source and posting their BS, that you don't follow your own links to their conclusion.  You cherry pick one sentence and then use it to "prove" that the climate isn't changing because it didn't go exactly how they said it would go.  So, let's take a look at part of the article that contains said quote, shall we?

Here is the LINK to the entire article, so anyone is free to go and read it for themselves.  Please keep in mind that this is the "source" that is used by the "Daily Mail" article, which was posted by.....   none other than ML!

Beginning in a decade or two which would have been 2005, scientists expect the warming of the atmosphere to melt the polar icecaps which has been happening exponentially in the last 20 years, raising the level of the seas already happening, flooding coastal areas already happening, eroding the shores and sending salt water far into fresh-water estuaries not sure about this one, so I won't comment yet (from what I've been able to find so far, there's more degradation due to construction at the coast.  It's hard to say, so I won't). Storm patterns will change already happening, drying out some areas already happening, swamping others already happening and generally throwing agriculture into turmoil already happening. Federal climate experts have suggested that within a century which will be the year 2085 the greenhouse effect could turn New York City into something with the climate of Daytona Beach, Fla.

But the new view of the greenhouse effect, as much as the old, highlights the difficulty of finding practical weapons against what remains an uncertain demon hence, since climate change is pretty new on the radar, the science is in its infancy.

So far, the greenhouse effect has not been clearly felt but within 5 years of this article being written, that changed. In the generations since scientists first theorized that increased carbon dioxide would alter the earth's temperature balance by trapping heat in the atmosphere, no one has been able to measure a significant warming. Scientists have explanations for that, and they believe their temperature curves will soon soar off the scale and that's exactly what it did. But for now the greenhouse effect remains part of a hypothetical, if not so distant, future that future was 20 years ago.

Even if officials were moved by the urgency of the problem, it would be hard to know what they should do at this point, some 30 years later, they have a much better idea, but the fossil fuel industry and any other polluting industry still hold the purse strings and pay off asshat politicians, who then convince their sheep that none of this will happen. The Environmental Protection Agency estimated last year, for example, that a drastic 300 percent worldwide tax on fossil fuels to discourage their use - a tax conceivable in a world of scientists, if not in a world of politicians and business executives - might make a tiny difference of about five years and here we are, well into the changes that were predicted and we're still fighting about it, I wonder why.

Now please refer to the post "Why People 'Fly from Facts'"

GSD and Travels please share with us the degrees in Meterorology or Atmospheric Science that you have personally achieved.

If of course neither of you have attained any degrees in either of these fields then I must conclude that you two weather justice warriors are merely subjecting us to your own personal suffocating presence concerning this matter.

Since I personally started this thread I must tell you that I am not in the least bit interested in reading anything written by some biased person on a government grant concerning their slant on "global warming".

Now you might want to pay attention to the following:

The earth has a molten core which presently is MOVING. The proof of this is that "magnetic north " has changed recently. This can greatly effect ocean temperature, currents, ice caps etc.

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-03/14/earth-core-fluctuations

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/12/091224-north-pole-magnetic-russia-earth-core/

Increased CO2=warming, don't need a degree to apply common sense.

yeah all those thousands of scientist who under both parties have taken research money should be slaughtered, omfg. Can you say, duh?