Forum Post: Your Death Sentence: 5 Years from now
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 13, 2011, 8:52 a.m. EST by USCitizenVoter
(720)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Climate change mitigation scenarios are possible futures in which global warming is reduced by deliberate actions, such as a comprehensive switch to energy sources other than fossil fuels. A typical mitigation scenario is constructed by selecting a long-range target, such as a desired atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2), and then fitting the actions to the target, for example by placing a cap on net global and national emissions of greenhouse gases. An increase of global temperature by more than 2°C has come to be the majority definition of what would constitute intolerably dangerous climate change, but some climate scientists are increasingly of the opinion that the goal should be a complete restoration of the atmosphere's preindustrial condition, on the grounds that too protracted a deviation from those conditions will produce irreversible changes.
The scientist from around the world have reports that indicate the world leaders have refused to address global warming in time to save life on our planet and in 5 years our planet will be past the tipping point of 450 ppm (parts per million) of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Its present level is 390ppm and last year, despite recession, more carbon dioxide from fossil fuels poured into the atmosphere than ever before.
Life on the planet as we know it may be doomed.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/09/fossil-fuel-infrastructure-climate-change
The consequences of failing to avoid dangerous climate change have been explored in two recent scientific conferences:
the 4 degrees and beyond climate change conference held Oxford university it 2009
the Four Degrees Or More? Australia in a Hot World held at the Univ. of Melbourne in July 2011
Prophetic voices throughout humankind's history have basically painted pretty stark choices and hellish results if we chose to serve evil. As a people of a nation - the USA - we have slumbered in a comfortable association or symbiosis with one of the most effective and exploitive nation states in history. This empire serves and is about corporate control - period. We used to get some crumbs from the banquet table but now the 1% are scarfing up those too. So at long last, we have woken up and are staring into the abyss. The choice remains the same. Those who are acting to save the planet may win the day. In my opinion they are the faces and logos of God and wisdom working its way into the 21st century. They have chosen to represent the sacred in a world that has been raped and defiled. To be with them even in their martyrdom is as close as I'll probably ever get to heaven. To turn against them for any reason is to be condemned.
Why wouldn't OWS be the way to rectify this. It's a movement attempting to smash the system that is preventing movement on these issues.
JonoLith good point my friend.
I know most of you don't want to hear this, but I guess we have no choice but to blow up the carbon power plants before they destroy this planet...
Maybe just add a lot more wind power stations and stop building the coal plants. Last time I looked at a wind generator there wasn't any smoke spewing from it. That's clean energy and that's a job for an unemployed person.
But wind generators are not as profitable so they will not be built...
Greed it makes me want to slap them around
It will take awhile for people to start dieing so we still have to try.
If it's true then it could be one hell of a ride. Hope you get your way, even if in the end our planet doesn't need us around any more.
My dad is a biologist and a democrat, He just lost interest in politics when he realized that we pretty much killed the entire planet. My isn't what you might think it is. We could start making electric cars. we could do a lot. Its probably too late but we need to try.
But where does the electricity come from? Coal.
Electric vehicles are useless for the planet until we can produce energy in a cleaner fashion; nuclear, wind, solar, wave power.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ep4L18zOEYI
I hear people talking about the need for jobs all the time..
This would offer a massive infrastructure project as would other alternative energy sources.
Also if implemented a land tax would promote higher density populations. High density populations live a greener lifestyle unconsciously. e.g. per resident Manhattan is the greenest city in the US
Our is hydroelectric, we have rural electric membership corp and that's the kind of power they are buying. We also produce nuclear power not far from here too. There are other sources of electric power but you are right about a lot of coal being used for electric power. At any rate, even if the went to work to fix this tomorrow, well we'd be a little short so to speak. All you can do is try.
There are thousands of ideas that can lower the carbon footprints. Examples: Share a car with a freind or neighbor. Neighbor hood co-ownership of vehicles. Share Rides. Get involved in planting trees. Just that some plans will feel like an inconvience at first.
Bicycle to work... there is absolutely no reason not to... monday take clothes with you in your car, the remaining 4 days, cycle to work and change when you get there... its simply, costs no gas, and you can quit the gym.
Unfortunately for the planet, some of us are a little more creative and they are taking their private jets to work.
And the problem is there is no financial incentive to speed up those solutions.
If we have a resource based economy, instead of a monied economy, than resource maximization becomes the motivator.
I have no idea what you mean by that. Please explain.
if all humans' standards of living rises, and those that innovate in new ways of resource accumulation rises higher, then resource accumulation becomes the new incentive. individuals will no longer brainstorm in ways to hoard money, but individuals will think of new ways of preservation, in order to maximize ones personal standard of living.
Why would you hoard anything if you can have access to everything you need when you need it? When there is access abundance, holding on to stuff you do not need is just a burden. You could if you wanted to, but i think most people would realize there is no reason for it.
that is a good question? ask those who hoard money, the one percent, why they do what they do? I believe they hoard money because they care about their families and want to insure that they will live long and prosperous lives. flip to a resource based economy and that instinct to preserve ones family, is focused on maximizing resources. are you speaking of the free rider dilemma? where once everyone has basic necessities, they will choose not to be productive and live off everybody else's hard work.
That people feel they need to gather as much as they can in our current system is pretty logical. They actually need it to insure the continuation of their lifestyle and that of their loved ones. But that same mindset isn't going to improve their lives in a RBE. People aren't stupid. They will realize.
Your other dilemma, that people will choose to live of the work of others. Some might, but most people actually do want to be useful. We are social being and there is nothing we want more then to belong. To be respected and accepted. Many people who do not have to work (like the retired), still do something useful. Not because they have to but because they want to.
the free rider dilemma is not my view of humanity, but it is a view used in political discourse. it is the reason why the republicans want to gut social programs. they believe that we are not innovating enough because welfare leaves us with too high of a standard on living to be bothered with new inventions. but i believe what you said, "We are social being and there is nothing we want more then to belong. To be respected and accepted." respect though has to come first, or then people don't care about acceptance. if you don't respect me, i won't take the time to understand you.
I'll guess in 4 years people will start making changes on their own with about a year of time to spare. Big question then will be do we throw the baby out with the bath water, what I'm asking is will pepole suggest an avoidable error in which something good is eliminated when trying to get rid of something bad.
I remember you made that same argument before in another post. But i think the risk of not moving forward into a more sustainable society is greater then the risk of losing something good.
Unfortunately time may not be on our sides this time. So if you know how to move our society forward then I'll back you 100%. The squeaky wheel gets the most attention.
Neighborhood co-ownership of vehicles? I can hear the Tea Party folks crying "marxism" already.
On a more serious note: people still live in neighborhoods?
Your dad being a scientist should know the difference between a scientific fact and a hypothesis.
people will not die no matter how much CO2 is put into the atmosphere by human beings, do you even understand what % of CO2 needs to be in ambient air to kill you?
I think the tipping point he is referring too is the idea of run away warming.... where the negative feedbacks the earth previously has had, cant deal with the relativly recent massive CO2 release
The heat is what will kill! Heat strokes during the summer will be a daily occurrence.
If this is true why is there no evidence of warming in the last 5 years?
says who Mobil-Exxon?
no the scientists that are not paid by the Club of rome, bilderberg, United Nations ect. If you think Oil companies are the most powerful organizations in the world you have some more research to do
This blog will explain why 5 years is inadequate to form a climate model over an influence that has been growing for a 100 years.
http://atmoz.org/blog/2008/01/29/on-the-insignificance-of-a-5-year-temperature-trend/
Also: http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-cooling-january-2007-to-january-2008.htm
and 100 years is no where near a large enough sample to show a trend that has been happening for Millions of years.
Predicts heat waves, with 3 different climate models http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110503133046.htm
Shows the climate of today is unique. That is, it does not follow the pattern of the last 20,000 years. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111021074532.htm
Also, 90% of scientist (in climate related fields) agree climate change is occurring, 82% believe it is due to human activity... this percentage usually goes up as you ask scientists who study longer trends.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090119210532.htm
Since I am not an expert on climate science, I defer to the experts... which the super-majority agree is occurring and due to human activity.
they are paid by who?
Last I checked the scientist paid by the Koch brothers to study if climate change is occurring due to human activity, came out and confirmed it was....
so, the BIG OIL companies are...
I am quite interested how you are going to respond to this.
thank you, carbon tax for all!!!
So, no logical supported response.... I won this debate!
the people paying these, for lack of a better word, "scientists" are global organizations that are represented well at meetings like the annual bilderberg meeting. They are globalists be it Oil companies, international bankers, news media or other multinational organizations. You won nothing
I'll gladly follow the experts, rather than claim I know something they do not and follow some people who make wild accusation without any scientific or supporting evidence..
so you now do not support the "global warming" movement?
So, you are a conspiracy theorist then... that lends massive credibility to your arguments.
Besides the point of conspiracies... can you point to any evidence for your assertion that the scientists in the articles I have provided you with are in any way paid by bilderberg related entities?
you obviously don't understand the definition of a theory, considering you call facts theories and theories facts (global warming) I'm not going to hold you hand, you can find out what the agenda is or you can follow Al Gore, your groupthink won't let you understand what you are supporting
I cant argue with someone who thinks 90% of scientists are wrong...
Either of us could be delusional, but one is making claims without evidence, and the other is deferring to experts.
You can continue to push this unproven hypothesis but that is all it is. An unproven hypothesis, ignore this to your own detriment
You can continue to push these conspiracy theories, that have no evidence backing them short of a delusional person capable of putting up a website and drawing conclusions from incredible leaps in logic.
I've read through a lot of this thread and found only one post that mentions China. What good is anything we do in this country when China continues to build coal fired plants at an alarming rate? China is producing over one million automobiles a month. China supports Iran and its nuclear program because it wants to secure Middle Eastern oil to fuel its economy. China is our enemy and the enemy of our planet.
Maybe the Chinese are after the Middle Eastern Oil supplies I don't know, but one thing is for sure it's not my oil and I don't want it. Plus I would not call them my enemy. However I don't want to buy a toy for a kid that will make the kid sick that I blame on Wal-Mart.
I would put the blame on the American companies that shipped all our manufacturing jobs to China. If you walk into Wal-Mart and everything is made in China, it's really not Wal-Mart's fault. They are just the middle man. The fact that you are concerned about the quality of products coming out of China is closer to the point. American consumers are content with low prices, but because the shelf life of products coming from China is so short, the consumer is actually paying more in the long run.
Every dollar spent on a Chinese product not only depletes our economy, it puts us into deeper debt to China. This kind of economic imbalance is very dangerous and in the past has almost always led to war. The scariest part is that should war with China come, it is a war that we cannot win using conventional means. In the final analysis it is our leaders who have failed us.
They do produce some crappy products. I would hate to see the USA use any of our 5000 N U Clear them off the face of the planet bombs on them.
Agreed, war is nasty. Unfortunately there are those who welcome war. Some are simply misguided; whipped up by national pride, or outraged with moral indignation. They deny that their pride and morals are tethered to the drawstrings of their purses. Others are simply looking to make a buck, and they are the worst because they act to enlarge themselves and don't pretend to give a damn about anything else. Greed personified. These types are not exclusive to any nationality or philosophy. They are everywhere.
I'm firm also and agree with you in analysis it is our leaders who have failed us.
Global Warming or change is a political term so they can debate about whose fault it is until the end of time. It should have been tittled Global Environmental Destruction which is 100% human caused.
barb, nice headline may I add the word total just to emphasize how servere the worlds pollution is, TOTAL Global Environmental Destruction
China wants to be the BOSS
Here's how climate denialist think. Al Gore is fat so climate science is false.
Why is that? Hey pepsi changed its mixture. So is a pepsi still a pepsi? No it's a modified pepsi. To sell it they tell it. Facts are facts and misconception is a liars friend.
Al Gore has been proven wrong as with his scientists so he is not credible
Link Please?
To sell it they tell it.
God, there are so many ways for people to attempt to dishearten this movement. It's really sad. Talk about fatalism! The last I heard we have about 70 to 100 years befor the planet actually becomes uninhabitable. Science has answers that might very well stem the tide, if we can get these oil companies by the throat and spend their trillions on alternative energy that woul create jobs and stem the tide. We have been trying to establish, unsuccessfuly, something as simple as curbside recycling since the 70s. Everywhere we turn we are met by vested interests with politicians in their pockets. Our Problem in profit uber alles standing in the way of every attempt to affect change. This situation cannot stand!
When you get some time read this article. jph was kind enough to share it with us. http://bit.ly/tCeKqx Capitalism vs. the Climate - Naomi Klein
I read that and it was very good, thanks! I just wanted to add an aside here, and that is that my heart goes out to the younger generation. I don't think there has ever been a generation with so many challenges" to face." Furthermore, I'm afraid young people must bare the brunt of those travails. The reasons being that young people have the energy, young people have more flexible minds, young people aren't "invested" in the infamous status quo, young people have the most to lose from failure, and young people are more fluent with the technology of potential salvation than older generations are.
This is not to say that some of us elders won't contribute as much as we can, but the battle has always been to the strong. In spite of all that I think we can prevail. Humanity has overcome terrible travails in it's long history; we are more resourcful than we even fully comprehend, and we have scientific resources undrempt of a century ago. Finally, and perhaps most importantly many of us have finally tired of the old order of the spiritually dead. This crisis may actually herold a new golden age.
"Courage," Maya Angelou said, "is the first of virtues because without it none of the other virtues can reach fruition." (paraphrase). Take your courage in your hands and build a better world. It has been done before, and it can be done again.
Here is the article that got my earnest attention.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/09/fossil-fuel-infrastructure-climate-change
Thanks again, I've got quite a backlog of viewing here to catch up on!
Sweet Dreams
[Removed]
FYI, a new author published a book about this and targeted to young adults and older teen. See http://www.amazon.com/Ls-Mirassion-Misty-Armstrong/dp/1609112466/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1321291678&sr=8-1
Did you read the book?
global warming is a scam propagated by solyndra and cronies to siphon more money out of the system for themselves
Promote urbanization for one through a land tax. Higher density populations live a greener lifestyle unconsciously.
http://persquaremile.com/2011/01/18/if-the-worlds-population-lived-in-one-city/
Support sustainability projects. Alternative energy infrastructure projects could offer a huge amount of jobs in the short term. Although I personally would prefer if self sustaining test cities were created to help us transition into a more sustainable society, drastic changes to energy infrastructure will need to occur pretty quickly.
http://www.thevenusproject.com/
Finally, 'if' a land tax is successful suburban sprawl and other low density developments can be returned to nature. (this will reverse the carbon footprint somewhat)
genanmer, You have present some great ideas. A step into the future would be to redesign our residential and commercial complexes and have them powered with natual gas, solar panels, and wind generators and never connect them to the grid.
That's alright. None of us will live forever.
Lets have some fun while we're here.
Lets tweet!
Corporations Have No Tongues!!
It doesn't matter. If we're unable to help ourselves then extinction is just nature's way of saying human beings were an evolutionary error and it's time to start over. Life will survive, just maybe not our life. The message has been out there, if a majority ignore it there isn't much the minority can do except keep the dialogue going.
We have the intelligence and technology to take a very significant swath of life on Earth with us. Billions of years of evolution and diversity down the drain. Nothing left in our final hours but us, cockroaches, and the huge vats of algae we convert to food. Beyond that a denuded planet. That's the nightmare for me.
There are ways to describe human activity that make us sound like a deadly virus or bacteria, strangling the earth with our waste and ever growing numbers. On the plus side the earth is likely to survive, it's had over 90% of all life wiped out before, it will come back, just without us.
Well, Earth has a limited lifespan. It's middle-aged now. It's taken life billions of years to get this diverse.
I sympathize with your viewpoint, but it represents rationalization for inaction. I don't accept being a cause of the next mass extinction. Life is precious.
Inaction will happen with some people i suppose. I always liked the idea behind Norse mythology. The gods were at war in a battle against evil and they knew they were destined to lose, but continued the struggle anyway.
I don't think we'll change human nature or convince people to take a long term outlook, that doesn't mean I've given up. Like life itself, I'm going to die, but I'm not going to give up and just let it happen.
One fact about the forces of nature. It does not have a mind of it's own. It's a wild thing.
We don't have 5 years. Oct 2008 global financial derivative exposure was 178 trillion...now it's 290 trillion...as we're told the crisis was solved...while we're now buying our own bonds...reassured everything is fine...up until the last minute before global currency riot: EPIC SYSTEM FAIL looking like sometime next year. http://occupywallst.org/forum/public-vote-option-on-competing-democratic-vs-repu/
Capitalism vs. the Climate - Naomi Klein
http://bit.ly/tCeKqx
Article that address this head-on.
JPH Thank you.That is a great article. I copied this line “You can pry my thermostat out of my cold dead hands.”
Technocratic Government
A new government that is against capitalism.
Do you know what it is?
Would you be for it?
OSW find a solution for capitalism. Send a message to your fellow Americans that they will understand and support. Shut them down is not a long term fix. A day of action will get an equal and opposite reaction from the press and soon you may lose the attention that you have earn up till now. The tab will have to be paid by law abiding citizens of New York not the 1%ers.
Sounds like shit from a 1% er that's heavily invested in "green energy."
[Removed]
I think, there still might be a chanche to go into another direction...
Ron Lawl knows it
http://www.bilderberg.org
See also Michael C. Rupperts Peak Oil Blog
http://www.fromthewilderness.com
Michael C. Ruppert "Crossing the Rubicon - the decline of the American empire at the end of the age of oil"
Global warming and, more broadly, climate change is a natural part of Earth's ecological cycle. You can't tell me the Ice Age was manmade. What, were Neanderthals polluting the air with their fuel-guzzling...erm...mammoth-mobiles?
Sure it's a well know fact that the planet continually changes but it is the rapid changes that the scientist are looking at and how the changes will affect life on the planet over the next hundred years. I don't know how much pollution a person can breath, eat, drink, and bathe in our suns light before he dies? If we can not turn back after measures of 450 ppm of carbon dioxide on the charts then we all have to make some sacrifices together.
Most of the major evidence that once formed the backbone of climate change theory has since been either disproven or yielded irrelevant. The rapid changes you describe are nothing uncharacteristic of naturally catalyzed changes to the overall climate of the Earth. The majority of people understand artificial global warming to be little more than a faux pas at best and a hoax at worst due to the critical lack of evidence to back it up. No Socratic, methodical scientist truly can accept global warming theory, especially in such a failure-stricken halcyon stage as that which it inhabits right now.
You can do what you want. I'll keep stocking up with supplies up on the higher ground with some others folks in the mean time. Good Luck to you.
ho hum - here comes the global warming nuts now lol!
Careful what you say. Seems to me the are a lot of very intelligent members posting their concerns.
define intelligent
rename post to Your
Climate change news: by The Guardian --- http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climate-change
I guess you haven't been paying attention, or you would have noticed, in spite of the CO2 going up in the past ten years, the temperature has stayed static. It hasn't warmed since 1998. http://ncwatch.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/02/23/co2_temp_graph.jpg now ask yourself, why was it warmer when CO2 was 365 PPM than when it's 390 ppm? do you even know what PPM stands for parts per million! as in, for every 1 million molecules in the atmosphere, only 390 of those are CO2, meaning it's less than 1%. And, in case you were all living under a rock, Governments are pushing for more taxes from the 99% on the CO2 issue, pushing for your jobs to all go to china, pushing you to buy a product at triple the cost than the competition and regulate it out of business, AND the 1% is whoring it out on their corporate-owned "news" channel out there.
You know it's a sham, when a government-owned entity is holding it's hands out, headed by a railroad engineer and an activist, demanding for control of your money, and when Speakers like Al gore are the highest paid(or most expensive) public speakers out there, and buying seaside mansions and burning 20x the energy than the average household.. And what was his excuse? "oh, he pays carbon credits that he owns, so it's ok. if you're too poor to do that, then i guess you better go live in a cave"
LOL more recycled denialist garbage.
"It hasn't warmed since 1998"
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-stopped-in-1998.htm
Read how the guy below gets all his talking points: http://www.thenation.com/article/164497/capitalism-vs-climate
"warming at a steady rate before and since 1998" I would like to point out from your OWN source that this guy has said that the earth is warming at a steady rate. Hmm...CO2 is to blame, then shouldn't it be spiking more of a hockey stick like mann is harping over? shouldn't the decade ended in a gain, and not a loss of -1.75 degrees?
What are the oceans water temps? Have they changed?
http://drtimball.com/2011/whether-it-is-warming-or-climate-change-it-cannot-be-the-co2/
by the way, the japanese are closer to the answer than your computer model, corporate and government funded lapdogs.
And by the way, tell Dr. Mann to stop blocking FOIA requests and allow his work to be looked at.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/11/09/carbon-dioxide-emissions-up-sharply-yet-temperatures-are-flat/ and just to add salt to the wound.
Reading the scientist reports that once we go past 450 parts per million that it will take over a hundred years to lower the levels. Posion is poison no matter what you say and some very low ppm levels of posion will kill you. Just depends on the posion.
http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/indoorair/co2/index.html
Again, Carbon dioxide is NOT poison. Carbon Monoxide is. Carbon monoxide takes the oxygen out of your blood and suffocates you from the inside.
and I don't mean to sound a little cliche..but do you think that's oxygen you're breathing out right now?
Thanks for the lesson. The problem is the elevated TEMPERATURE OF THE PLANET, Not breathing it. Carbon dioxide is commonly called dry ice. Concentrations of CO2 at 7% to 10% cause dizziness, headache, visual and hearing dysfunction, and unconsciousness within a few minutes to an hour. Five hundred million years ago carbon dioxide was 20 times more prevalent than today, decreasing to 4–5 times during the Jurassic period and then slowly declining with a particularly swift reduction occurring 49 million years ago. Human activities such as the combustion of fossil fuels and deforestation have caused the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide to increase by about 35% since the beginning of the age of industrialization. Oxygen is the third most abundant chemical element in the universe. In nature, free oxygen is produced by the light-driven splitting of water during oxygenic photosynthesis. According to some estimates, Green algae and cyanobacteria in marine environments provide about 70% of the free oxygen produced on earth and the rest is produced by terrestrial plants. Other estimates of the oceanic contribution to atmospheric oxygen are higher, while some estimates are lower, suggesting oceans produce ~45% of Earth's atmospheric oxygen each year
And MY problem is that the real world observation and data shows that Something other than CO2 is the cause. What the scientific consensus(last time I checked, science is NOT done by consensus) theorizes what should happened, and what actually is happening, we should be in a stage of rapid spike in tempertures. as a matter of fact, why don't you argue this with this guy? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh20cnLwCiw&feature=player_embedded
okay din365 now you have me concerned that it is something other than CO2.
the sun?
That's according to the exact same body I was talking about in the above statement, bud. It's very hypocritical in a way, because the U.N is pushing control of our money and promoting technology that needs very destructive mining processes to get. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/12/28/isnt-it-ironic-green-tech-relies-on-dirty-mining-in-china/
so yeah, it's ok if we poison the hell out of the land, just as long as a trace gas essential for life in earth doesn't go past a Politically-motivated acceptable level.
makes plenty of sense, right?
For it all to make sense may depend on what kind of world we want to live in.
a world whee i'm able to choose my own shitter without big government telling me what politcally correct P.O.S i have to get.
I see read some things that just make me want to say hummmm talk to the hand
If their is a big human die off due to all of these so called problems, it will be the fault of AlGore, the biggest climate change hypocrite the world has seen. His carbon footprint is not very exemplary, for the the guy shouting from the rooftops for everyone else to reduce.
On the lighter side: Al likes to be in the lime light. He is no different than some of the actors on stage today. It's hard to hold him accountable for anything. He's just one of the ex-vice presidents but I think he was hoping to stand out among so many of the vice presidents to be read about in a future history class.
He most likely will be for his great invention: The Internet.
We are doomed the earth is warming so fast that we can't find any evidence of it warming in the last 5 years, that sneaky earth.
2010 was the warmest year on record.http://co2now.org/
That link does not work, and you telling me the warmest year includes the largest snow accumulation in the U.S. mountain ranges in recorded History.
Just search CO2 now, Increased snow fall is to be expected with higher average temperature. Higher temps mean more evaporation of water into the atmosphere. It comes down somewhere.
this is the common "climate change" argument where everything is because of global warming, be it snow or cold temperatures. Some how you think everything in nature is caused by man. But higher temperatures would cause rain not snow, snow levels would rise in elevation (not the case) to say 2010 was the warmest in history is funny to me considering the winter of 2010 lasted until june and the 2010-2011 winter began early October 2010. Glaciers are starting to reform in California, this summer was equally as short as that summer, and was not warm enough to melt all of the snow. So are glaciers in California part of "global warming"
If the typical seasonal temperature in a region is say normally 25 degrees and you raise it 2 degrees, will it rain or snow.
that is a day to day question, you can't take the median temperature and say yes it will snow all the time because weather is constantly changing, you can have snow at temperatures far above 32 degrees and you can have what appears to be rain at less than 32 degrees. The point here is you are all mindless sheep following into an agenda weather or not you see it, its called Agenda 21 look it up
No,sorry I'm not gonna look it up,Nor am I going to look up links for chemtrails, 9-11 truthers.Bigfoot or space aliens. I've heard it. If you choose to ignore actual data, and the consensus of the entire credible scientific community in favor of fight wing propaganda, go for it.
"credible scientific community" Have you not read the emails from the leading UN scientists?
From Phil Jones (modification of data to hide unwanted results):
I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.
From Kevin Trenberth (failure of computer models):
The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.
From Michael Mann (truth doesn't matter): Perhaps we'll do a simple update to the Yamal post, e.g. linking Keith/s new page--Gavin t? As to the issues of robustness, particularly w.r.t. inclusion of the Yamal series, we actually emphasized that (including the Osborn and Briffa '06 sensitivity test) in our original post! As we all know, this isn't about truth at all, its about plausibly deniable accusations.
From Phil Jones (witholding of data):
The skeptics seem to be building up a head of steam here! ... The IPCC comes in for a lot of stick. Leave it to you to delete as appropriate! Cheers Phil PS I’m getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don’t any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act !
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Climategate-CRU-emails-hacked.htm
you are an idiot, just a tape babbling parrot
Thank you. Every idiotic claim you make has been made by a thousand people, all of them smarter than you, and all of it has been debunked. I don't even have to think, because you're just spouting recycled garbage from people who take an ideological stand against science. You're a tool, bro. Alex Jones has you right where he wants you.
I am saying facts, the problem is you are worshiping a hypothesis not a fact
here you go I'll hold you hand little boy, and sorry you are so ignorant
I'll tell ya what, "loosely human", there's tonnes and tonnes of articles that debunks your debunks, that you haven't even once considered.
http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/
Why not come here and try to spread your anti-human, pro-nanny spew here?
Glaciers are not growing:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/himalayan-glaciers-growing.htm
More precipitation and other exteme weather is evidence of ongoing climate change:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Record-snowfall-disproves-global-warming.htm
Also:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2008/07/09/shasta-glaciers.html
And all your propaganda is straight out of 1998. Update your denialist memes please.
Everything is "global warming" oh i mean "climate change" Keep supporting this bogus cause and enjoy your Agenda 21. Carbon tax is the answer
Thank you, I will. I know there's a FEMA coffin waiting for me at the hands of the sociofascistbankerNWOjewconspiracymexicanmafiazionistelite.
Alex Jones tool.
the road to hell was paved with good intentions
Built by the crypto-fascists with evil intentions and their idiotic but also well-intentioned followers.
you said it, stop being one of um
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uysdwTf3zU
Meme, I'm telling you my personal observations. Unlike you I have first hand information
It is in the news and you shouldn't mock mother nature Take the time to read the news reports then get back to me. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/09/fossil-fuel-infrastructure-climate-change
there is a reason why they changed the name to 'climate change' because their is not evidence of warming in the last 5 years. The climate has been changing for millions of years, and now anything from snow in october to rain in july are blamed on climate change. It is just a general term that is true the climate changes every year and has for millions of years. To think you can stop that is absurd.
I just don't like the idea of waking up 5 years from now and listening to people making comments about how the problem was all of the governments fault and not the peoples fault. The solution is our problem. If you have the opinion that there is no problem then I see that as you are saying it's not your problem. Energy demand Source: IEA Christiana Figueres, the UN climate chief, said the findings underlined the urgency of the climate problem, but stressed the progress made in recent years. "This is not the scenario we wanted," she said. "But making an agreement is not easy. What we are looking at is not an international environment agreement — what we are looking at is nothing other than the biggest industrial and energy revolution that has ever been seen."
Are you a scientist? Have you got the means to test the ozone layer?
your talking about two different things. CO2 and ozone. You seem to be missing the agenda to put in place a global carbon tax paid to the international bankers, you should understand that these sources you are getting this information from have an agenda and it is not for your or the earths protection. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UugnMAIE3U
Carbon dioxide a factor that destroys the ozone layer. If you have time read this the facts have been discovered in the ICE CORES and the scientist proved it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
wikipedia is not a credible source of information.
Isn't it the collective knowledge of the internet with credible references.
some points are referenced but weather or not they are credible is questionable, so it is not credible. You can not use wikipedia in a bibliography because it is not a source.
all I was referencing is the data from the ICE CORE samples
from a source? you gave me no credible source
google. everything you can find on google is true right?
oh wait Al Gore. Ok your right, now I understand
life is much more resilient that a single species such as a human
I'm in my 50s and if I found out that today was my last day then I can honestly tell you that I have had an amazing ride and it has been a lot of fun. The wonders of it all are just incredible.
It may be time for occupiers to go home. The crys of your voices may not matter in 5 years. Do your research, Open your minds, there is a hell of a lot more going on in the world besides the greedy people screwing you out of your livelihood. They have bunkers to hunker down in for years while the carbon dioxide levels drop back down. They may have the technology to repair it after the worlds populations are wiped out.
If you don't take down the parties bought by Big Oil and the like, how do move forward on this? The answer is you don't. The two party system is a scam that will not respond. You can't even address this without OWS or kind of massive protest and that is made hard by liars like fox news and the people hijacking the tea party.
I can't stand Fox news
It takes a lot to piss off the American people so I have said this before I'll guess in 4 years people will start making changes on their own with about a year of time to spare. The big question then will be do we throw the baby out with the bath water, what I'm asking is will pepole suggest an avoidable error in which something good is eliminated when trying to get rid of something bad.
Fox is behind everything evil. They are owned bythe Rothchilds.
Perhaps we can go occupy Mars.
It's like dust mites living on a speck of dust worried that they are harming the speck of dust.
I wish I could move off this rock the universe is looking pretty good right now. Take better care of your dust mites Rex.
70 years?..Planet Earth Uninhabitable?. Because of global warming?. You people are ignorant FREAKS. The fucking planet has been around for 4 billion years. asshole. It will last a bit longer.
How fucking ARROGANT you and your religious founder Al Gore are.To actually think that YOU choose that this moment in our planet's existence, is the perfect temperature, and it must remain here...and that YOU know how to lower the planets temperature...if you only pay trillions in tax ....for about 100 years
Fucking MADNESS!
Oh yea..5 years..everybody dead. That's old news.
5 years to make the changes necessary to correct the problems. After that the scientist report that it will be too late. Last time I checked without a planet to live on we are screwed. Just be informed and get involved if you care.
You're crazy. I advise hiding under your bed