Lindaland
  Global Unity 2.0
  Chicken Littles Confused By Snowing In Australia!

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Chicken Littles Confused By Snowing In Australia!
Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 55718
From: Saturn next to Charmaine
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 04, 2015 12:49 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Global warming alarmists must be shaking their heads in disbelief. Just when they felt they had the stars aligned to push their anti-capitalism/free enterprise agenda on the international stage and claim the power that they crave, the climate and scientists have begun to turn against them.

Sydney, Australia, has snow for the first time since 1836. To put this in perspective: in 1836, Andrew Jackson was president of the United States, Victoria was a year away from being crowned Queen of England upon her 18th birthday, and Davy Crockett met his heroic end at the Alamo.

Needless to say, it has been a long time since Sydney has seen snow.

In other news, the Big Island of Hawaii had snowfall in July. Not to be outdone, the Sierra Nevada mountain range in California also had snowfall this July. Antarctica set a new record for ice extent in 2014 and continues to set records for how much ice covers the oceans surrounding this southern hemisphere continent as 2015 progresses.

And to confuse the science-is-settled-on-global-warming crowd even further, some solar scientists are now projecting that due to changes in the sun's cycles, the earth is likely to suffer from what is known as a "Little Ice Age" starting in 2030, as the heat-giving star settles into a very rare pattern of inactivity. Imagine their consternation at learning that the sun actually plays a role in the earth's temperature.

Alarmists are battling the climate record's showing an 18-year hiatus from warming by changing and erasing temperature data collection to create the results needed to justify their continued funding.

The church of global warming is also struggling to explain why the much more reliable satellite temperature data also continue to embarrass them by showing no new warming for almost two decades.

Yet the Obama administration pushes on with their attempts to destroy coal-fired electric generation, as well as the misguided taxpayer funding of bird- and bat-destroying wind farms and regulatory schemes intended to hamstring oil-based domestic energy production.

The reason is simple. The global warming agenda is not about the planet. Otherwise, world environmental do-gooders would be focused upon the world's worst polluting nation, China, rather than giving them a pass.

The head of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, Christiana Figueres, readily admits that the real climate change agenda has nothing to do with the environment, but instead is about redistribution of wealth. "This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves," she says, "which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history.

"This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for the, at least, 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution."

So there you have it. You can't argue climate facts with those determined to twist scientific data to justify a worldwide, fundamental economic transformation toward a socialist model governed by an international body.

The only way to beat this global economic coup d'état is to beat them politically with the first step being to stop taxpayer funding for those who plot our national demise at the Environmental Protection Agency, the United Nations and elsewhere.

Failure to deny these institutions the political means to enact their plan is an almost guaranteed pathway to their successful collapsing of the free-enterprise system along with the middle class that it creates.
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-viewpoint/080315-764799-real-agenda-is-destroying-capitalism-not-climate.htm?p=2

IP: Logged

Catalina
Knowflake

Posts: 3280
From: shamballa
Registered: Aug 2013

posted August 05, 2015 01:37 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Catalina     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Werent you talking about Regional Variance a couple of posts ago? I still haven't figured out what relevance that had in the thread you posted it to. ..but it does apply to this one.

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 55718
From: Saturn next to Charmaine
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 05, 2015 07:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
You miss the point. Chicken Littles like to use localized geographic events to "prove" climate change, but they conveniently ignore when such events show the opposite.

IP: Logged

Catalina
Knowflake

Posts: 3280
From: shamballa
Registered: Aug 2013

posted August 05, 2015 09:00 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Catalina     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I dont notice that...it is the deniers who are prone to saying a snowstorm means warming isnt happening..and this article has no such implication.

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 55718
From: Saturn next to Charmaine
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 05, 2015 10:31 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Deniers say warming isn't happening, because warming isn't happening. Satellite data is quite conclusive.

IP: Logged

Catalina
Knowflake

Posts: 3280
From: shamballa
Registered: Aug 2013

posted August 06, 2015 12:42 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Catalina     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
If you cherry pick your data. I remember one thread where you and I posted two different sets, both from NASA..with very different pictures. Whom to believe? It seems to me that neither case is conclusive but both sides are adamant. I am convinced by neither for that reason

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 55718
From: Saturn next to Charmaine
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 06, 2015 06:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
We couldn't warm the earth even if we tried to intentionally.

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 55718
From: Saturn next to Charmaine
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 06, 2015 07:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
CO2 levels are at the highest levels in recorded history. Any half-brained pseudoscientist can measure that. It requires no computer simulations/models. High CO2 levels are to be expected with a healthy lush green earth. But where's the heat? Where are the underwater cities? CO2 is only a small percentage of greenhouse gases, and humans contribute only a fraction of that. Then why do these charlatans want to regulate CO2? Because there's no way to control water vapor.

IP: Logged

Catalina
Knowflake

Posts: 3280
From: shamballa
Registered: Aug 2013

posted August 06, 2015 07:36 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Catalina     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Actually lush vegetation absorbs CO2 and deforestation releases out into the atmosphere. As to where the flooded cities are, Tampa is experiencing record flooding, partly due to poor plumbing at a time when they need to upgrade their drainage system but also due to heavy rain. Meanwhile, as you pointed out its snowing in Australia, Washingtons rainforest is on fire, tourists are writing back from Alaska how warm it is, its like 150* in Iran and Iraq..ie extremes all over tho not all hot or the same as each other.

I am more concerned, as always, with the damage done by pillaging resources and poisoning water earth and air. The Hopis have warned for years about sucking groundwater out of the earth, now Cali and other places are suffering from pretty drastic subsidence no tech can stop. ..etc. Orange rivers, black bathwater, and earthquakes where they don't belong. And on and on.

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 55718
From: Saturn next to Charmaine
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 06, 2015 08:50 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Yes, it absorbs. If there's nothing to absorb, no lush vegetation.

IP: Logged

Catalina
Knowflake

Posts: 3280
From: shamballa
Registered: Aug 2013

posted August 06, 2015 09:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Catalina     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
If theres no or much less vegetation CO2 goes up

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 55718
From: Saturn next to Charmaine
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 06, 2015 09:47 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Precisely. Tomato, tomahto. But as CO2 rises, plants thrive.

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 55718
From: Saturn next to Charmaine
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 06, 2015 11:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Fortunately, life works such that CO2 causes vegetation to flourish. And, in turn, creates an oxygen-rich environment for us non-plants.

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 55718
From: Saturn next to Charmaine
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 07, 2015 01:47 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Obviously, with CO2 at record levels, it's not the least bit catastrophic.

IP: Logged

Catalina
Knowflake

Posts: 3280
From: shamballa
Registered: Aug 2013

posted August 07, 2015 04:39 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Catalina     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Sorry but we are cutting em down faster than they can grow. .and the northwest is on fire from Washington to Alaska to several Canadian provinces...carbon releasing not being absorbed. WE do not thrive in a carbon-rich atmosphere.

Unless someone gets busy replacing what is destroyed the temps won't matter much.

Unless we focus on repair the oceans will be to acid to support marine life before long. We cant live without the oceans either.

In fact while I'm sure earth can handle it byebye animals including humans.

If someone gets rich saving our support system I would rather support them than Donny Dumpster anyday, despite the fact that he actually has some opinions i agree with.

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright 2000-2015

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a