Student "Turned off" on Dr. Paul's stance on Global Warming

[rp0x]

You cannot win over these global warming extremists. They are terminal liberals. There is no cure.

..

 

[southerntrendkill]

I have done my research and I will share it with you
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11650

And here is the entire list: Climate change: A guide to the perplexed.
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462

So the concesus is that it is a Fact but not Caused by Man right?

 

[jamesmadison]

So the concesus is that it is a Fact but not Caused by Man right?

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/glob-warm.html

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/FAQ2.html
"However, according to Drew Shindell, a climate researcher from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, NY, the most recent studies have confirmed that changing levels of energy from the Sun are not significant enough to be a major cause of global warming: "...the solar increases do not have the ability to cause large global temperature increases...greenhouse gases are indeed playing the dominant role..." The Sun is once again less bright as we approach solar minimum, yet global warming continues." For more details, see Link Between Solar Cycle and Climate is Blowin' in the Wind "



http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/FAQ1.html
Where are the data that show global warming is largely attributed to the increase of greenhouse gases in the Earth's upper atmosphere caused by human burning of fossil fuels?

"The statement is described and justified by quite a number of scientific studies and detailed in several places. The most thorough and extensive studies have been by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, an international group of scientists associated with the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations. A summary of their 2007 report is available at Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis (Summary for Policymakers)

The IPCC summary details both the data indicating the existence of global warming as well as potential causes. After examining various possible natural causes, the data seem to rule them out. The determination from the committee is that the causes are anthropological. A good number of summary graphs, charts, and tables of data are included, with pointers to sources of original data. The IPCC complete reports are available through several pointers at IPCC Assessment & Special Reports. One example is: Technical Summary. "

 

[jamesmadison]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6290228.stm

'No Sun link' to climate change
A new scientific study concludes that changes in the Sun's output cannot be causing modern-day climate change.

It shows that for the last 20 years, the Sun's output has declined, yet temperatures on Earth have risen.

It also shows that modern temperatures are not determined by the Sun's effect on cosmic rays, as has been claimed.

researchers say cosmic rays may have affected climate in the past, but not the present.

"This should settle the debate," said Mike Lockwood, from the UK's Rutherford-Appleton Laboratory, who carried out the new analysis together with Claus Froehlich from the World Radiation Center in Switzerland.

Dr Lockwood initiated the study partially in response to the TV documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, broadcast on Britain's Channel Four earlier this year, which featured the cosmic ray hypothesis.

"All the graphs they showed stopped in about 1980, and I knew why, because things diverged after that," he told the BBC News website.

"You can't just ignore bits of data that you don't like," he said.

 

[aravoth]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6290228.stm

'No Sun link' to climate change
A new scientific study concludes that changes in the Sun's output cannot be causing modern-day climate change.

It shows that for the last 20 years, the Sun's output has declined, yet temperatures on Earth have risen.

Ok, the sun has nothing to do with heat on planet earth, makes perfect sense to me

 

[Birdlady]

If any of you are interested in looking at information about this, I would like refer you to this blog.
http://www.climateaudit.org/

Steven McIntyre is the author of this blog. He was the first to discover that the mean temperatures NASA gathered were incorrect due to a "Y2K" bug. Which put the highest mean temperatures at 1934 rather than 1998.

Now does this prove there is no global warming, nope. But I think this shows how dependent a lot of the arguments and "facts" are on a small amount of data.
We just don't have enough data to make a conclusive theory.

From my research I feel that climate change or global warming is just another way of centralizing government. The solutions that these groups want is quite ridiculous, such as a carbon tax and switching to fluorescent lamps. Fluorescent lamps are FULL of mercury and cannot be disposed of in landfills. How's that for helping the environment!?

 

[jamesmadison]

http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/proceedings_a/rspa20071880.pdf

Recent oppositely directed trends in solar climate forcings and the global mean surface air temperature

There is considerable evidence for solar influence on the Earth’s pre-industrial climate and the Sun may well have been a factor in post-industrial climate change in the first half of the last century. Here we show that over the past 20 years, all the trends in the Sun that could have had an influence on the Earth’s climate have been in the opposite direction to that required to explain the observed rise in global mean temperatures.

 

[QWE]

Ok, the sun has nothing to do with heat on planet earth, makes perfect sense to me

it does...

the sun's output has decreased slightly, yet temperatures are rising...

what do you think is the problem? How is the sun the problem?

 

[libertyordeath]

Global warming reminds me of my parents telling me once the government claimed we were running out of oil, so gas prices jumped to $5.00 a gallon. (back when it was normally 89 cents/gallon)

 

[ksuguy]

Taking care of the environment is a worthy goal. However, much of the global warming movement isn't about that. It's about power and control. They want to tell me what I can drive, how I can live, and then steal even more of my money in the form of BS carbon taxes. These people have the vision of some wonderful green socialist utopia where all the cute little animals will be frolicking and everyone will be happy. The reality is that we will get a totalitarian nightmare where powerful people will do whatever the fuck they want where average people will be harassed and persecuted for every little environmental "crime" they commit.

 

[leipo]

Why is it that the only people i hear talking about global warming are the ones that watch TV.

 

[jamesmadison]

Ok, the sun has nothing to do with heat on planet earth, makes perfect sense to me

Read the study.

http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/proceedings_a/rspa20071880.pdf

Recent oppositely directed trends in solar climate forcings and the global mean surface air temperature

 

[freelance]

I am somewhat agnostic on this subject. I know the earth is warming slightly. But there is nothing to show it is because of hydrocarbons.

Back in the 70s, they tried to scare us to death by telling us that we were going to freeze to death. Many have forgotten, many more weren't around then.

For those who are concerned about their carbon footprint, you can go buy a few boatloads of carbon offsets.

http://www.bigbluecarbon.com/?gclid=CKuptMGR048CFSQYZAodDWQB8w

I'll buy a few extra plants.

 

[Ron Paul Poker]

Lets get on the same page here. Lets quit wasting time debating global warming and focus on why Ron Paul's platform is good for the environment. I believe the prime cause of pollution is our current monetary policies. The large central banks love to loan money to build power plants. It gives them a reason to create money out of thin air.

 

[aravoth]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6290228.stm



It also shows that modern temperatures are not determined by the Sun's effect on cosmic rays, as has been claimed.

researchers say cosmic rays may have affected climate in the past, but not the present.

......
................
...............................

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!11!!!!!!!!11!!

Rofl, yeah, the sun used to affect the climate, but for some odd reason it has no affect anymore, Global warming has rendered the sun useless.

 

[winston_blade]

Global warming is a natural thing. I haven't studied the issue a lot, but I do study history and I know for a fact that the previous statement is true. I also know that Al Gore is insane. That doesn't bode well for the validity of global warming.

 

[freelance]

researchers say cosmic rays may have affected climate in the past, but not the present.

Any idea WHO pays those researchers???

 

[Richandler]

I think the thing that is scariest about Global Warming is all the energy we could potentially be taking out of the atmosphere through these "renewable" energy sources. Windmill farms do change wind patterns and so do solar panels. Instead of energy remaining in the wind and in the air it becomes electricity for us. For right it's next to un noticeable but on a mass scale it could have unintended consequences. Might I add to a post from earlier that Nuclear weapons were not free market projects, they were mass scale projects from governments similar to what we are proposing for Global Warming.

Global warming is real the earth temperature rising 0.5 degrees across the globe proves that. However, it's man amplified not man made. CO2 is a result, according to scientific charts of data, of temperature and similarly is Methane. Of course humans produce more methane than CO2 which is a shame because even though we produce far more the graphs remain consistant with each other. Right now we are just as much above average world temperature as we were below it 150 years ago. So natural flucation could be a lot more easily arrived than man made gases, which aren't man made. Which leads me to the fact that the earth produces more CO2 itself than we will for a very long time. Dead leaves love doing that.

Onething that is that is beneficial about more CO2 levels in the air is that plants grow faster and strong. This has been scientifcly proven through controlled tests. We'll see plants growing abnormally fast before we see disasterous weather. Plants taken CO2 based on how much there is not how much they feel like. Also if northern ice is melting that does two thing, one in increases the amount of CO2 the oceans can absorb, which by the way there is more CO2 in the ocean than on the surface of the planet, and number two the bigger the ocean the longer it will take to heat. All of these factors are scientific facts.

Scientists are not stupid and there are hundreds of facts that back non-man made global warming and there is pretty much a documentary and study by world governement elected "scientists." The IPCC report, read it. No seriously because it's every alarmists' defense, but they have never read it. They don't know which scientists are credibile or if the people doing the study are even scientists to begin with. Not to mention the abundant ignorance of a variety of other unknown not applied to the equations the mention.

The temperature will drop sooner or later and the movement will be renamed climate change. The concepts been around since before all of us were born. It's a cash cow. Go to treehugger.com and try to find a page where you are not being sold something.

 

[jamesmadison]

Any idea WHO pays those researchers???

I'm guessing oil companies?

 

[Ron Paul Fan]

So we can go on and on about whether or not global warming exists. But can we all agree with Ron Paul that the federal government shouldn't be involved? I'm guessing none of you want a national carbon tax placed on you.