Posted on Jul 23, 2014
Colder winter and cooler summer, the global warming theory sounds like junk. What do you think?
33.8K
680
512
8
8
0
Posted in these groups: 
Politics
Climate Change
Politics Climate Change
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 94
0
0
0
This is factual science with junk research.
Global warming; global cooling. Both happen and can be proven with factual (and I stress the word, factual) scientific research. The problem is that the "facts" have been fiction when it comes to proving man made global warming.
The "scientists" that were a part of the original research into man made global warming have openly admitted that they fudged the numbers in order to "prove" man has enough of an impact on the atmosphere to cause global warming. Can you say paid off by Al Gore? Good. I knew you could!
Ever wonder why they changed the name from "global warming" to "climate change"? That's because they couldn't prove a continuous global warming trend. And there are other factors that they can't prove that were supposed to prove man made global warming, such as:
The shrinking of Antarctica, The Artic, and the ice around Greenland and the related coastal flooding. Oops.... seems all those places have grown in coverage, not shrunk and no related coastal flooding. There's one Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore.
The increase in amount and strength of hurricanes around the world. There's also supposed to be increased amounts of severe thunderstorms and tornadoes. Of course, there's no real proof of any of that. Oops.... There's another Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore.
Anyone remember the plight of the polar bear? You know.... polar bears were on the endangered species list because of the shrinking Artic ice, which was directly related to man made global warming. There were even commercials for more environmentally friendly products with the polar bear in mind. Does anyone know the current status of the polar bear? Guess what. The polar bear isn't on the list anymore! They were endangered due to man, but not because of global warming. They were being hunted out of existence, which has been corrected with hunting restrictions.
There's more, but this post is getting long and my carpal tunnel syndrome is starting to act up.
And right quick... lest we forget that in the 70s, environmentalist warned of the next Ice Age due to global cooling.
Global warming; global cooling. Both happen and can be proven with factual (and I stress the word, factual) scientific research. The problem is that the "facts" have been fiction when it comes to proving man made global warming.
The "scientists" that were a part of the original research into man made global warming have openly admitted that they fudged the numbers in order to "prove" man has enough of an impact on the atmosphere to cause global warming. Can you say paid off by Al Gore? Good. I knew you could!
Ever wonder why they changed the name from "global warming" to "climate change"? That's because they couldn't prove a continuous global warming trend. And there are other factors that they can't prove that were supposed to prove man made global warming, such as:
The shrinking of Antarctica, The Artic, and the ice around Greenland and the related coastal flooding. Oops.... seems all those places have grown in coverage, not shrunk and no related coastal flooding. There's one Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore.
The increase in amount and strength of hurricanes around the world. There's also supposed to be increased amounts of severe thunderstorms and tornadoes. Of course, there's no real proof of any of that. Oops.... There's another Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore.
Anyone remember the plight of the polar bear? You know.... polar bears were on the endangered species list because of the shrinking Artic ice, which was directly related to man made global warming. There were even commercials for more environmentally friendly products with the polar bear in mind. Does anyone know the current status of the polar bear? Guess what. The polar bear isn't on the list anymore! They were endangered due to man, but not because of global warming. They were being hunted out of existence, which has been corrected with hunting restrictions.
There's more, but this post is getting long and my carpal tunnel syndrome is starting to act up.
And right quick... lest we forget that in the 70s, environmentalist warned of the next Ice Age due to global cooling.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I don't know. I am freezing my ass off here in the Northeast yet they say it's because of global warming? I am truly confused and hope I am dead before any of these claims com into fruition.
(0)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
Whether it is a short period of cold or hot weather, it is still just a short period of time (a few days or less) and we remember extremes because they are just that.... extreme.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
Can't get much colder than an Alaskan winter! On a more serious note, the winters have been too warm here (last yr it only went down to -40F for a few days) and our icebergs are melting so fast that polar bears have nothing to float on to hunt seal off the north coast. Our poor Polar Bears are going extinct thanks to global warming.
(0)
(0)
SPC Randy Torgerson
The Polar bear population has grown from 5,000 in the 1950s to about 25,000, according to testimony submitted in 2008 to the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and it’s still growing. In other words, the bear population has increased five fold. Call me simplistic but isn’t a decreasing population, rather than an increasing one, supposed to be indicative of a species heading for extinction?
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Global warming is 100% real if it weren't the Ice Age never would have ended.
(0)
(0)
SPC Randy Torgerson
Thats true SSgt Guina, and it will happen again and again. The argument is do humans have anything to do with it?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
SSgt John Steigerwald <--- Another forecaster. lol and there are more, Johnny Bratton and we have a couple LTCs who are too.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I don't know or care if the globe is warming. What I do know is that every plan I have seen for the government to deal with it is extremely expensive and would provide no measurable change in the temperature.
Conservation of free people is great, government control over the means of production to save the world from an intangible threat scares the crap out of me.
Conservation of free people is great, government control over the means of production to save the world from an intangible threat scares the crap out of me.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
It's not just global warming,it's spills of all kinds in the waters ways ,oceans and on land,it's ships that dump waste and trash in the waters,it's the dying off of species,it's sonar hurting aquatic life,it's deforestation,fires,it's the destruction of animal habitats,it's dead zones caused by run off and emissions of poisonous agricultural,manafacturing,energy and domestic chemicals,it's over use of all of our natural resources,and it's all because deniers will not look out side their box and come up with real solutions,therefore they are incapable of connecting the dots on global scale.We better wise up and research it.Don't take BPs word for it,their for profits only.
(0)
(0)
SSG Gerhard S.
These are two separate issues as there is no definable link between spills, and deforestation (which has been the case throughout global history from things like unchecked fires from lightning). Clearly you will find few who would condone unchecked pollution. The fact remains that harmful emissions, and pollution in waterways has largely decreased dramatically in the US since the 1970's. In less developed parts of the world, inefficiencies, and economic practicalities have greatly elevated these same emissions and pollutions we've succeeded in reducing. The widespread practice of cooking with inefficiently produced and burned charcoal, and animal dung that is common throughout Africa and India to name a few does great harm to the environment. China, with it's expansive growth and limited capabilities is also a great contributor to pollutants. These are rarely the focus of those who wish to blame "global climate change" on humans, and seek to make the US poorer by doing so. Clearly, the solution to these inefficiencies is greater wealth, not decreased wealth. THIS should be the goal, and once wealth is increased in these impoverished areas, then efficiencies and infrastructure can take hold.... decreased pollution will be the natural result. It seems alarmists always want to put the cart before the horse, and want to force expensive reductions in pollution on the industrialized world to the point of diminishing returns (the "mote"), while the "beam" of inefficiencies in the impoverished world remains untouched.
(1)
(0)
PFC Stephen Eric Serati
Volcanic erruptions can cause it so can the sun or a shift in our orbit.But were doing the most right now.Yes they are different issues but connected.It's the big picture I was looking at.Respectfully.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google