Question:

Have u noticed that the global warming n***s call it "climate change" now? Is it because of all the snowy

by Guest65620  |  earlier

0 LIKES UnLike

cold weather worldwide?

Is it because they found out that carbon dioxide is the result of warmer temps, not the cause of warmer temps?

Is it because it's normal for the world to warm and cool in various cycles?

 Tags:

   Report

15 ANSWERS


  1. It's always been called "climate change".  The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) got its name back in 1988.

    You must be pretty desperate, to make arguments like this.


  2. It does create some opportunities so the researchers who's careers depend on global warming can seamlessly move into a completely different theory without ever having to say they were wrong about anything.

  3. Actually, if you knew a little history on this topic, you'd know that the term "climate change" was popularized by the denier crowd.  It was an intentional calculated step to decrease the level of public concern.

    Frank Luntz advised the Republican Party to call 'global warming,' 'climate change,' because 'climate change' sounds more scientific, less polarizing and less radical.

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/...

  4. yes lily.

    also, the 'arctic oscillation' is in its strong phase for a change. this has pushed the weather patterns brought across the atlantic by the jet stream down by a few hundred miles so england got scotland's normal weather last summer and this winter. it also pushed a load of broken pack ice out of the arctic sea into the north atlantic, i'm sure that has made a short term difference to the eastern u.s. and northern europe.

    as for 'worldwide', i'm sure the australians will be glad of all that snow lol!

    looks like despite that bit of weather we are still in for an above average temp. year this year, like last.

    by the way o.p. you have lost this argument before you start;

  5. You are partially right, the fascist Republican Party invented the term "climate change" around 2004 to confuse the issue and sucker people like you into believing it was a natural process.  It blew up in their faces as it has come to be known as a result of AGW, not a synonym.

    As for your other statements; you are very confused.  Put down the PSP and pick up a newspaper, you really need to educate yourself.

    1. Of course it is cold IN THE NORTHERN HEMISPHERE, winter has just ended.  Summer is just ending in the Southern Hemisphere, it isn't cold there!

    2. Warmer temperatures do not create CO2, they release more trapped CO2 which just makes the problem worse.

    3. If you are comparing Global Warming to the seasons then I guess you'll stop making these assinine arguments when the temperature outside hits 120 in mid June.

  6. It provides the AGW zealots a means of attributing anything and everything having to do with weather to......... you guessed it....... AGW!!

  7. Obviously, you are not rational, therefore no rational response will be provided.

    You are expanding the divide between those who agree with the mainstream scientific theory of AGW and those who do not with your n**i insult. Oops, that was a rational statement, sorry!

  8. Have you ever heard of the La Nina effect? Obviously you have not. Well, let me break it down for you. The La Nina cools the world's temperatures, and this is the year it does. Just because all the ice caps aren't melted yet doesn't mean there is no global warming, it just means all the people who think that global warming is fake aren't looking at the evidence. It is so obvious that it is real and is happening, the ice is melting overall so much that there is less ice in the Poles than there has been for centuries! Where is the proof it isn't happening?

  9. Actually it was a republican strategist who wanted to use the term "climate change". He thought "global warming' sounded too scary and wanted his party to rephrase it.

    The term "climate change" is more accurate however, because the problems caused by AGW are not just increased temperature, but all the side effects of the climate that happen as a result.

  10. Do some research

  11. PS  I assume by your clueless question and your inflamatory accusations that you are a right winger.  Am I warm?  Well then, maybe you need a history lesson, because Naziism and fascism of which it is a type, are extremes of the right,  Not the left.

    As has already been pointed out here about 20 times a day,  local or even regional weather for a day, month, year or more has absolutely nothing to do with whether we are in the middle of a global long term warming.  

      Even global temperatures for short time periods are not valid arguing points.

      And in case you haven't noticed, it's been winter for some months now, in the northern hemisphere.

    The IPPC only says temps have risen on average about 1.3 F degrees in the last century.  what did you expect this winter would be canceled out by that?   Use your head and stop listening to propaganda that has no scientific basis.

    Oh it's just a normal cycle?   That is an old and fraudulant claim.  

    Skeptic argument:

    Current warming is just part of a natural cycle."

    Answer:

    "While it is undoubtedly true that there are natural cycles and variations in global climate, those who insist that current warming is purely natural -- or even mostly natural -- have two challenges.

    "First, they need to identify the mechanism behind this alleged natural cycle. Absent a forcing of some sort, there will be no change in global energy balance. The balance is changing, so natural or otherwise, we need to find this mysterious cause. "

    "Second, they need to come up with an explanation for why a 35% increase in the second most important greenhouse gas does not affect the global temperature. Theory predicts temperature will rise given an enhanced greenhouse effect, so how or why is it not happening?"

    "The mainstream climate science community has provided a well-developed, internally consistent theory that accounts for the effects we are now observing. It provides explanations and makes predictions. Where is the skeptic community's model or theory whereby CO2 does not affect the temperature? Where is the evidence of some other natural forcing, like the Milankovich cycles that controlled the ice ages (a fine historical example of a dramatic and regular climate cycle that can be read in the ice core records taken both in Greenland and in the Antarctic)? "

    "So could current changes be part of a natural cycle? Well, no natural cause has been identified. There is no climatological theory in which CO2 does not drive temperature. And natural cycle precedents do not exhibit the same extreme changes we're now witnessing."

      http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/12...

    "The big difference I have with the doubters is they believe the IPCC reports seriously overstate the impact of human emissions on the climate, whereas the actual observed climate data clearly show the reports dramatically understate the impact."

    "One of the most serious results of the overuse of the term "consensus" in the public discussion of global warming is that it creates a simple strategy for doubters to confuse the public, the press and politicians: Simply come up with as long a list as you can of scientists who dispute the theory. After all, such disagreement is prima facie proof that no consensus of opinion exists."

    "So we end up with the absurd but pointless spectacle of the leading denier in the U.S. Senate, James Inhofe, R-Okla., who recently put out a list of more than 400 names of supposedly "prominent scientists" who supposedly "recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called 'consensus' on man-made global warming."

    "As it turned out, the list is both padded and laughable, containing the opinions of TV weathermen, economists, a bunch of non-prominent scientists who aren't climate experts, and, perhaps surprisingly, even a number of people who actually believe in the consensus."

    "But in any case, nothing could be more irrelevant to climate science than the opinion of people on the list such as Weather Channel founder John Coleman or famed inventor Ray Kurzweil (who actually does "think global warming is real"). Or, for that matter, my opinion -- even though I researched a Ph.D. thesis at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography on physical oceanography in the Greenland Sea."

    "What matters is scientific findings -- data, not opinions. The IPCC relies on the peer-reviewed scientific literature for its conclusions, which must meet the rigorous requirements of the scientific method and which are inevitably scrutinized by others seeking to disprove that work. That is why I cite and link to as much research as is possible, hundreds of studies in the case of this article. Opinions are irrelevant."

    http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/0... The Cold Truth about Global Warming by Joseph Romm

  12. Actually it was the Republican n**i's in the White House who came up with that name.  The Global Warming folks are "lefties", "socialists", "commies", etc.  Certainly the other end of the political spectrum from the n**i's!

  13. Are you serious? It's early March, genius. It's obviously going to be quite cold throughout the Northern Hemisphere. Almost every year, the neo-cons like you have to bring up that "the world is getting cooler," directly after winter, while scientists continue to measure increased global temperatures at the poles and drastic increases in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

    It's funny how the only people who are in denial about global warming desperately don't WANT it to be true, because then big business would have to change their ways, and you would be obligated to give up your giant pick-up truck with camouflage tint that gets 8 miles/gallon.

    If you care to educate yourself and get information directly from the climatologists, visit this link: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/rese...

  14. Its because some people are still to stupid to understand that their house isn't the center of the flat earth they live on.   Just because its colder in your town or country doesn't mean the average temperature of the last 100 years of the whole planet  has fallen.   The "cycles" you are talking about happen to be called seasons by the rest of humanity.   They happen every year!   You should pay a little more attention to whats happening outside once in awhile.

  15. Oh my goodness...  I knew it was a politically motivated issue.  This THING perpetuated during the Afghanistan and Iraq era due to the fact that they hated Bush so much, that is was just another means of retribution and blame for something.  Sadly, there is absolutely no validity to this hoax.

    However, in a few weeks, it will probably be called global cooling again.  Then in a few years, global warming and Bush will be blamed for it all...

    LILLY, the proof is that you are still here.....  Otherwise our industrial revolution in the 40s and 50s would have wiped us out....  THINK young lady, don't rely on a man for the rest of your life!!!!

Question Stats

Latest activity: earlier.
This question has 15 answers.

BECOME A GUIDE

Share your knowledge and help people by answering questions.
Unanswered Questions