Climat Change is not a commie myth.

[Aractus]

[Brian37]

I am sort of intrigued how a mere century can be considered other than a short term variation of 4.5 billion years.

Part of the problem is that the same bunch of fools who deny climate change think the earth is only 6,000 years old because some idiot did some math based on their fucking bible, Mouse.

Somehow, it always comes back to that same shitty book, eh?

Because our species is not a product of the apex of pragmatic testing and verification. We are flawed and emotional as a species which allows us to gap fill with bullshit.

[A_Nony_Mouse]

Part of the problem is that the same bunch of fools who deny climate change think the earth is only 6,000 years old because some idiot did some math based on their fucking bible, Mouse.

Somehow, it always comes back to that same shitty book, eh?

Because our species is not a product of the apex of pragmatic testing and verification. We are flawed and emotional as a species which allows us to gap fill with bullshit.

Which would apply to all sides in the melting discussion.

[KichigaiNeko]

What I DO find very confusing is the various reports by the media conflicting with various research on the same topic. For example.... Antarctic Ice sheet is shrinking and expanding at the same time? CO2 is @ 400ppm but has remained static for the past 10 years? All backed with peer review process all so terribly confusing

I'm getting too old for conspiracy theories

[popeyespappy]

CO2 is @ 400ppm but has remained static for the past 10 years?

?

[KichigaiNeko]

CO2 is @ 400ppm but has remained static for the past 10 years?

?

EXACTLY Pappy!

The chart you are quoting is 3 years old?

I think it was this week I read one science news article that CO2 was high and then the next day that it was still static!! Grrrr

Very confusing :S

[orogenicman]

No offense, but if you don't believe any of it, why bother reading about it? That would seem to me to be a big waste of your time.

[Tiberius]

No offense, but if you don't believe any of it, why bother reading about it? That would seem to me to be a big waste of your time.

What kind of argument is that? How are people supposed to change their minds about things if they are never exposed to counter-arguments?

[A_Nony_Mouse]

No offense, but if you don't believe any of it, why bother reading about it? That would seem to me to be a big waste of your time.

But we were promised great weather extremes. Headline, 2012 a fifty year low in tornadoes.

There is every right to compare dire predictions to the absence of dire events and ask what is the point in making predictions if they do not happen. But both sides have the right to say we have to wait for long term trends in those predictions. A unusual number of tornadoes in 2011 compared to the low of 2012 gives neither side a claim.

Seriously, when does the sea level start to rise noticeably?

One has to wonder at people who constantly make dire predictions without offering solutions. Sounds like telling children about about the bogeyman. At least the preachers have the common courtesy to tell us how to avoid their hell. But when it comes to CO2 their only advice is, Stop that!

Is there any wonder there is melter fatigue?

[KichigaiNeko]

Oh this is soooo cool!! This is what I've been looking for! Science! It works!...... Bitches! Hope you all can view it!

http://www.watoday.com.au/tv/science/fiv...51001.html

---

World carbon levels in 'dangerous' new territory
Date
May 12, 2013

The planet has passed a significant - and unwelcome - milestone, with the concentration of heat-trapping carbon dioxide in the atmosphere exceeding 400 parts per million (ppm) for the first time in human history.
While the 400ppm mark was reached at some measuring sites last year, on Thursday the daily average topped the mark at the official site at Hawaii's Mauna Loa station.
''Humanity has never been here before,'' John Connor, chief executive of the Climate Institute, said in a statement. ''We are in dangerous and uncharted territory, with little time to ensure a safe and sustainable future.''
A report on the website of the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said the concentration of carbon dioxide had increased each year since the Mauna Loa site began tracking the greenhouse gas in 1958. In the late 1950s, the yearly increase of the gas was 0.7 ppm. It has since tripled, to 2.1 ppm a year during the past decade, the NOAA said. ''The evidence is conclusive that the strong growth of global CO2 emissions from the burning of coal, oil, and natural gas is driving the acceleration,'' said NOAA senior scientist Pieter Tans, according to the website.


Read more: http://www.watoday.com.au/national/world...2jf06.html

---

Have to agree with Nony that it is very difficult for your average punter to get their head around the publicly available information let alone the science. Hope the above may be of some help.


Still not panicking just yet...watch the video (hope it works for the Northern Hemisphere)