The lid is coming off the hoax.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...ctions_opinion


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sh...ets-except-fox

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...lobal-cooling/

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archive.../11/024993.php

Interesting developments...been scouring the Lame Stream Media for updates on this story...listen, here it comes.....ready....crickets....

Thanks for posting enlightening information on a topic where we all know the discussion is over...now delete it please.

The NY Times say they won't publish the e-mails because they think they were otained illegally. When did the Times start caring about legality?? It never bothers them to print military secrets or anything else that will harm America.

I wonder what the koolaid drinkers will say about this?

Yoda

It's a scam and it's always been a scam. Not that I condone hacking, but they got caught red handed. Follow the money...

Follow The Money, indeed. Sad that it comes to that so frequently.

"Global Warming" has already been falling out of disfavor to be replaced with the term "Climate Change".

The interesting part here is how to reconcile real data, faked data, hoax information and clearly observable conditions.

What nobody on the planet can argue with, because of everything from satellite pictures to shipping schedules, is that polar ice is going away. Glaciers are melting, more icebergs are calving, the Ross ice shelf is deteriorating. Those are facts. The question then becomes "why". Well, warmer temps are the first suspect. Then the next question is "why" and that's where the REAL arguments start.

My position? I have a hard time believing some of the alarmists because I worked in Boston when seas were supposed to be rising. Not only did I work in Boston, I worked ON A PIER - literally on the water - old-timers would know the place as Commonwealth Pier Exhibition Hall, the modern name is the World Trade Center in Boston. Some areas steps down into the ports and I didn't notice any steps "going away". (I did notice one unbelievable jellyfish bloom - whole harbor looked like a bowl of Rice Krispies for 2 days).

I don't believe all the apocalyptic rantings that have come out. I mean, I don't see a lot of news covering the huge algae/plankton bloom that happened around Antarctica (wish I remembered the details) that nobody expected and is now going to be digesting more CO2 in that area than had been previously estimated. To me, this is part of nature reacting. Lots of growth of organisms that eat stuff that now happens to be in abundance (CO2). Duh!

That being said, I don't think we should be dumping everything into the atmosphere that we're doing. I believe we have the technology to get off of fossil fuels and make things a LOT better for everyone. I think there's a lot of money to be made "doing the right thing". I mean, I don't know if we can make plastics out of something else, but we don't HAVE to burn oil in order to commute to work.

Now, I love to drive. But the commute can get monotonous, boring and aggravating as traffic gets worse. I would like it if there were options - but in this area, there aren't.

I also want to put my money where my mouth is. I'd like to be able to make my next car a Volt (plug-in hybrid) but I also know that converting to more electrically-based cars will cause a disruption down the road. How will we pay for our roads as people use less and less gas (and paying less gas taxes)? I find it frustrating that it took until the 21st century for car companie to discover what the railroads discovered in the 1930s and 40s - that the most efficient form of locomotion is an engine producing power for electricity to drive the wheels. An engine can be tuned for optimum efficiency if it doesn't have to worry about driving the wheels. Let the electric motors worry about that.

It ticks me off that people say nukes aren't a solution because we "have no plan to deal with the waste". Well, we do. It's called Yucca Mountain. And you're also assuming that we don't act like France and reprocess spent rods or that technology won't come up with a solution in the next 50-100 years (remember, 100 years ago, we didn't have nuke plants at all - technology doesn't stand still).

And stop treating "Europe" like it's a dirty word. There ARE things we can learn from them. we can study their health plans (especially the ones that include private insurance) and make them better. Look at the French when it comes to getting around by train or getting electricity. Look at the Brits and how cars aren't the ONLY option for travelling a lot of places. It doesn't mean we HAVE to mimick their employment model (making it nearly impossible for a company to fire workers in France)

I mean, come on, they built a tunnel between France and England over a DECADE ago and we can't bypass traffic in New York with a tunnel between Long Island and Connecticut because of NIMBYs?????

The solutions ARE THERE. We just need the political will to DO IT.

Um... the last 10 years data shows we've been actually cooling off.

I think everyone agrees the climate changes. What the liberals like to tell us, it's our fault.

You could remove every human on the face of the earth. Guess what? The climate still changes. Always has always will.

It's a scam to separate people from their money.... and their freedoms. The emails clearly show the top guys have been holding back data, fudging numbers and basically conspiring to perpetuate the hoax.

What more do people need?

CCryosphere Today, put out by The University of Illinois in cooperation with NASA shows that total sea ice is unchanged over the last thirty years. No warming or cooling evident. Water vapor makes up 95% of greenhouse gas. CO2 makes up less than 0.04% of the atmosphere.

Methane is a much more significant greenhouse gas – 20 times more effective in trapping heat than is CO2. CO2 concentrations are 387 ppm as of September and Methane’s concentration is 79 ppm. With its greater effectiveness at trapping heat Methane's impact is 4 times that of CO2. Methane comes in large part from ruminant animals (animals with multiple stomachs, primarily cattle and sheep). If you wish to cut your greenhouse gas output, you will do more by buying one less Big Mac each week than you will by trading in your SUV for a Prius. We need to use less oil in order to both help our economy and reduce energy independence, but it has little to do with greenhouse gases.

Originally Posted by djplong

Follow The Money, indeed. Sad that it comes to that so frequently.

"Global Warming" has already been falling out of disfavor to be replaced with the term "Climate Change".

The interesting part here is how to reconcile real data, faked data, hoax information and clearly observable conditions.

What nobody on the planet can argue with, because of everything from satellite pictures to shipping schedules, is that polar ice is going away. Glaciers are melting, more icebergs are calving, the Ross ice shelf is deteriorating. Those are facts. The question then becomes "why". Well, warmer temps are the first suspect. Then the next question is "why" and that's where the REAL arguments start.

My position? I have a hard time believing some of the alarmists because I worked in Boston when seas were supposed to be rising. Not only did I work in Boston, I worked ON A PIER - literally on the water - old-timers would know the place as Commonwealth Pier Exhibition Hall, the modern name is the World Trade Center in Boston. Some areas steps down into the ports and I didn't notice any steps "going away". (I did notice one unbelievable jellyfish bloom - whole harbor looked like a bowl of Rice Krispies for 2 days).

I don't believe all the apocalyptic rantings that have come out. I mean, I don't see a lot of news covering the huge algae/plankton bloom that happened around Antarctica (wish I remembered the details) that nobody expected and is now going to be digesting more CO2 in that area than had been previously estimated. To me, this is part of nature reacting. Lots of growth of organisms that eat stuff that now happens to be in abundance (CO2). Duh!

That being said, I don't think we should be dumping everything into the atmosphere that we're doing. I believe we have the technology to get off of fossil fuels and make things a LOT better for everyone. I think there's a lot of money to be made "doing the right thing". I mean, I don't know if we can make plastics out of something else, but we don't HAVE to burn oil in order to commute to work.

Now, I love to drive. But the commute can get monotonous, boring and aggravating as traffic gets worse. I would like it if there were options - but in this area, there aren't.

I also want to put my money where my mouth is. I'd like to be able to make my next car a Volt (plug-in hybrid) but I also know that converting to more electrically-based cars will cause a disruption down the road. How will we pay for our roads as people use less and less gas (and paying less gas taxes)? I find it frustrating that it took until the 21st century for car companie to discover what the railroads discovered in the 1930s and 40s - that the most efficient form of locomotion is an engine producing power for electricity to drive the wheels. An engine can be tuned for optimum efficiency if it doesn't have to worry about driving the wheels. Let the electric motors worry about that.

It ticks me off that people say nukes aren't a solution because we "have no plan to deal with the waste". Well, we do. It's called Yucca Mountain. And you're also assuming that we don't act like France and reprocess spent rods or that technology won't come up with a solution in the next 50-100 years (remember, 100 years ago, we didn't have nuke plants at all - technology doesn't stand still).

And stop treating "Europe" like it's a dirty word. There ARE things we can learn from them. we can study their health plans (especially the ones that include private insurance) and make them better. Look at the French when it comes to getting around by train or getting electricity. Look at the Brits and how cars aren't the ONLY option for travelling a lot of places. It doesn't mean we HAVE to mimick their employment model (making it nearly impossible for a company to fire workers in France)

I mean, come on, they built a tunnel between France and England over a DECADE ago and we can't bypass traffic in New York with a tunnel between Long Island and Connecticut because of NIMBYs?????

The solutions ARE THERE. We just need the political will to DO IT.

Please do some more research on the polar ice story.
When you do you will find that overall the ice in the world is not dimishing at all. You cannot take a change in one area and pretend it represents the entire earth.

Check the South Pole and also remember the Polar bear population is increasing faster than ever. That's another Liberal lie gone bad.

Originally Posted by cashman

Please do some more research on the polar ice story.
When you do you will find that overall the ice in the world is not dimishing at all. You cannot take a change in one area and pretend it represents the entire earth.

Check the South Pole and also remember the Polar bear population is increasing faster than ever. That's another Liberal lie gone bad.

Care to give a cite on the ice? I'm going by what I've been reading all year - including marine shipping companies making plans for new routes during months when polar routes are normally iced-in. This year I've found a couple of articles in the financial sections - got pointed to them from some 'watches' I keep on the transportation sector for financial interests.

Now, I know about all the hoopla concerning the polar bears, but I also just read that they're moving south. In other words, if their habitat is ice that's going away, they're simply adapting - not going extinct.

Like I said, I don't buy the apocalyptic stories. Nobody in that camp seems to take into consideration what a breadbasket Canada and Siberia would become with a longer growing season - just as an example.

It's all moot anyway.

Guess what... even if the climate is changing which I'm sure it has been for millions of years, there's not a damn thing we can do about it one way or the other.

We didn't create the earth nor do we control it's climate no more than we can control the weather. There's larger and greater forces at work than wee little humans.

Anyone who tells you different, follow the money. Trust me, there are tens of billions to be made. We'll pay it and others will get it.

Originally Posted by djplong

Care to give a cite on the ice? I'm going by what I've been reading all year - including marine shipping companies making plans for new routes during months when polar routes are normally iced-in. This year I've found a couple of articles in the financial sections - got pointed to them from some 'watches' I keep on the transportation sector for financial interests.

Now, I know about all the hoopla concerning the polar bears, but I also just read that they're moving south. In other words, if their habitat is ice that's going away, they're simply adapting - not going extinct.

Like I said, I don't buy the apocalyptic stories. Nobody in that camp seems to take into consideration what a breadbasket Canada and Siberia would become with a longer growing season - just as an example.

For information on sea ice, see Cryosphere Today, http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/ The greatest extent of arctic polar ice recorded was 1n 1979 at 15M sq kilometers. Last year's peak was 13.5M sq kilometers.

The total extent of sea ice has not changed in the last thirty years. Yes, icebergs are caving from Greenland and the Ross ice shelf. They have for centuries. It was an iceberg that originated in Greenland that sunk the Titanic.

I went to the site you provided and I see a quite CLEAR downward trend in the graphs they're providing. Looking at the 107 year chart at http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosph....1900-2007.jpg shows that trend.

Summer arctic ice which hovered aroun 11M sq km is now down around 7 (was a 8, plunged to 6 but rebounded slightly in the last 2 years).

Spring ice went from 15M to about 12.5M, overall ice went from 13.5M to about 10.3M.

Even if I look at the last 30 years on that chart, it CLEARLY show a downward trend.

presented on the site. Scroll to the bottom of the page and you will see that total global sea ice remains unchanged. No evidence of either global warming or cooling.

Here is another presentation of polar ice coverage done as a joint project between NASA and Japanese Aerospace. http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/...Ice_Extent.png

Originally Posted by djplong

I went to the site you provided and I see a quite CLEAR downward trend in the graphs they're providing. Looking at the 107 year chart at http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosph....1900-2007.jpg shows that trend.

Summer arctic ice which hovered aroun 11M sq km is now down around 7 (was a 8, plunged to 6 but rebounded slightly in the last 2 years).

Spring ice went from 15M to about 12.5M, overall ice went from 13.5M to about 10.3M.

Even if I look at the last 30 years on that chart, it CLEARLY show a downward trend.

What about Antartic ice?

Yoda