I just thought it was sort of funny being that they have been pushing this May 21 2011 end of the world bit for some time.
I think I first became aware of it at least a few years ago now.
Maybe he needs to talk tot he Global Warming and Climate Change spin masters about how to go about doing a right and proper large scale scam.
He should have spent the money on money grubbing scientists instead of billboard companys to back him up!
Yeah, all those "money grubbing" scientists who barely make any money at all and do the work for the love of it. Versus the global warming deniers of big business who have a real financial incentive to lie....they're want EVEN MORE money.
You mean the ones that earn up to 100 grand a year, or the ones that intern for slave wages at 5 grand a year?Yeah, all those "money grubbing" scientists who barely make any money at all and do the work for the love of it
Yeah, you're right all that money is going to one or two fat cat scientists. They're just sitting at home and laughing.
Human-caused climate change is a global scientific consensus. Just as evolution is. Of course money is spent on it, its effects have dramatic consequences.
But if you're going to cite Fox News, you've got your mind made up already.
up_and_at_them said:Yeah, all those "money grubbing" scientists who barely make any money at all and do the work for the love of it. Versus the global warming deniers of big business who have a real financial incentive to lie....they're want EVEN MORE money.
But if you're going to cite Fox News, you've got your mind made up already.
On Earth, human activities are changing the natural greenhouse. Over the last century the burning of fossil fuels like coal and oil has increased the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). This happens because the coal or oil burning process combines carbon with oxygen in the air to make CO2. To a lesser extent, the clearing of land for agriculture, industry, and other human activities have increased concentrations of greenhouse gases.
The consequences of changing the natural atmospheric greenhouse are difficult to predict, but certain effects seem likely:
On average, Earth will become warmer. Some regions may welcome warmer temperatures, but others may not.
Warmer conditions will probably lead to more evaporation and precipitation overall, but individual regions will vary, some becoming wetter and others dryer.
A stronger greenhouse effect will warm the oceans and partially melt glaciers and other ice, increasing sea level. Ocean water also will expand if it warms, contributing further to sea level rise.
Meanwhile, some crops and other plants may respond favorably to increased atmospheric CO2, growing more vigorously and using water more efficiently. At the same time, higher temperatures and shifting climate patterns may change the areas where crops grow best and affect the makeup of natural plant communities.
The role of human activity
In its recently released Fourth Assessment Report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a group of 1,300 independent scientific experts from countries all over the world under the auspices of the United Nations, concluded there's a more than 90 percent probability that human activities over the past 250 years have warmed our planet.
The industrial activities that our modern civilization depends upon have raised atmospheric carbon dioxide levels from 280 parts per million to 379 parts per million in the last 150 years. The panel also concluded there's a better than 90 percent probability that human-produced greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have caused much of the observed increase in Earth's temperatures over the past 50 years.
They said the rate of increase in global warming due to these gases is very likely to be unprecedented within the past 10,000 years or more. The panel's full Summary for Policymakers report is online at https://www.electro-tech-online.com/custompdfs/2011/05/ar4_syr_spm.pdf.
several lines of evidence show that current global warming cannot be explained by changes in energy from the sun:
Since 1750, the average amount of energy coming from the Sun either remained constant or increased slightly.
If the warming were caused by a more active sun, then scientists would expect to see warmer temperatures in all layers of the atmosphere. Instead, they have observed a cooling in the upper atmosphere, and a warming at the surface and in the lower parts of the atmosphere. That's because greenhouse gasses are trapping heat in the lower atmosphere.
Climate models that include solar irradiance changes can’t reproduce the observed temperature trend over the past century or more without including a rise in greenhouse gases.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?