quote:

Originally posted by Unique Dog:
Global warming theory is not a proven fact by any means. It is a consensus. I work with Scientists everyday of my life and I know that science is not based on a consensus and global warming is just that.

According to the report that I have read, simultaneous warming of the Earth and Mars by the sun suggest that recent climate change may not be caused by man. As proof, the report cites a NASA report that says the polar ice caps are also melting on Mars. Uh-oh...time to pass a climate treaty for Mars. Those Martians obviously need to cut back on their driving and install solar panels. But remember .. only advanced industrial nations on Mars will be affected. Developing nations will be exempt.

And there's more...scientists at the Danish National Space Center think global warming is caused by cosmic rays from exploded stars, not man. Are they right? Who knows. But the point is that there are reasonable people who disagree about global warming. This is something the media hides from the public. Anybody who dares to speak out against the global warming movement is derided as a Holocaust denier and a member of the Flat Earth Society.

But back to that Mars thing....perhaps Al Gore could move there and run up the light bill.

-----------------------------------

quote:

Originally posted by Unique Dog:
*Global cooling is back....*
More troubling facts for the global warming movement. The government has released temperature data for February. Do the statistics show the Earth continues to warm at a troubling rate? Is certain doom accelerating in the environment, ready to melt the polar ice caps and cause California to fall into the ocean? Will winter soon be relegated to the ash heap of history, with the entire world enveloped in a global warming-induced massive temperature hike? Uh..no.

As a matter of fact, according to the National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service, the average temperature in the month of February fell almost 2 degrees. What, you say? Is this over last year? The last 5 years? Compared to the last 10 or 20? Nope. When compared with the average over the 100-year period between 1901 and 2000. In fact, we've just experienced the 34th coldest February in the last 113 years.

This is a long-standing problem with the global warming hype. The facts and figures don't line up with the hysteria. Just as there may be data that shows the Earth is warming, there is plenty of information to the contrary. But anything that doesn't square with the environmental extremists is ignored and not reported. And that's why global warming has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with politics.

-----------------------------------

quote:

Originally posted by Unique Dog:
Remember those pix of the polar bears floating on melting ice? Here`s an interesting piece to read:

Polar bears 'thriving as the Arctic warms up'
By Fred Langan in Toronto and Tom Leonard
Last Updated: 1:43am GMT 09/03/2007



In pictures: Polar bears thriving in the Arctic
Pictures of a polar bear floating precariously on a tiny iceberg have become the defining image of global warming but may be misleading, according to a new study.


Polar bear experts said that numbers had increased due to the efforts of conservationists

A survey of the animals' numbers in Canada's eastern Arctic has revealed that they are thriving, not declining, because of mankind's interference in the environment.

In the Davis Strait area, a 140,000-square kilometre region, the polar bear population has grown from 850 in the mid-1980s to 2,100 today.

"There aren't just a few more bears. There are a hell of a lot more bears," said Mitch Taylor, a polar bear biologist who has spent 20 years studying the animals.

His findings back the claims of Inuit hunters who have long claimed that they were seeing more bears.

advertisement"Scientific knowledge has demonstrated that Inuit knowledge was right," said Mr Taylor.

While fellow scientists have accepted Mr Taylor's findings, critics point out that his study was commissioned by the Inuit-dominated government of Nunavit.

Critics claim the government has an agenda to encourage polar bear hunting and keep the animals off the endangered species list.

In small Inuit communities, hunters kill bears that wander too close to human settlements and, in this particular region, they are licensed to kill six polar bears a year.

Polar bear experts said that numbers had increased not because of climate change but due to the efforts of conservationists.

The battle to ban the hunting of Harp seal pups has meant the seal population has soared - boosting the bears' food supply.

At the same time, fewer seal hunters are around to hunt bears.

"I don't think there is any question polar bears are in danger from global warming," said Andrew Derocher of the World Conservation Union, and a professor of biological sciences at the University of Alberta in Edmonton. "People who deny that have a clear interest in hunting bears."

Bear numbers on the west coast of Hudson's Bay had shrunk by 22 per cent over the past decade, he said.

"They are declining due to global warming and changes in when the ice freezes and melts in Hudson's Bay," he added. He and other scientists in his group are concerned that the retreating ice in the Arctic may pose a danger to future generations of polar bears because of 'habitat loss'. "The critical problem is the sea ice is changing. "We're looking ahead three generations, 30 to 50 years.

"To say that bear populations are growing in one area now is irrelevant."

However, Prof Derocher conceded that some polar bear-related evidence of the damaging effect of global warming was misplaced.

Contrary to concern over a celebrated photograph of a bear and its cub floating on a tiny iceberg, the animals often travel in that way, he said.

"Bears will often hang out on glacier ice or large pieces of multi-year ice," he said.

The state of Alaska yesterday questioned the scientific justification for proposals to add polar bears to the US endangered species list.

Tina Cunnings, a biologist attached to the Alaskan government, questioned whether they needed sea ice to survive, saying they could adapt to hunt on land and find alternative food sources to seals.

Prof Derocher said the theory was "absolutely
fanciful".

-----------------------------------

quote:

Originally posted by LISAJUNKIEE:
did I read this right????????Global warming is NOT A FACT??????? HAVE YOU EVEN SEEN THE PICTURES, THE BEFORE AND AFTERS??????? GLACIERS ARE GONE, LAKES ARE DRIED UP, MOUNTAINS HAVE NO SNOW PEAKS, WAKE UP AND SMELL THE HEAT !!!!!!!!!!!!

-----------------------------------

quote:

Originally posted by gilesmic:

quote:

Originally posted by Unique Dog:
*Global cooling is back....*
More troubling facts for the global warming movement. The government has released temperature data for February. Do the statistics show the Earth continues to warm at a troubling rate? Is certain doom accelerating in the environment, ready to melt the polar ice caps and cause California to fall into the ocean? Will winter soon be relegated to the ash heap of history, with the entire world enveloped in a global warming-induced massive temperature hike? Uh..no.

As a matter of fact, according to the National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service, the average temperature in the month of February fell almost 2 degrees. What, you say? Is this over last year? The last 5 years? Compared to the last 10 or 20? Nope. When compared with the average over the 100-year period between 1901 and 2000. In fact, we've just experienced the 34th coldest February in the last 113 years.

This is a long-standing problem with the global warming hype. The facts and figures don't line up with the hysteria. Just as there may be data that shows the Earth is warming, there is plenty of information to the contrary. But anything that doesn't square with the environmental extremists is ignored and not reported. And that's why global warming has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with politics.

Can you post a link to your source? Thanks.

And where are they getting this data from? Coldest februrary where? On global average, in the US, where? And it's compared to post industrialized (1901-2000) numbers. What is compared to PRE-INDUSTRIAL temperatures (i.e. before we started kicking greenhouse gases out)?

And please answer the questions in my previous post. It's not often I get to converse with someone as conservative as you so I'd really like to hear how someone from your political standpoint would respond.

quote:

Originally posted by Unique Dog:


All you have to do is go the website that I mentioned in the post and look up the information.

-----------------------------------

quote:

As a matter of fact, according to the National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service

quote:

Originally posted by Unique Dog:

quote:

As a matter of fact, according to the National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service

-----------------------------------