New climate model scenarios for the future based on the last four years!!

:GW33:

You are correct. I meant to say 12-15 degrees by the end of the century. Did you look at the link? are you calling me, NASA or both of us liars?

NASA is US government - you trust the government?

Ha!

They lie every day , on most issues!

The push the global warming myth just to justify future carbon credits (new taxes) total sham.

I keep seeing this one, as I said to No Dhimmi, that graph shows greenland is currently three degrees below its peak from the past 10,000 years, the OP charts show the US will be 8 degrees hotter in fifty years. Massive difference.

30.000 Scientists Charge Al Gore for Global Warming fraud

The despicable Al Gore peddling fear for years is being outed for the fraud he is and the profiteering on fear. A loathsome character and part of the NWO and the UN agenda 21 advocate. A trecherous man with only loyalty to money and the NWO of psychopathic despots....Their days are numbered...we the people are waking up...elites run your diamonds to Switzerland and collect the insurance.

The theory that CO2 is the main driver for global warming is complete BS. The temperature trend for the past 18 years has been flat even though CO2 level kept going up.

[link to wattsupwiththat.com]

NASA has lost their credibility. James Hansen of GISS tampered with raw data to make it look like it's getting hotter than it really was.

I agree that government can't be trusted, but the vast majority of science agrees, and nasa have proven in the past they know what they are talking about. The idea that 90% of scientists are in cahoots with some shady cabal for the sake of some new tax is just too much. As for co2 being good for growing, this is true but only to an extent, plants will only take what they need, there's a limit to how much they will absorb. Chuck in the melting arctic and all the co2 trapped there and we could well be on the A2 path.

Based on one misrepresentation, in the daily mail, that the met office have refuted. I even posted the link to the Mets response in this thread.

Since they adjust the past temperatures down now on a monthly basis, they might get their 6 degrees of warming.

The temperature won't go up of course, they'll just adjust the past temperatures lower to make it appear as if it did.

The official position of the World Natural Health Organization in regards to global warming is that there is NO GLOBAL WARMING! Global warming is nothing more than just another hoax, just like Y2K and the global freezing claims in the 1960's and 70's were. Global warming is being used to generate fear and panic. Those behind this movement are using it to control people's lives and for financial gain.

There are not many individuals, groups, or organizations willing to stand up against this fraud that is being perpetuated for fear of being persecuted, harassed, and ostracized by those who support global warming within the scientific and other communities. But fortunately, a few have decided to do the right thing and take a stand against this evil, proving just how unscientifically founded global warming is and exposing those who are behind it. Below, you will find links to information and articles showing the proof that global warming is nothing more than just a bunch of hot air (pun intended).

[link to www.wnho.net]

It's definitely getting hotter where i live I've seen a change in the past twenty years and the lack of spring and fall temps.

"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."

Voltaire

Climate models lol about as accurate as crystal ball.

That website outright denies global warming is happening, but the arctic melting would be strong evidence to the contrary, no?

From your link,

The bit about co2 cooling the atmosphere.

[link to www.naturalnews.com]

Greenhouse gasses are a simple concept, that I explained in layman’s terms above. This report doesn’t contradict in any way what I described, it just chooses to focus on one aspect, the fact that greenhouse gasses reflect some energy. This has never been in doubt, They taught this in high school but it doesn’t mean what the debunkers like to claim. I thought natural news was fairly trustworthy, but everything they have about climate change is firmly rooted in the 'nothing to see here' camp. I wonder what qualifies them ahead of NASA, ESA the met and co? Or are they just aiming for a niche of sceptics and telling them exactly what they want to hear?

The feedbacks for co2 to have a measurable effect just are not there.

So the arctic sea ice has shown a decrease in the 33 years since records began. Buts let not forget the increase in antarctic levels.

BS, people are free to question climate change, stop trying to paint me as a NWO stooge.

Answer me this, do you understand how greenhouse gasses work?

Do you acknoulage that co2 is a GHG?

Where do you think all the man made co2 is going?

Yup, because most of the co2 comes from the north, the north will be first to experiance the effects.

It's very weak. Water vapor is much more powerful GHG...

Still Co2 is a very weak player. Focus more on the sun activity and ocean. They are the ones that is responsible for climate changes.

Really?

Pollution in Northern Hemisphere Helped Cause 1980s African Drought

[link to www.sciencedaily.com]

I'll ask again, do you understand the greenhouse effect?

It's the sheer amount of CO2 we're putting out, an increase of 50% since the industrial revoluition after centuaries of near constant level.

Yet nothing changed. World is getting greener thanks to extra CO2...

Meh, this is nothing that cap and trade won't fix.

You should read the original article properly it is not helping your argument.

[link to jonova.s3.amazonaws.com]

Time for you to learn some things...

[link to jonova.s3.amazonaws.com]

Time for you to learn some things...

There's only so much that can be absorbed and held. The arctic ice was a massive carbon sink, if it all melts, not only will all that excess go into the atmosphere but we lose a massive carbon storage slot. Trees and plants will only ever take so much, once they are full the excess co2 will build up in the atmosphere. After that, we will see but NASA seem convinced that there's only so much we can take and we're fast approaching the threshold.

Just for the record, I'm no propagandist, I don't want to take your car away or force you into a Prius (actually counterproductive but that's a different story). As I see it though, your government and that of China and other countries hide behind the ill-informed public to shun their responsibilities because it'll cost them. If this was purely about taxxing you that bit more wouldn't the government be behind it, instead of trying to trip it up at every turn?

It's not the article I was looking for but highlights the difference in co2 concentrations in the north/south, the higher the levels, the more rapid the changes.

The governments are funding it.
Arctic ice is not a carbon sink.
you should have a read about soot.

The government are funding what? I'm talking specifically about the US gov and others that've failed to meet, or even attempt to meet emmision reduction targets.

Ye, I see soot is a major factor, but tends to come part and parcel with co2.

As for ice as a carbon sink, I thought this was the case but it seems to de still up for debate

[link to www.eurekalert.org]