PDA

View Full Version : Global Warming or Cooling?



eg8r
02-27-2008, 11:56 AM
Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling (http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Worldwide+Global+Cooli ng/article10866.htm) <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Twelve-month long drop in world temperatures wipes out a century of warming

Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on.
No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously. </div></div> I guess these scientists at the four major global temp tracking outlets did not get the lefty note that says the earth is burning up and all humanity is at fault.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Scientists quoted in a past DailyTech article link the cooling to reduced solar activity which they claim is a much larger driver of climate change than man-made greenhouse gases.</div></div> These pesky scientists must not have seen Al Gores movie and Nobel trophy. Gasp, all those scientists seem to think humans have more profound effect on the temp than THE SUN!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> While the data doesn't itself disprove that carbon dioxide is acting to warm the planet, it does demonstrate clearly that more powerful factors are now cooling it.
</div></div> This is the one sentence in the link that is there to keep the wolves at bay who would consider this article as detrimental to their "research".

eg8r

pooltchr
02-28-2008, 05:23 AM
The same report says that the sea ice in Antartica is freezing over even thicker than it was in past years. The drop in average temperature in the northern hemisphere in the past year offsets any warming trend over the past 10 years. Damn! If this continues, my beach front property might be 10 miles inland in a few years!
Steve

LWW
03-06-2008, 04:49 AM
Where oh where are the Goremons?

LWW

Qtec
03-06-2008, 08:42 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where oh where are the Goremons?

LWW </div></div>

Did any of you check this story out?
Of course not!
You read something that supports your own viewpoint and accept it as fact.

From the original author.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Note from Anthony: When the DailyTech first posted this story and referenced my blog as the source of th compilation, without ever interviewing me or asking me a single question, <u>I told them immediately they had it wrong.</u> Shortly after that I published this ”Update and Caveat” (below) on the original post since they were slow to react. All told it took over 8 hours for Dailytech to make a change to the wording, but by then the genie was out of the bottle.
The website DailyTech has an article citing this blog entry as a reference, and their story got picked up by the Drudge report, resulting in a wide distribution. In the DailyTech article there is a paragraph:

“Anthony Watts compiled the results of all the sources. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C — a value large enough to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year time. For all sources, it’s the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.”

I wish to state for the record, that this statement is not mine: “–a value large enough to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years”

There has been no “erasure”. This is an anomaly with a large magnitude, and it coincides with other anecdotal weather evidence. It is curious, it is unusual, it is large, it is unexpected, but it does not “erase” anything. I suggested a correction to DailyTech and they have graciously complied.
This demonstrates how one story written in one place can often go repeated, without being challenged or double checked. </div></div>
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/200...-climate-trend/ (http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/03/05/twelve-months-of-cooling-doesn%e2%80%99t-make-a-climate-trend/)

Boy! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif Don't you all feel a bit silly now?

LOL

Q...........too easy /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/cool.gif

Deeman3
03-06-2008, 08:56 AM
Oops! We are now apparently now faced with global cooling as the polar ice cap thickens, the average temperature stabalizing for the last ten years and Disco making a comeback in Eastern European countries.

I like what Bill Oreilly says, "A cleaner planet is better than a dirty one." Now lets get China, India and other countries on board and clean it up. Nothing wrong with that if the whole world pitches in.

I would ike them to make up their mind on the Global Warming/ Global Cooling thing, just to save money and embarrassment later.

eg8r
03-06-2008, 11:32 AM
Why would anyone feel silly. The fact that the cooling happened was not refuted you nitwit.

eg8r

Qtec
03-07-2008, 03:04 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why would anyone feel silly. The fact that the cooling happened was not refuted you nitwit.

eg8r </div></div>

The article is misleading and inaccurate. Thats why the org author disowned it. I have shown that the statement,

"Twelve-month long drop in world temperatures wipes out a century of warming",

..is <u>totally wrong</u>.

There is a reason for the recent fall in temp.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">La Nina weather phenomenon is coming: WMO
Mar 3 03:32 PM US/Eastern
The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) said it saw unprecedented signs pointing to a looming La Nina, a phenomenon that originates off the western coast of South America but can disrupt weather patterns in many parts of the globe.

In a press release, the Geneva-based agency said temperatures in the central and eastern equatorial Pacific had been between 0.5 and 1.0 C (0.9 and 1.8 F) below normal since the start of the 2006.

"Combined with broader tropical Pacific ocean and atmosphere conditions, this is consistent with the early stages of a basin-wide La Nina event," it said.

"(...) It is unprecedented in the historical record for a La Nina of substantial intensity or duration to develop so early in the year."

La Nina, which has the opposite effects to the more notorious El Nino, last occurred from mid-1998 to early 2001.

Under La Nina, the sea-surface temperature in the central and eastern tropical Pacific falls below normal.

This typically brings far dryer weather to the southwestern United States, Florida and western Latin America and above-average rainfall to Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines.

But there can also be a knock-on much further afield, with an increase to monsoon rainfall in South Asia, unusual coolness in tropical West Africa, Southeast Africa, Japan and the Korean peninsula.

La Nina usually lasts nine to 12 months, although "some episodes may persist for as long as two years," the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) says on its website.

The WMO sounded a note of caution.

The buildup of this La Nina was so exceptionally swift and intense that it was impossible at the moment to infer what the impact would be, and how long the phenomenon would last, it warned.

"Most models and expert interpretations favour the event dissipating quite rapidly over the next three to six months," the UN's weather agency said.

"Nonetheless, neither a continuation of La Nina beyond mid-year, nor the development of El Nino in the second half of 2006, can be ruled out as possible outcomes from the current prevailing situation."

El Nino, which last ran from 2002-3, occurs when warm water builds up in the western tropical Pacific and creeps eastwards, again causing huge disruption to classic patterns of rainfall and wind.

Both El Nino and La Nina are naturally occurring cycles, although there is much speculation among climate scientists that man-made global warming may make them more frequent and more vicious and that this trend may have already started.

El Nino means "the little boy" in Spanish. Its name is attributed to fishermen off the coast of South America who noted the appearance of warmer water, often around Christmas. La Nina means "the little girl."

</div></div>

eg8r,
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I guess these scientists at the four major global temp tracking outlets did not get the lefty note that says the earth is burning up and all humanity is at fault. </div></div>

You didn't really read the link did you? if you had you would know that this was posted by the org author on his website.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">NOTE: This was posted on ICECAP today, and I’m copying it here. See my further notes below.

By Dr. John R. Christy.

I have been flooded this week with calls and e-mail messages concerning a story that has appeared on various Internet sites, in which the claim is made that cooling global temperatures over the past twelve months in some way negate or eliminate any global warming that might have happened over the past 100 years.

“Here is my perspective on this issue: Twelve months of data does not make a trend, especially in a system as complex and slow moving as global climate, and even more so when the cause for that short-term cooling is as reasonably well understood and well documented as a switch from a minor El Nino Pacific Ocean warming in January 2007 to the La Nina cooling event now taking place.

“The 0.59 C drop we have seen in the past 12 months is unusual, but not unprecedented; April 1998 to April 1999 saw a 0.71 C fall. The long-term climate trend from November 1978 through (and including) January 2008 continues to show a modest warming at the rate of about 0.14 C (0.25 degrees F) per decade.

“One cool year does not erase decades of climate data, nor does it more than minimally change the long-term climate trend. Long-term climate change is just that “long term” and 12 months of data are little more than a blip on the screen.”

Dr. John Christy is Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama in Huntsville

Icecap Note: John is absolutely correct that we can’t make assumptions about one year’s trend either up or down. </div></div>

You and the article you quoted think this 12 month blip proves something but it doesn't.

Q

pooltchr
03-07-2008, 05:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[
There is a reason for the recent fall in temp.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Yes, there is a reason, and oddly enough, it isn't man made...it's a natural occurance of nature</span>

You and the article you quoted think this 12 month blip proves something but it doesn't.

<span style="color: #FF0000">Sure it does. It proves that regardless of what humans do, nature is a thousand times more powerful force on our climate. </span>

Q </div></div>

Steve

LWW
03-07-2008, 06:13 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where oh where are the Goremons?

LWW </div></div>

Did any of you check this story out?
Of course not!
You read something that supports your own viewpoint and accept it as fact.

From the original author.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Note from Anthony: When the DailyTech first posted this story and referenced my blog as the source of th compilation, without ever interviewing me or asking me a single question, <u>I told them immediately they had it wrong.</u> Shortly after that I published this ”Update and Caveat” (below) on the original post since they were slow to react. All told it took over 8 hours for Dailytech to make a change to the wording, but by then the genie was out of the bottle.
The website DailyTech has an article citing this blog entry as a reference, and their story got picked up by the Drudge report, resulting in a wide distribution. In the DailyTech article there is a paragraph:

“Anthony Watts compiled the results of all the sources. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C — a value large enough to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year time. For all sources, it’s the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.”

I wish to state for the record, that this statement is not mine: “–a value large enough to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years”

There has been no “erasure”. This is an anomaly with a large magnitude, and it coincides with other anecdotal weather evidence. It is curious, it is unusual, it is large, it is unexpected, but it does not “erase” anything. I suggested a correction to DailyTech and they have graciously complied.
This demonstrates how one story written in one place can often go repeated, without being challenged or double checked. </div></div>
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/200...-climate-trend/ (http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/03/05/twelve-months-of-cooling-doesn%e2%80%99t-make-a-climate-trend/)

Boy! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif Don't you all feel a bit silly now?

LOL

Q...........too easy /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/cool.gif </div></div>
Not at all.

I never accepted or denied the article ... just as I have never denied GW is happening.

What I have denied is the idea that it is a human causation.

Now, since you have once again made a false statement I should ask how silly you feel ... however from reading your body of work I am aware that you feel no shame at all in making indefensible statements.

I asked where the Goremons were and here they came.

LWW

Qtec
03-07-2008, 07:09 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Not at all.

I never accepted or denied the article ... just as I have never denied GW is happening.

What I have denied is the idea that it is a human causation.

Now, since you have once again made a false statement I should ask how silly you feel ... however from reading your body of work I am aware that you feel no shame at all in making indefensible statements.

I asked where the Goremons were and here they came.

LWW </div></div>

If you had actually READ the original article , read it (http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/02/27/a-look-at-temperature-anomalies-for-all-4-global-metrics/), you would know that it makes ABSOLUTELY no reference to the CAUSE of warming OR cooling!!

The DT article took some new data and came to completely the WRONG conclusion. Some simple research, 15 mins tops, and you can discover the truth but you guys are content to hang on to delusions and believe every crackpot article that confirms your crackpot theories about some Lefty GW conspiracy!

Q.......don't know why I bother educating you guys. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

eg8r
03-07-2008, 07:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You and the article you quoted think this 12 month blip proves something but it doesn't. </div></div> LOL, neither does all the human caused global warming conspiracies.

eg8r

SKennedy
03-07-2008, 09:25 AM
Q,
He is only stating that he never used the term "erased." He does admit the temperature change and admits to its magnitude. However, all of us should note that the evidence, as stated in the article, is anecdotal. I think the main point here is that the jury is still out on this debate.
But, I do note that Bonny Prince Charles has declared that those who are global warming skeptics, at least that it's caused by man, are crazy. His comment will now force me to really evaluate my position further as I want him to only think the best of me!

bsmutz
03-07-2008, 12:30 PM
"It proves that regardless of what humans do, nature is a thousand times more powerful force on our climate."

Could you please provide some proof for this ridiculous statement? I'll certainly grant you that the forces of nature are definitely stronger than the forces of man, but exactly a thousand times? You don't think that if we set fire to all vegetation on the planet and set off thousands of thermonuclear devices that it wouldn't affect the climate as much as the climate is influenced by nature (the natural swings we have seen over the past few thousand years, i.e. non cataclysmic)?

LWW
03-07-2008, 01:12 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bsmutz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"It proves that regardless of what humans do, nature is a thousand times more powerful force on our climate."

Could you please provide some proof for this ridiculous statement? I'll certainly grant you that the forces of nature are definitely stronger than the forces of man, but exactly a thousand times? You don't think that if we set fire to all vegetation on the planet and set off thousands of thermonuclear devices that it wouldn't affect the climate as much as the climate is influenced by nature (the natural swings we have seen over the past few thousand years, i.e. non cataclysmic)? </div></div>
Are you TRULYthis stupid?

Who said ANYTHING about setting off nukes?

Uhhhh ... noboby, except a moonbat would suggest such a ridiculous thing.

That being said, even if we did set off thousands of nukes it would pale in comparison to the energy the Sun hits the Earth with over time.

Please, learn something before you spout off.

LWW

bsmutz
03-07-2008, 03:31 PM
Okay, dummy, I'll do this one more time since you are obviously too stupid to figure ANYTHING out on your own, much less make sense of the written word. The OP said that NO MATTER WHAT HUMANS DO, nature is blah, blah, blah. I was simply pointing out that humans COULD do much more to destroy our climate than what they have already done, and the scenario I provided would certainly be within the realm of possibility. Get a clue or STFU!

pooltchr
03-07-2008, 07:49 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bsmutz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"It proves that regardless of what humans do, nature is a thousand times more powerful force on our climate."

Could you please provide some proof for this ridiculous statement? I'll certainly grant you that the forces of nature are definitely stronger than the forces of man, but exactly a thousand times? You don't think that if we set fire to all vegetation on the planet and set off thousands of thermonuclear devices that it wouldn't affect the climate as much as the climate is influenced by nature (the natural swings we have seen over the past few thousand years, i.e. non cataclysmic)? </div></div>

You call my comment ridiculous, then top it by your ignorant comment about a thousand thermonuclear devices.
Alright, let's bring it to a realistic level. One volcano can introduce more pollutants into the atmosphere than all the SUV's in the country on any given day. And no matter how much hot air you spew into the atmosphere with idotic statements, 10 seconds of sunlight will have more of an impact on the temperature.
No, I don't have data to back that up, but it should give you a goal to work for!
Steve

eg8r
03-08-2008, 01:21 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Could you please provide some proof for this ridiculous statement? I'll certainly grant you that the forces of nature are definitely stronger than the forces of man, but exactly a thousand times? You don't think that if we set fire to all vegetation on the planet and set off thousands of thermonuclear devices that it wouldn't affect the climate as much as the climate is influenced by nature (the natural swings we have seen over the past few thousand years, i.e. non cataclysmic)? </div></div> Your entire post is ridiculous. No one is even trying to compare humans trying to obliterate the earth on purpose vs nature. The comparison is nature vs. the normal human activity.

eg8r

LWW
03-08-2008, 07:02 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Could you please provide some proof for this ridiculous statement? I'll certainly grant you that the forces of nature are definitely stronger than the forces of man, but exactly a thousand times? You don't think that if we set fire to all vegetation on the planet and set off thousands of thermonuclear devices that it wouldn't affect the climate as much as the climate is influenced by nature (the natural swings we have seen over the past few thousand years, i.e. non cataclysmic)? </div></div> Your entire post is ridiculous. No one is even trying to compare humans trying to obliterate the earth on purpose vs nature. The comparison is nature vs. the normal human activity.

eg8r </div></div>
Close.

The comparison is analytical thought from educated adults vs the normal moonbat activity.

LWW

New2Pool
03-19-2008, 01:44 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bsmutz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Okay, dummy, I'll do this one more time since you are obviously too stupid to figure ANYTHING out on your own, much less make sense of the written word. The OP said that NO MATTER WHAT HUMANS DO, nature is blah, blah, blah. I was simply pointing out that humans COULD do much more to destroy our climate than what they have already done, and the scenario I provided would certainly be within the realm of possibility. Get a clue or STFU! </div></div>

I really respect the pool knowledge that most of you have but the discussion on here does not seem to be as high of a quality as what I see on the pool related forum. Maybe it is just this thread but based on my first visit to here the intent does not seem to be to persuade or inform but rather to argue and insult.

I guess I should just avoid this forum and stick to the pool forum so I can learn from everyone's words of wisdom.

Regards,

LWW
03-19-2008, 04:05 PM
They won't have it any other way.

LWW

bsmutz
03-19-2008, 07:01 PM
Sorry you got caught in the crossfire. There's some history here that may help explain things for you. Things used to be pretty calm and collected over here in NPR. Then LWW came to visit and screwed everything up. Basically, he started bashing people left and right claiming that his viewpoint was the only one worth having. Since then, one or two posters have encouraged him (brown-nosers) and the rest of us have fun antagonizing him. There are a few threads that he doesn't stick his nose into that turn out okay, but they seem to be few and far between. Best to have a thick skin or good sense of humor if you decide to join the fray.

LWW
03-20-2008, 04:32 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bsmutz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sorry you got caught in the crossfire. There's some history here that may help explain things for you. Things used to be pretty calm and collected over here in NPR. Then <s>LWW came to visit and</s> some of us went to AZB and acted like jackasses, we claimed that the leftists here would kick El Dubb's arse, that screwed everything up. Basically, <s>he</s> started bashing <s>people</s> him left and right claiming that <s>his</s> viewpoint was the only one worth having. Since then, <s>one or two posters have encouraged him (brown-nosers) and the rest of us have fun antagonizing him</s> he has bloodied us repeatedly. <s>There are a few threads that he doesn't stick his nose into that turn out okay, but they seem to be few and far between. Best to have a thick skin or good sense of humor if you decide to join the fray.</s> Most of us are too blinded by ideology to realize how stupid we truly are. </div></div>
I fixed that for you buddy.

LWW

bsmutz
03-20-2008, 11:01 AM
L. Drubb, you are truly one sick individual. I'm pretty sure it's way too late for any type of therapy to be of any benefit. Your best bet is probably to join one of those suicide cults that you seem to be attracted to.

LWW
03-20-2008, 01:12 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bsmutz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">L. Drubb, you are truly one sick individual. I'm pretty sure it's way too late for any type of therapy to be of any benefit. Your best bet is probably to join one of those suicide cults that you seem to be attracted to. </div></div>
Coming from someone of your intellect I consider that high praise.

Thank you sir.

LWW

wolfdancer
03-20-2008, 03:03 PM
Bill, while he is annoying,him posting on the board here may be saving lives.
It's people like him,with an inferiority/persecution complex, that go down and shoot up a Burger King.....
"Mall Shooter" syndrome comes to mind, from his writings.
Reading between the lines...since every post of his mentions how much he is feared, I'd have to guess in real life....it's the other way around.
I'd spring for the Kool aid if he decides to join.
He may not have to though....I'm thinking he might be in a bar some day, and forget that he isn't hiding behind some keyboard...and, well, you can fill in the blanks...

LWW
03-21-2008, 06:17 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Bill, while he is annoying,him posting on the board here may be saving lives.
It's people like him,with an inferiority/persecution complex, that go down and shoot up a Burger King.....
"Mall Shooter" syndrome comes to mind, from his writings.
Reading between the lines...since every post of his mentions how much he is feared, I'd have to guess in real life....it's the other way around.
I'd spring for the Kool aid if he decides to join.
He may not have to though....I'm thinking he might be in a bar some day, and forget that he isn't hiding behind some keyboard...and, well, you can fill in the blanks... </div></div>
Are you actually the first i-bird ... a parrot with a keyboard?

I'm yet to see a thought from you that wasn't lifted from the writing of someone else.

LWW

Treehumper
03-21-2008, 08:36 AM
This is a thread about Global Warming or Cooling? Hmmmmmm. Start another thread if you want to bash someone....

JMHO

LWW
03-21-2008, 09:01 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Treehumper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is a thread about Global Warming or Cooling? Hmmmmmm. Start another thread if you want to bash someone....

JMHO </div></div>
Yet you don't have the same criticism for a moonbat who agrees with you ... so you trash me.

Seems the MB squad has a new member.

Hopefully you can add some intellectual ability to that side of the equation, God knows they need it.

LWW

bsmutz
03-21-2008, 10:49 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's people like him,with an inferiority/persecution complex, that go down and shoot up a Burger King.....
</div></div> Well, WD, I'm afraid you might be giving him way too much credit. You're inferring that he has the mental capacity to a. find his way to a Burger King, b. load a weapon, c. fire the weapon in such a way as to harm someone. From what we've seen so far, I think you may be overestimating his cognitive powers. I think it much more likely that he would only shoot himself (especially given his close affinity with groups that love to do this sort of thing).

Frankly, I'm glad that Treehugger called him on his inanity in this post. It's about time more of us stood up for the integrity of these threads that L Dweeb seems to think are his own little playground for spewing his vitriolic rhetoric that really does nothing but expose his total self-absorption. The sad truth is that intellectually, he would get trashed on a kindergarten bulletin board, just as everywhere else he posts.

To get this thread back on topic, finally, my personal opinion is that we are going through a period of global stagnation vis-a-vis the weather and that further investigation will be necessary.

LWW
03-21-2008, 01:33 PM
Still trolling along I see.

LWW

wolfdancer
03-21-2008, 04:51 PM
be careful whom you try to impress. On you tube there is a video proving that Bonny Prince Charles is the anti-Christ!!!!!
There's several others though that prove Bush is.....
the jury is still out, but the numbers seem to favor GWB.
Amazing that global warming is divided along political issues....it's observable and measurable....yet both sides can pull up texts to support their version. Even seems like the right is now predicting an ice age????
I use the Eskimo commute to support my beliefs.....they used to walk to work....work being fishing and clubbing baby seals...but now they are forced to kayak pool.....