Global warming revisited.....

Last post 07-21-2008 5:26 PM by r1a2c3e. 7 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (8 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 07-03-2008 4:29 PM

    Global warming revisited.....

      Global Warming as Mass Neurosis
    July 1, 2008; Page A15

    Last week marked the 20th anniversary of the mass hysteria phenomenon known as global warming. Much of the science has since been discredited. Now it's time for political scientists, theologians and psychiatrists to weigh in.

    What, discredited? Thousands of scientists insist otherwise, none more noisily than NASA's Jim Hansen, who first banged the gong with his June 23, 1988, congressional testimony (delivered with all the modesty of "99% confidence").

    [Global Warming as Mass Neurosis]
    AP

    The New True Believers

    More on the story at this link......

    But mother nature has opinions of her own. NASA now begrudgingly confirms that the hottest year on record in the continental 48 was not 1998, as previously believed, but 1934, and that six of the 10 hottest years since 1880 antedate 1954. Data from 3,000 scientific robots in the world's oceans show there has been slight cooling in the past five years, never mind that "80% to 90% of global warming involves heating up ocean waters," according to a report by NPR's Richard Harris.

     

     

     

     

     

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121486841811817591.html?mod=todays_columnists

     

    Filed under:
  • 07-03-2008 4:38 PM In reply to

    Re: Global warming revisited.....

    So ,here we are , Global warming is a "sick souled religion" according to and presented by Greg Stephens. Here's a little Bio on Mr. Stephens.  Bret Stephens

    Mr. Stephens writes the Journal's "Global View" column on foreign affairs, which runs every Tuesday in the U.S. and is also published in the European and Asian editions of the paper. He is a member of the Journal's editorial board, and has previously worked for the paper as an assistant editorial features (op-ed) editor in New York and as an editorial writer in Brussels for The Wall Street Journal Europe.

    From March 2002 to October 2004 Mr. Stephens was editor-in-chief of The Jerusalem Post, a position he assumed at age 28. At the Post, he was responsible for the paper's news and editorial divisions. He also wrote a weekly column.

    In 2004, Mr. Stephens was named a Young Global Leader by the World Economic Forum, where he is also a media fellow. He is the recipient of a prize for commentary from the South Asian Journalists Association for his coverage of the 2005 earthquake in Kashmir, and of the Frank Knox Media Award for his coverage of U.S. military affairs. He is the 2008 winner of the Eric Breindel Award for Excellence in Journalism.

    Raised in Mexico City and educated at The University of Chicago and the London School of Economics, Mr. Stephens is married and has two children.  "Mr Stephens has no so whatever concern for his chilren's future

    Forget I said that"

     

    ARE We are getting deseprate. Mr Stephens. Time to sell your articles to your declining readership.

     

    Carpe Diem.!!

     

  • 07-05-2008 12:03 PM In reply to

    Re: Global warming revisited.....

     Seti03, thanks for the informative bio. Seems he has accomplished quite a bit. But I thought you might find the NASA information interesting. This is the part I mean........

     But mother nature has opinions of her own. NASA now begrudgingly confirms that the hottest year on record in the continental 48 was not 1998, as previously believed, but 1934, and that six of the 10 hottest years since 1880 antedate 1954. Data from 3,000 scientific robots in the world's oceans show there has been slight cooling in the past five years, never mind that "80% to 90% of global warming involves heating up ocean waters," according to a report by NPR's Richard Harris.

    Not Stephens data ..... NASA's data. 

  • 07-06-2008 8:37 PM In reply to

    Re: Global warming revisited.....

    Funny, with all the green people around, these posts draw minimal discussion.

  • 07-20-2008 7:11 PM In reply to

    Re: Global warming revisited.....

    Regardless of the decision, I'd err on the side of caution and safety. Would it really hurt us to reduce, reuse, and recycle? Manufacturing uses a lot of resources and hurts the environment. Everyone driving their own cars hurts the environment... The mindest has to change.
  • 07-20-2008 7:46 PM In reply to

    Re: Global warming revisited.....

    Actually, Surveybob the so called debate, about Global Warming is pretty much over. No, the sky isn't falling, its just starting to burn up  Most of us are already on the same page. So, what's to debate?

     

    surveybob:

    Funny, with all the green people around, these posts draw minimal discussion.

     

  • 07-20-2008 9:28 PM In reply to

    Re: Global warming revisited.....

    surveybob:

      

    [Global Warming as Mass Neurosis]
    AP

    The New True Believers

    More on the story at this link......

    But mother nature has opinions of her own. NASA now begrudgingly confirms that the hottest year on record in the continental 48 was not 1998, as previously believed, but 1934, and that six of the 10 hottest years since 1880 antedate 1954. Data from 3,000 scientific robots in the world's oceans show there has been slight cooling in the past five years, never mind that "80% to 90% of global warming involves heating up ocean waters," according to a report by NPR's Richard Harris.

     

     

     

     

     

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121486841811817591.html?mod=todays_columnists

     

    Very interesting surveybob. What I find interesting, with regards to skeptics and proponents of climate change, is how quickly they accept information when it is in their favor. I dont know how many times I have heard people on AM radio talking about how the climate patterns take hundreds of years, that a change in temperatures for a decade or two is meaningless. Now when the data shows cooler temperatures, it is supposed to disprove climate change? Had the data shown that the oceans had warmed over the last five years, it would have been discredited by the same people as insignificant. If a few years of warmer temps does not prove climate change, then a few years of cooler temps cannot disprove it. It would be nice to see more objectivity on either side of this issue.

    One of the greenies  :)

  • 07-21-2008 5:26 PM In reply to

    Re: Global warming revisited.....

    Unfortunately this has turned into a political debate instead of just watching out for the environment.  I am all for recycling, but our planet is not near as bad off as some want us to believe.  One thing the policitians cannot dispute is raw data.  Every time I watch the news and it is 100+ degrees outside, the record highs always seem to be several decades ago.

Page 1 of 1 (8 items)