|
|
Post by fudgetunnel on Mar 8, 2007 9:49:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by redviking on Mar 8, 2007 19:31:17 GMT -5
34th coolest February out of 113 years isn't that dramatic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Mar 8, 2007 19:34:51 GMT -5
34th coolest February out of 113 years isn't that dramatic. I bet if it was the 34th hottest february in 113 years you would be singing a climate-crisis-tune. you are a phony. admit it. |
|
|
|
Post by redviking on Mar 9, 2007 19:28:26 GMT -5
34th coolest February out of 113 years isn't that dramatic. I bet if it was the 34th hottest february in 113 years you would be singing a climate-crisis-tune. you are a phony. admit it. No. I'm not a global warming guy. In fact, on the mat.com, I started a thread indicating that the global warming was a solar-system wide phenomenon. But I actually backed my thread up with a little bit of science. Your post is just stupid though. It doesn't show anything either way. This February generally had "below average" temperatures. Whoopty doo. So based on that one month, we can conclude that global warming is non-existent? Go take some science or math classes moron and learn the meaning of "statistical significance". |
|
|
|
Post by sgallan on Mar 9, 2007 21:00:57 GMT -5
Dang.... I am agreeing with RV....
It was in the 90's here today.... therefore it must be global warming. Err.... using that as proof would be rather stupid. So I won't do it. And I am one who goes with the generally accepted science - not to mention what is going on in the arctics where global warming is just a day to day fact of life. I doubt the folks RV is taking to task could get better than a low 'F' on any 9th or 10th grade science exam. They don't like science.... except when they have to see a doctor, or post on the internet. Then science becomes their friend. They are just to ignorant too get the connection.
|
|
|
|
Post by garagelogic on Mar 9, 2007 22:10:48 GMT -5
If only everyone were as enlightened as you on EVERY subject.
|
|
oc
Round of 12
Posts: 294
|
Post by oc on Mar 10, 2007 9:39:54 GMT -5
Ever wonder how valid these numbers are?
34th coldest February out of the last 113, based on what?
Does anyone really believeweather info from 1895, 1895, 1896,....is as valid as info collected now? Until recently temperatures were little more than localized snapshots. Now a more discrete measure of temperature(s) is possible. That number may be more significant than it first appears, there are a lot of things that can skew ambient temperature readings that weren't a factor 113 years ago (heat sinks).
|
|
|
|
Post by ground3pound on Mar 10, 2007 10:03:35 GMT -5
OC, I often wonder the same thing. It bugs me when the news reports things like, "all time record temperature". "All time" is really only about 100 yrs. ---------------- The data that I can best relate to are photos of melting glaciers such as these.   |
|
oc
Round of 12
Posts: 294
|
Post by oc on Mar 10, 2007 13:06:08 GMT -5
GNP, I would argue it's even less, maybe 30 or 40 years, only staellites gaves us the ability to monitor world wide temperature. I believe it was Edith Efron in, The Apocolyptics (sp) who pointed out that the avaerage temperature of the South Atlantic was determined at one weather station at the Falklands. Regardless, here's something that may put your mind to rest if you're fretting over the "Vanishing Glacier" fraud: jamesphogan.com/bb/bulletin.php?id=1076 |
|
oc
Round of 12
Posts: 294
|
Post by oc on Mar 10, 2007 13:12:25 GMT -5
|
|
oc
Round of 12
Posts: 294
|
Post by oc on Mar 10, 2007 13:15:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by redviking on Mar 10, 2007 13:48:03 GMT -5
There is no doubt that the earth is warming up. If you don't believe the temperature data, go ahead and look at the receding glaciers and rising sea level. There is no way you can dispute that. The question is what is causing the global warming? Is it man-made emissions, the sun heating up, natural cycles, etc.? That is the question.
|
|
|
|
Post by satiev1 on Mar 10, 2007 13:53:16 GMT -5
Can the earth really be immune to pollution and constant burning of fossil fuels?
|
|
|
|
Post by ground3pound on Mar 10, 2007 14:35:07 GMT -5
GNP, I would argue it's even less, maybe 30 or 40 years, only staellites gaves us the ability to monitor world wide temperature. I believe it was Edith Efron in, The Apocolyptics (sp) who pointed out that the avaerage temperature of the South Atlantic was determined at one weather station at the Falklands. Regardless, here's something that may put your mind to rest if you're fretting over the "Vanishing Glacier" fraud: jamesphogan.com/bb/bulletin.php?id=1076"... raising sea levels, inundating the coasts, and turning Florida into a huge rice paddy. "There is a lot of irony in this quote from the above "anti-environmentalsim" website. Florida originally was a huge rice paddy before the Army Corp of Engineers "fixed" it for us. |
|
oc
Round of 12
Posts: 294
|
Post by oc on Mar 10, 2007 14:50:45 GMT -5
GNP, You're correct about Florida, I remember reading about the Spanish settlement of Florida, the whole place was a swamp.
|
|
