# Global Warming causing



## Bowstring (Nov 27, 2006)

"Global Warming" causing rare snow in London England! It must be to warm somewhere pushing all that cold air over to London. :roll:


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

So are you going to agree that there is global warming everytime there is a heat wave, drought or a record high somewhere in the world? Because if you are going to use a rare snowfall in London as evidence against global warming then you have to use those other events as evidence for it.

Look, I don't care what side of the fence you are on...I really don't. I do care that if you're going to take the time and bytch about something, you should have at least some understanding of what you're bytching about. Global warming has to do with weather *Trends*. Not day to day anomalies.


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

Not to mention that one of the long-term consequences of global warming could be the halting of the Gulf stream current that is responsible for keeping England, and the whole of Northern Europe warmer than comparable latitudes elsewhere.

That's not to say that that's what happened. I'm just saying that even if there were a long-term cooling trend in one place, that it doesn't necessarily disprove global warming.

The snow in London is a one-time event in one location. Not exactly hard evidence.


----------



## jgat (Oct 27, 2006)

Matt Jones said:


> Global warming has to do with weather *Trends*. Not day to day anomalies.


And what are said trends looking like over the past decade and change?


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

jgat said:


> And what are said trends looking like over the past decade and change?


Like I said, I don't care what your opinion is...I'm not looking to get into a debate over global warming.

I'm just sick of seeing these stupid posts where someone will be like,
"Man, it's like 40 below...that Al Gore is full of crap."

Because that isn't what people are debating. They're debating long-term weather trends and carbon dioxide levels. Whether you believe it or you don't believe it, a single event like snow falling in London has absolutely nothing to do with the argument.


----------



## jgat (Oct 27, 2006)

Agreed. :beer:


----------



## Bowstring (Nov 27, 2006)

Global Warming, humans, Carbon Dioxide
Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?

By Timothy Ball

Monday, February 5, 2007

Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was one of the first Canadian Ph.Ds. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg. For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening. Here is why.

full article at http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/glo ... 020507.htm

This guy seems to know a lot more about the subject than I do, and makes a good argument. I remember the big ice age theory in the 70's too. I'm not looking to debate it on this site either, but until someone can prove global warming or global cooling it looks like it will change. :roll:


----------



## Bowstring (Nov 27, 2006)

OK I'll agree, Al Gore is full of crap even if its warmer than 40 below.


----------



## MSG Rude (Oct 6, 2003)

omegax said:


> The snow in London is a *one-time* event in one location. Not exactly hard evidence.


I added the bold for reference...

This wasn't a "one-time" event. 18 years ago was the last time. Is this a "trend" now?


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

"One-time" may not have been the right wording, but a couple of points is not statistically significant in any way. You'd need a lot of points for a very long time to draw any conclusions about something that happens so infrequently.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

My take on Global warming......

The Earth has been around for millions and millions of years. We as a society have been collecting weather data for about 100 years (accurate not carbon dating or what ever.)

So now that is such a small drop in a bucket for the grand scheme of things or with the earth.

Yes scientists can use info to make a conclusion about the past.....but not an spot on accurate account.

Take carbon dating.......they can't say exactly to the year this item was....they come close but not spot on accurate.

So in conclusion......this weather pattern that people are calling global warming might be a trend that happened years and years ago....but now is just coming back.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

How can people predict the weather years from now when they can't even predict it two days from now?


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

We have climate change occurring. It has been warming with some regression for a few hundred years since the last Ice Age. We have today a portion of the people who believe warming is accelerating faster than normal and the cause is man made. We others who acknowledge that we are warming but do not concur that the cause is man made. We have those who believe the earth is actually cooling and we are headed for a new ice age, or a mini ice age.

So what are the facts?

Well one thing introduced in this thread is clearly fact and that Al Gore is crap or full of crap, either one works!!!!!

I have weighed in on this many times, and my opinion is that we A do not have the ablity or the FACTS to make a computer model that is accurate and not affected by bias. The bias comes from the dollars doled out in research grants. If there is not a crisis, you make it a crisis to garner more funding. Recently the man made global warming crowd is garnering the most favor. Just like in the 70's when we had global cooling! I still have the Time mag that shows most of Canada and parts of the US being under ice by this date!!!!!!!

We worried that the Arctic regions where building ice at alarming rates and wild plans such as spreading soot on the ice to promote melting was seriously looked at!

Lost in all of this is that few if any of the alarmist on the warming side want to look at the affects the sun has on all of this. I am not a scientist and like almost all of us rely on what we read. The models that UN,Gore and the like do not factor the sun in or discount it to a point of it being irrelevant, yet the Suns affect on our planet is huge especially in regards to the oceans which really are the engine for all of this!


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

I think Obama caused global warming. Its change, CHANGE we can believe in! :lol:


----------



## 4EVERHUNTING (Feb 13, 2008)

Global warming it is not a matter of it being warmer it is a matter of change in climate change that is why it should be called global climate change which is what people that know about it call it. There is no debate about whether it is real or not it is already proven to be a real problem. Yes there are changes in weather and large changes in weather at that but there is no way to say that there is no change in our global climate that is way out of whack. Yeah you may not be seeing this in ND or in the U.S. in general for that matter but there are places that are now underwater and other things like that.

I believe there is a large unknown as well and the big upstairs only knows what will happen in the end but there is really is no doubt that humans are speeding up the process. But I also will drive a pick-up and love watching black smoke roll from the exaust pipe till the day they make other ways for us to do things. We still got to live our life till they find a way to change things.


----------



## Drake Jake (Sep 25, 2007)

does global warming cause one of the coldest winters in minnesota since global warming was deemed such a hot topic? :-?


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

4EVERHUNTING said:


> but there is really is no doubt that humans are speeding up the process.


For every scientist that claims humans are speeding up or causing global climate change there is another claiming we arent.

The worlds been warmer before, and its been colder before, it will be warmer again, and colder again, regardless of us.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> there are places that are now underwater and other things like that.


Say now ---- if I was to let my nasty SUV run all the time out in the front yard would there be a chance of San Fransisco and Los Angeles going under water? Just curious. :gag:

I think this year it is :snow: on the global warming parade.


----------



## giwoyna5 (Mar 5, 2008)

Plainsman said:


> Say now ---- if I was to let my nasty SUV run all the time out in the front yard would there be a chance of San Fransisco and Los Angeles going under water? Just curious. :gag:
> 
> :beer:
> 
> Thats good humor right there! If only it were true. :lol:


----------



## 4EVERHUNTING (Feb 13, 2008)

Comments like this show your ignorance on the topic. It is wrong to call it global warming and it does not mean that it is going to get hotter everywhere. Like I said it is global climate change places are going to have longer milder summers, some places will have cold and violent winters, some places will not change. You are going to tell me that because we are having a normal winter there is no such thing, look it up before you run your mouth. I have spent 5 years working with this sh*# at the U of M and let me tell you I am sick of talking about it.

Running your truck all day is a dumb example because it is such a small factor but when everyone does it, it will add up. I hope you really dont think that what you do here will not effect people in other locations.


----------



## drjongy (Oct 13, 2003)

4EVERHUNTING said:


> I have spent 5 years working with this sh*# at the U of M and let me tell you I am sick of talking about it.


I'll tell you what I am sick of, carbon dioxide being called a "geenhouse gas" and responsible for global warming or "global climate change" as you like to call it. If this isn't one of the biggest fallacies in the pseudoscience of man-made global climate change.


----------



## KRAKMT (Oct 24, 2005)

I don't know that the current climate change is man made but when you look back at our grandparents homesteading 100 years ago it is hard to argue that things have not drastically changed.

Second -Whether or not it is man made doesn't change the fact that we need to plan for the possible disasters. Some hope it takes out the west coast-what if rather, they all move to north dakota to get away from the floods. Along with the New Yorkers? And the Floridians? And all the displaced Brits?

If it is a changn we should probably have a plan- hoping it is not true is not a plan.


----------



## MSG Rude (Oct 6, 2003)

KRAKMT said:


> I don't know that the current climate change is man made but when you look back at our grandparents homesteading 100 years ago it is hard to argue that things have not drastically changed.
> 
> Second -Whether or not it is man made doesn't change the fact that we need to plan for the possible disasters. Some hope it takes out the west coast-what if rather, they all move to north dakota to get away from the floods. Along with the New Yorkers? And the Floridians? And all the displaced Brits?
> 
> If it is a changn we should probably have a plan- hoping it is not true is not a plan.


I tell you what, you make your plan for 1000 years from now, because that is when all the 'drastic' changes will occur, and let me know how that works out for you will ya?

If we are rising 1 degree every 1000 years, I think we are safe for a while and all the Chicken Little's are running around beside themselves with fear for the future....

I remember the 'Global Freezing' fear of the 70's and if my memory (and Google) are correct, seems to be that a big player in the global warming BS was screaming Global freezing 30 years ago...hhhmmmmm....


----------



## giwoyna5 (Mar 5, 2008)

Hey, we have our share of disasters here in no dak. I just think we handle it a little better than other areas of the country. We band together, help each other out, place the blame on mother nature and move on.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

I am willing to bet your time studying this was spent trying to prove it was so and not simply doing research on what is happening!

Ever wonder why all of a sudden after the publication of the UN report so many of the experts suddenly are saying that their conclusions or work are being misrepresented or outright changed?

The reason is simple, the data has been manipulated to support a position nothing more.

The earth at one time had fern growing in the Arctic region and ND was covered by sea water. We had a period in time not all that long ago where England grew grapes that cannot be grown their now because of climate change. None of those changes where created by man, but today we have such a high opinion of our superiority that we cannot phantom the idea that we are not affecting change.

Hey I am all for new and cleaner ways to provide energy and products for consumption. I am for reducing toxic waste, etc.. But do not insult my intelligence by claiming that the data proves conclusively that we are responsible for the current changes in weather patterns. Each and every model providing this assertion has been manipulated to show pre determined results. The crisis crowd has tried to shout down anyone who provides any data or offers any conclusions that are not in line with the predetermined crisis hysteria.

I have said before that we are seeing a change in climate, it could be man made, it could be normal or it could be some of both. The real science is not out their to prove it definitively one way or the other. But people lose complete credibility by making comments like this!



> 4EVERHUNTING wrote:
> but there is really is no doubt that humans are speeding up the process.


It is why global warming and climate change has fallen off the radar screen to the general public world wide. Enough people finally are being heard in regards to this issue calling into question legitimately the so called studies and Al Gores lying in his fictional movie.

So unless you have something other than 


> 4EVERHUNTING wrote:
> but there is really is no doubt that humans are speeding up the process.


you only bring old dis-proven theory to the debate.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I have spent 5 years working with this sh*# at the U of M and let me tell you I am sick of talking about it.


So how much funding do you get to study global warming, or climate change? If we get ten years of cooling will that hurt your funding? I think most of this climate change talk is to create funding. There are still scientists who think we are cooling. They tell us now that we are moving into a mini ice age. So the trend is cooling and will the same scientists look for funding to study global cooling? Do these same scientists now want to call it climate change so they can switch funding gears without clutching?

I think the earth is changing. I have no idea what percent man contributes to that change. I do believe we are entering a cooling phase. From what I can see man is arrogant in the respect that we think we can alter the earth or significantly change the ebb and flow of global heating and cooling. I think before we roast glaciers will push us south. California will have to worry about us invading them rather than the oceans pushing them to us.

We humans are not as important as we think, the sky isn't falling, there are many aspects of global change to study so don't worry about funding. I can see many have an opinion based upon their wallet.

I might add that I don't think we should be environmentally irresponsible. I don't however think we should waste money. Continue to study and watch our planet. Take mitigating preventative measures to compensate for out influence such as restoration of wetlands to sequester carbon. That would not be a waste of money if we are wrong about global warming. It would not only store carbon, but provide farm income, provide water storage hence flood prevention, and last but far from least habitat restoration for wildlife.

In other words do something if the chicken little's are right, but don't waste money. There are win win situations and preventive measures available that are not economic stupidity.


----------



## 4EVERHUNTING (Feb 13, 2008)

I am not saying we should run around scared I was the one saying I will continue living my life the way I do, I hate them hippies at the U telling me what I should do. I do think that humans have contributed to it but to what degree I do not know.

When you say wasting money on studying climate change I totally agree there are so many other things that should be getting money before something that is out of our hands does. How bout we worry about studying things that could cure cancer or finding a way for north dakota to build a wall to keep people from NY and Calif. out.

I just am trying to say that humans can affect climate change maybe in a small way but we do sorry for making this claim if you dont agree but we are all able to believe what we will.


----------



## MRN (Apr 1, 2002)

4EVERHUNTING said:


> or finding a way for north dakota to build a wall to keep people from NY and Calif. out.


Do you think that is possible? Could it be built really short to keep 'Sotas out too? How about Nebraskins? Maybe putting the slats at an angle, or leaving the gate open will keep them out? Some one has to pursue the good ideas here.

M.


----------



## Bustem36 (Feb 5, 2008)

Plainsman

I can definately tell you 4EVERHUNTING is not getting funding. He is saying he's in the same boat as you and thinks most of it is a big waste of money. THe problem though is the people studying these things and making laws such as hunting and fishing regs are hippie losers from big city universities with no real life experience. They definately won't spend the same money on cooling because thats not what the politicians and most environmental tree huggers want you to believe.

They want you to believe that polar bears are floating away on ice cubes even though their population is more stable now than in the past few decades.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

4EVERHUNTING gotcha, and thanks for the clarification. When you said you worked with it, and were sick of hearing about it I am guilty of jumping to the wrong conclusion. For that I do apologize, and I see we think much alike.

I think there is global change. I don't know if we can have any affect, but the liberals have simply found a political club. Much of the world is coming to realize that Gore has a political agenda not an environmental one.

As hunters I think we all are concerned about wildlife, habitat, and environmental conditions. Many of us just don't buy into the sky is falling crowd. I think the UN loves it because signing on to things like the Kyoto protocol will punish the United States economically. The war on terrorism isn't confined to geographical borders, we have enemies within the office walls of the UN also. They fantasize over the demise of the United States just as much as Osama Bin Laden, and the demise of capitalism as much as Obama Bin Laden. :rollin: It wasn't my idea Kennedy made me do it.


----------



## 4EVERHUNTING (Feb 13, 2008)

Exactly These issues are big and involve more then what the people making the laws see. The hippie kids in the city that are the ones who think they will be making laws dont understand that it is not possible for everyone to drive a car. I am pretty sure they dont know that their food comes from a field worked by tractors or got to them after it was hauled by a Peterbuild 379 with a 500 horse Cat with a 53' refeer on. I am more scared for these kids to be running our game and fish then for a climate change.

Maybe we could band together kick all of the d bags out of MN and put a fence around MN to then turn the cross country ski trails into mud runs. and there would actually be fish left in our lakes because out of staters would not come and keep everything.


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

giwoyna5 said:


> Hey, we have our share of disasters here in no dak. I just think we handle it a little better than other areas of the country. We band together, help each other out, place the blame on mother nature and move on.


Are you serious? ND handles it just about like everywhere else in the country....government bailouts. Flooding, farm disasters, roads, you name it. If you live in this state, thank the feds. If it wasn't for all the money they continually dump here this state wouldn't even exist.

In fact, ND probably handles it worse. In terms of federal tax dollars doled out for dollars paid in, we are continually one of the worst.


----------



## giwoyna5 (Mar 5, 2008)

I guess I was was talking about the "people" in general handling disasters. Govt. is Govt. no matter where you live. People will take advantage of Govt. spending if it is available.


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

Fair enough. As long as you realize it isn't due to people 'pulling themselves up by their bootstraps.'


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Matt Jones said:


> giwoyna5 said:
> 
> 
> > Hey, we have our share of disasters here in no dak. I just think we handle it a little better than other areas of the country. We band together, help each other out, place the blame on mother nature and move on.
> ...


Matt, I agree, I think we get about $4 for every $1 we pay in taxes. However, when something happens I think there is a better effort to help ourselves up here. One of the fellows from our church who was down to New Orleans shortly after the hurricane said "those folks are sure laid back. The fellows house we were working on sat in a lawn chair and drank a beer watching us". That's not laid back that's lazy. My son and his wife just got back from New Orleans last night. How many years are we going to keep going down there? There are other disasters where people need help, but for some reason we are fixated on New Orleans.

I think it may be due to the media using it to try give Bush a black eye. Before I retired I had access to some of the government news (I think it was called Federal Times). Just across the Louisiana border thousands of trailer houses sat unused because Louisiana had a law on the books about temporary quarters being established in flood zones and would not let the federal government bring the trailers in for people to live in. Common sense isn't that common. I don't know why the public was never made aware of that.


----------



## drjongy (Oct 13, 2003)

Matt Jones said:


> Fair enough. As long as you realize it isn't due to people 'pulling themselves up by their bootstraps.'


Apparently you didn't live in GF during the flood, Matt. Plenty of people didn't get money from the governement, Mrs. Kroc, or from their insurance company. I'm one of them, and yes, we did "pull ourselves up by our bootstraps"!!


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

If you live in GF now even after never experiencing the flood then you have received money from the government...even if you haven't received it directly into your bank account (most people don't get it that way). The feds dumped a lot of money into repairing the city in which you live. They gave money to help redevelop it economically. They gave money to protect it from future floods. The people of GF didn't get together and pool their dough and fix it.

There's nothing wrong with that, I'm just saying that we shouldn't get on a high horse because we're really no different or better than anyone else. Most Americans respond just like people in North Dakota do. That's all I'm saying.

...with the possible exception of New Orleans. But then again, is there anyone else even close to that bad? If that is supposed to be a compliment, that we're better than the people of New Orleans...well, it's not a very big compliment because it doesn't take much.


----------



## Bgunit68 (Dec 26, 2006)

Back in the Jurassic period the average earth's temp was 100 to 110%. Today the average temp is between 54 and 56 degrees. The earth is getting closer to the sun. The planet was thrown into a cold period by a specific event whether you choose a super volcano, a meteorite or my ex-wife's heart. We may be helping is ever so slightly but over all I believe it's a natural pattern. Everyone has their opinion. The scientists can't agree. I just know that there have only been three times in the earth's history the earths average temp has been lower that today. Pre Cambrian, and twice in the Paleozoic era (which ended 250 million years ago. And, I believe, there is less CO2 than there has ever been. But Gore could be right. After all he was the inventor of the internet. I actually think he's the reason I disbelieve it so much. LOL


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

Bgunit68 said:


> The planet was thrown into a cold period by a specific event whether you choose a super volcano, a meteorite * or my ex-wife's heart.*


 :rollin: :rollin:


----------



## Bgunit68 (Dec 26, 2006)

Oh, dude, she is the Anti-Christ!


----------



## drjongy (Oct 13, 2003)

Matt Jones said:


> The feds dumped a lot of money into repairing the city in which you live. They gave money to help redevelop it economically. They gave money to protect it from future floods. The people of GF didn't get together and pool their dough and fix it.


Yes they did throw a lot of money into the town, specifically for infrastructure. It certainly is not all a free handout, however, as I will be paying special assessments on the flood control project for the next 20 years as part of my property taxes at home and my work building.


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

It's not all a free handout, just most of it. :wink:

It's kind of like plainsman mentioned that we get $4 back for every dollar paid in. I believe that's high...I think it's ranged from $1.75 to as high as $2.50 over the past decade.

So you can look at it this way ND is getting $2 for every $1 paid in...or the feds are just giving us a $1 and we're not paying Anything. Because really, they are losing money on the deal. If my buddy asked for $10 and in exchange he gave me $20, I'm no mathematician but I'd say I just got $10 free dollars.

Either way you want to slice it, the taxes here don't pay for the services rendered. The state is a money pit.

I find it amusing that people on here are up in arms about the stimulus package because of all the pork in it. Just think of it this way, other states just want the same treatment that ND has always received...lots of free $$$ from the federal government!


----------



## drjongy (Oct 13, 2003)

Matt Jones said:


> Either way you want to slice it, the taxes here don't pay for the services rendered. The state is a money pit.
> 
> I find it amusing that people on here are up in arms about the stimulus package because of all the pork in it. Just think of it this way, other states just want the same treatment that ND has always received...lots of free $$$ from the federal government!


A little too simplistic, Matt. I agree, the taxes here don't pay for all the services rendered, but the actual amount of money is still peanuts compared with every other state I bet. We may get $4 for every $1 paid in, but then again we only have 600,000 people that live in the entire state. It's not like the residents of ND are getting a check in the mail. I bet most of this "free" money goes towards roads and government-mandated programs anyway. Money pit....I don't think so. :lol:


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

drjongy said:


> A little too simplistic, Matt.


Probably so...just trying to offer a different perspective. Take it for what it's worth...not much. :lol:



drjongy said:


> I pay probably $25,000 a year in income taxes, so you tell me where my $100,000 is. :lol:


April 15 would be the biggest holiday of the year. :beer:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

That $4 for every $1 paid in is what I remember from 20 years ago. It may not be accurate now.  I remember California and New York were at the other end of the spectrum. The lower population states made out best.
Back when I was looking at it there were three major things that the money was for. Highways, Agriculture, and Native Americans.


----------



## KRAKMT (Oct 24, 2005)

MSG Rude said:


> If we are rising 1 degree every 1000 years, I think we are safe for a while and all the Chicken Little's are running around beside themselves with fear for the future.....hhhmmmmm....


So are those the bookends? You are either a chicken little running around screaming climate change or you believe it isn't going to happen for a 1000 years so leave it for that generation to worry about?

Kinda like a superfund project for the ages?


----------



## USAlx50 (Nov 30, 2004)

Matt Jones said:


> April 15 would be the biggest holiday of the year. :beer:


Yeahhhhh boy! :beer:


----------

