GLOBAL WARMING - "Snowfalls are a thing of the past"

by Nathan Natas 92 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Nathan Natas

  There is a lot of similarity between many "climate change cultists" and religious cultists.

  We're seen how many JWs become even more firmly entrenched in their chosen religion the more often it is shown to be wrong.

  No Armageddon in 1914, 1918, 1925, 1944, 1972, 1975, 1984, 1999, etc. Each time they deny what they said and become more insistent that the change they expect is just around the corner. Each time there's a new, "refined" understanding rather than an admission of error.

  Ask these JWs what it would take to convince them they are WRONG, and they say, "NOTHING will convince me I am wrong about this."

  Climate Change Cultists are similar.

  They used to be exponents of GLOBAL COOLING.

  Then they became exponents of GLOBAL WARMING.

  Then they became exponents of GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE.

  Most recently they are exponents of GLOBAL CLIMATE CHAOS.

  Hot summers PROVE they're correct, cold winters PROVE they're correct, and they will admit to no circumstances in which they would concede being wrong. They are true believers who resort to name calling and thread locking to prevent assaults on their precious TRUTH™.

  Maybe soon they'll resort to an overlapping generation explanation.

  The important thing is to keep believing - the spaceships are on the way - King Jesus is on his throne - Armageddon is closer than the inside of your eyelid. In each case, it is their "chosen ones" - the Space Brethren, the Faithful & Discreet Slave, or the POLITICIANS who will save us from planetary doom.

  Well, I've been there before. I bought the t-shirt and the funny hat and I ain't gonna do it again.

  NO POLITICIAN - even his holiness Obama - can save the planet from it's geological/planetary destiny.
• 

  besty

  They used to be exponents of GLOBAL COOLING. Then they became exponents of GLOBAL WARMING

  The vast majority of climate scientists predicted global warming in the 1970's - not sure if "climate cultists" and climate scientists are the same people in your defintion.

  Then they became exponents of GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE

  Republican spindoctor Frank Luntz instructed the Bush Administration in 2002 to stop calling it 'global warming' and adopt the less frightening 'climate change'. Perhaps Dubya is the climate cult leader?

  Most recently they are exponents of GLOBAL CLIMATE CHAOS

  Climate chaos returns 500,000 search results on Google, most of which are related to an online video game. Climate change returns 43,000,000 results. Think you are making sh*t up now Nathan.

  Hot summers PROVE they're correct, cold winters PROVE they're correct,

  No credible science I have read points to seasonal regional weather and then makes assertions of proof. Climate change theory accurately predicts a greater incidence of extreme weather events over decadal periods.

  they will admit to no circumstances in which they would concede being wrong.

  I will be delighted to admit I am wrong when global average surface temperatures show a consistent declining trend over a decadal time frame whilst atmospheric CO2 concentrations continue to rise.

  Interesting you chose to end your rant* with some name-calling of your own directed at an American politician, as if climate change is somehow interested in him.

  Your ideology is clear - you have an anti-science position based on your politics.

  * Using bold and capital letters doesn't enhance your argument - makes it seem more ....ranty?
• 

  DaCheech

  kudos nathan!
• 

  besty

  Not forgetting your original post Nathan.

  And I asked you a polite question:

  classic quote-mining from nathan natas - David Viner also said in the same article: "Heavy snow will return occasionally, says Dr Viner, but when it does we will be unprepared. "We're really going to get caught out. Snow will probably cause chaos in 20 years time," he said." This is exactly what has happened in Europe this winter.

  Why did you choose to omit this part of what he said?

  So Nathan - exactly why did you chose to omit the part of the article that didn't support your ideology?

  Maybe dacheech can add some actual value to this thread?
• 

  DaCheech

  earth has cycles, did man stop the ice age?
• 

  besty

  earth has cycles, did man stop the ice age?

  climate will respond to the predominant forcing - right now that is CO2 from human activity

  In the meantime dacheech are you able to help answer why Nathan omitted the part of the Viner quote which didn't match his ideology?
• 

  DaCheech

  educate me, but don't trees eat CO2?
• 

  besty

  educate me, but don't trees eat CO2?

  I think you may be hinting at the carbon cycle - in nature CO2 is added and subtratced to keep a balance; humans add extra CO2 (fossil fuel burning) without removing any. Massive deforestation exacerbates the problem. And so the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is measurably rising. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeling_Curve
• 

  Satanus

  Don't forget that warming causes co2 release from formerly tundra, bogs and such.

  S
• 

  bohm

  "educate me, but don't trees eat CO2?"

  yap, and plankton produce oxygen: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7306/full/nature09268.html, http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100728/full/news.2010.379.html

  "Marine phytoplankton — the vast range of tiny algae species accounting for roughly half of Earth's total photosynthetic biomass — have declined substantially in the world's oceans over the past century, researchers report in Nature 1 this week. The findings add to concerns that climate change is dangerously altering marine ecosystems. ... Since 1950, phytoplankton in the world's oceans have declined by 40%."

  I suppose its safe to assume this is all parts of the natural cycle you keep talking about because otherwise we would be screwing up with something that is potentially very dangerous?