What the... Snow in June, then in August!

[Chaos-Shaman]

just got a report from Environment Canada that this spring is the coldest in over a 100 years, breaking many temperature records.
Canada is one big country, and most of it was well below seasonal this year.
WHY? where did that greenhouse go?, where is the CO2 in our upper atmosphere, where? Russia and China are also reporting the same thing.
what excuses will they come up with this time?

[Seriously Unserious]

what excuses will they come up with this time?

I don't know...

What I do know right now is that I've enjoyed several days in a row of nice, warm, sunny weather. I think there may be some rain mixed in with the sun for tomorrow though, but still, several days in a row of sun at this time of year is a nice treat and I'll definitely take it.

[Chaos-Shaman]

the west coast has been lucky for years, it does tick me off. i want a good growing season, been crap for years and years. best for me is hot and sunny with cool nights, just has not been that good where i am, and i could use a few beer, bbq dayz too
finally our grass is greening up though. we broke another temp record 2 days ago and tied one today. warmer weather is starting to move in FINALLY. they predict it will be near 20, close to where it should be instead of 2.

[Seriously Unserious]

Yesterday it got up to about 19 away from the water. Today it's supposed to be a little cooler but still sunny but by tonight it should start raining again and continue raining all day Saturday, and possibly again on Sunday -- just in time for the weekend.

[Chaos-Shaman]

screw you SU you dog. BC gets some hot dog dayz. i'd live out there if i could afford it.

[Lord_BoNes]

Here is Australia, a lot of December & January was 30-35+... wanna talk about BBQ days
But, then it goes to the other extreme ("Holy-crap! It's friggin hot out here... screw the BBQ... I'M THE ONE COOKING!")

[Chaos-Shaman]

hahaha, Australia has 3 deserts, mostly flat and drought prone. you guys probably get the most extreme types of weather. that's another place i'd like to live if i could afford it there. you need a half million dollars in assets to move there, i got that info from a friend who moved there.

[Lord_BoNes]

As they say "it's a land of droughts, and flooding rains"

[Seriously Unserious]

screw you SU you dog. BC gets some hot dog dayz. i'd live out there if i could afford it.

Well, I guess you got your wish... It's pouring rain now, and has been all day.

[Zyx]

i use many other sites Zyx, they are just ones i see when i log on, and was easy to do. what sites that are not biased do you have that i can visit?

I would recommend scientific sites (by that I mean not that they have legitimating credentials or are part of an establishment, but that they proceed with a clear method and explicit sources of data to reach logical conclusions).

For example: phys.org
http://phys.org/space-news/environment/

[Chaos-Shaman]

SURE THING zYX, HEHE, i mean sure thing Zyx. it is easy to miss things when logically expecting the results. a magician uses this very concept.

[Chaos-Shaman]

hahahha, finance a laptop for 49 cents... come on now, read between the fjords.

[Seriously Unserious]

I don't get it... what does that have to do with weather and climate???

[Chaos-Shaman]

i think Zyx is saying that the site that he provided was a credible place to read and to believe what those scientists say that think the most logical. they are government sponsored and it's 100% biased to AGW being 90% man made from CO2 emmisions. but as i stated with my remark, if you can get past brainwashing fjords of ads that obviously are sponsoring their truth.

i can be a bit difficult to understand sometimes, and it can take a few minutes to understand my methods of explanations. in other words i'll try and make others think for the answer. everything is a game, everything is a test. i think i said that once before like 7 years ago to Sophia. bet if i do a search that's what i'll find. i also said be careful what you say (applies to everyone) and a bunch of other things i doubt anyone paid attention to. search engines are powerful and can be wielded. nastiness can rear its ugliness that which i want no part of really.

now back to the topic, the only way to be certain is to gather all information from both sides, but i've read all the AGW scare tactics they have, i didn't read (learn) about all the other possibilities of why this is happening. you'll be surpised how hardlined people are and yet they know not a thing about it when a few questions is poked at them. what really bugs me is the ones who really blow their horn are doing nothing about it, they still drive their vehicles, still pollute like the dickens and think they can get away with it by buying a few green items. hahaha, really. if i was in business i'd make a shit load of money on these suckers, just have to put green on it, it's about money. i ask, don't you think i care about the planet??? ha, i'm a frigging shaman, hehehehe, but i don't tell them that. i'm not one to kill off people in hopes of saving the world, it will save itself, it doesn't need me or anyone else. man thinks it has control over its destiny, ahhh, NOT.

Zyx, did you not like the method i provided on how to check out a study or whatever... yeah man, that's what i do, that's how i do my testing. has anyone here even at least gave a moment to check the other side of the story, please tell me in your own words what ya all think, and i want to know why you think it in your own words. can someone please tell me what you all think i don't know, or at least call me crazy or something like that. i like when people call me crazy

climate change, climate shifts, climate something, it is not something you can just say, oh, we put out that hockey stick, it must be our CO2 causing it. it is true that CO2 levels are higher and it was the same in the past as well, it goes up, then comes down regardless if we're here or not. i ask all you speciallists, what happened to the CO2 concentrations back then, where did it go, why did the levels drop, what casued this change in CO2 levels? IT WILL DROP AGAIN from whatever was the changing factor, what was it? i could spend a year spitting out stuff, so many questions just not answered yet to be certain.

it comes down to this, What have ya done to stop it? are you taking a bus to work, are people putting in the effort? a few are, but most are not. that's what it comes down to. we can only produce 3% of energy with non fossil fuels. there is no good answer, just people will suffer. it's about money, does anyone dispute this?

my daughter tells me her chemistry and physics teachers don't believe it either. i found that amusing.

ahhh, enough for today

[Seriously Unserious]

at least call me crazy or something like that. i like when people call me crazy

Chaos Shaman .....











YOU'RE CRAZY!!!!!



There, you happy now?

Anyhow, back on topic:

it is true that CO2 levels are higher and it was the same in the past as well, it goes up, then comes down regardless if we're here or not.

I doubt if anyone is disputing the fact that CO2 levels change over time, yes they fluctuate up and down under a natural cycle, but that cycle takes place over 100's of years, not just a few decades. I did some research on CO2 levels in the atmosphere and basically the main factors that affect it are:
1- human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels
2- natural events such as volcanic activity, forest fires, etc.
3- natural sources of CO2 emissions, such as organic decay, nighttime plant respiration, animal respiration, etc
4- tropical ocean upwelling, basically warm water can hold less dissolved CO2 then cool water can so as water warms up it releases CO2 some of which rises up and joins the atmospheric CO2
5- CO2 sinks, such as plant life consumption of CO2 during daylight hours (removes CO2 from the atmosphere)

So on a daily basis CO2 rises during daylight hours while human activities are at their highest, and falls off at night as the human-caused CO2 disperses.

On an annual basis CO2 rises falls during the spring reaches it's minimum by the end of summer, and rises during the fall, reaching it's peak levels by the end of winter. The reasons for this cycle are that in the fall/winter seasons, there is a lot of plant live decay from fallen leaves and such, many plants go into a dormant state and so are not consuming any CO2, those that are still active, release more CO2 then they consume due to the shorter days. In the spring and summer seasons, plant life it at its most active, days are longer and thus plants consume more CO2 then they release.

Longer-term CO2 fluctuations happen on a scale of 1000's of years, and there is a strong correlation with CO2 levels and natural climate shifts. CO2 levels during ice ages, measured through processes like glacier core samples among others, are noticeably lower during ice ages and noticeably higher during interglacial periods (times when the Earth has no polar ice caps).

These climate shifts come from 3 main causes:

1- changes in radiation balance between sun and Earth (either caused by a change in Earth's orbit, or energy output of the sun itself)
2- changes in the reflectivity of the Earth affect how much energy gets reflected back out into space and how much gets absorbed by the Earth. Things like cloud cover, tiny atmospheric particles (eg: aerosols) and surface cover (ie: water, ice, vegetation, rock, etc) all affect this
3- levels of greenhouse gasses (eg CO2) which affects how much or little of the sun's energy the Earth retains.

All of these, when naturally occurring, happen over a period of 100's or 1000's of years. The graph below shows the changes happening since about 1955 and these changes are happening much faster then the natural shifts referred to by Chaos Shaman in the quote above.

This rapid rise in CO2 levels can most certainly be attributed to a combination of the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation by forestry practices and clearing land for other developments such as construction or farming. This rapid rise in Global CO2 levels corresponds with the rapid industrialization of the 19th and 20th centuries, also, CO2 concentrations are highest in the Northern Hemisphere, where the majority of industrial activities are occurring. Why is this significant? First off, CO2 concentrations will naturally be highest closest to their sources, and second, there is a part of the Earth's atmosphere that acts as a natural barrier to atmospheric conditions crossing it (such as CO2 concentrations), called the intertropical convergence zone (ITCZ) which is located along the equator and is basically a permanent low pressure system that rings the entire Earth, following the equator (which is why there are so many jungles located along the equator), thus trapping CO2 emissions from the northern hemisphere in the northern hemisphere.

Are climate shifts entirely human caused? No, absolutely not, many natural factors can cause them, and some of them can happen quite fast in geological terms.
Can humans affect the Earth's climate? Yes, we absolutely can, by emitting greenhouse gasses in large enough quantities we can cause a series of events that can dramatically and rapidly change out planet. We are already doing so on a local level. Cities are noticeably warmer then rural or wilderness areas. Cities produce a lot of heat, from everything from burning fuels in vehicles, to industrial activities, to heating buildings to changing the landscape and surface in a drastic way. For example, try standing out on your paved patio, driveway, street or other large paved area in the sun, then go to a large non-paved area, such as a lawn, or garden and stand there for the same amount of time, you will undoubtedly notice it's warmer on the pavement. This is because pavement absorbs and radiates energy more efficiently then dirt, plants or grasses.

Sources: http://co2now.org/Know-the-Changing-Cli ... hange.html
http://www.ferdinand-engelbeen.be/klima ... ments.html
http://www.pnas.org/content/99/7/4167.full

[Chaos-Shaman]

beatifully said SU... love ya man.

yeah, there is no dispute on any of that information you have above, for it all plays a roll. i could respond to every fact given above, but those facts are not solid, just a general concensus. the cause is not known yet. if you've read this thread, you'll notice the references to much of the above, but the one you missed was the volcanoes that are activated below the Arctic sea ice, we already know of the ones on Greenland and Iceland that are melting the glaciers from below, not to mention the black soot that is forming on the ice from forest fires and man and volcanoes, etc, this soot melts a hole into the ice, until it either reaches the water or bottom land, which creates a sliding effect on the glaciers, they slide into the ocean, so it's not the CO2 in that case. research that info, i got it from a national geographic mag. now the cause of this excitement was not from accumulations of CO2, (the hockey stick),
but from the sun earth cycle, its play with magnetics which affects those upwellings of warm and cold water, volcanoes, hot water sulpheric hot water vents which they just started noticing how they were finding more and more of them especially in the Atlantic ocean and off the coast of South America and then towards Australia, where we get the El nino and La nina. this is the main game changer, not CO2 in the atmosphere, which has its roll, but better for life, not worse as they try an tell you. more CO2 means more vigorous growth for trees, and isn't that what we need, more trees. i could care less if the Arctic melts, it'll freeze over again, and that polar bear story is full of it, all propaganda. i watched stuff on CBC news where the inuits living in the Arctic said there was nothing wrong with the polar bear population, and they live there. this bull as i call it is spreading. the truth is real simple, we're not going to stop using fossil fuels, we can only supply 3% of alternative power other than from coal, gas and oil and nukes. so to start constricting the use of these very abundant energies is just not possible, and if we do stop, it will kill millions if not billions, just what some people want i guess, heh, as long is it's not them, that's not a good thing. you can bet in a short period of time, something will disrupt this, we'll die off, but not from a warmer planet. the earth has its own mechanisms and we won't be able to stop it. in essence, there is a scientific statement that sorta says it all, the only thing constant is change, and change is happening now.
you mentioned the island heating and surfaces being paved... THIS IS WHY OUR TEMP READINGs ARE OFF. one of the things i got out of reading climatology books written by clinatologists was the placement of the stevensons screens, their weather monitors. these monitors are taking readings from city areas, and as you said they increase the temps, so the city is usually warmer by a few degrees, some days, Toronto is more than 10 degrees celsius warmer than its surroundings, so the info they use to brainwash people is corrupt, these cities are at least 4 times their size since i was born. this island heating is still not the cause, but it doesn't help. currently we take up less than 1% of the earths surface with cities, it's obvious water takes around 80%, so these numbers they give are bogus. i'd like you to check the parts per million concentration, you'll see it's not much at all, not enough to warrant the panic we see, the starving of peoples.

i'll have a read on the material you provided, see if there is anything new in it for me... thanks SU, i like when you use your own words.

[Chaos-Shaman]

there is snow still in our forcast here in Southern Ontario for May 12th, a bit far off yet, but there is something going on here.
prairies are freezing their asses off, second coldest in history, how is that possible?

how many years of below average temps is needed to begin to get people to look outside the mainstream box and see with their own eyes, maybe have seconds thoughts of the carnage that will follow in trying to reduce fossil fuels, think about it people.

[Rasmus]

I haven't read all the posts. But my opinion is that there is no solid hard evidence that can explain the temperature rises.
I did a report in school about if the greenhouse gases was the reason for the temperature rises and I came to this conclusion:
Even if there are other factors to count in like volcanoes, suns activity and increasing clouds in the stratosphere, the most evidence points towards that our pollution is the main cause for the temperature rise.

Now, we could always say that the scientist aren't 100% sure because the most facts out there are indirect pointing towards that the pollution is the cause. But are we really ready to take that chance?

I know that people as individuals can't make a large impact on solving the problem, but I really hope our governments and politicians can take this problem seriously before it is to late..

[Zyx]

EDIT: to put the readers in a good mood, a video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAY1UoQYMHk

@Chaos-Shaman: I think there are some misunderstandings about why I posted here. I came here as a friend. My critics about yahoo and their methods don't mean I disagree with you and there are no feelings of antagonism from me. I don't belong to one "political" side or to the other. In fact I believe it's sheer nonsense to take sides when we talk about an objective reality: words can't fool nature.
In the same line of thought, I'm not saying you should "believe" what scientists say. I think you should maintain a critical mind for any kind of information, and THAT'S WHY scientific method usually holds better information than other methods: because there are less biases and less opacities. (There is variability and exception of course, for example I strongly distrust the copenhagen's interpretation of quantum mechanics). As I said, when you have access to the raw data AND the reasoning you can judge by yourself the conclusion. This way, you can agree on universal knowledge without manipulation.

I subscribe to your approach of measuring the degree of speculation and dishonest attempt of influence, I practice it myself all the time (without a word processor, though). But I don't think it's enough to apprehend the external reality (spiritual realms are another story). Medias, articles and words, even thoughts, are only intermediaries between us and the noùmeno, and as such, they must be deeply analyzed so that you can get rid of their possible traps.
My trust in certain information is not based on the authority it emanates from, it is based on how much the intermediary is transparent and the report complete enough so that I can judge by myself whether what they're saying is correct or not.

About the global warming, I know very little for sure, but here are some solid assertions:
- comparing dozen of thousands of spots in the planet year after year, with the same methods, there is a long-term, statistical, trend of global warming. Statistical means that you still can get local fluctuations and anecdotes. Long-term means over decades.
- the velocity of this warming is two magnitudes faster (a hundredfold) that any previous global warming we know of in the last 3 billions years.
- there are no massive effects without massive causes. For the Earth to warm at such a scale and velocity, some massive mechanisms must be happening.

- Amongst the known mechanisms that can warm a whole planet, the greenhouse gases are strong candidates.
- CO2, CH4, and in general C in gaseous form are the strongest candidates. In fact, the changes in global CO2 concentration during the past 600,000 years have mimicked the changes in global temperature.

- Carbon is released into the atmosphere and fixed from it all the time, so amongst the massive, recent changes in its dynamic, there are:
- deforestation (less carbon fixing)
- volcanoes (release carbon from the mantle)
- ice melting (releases trapped carbon)
- coal and oil burning (releases fixed carbon)

The last item, fossil fuel burning, dwarf all the other by a factor of 100.

I didn't dedicate much time into this topic, but many trustable, scientific friends did, and we all agree those are checked facts, sounds arguments. The global warming seems to be a fact and the theory of the human cause makes sense. Whether we like or not, it looks like the more plausible description of what is happening to our planet.

A site about this specific topic, which answers to several of your arguments: http://www.skepticalscience.com/

[Chaos-Shaman]

that's right Rasmus, there is no clear proof of anything yet, we need more that 30 years of sat data, more like a couple hundred min.
the question is, what have people done about it?. i don't see them doing anything, just the same old people fighting for a cause which is noble, but as they fight for it, they drive their SUVs and have all the toys of man. car commercials are a great example of what people think, especially if it's a truck. the truck beats up nature and drives over mountains, heh, and the cars, they're suppose to be some new hybrid that is better for the environment, hahaha, but they pollute even worse, not CO2, it's the batteries they use, it's the steel smelting and forging that's doing the pollution. what do they do with the billions of batteries in the end. they are suppose to be telling us to stop driving our cars, that's not what is going on. oh, scientists are not 100% right that's for sure, they do their best to determine what is the right answer, people kinda go off the wall with some reports, an example of that is the polar bears.

HOW MANY OF YOU DRIVE A CAR AFTER KNOWING IT IS DESTRUCTIVE IN EVERY WAY? if ya don't want CO2, why do you drive? it is the main reason for this AGW.... hmmm

as for the government, Canada and the US both did not sign the renewal of the Kyoto Accord, and it's obvious why, there is no way they can reduce emissions without killing the economy, it's straight and simple, not hard to figure out, not unless we want to pay 10$ for a loaf of bread, 5$ a litre of gas, etc... there is no great solution, but what i hate, i mean hate! is the sale of green items pretending to be a good thing, and people fall for this scam, meanwhile all they have to do is not use the item, find another way instead. i really really hate detergents, and the commercials they have, designed for childish minds.

[Chaos-Shaman]

i loved the little vid, i at first thought the cranes were a noose hanging the birds

no, i am not taking anything seriously Zyx, you should know that by now. i maintain an open mind all the times. you must realize that there must be something wrong with the picture, otherwise i'd be jumping at looking after our world, be it for my children and grandchildren or anyone elses. but one thing remains, MONEY, which drives the world and this leads to crooks, misinformation, it's in the billions of dollars. they figure if they put green on the label, people will buy it and think they are doing good, so it releaves them of their guilt for doing other things like, driving their car. if you want to make an impact, get rid of the cars. this is what has to be done, but you and i know that that is not going to happen. it will take down the economy if everyone did that. so oil is not going anywhere.

now you mention the statistics of long term, the last climate shift was in 1977, and it wasn't from CO2. you can bet there will be another most likely in our lifetime, the question is in which direction will it go. as SU has stated, CO2 gets flushed out of the atmosphere over time, how much time, nobody really knows, but it does happen, it will happen. another way to picture this is, when our fuels start running out, the atmosphere will clean itself up, and we're talking in a couple hundred years MAX, there will be a supply demand problem in shorter time, so this CO2 problem is not going to last, no matter how you look at it. when fuel runs out, we're screwed.
gases like CO2 have been way higher in the past, and you can't take any record like 600,000 years to be accurate, just not possible. beware the #s. from what i've read, the CO2 being produced today will not affect us for another 500 years or so, a time lag. so for all the industrial time we've gone through, it does not coincide with the scientists numbers, scientists argue with each other on this theory.
you should take a stab at reading some climatologists opinions, check out Roy Spencer who is a principal research scientist at the university of Alabama in Huntsville, a senior scientist for clamate studies at NASA. he leads the NASA aqua satellite program. he has written several books on GW.

[Sophia]

one thing remains, MONEY, which drives the world and this leads to crooks, misinformation, it's in the billions of dollars.

I think this one cuts worse the other way. Polluting industries have a lot to gain if they can prevent any sort of regulations capping their emissions or any public outcry against what they are doing, so they will willingly and eagerly spread all kinds of misinformation in order to convince people that what they are doing is not so bad. Worse yet, they apply this approach not just to climate change but to everything they do-- including toxins that are more harmful to life than CO2 will ever be. In that light, hypocrites like Al Gore are about the best thing that can happen to them. It makes people throw out an essentially good message because the messenger is so bad.

the last climate shift was in 1977

This statement is meaningless. The climate is not some binary thing that remains constant until it changes abruptly. It is a dynamic system and it is always shifting. Even at this very moment, changes are occurring, albeit at such a slow pace we will not notice the effects of the shift until years in the future.

[Bit]

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/autho ... stein.html

Now guess in which sequence I would sort those commenting this thread...

[Seriously Unserious]

Only a life lived for others is a life worthwhile.

I actually disagree with this statement: I say a life lived equally for self, family, others, life itself, and spirit is a life worthwhile. It's only when you are able to hold each of these things in balance, giving none preference over any other that you can achieve the true optimum.

BTW: I loved that page of Einstein quotes, good stuff Bit.

these monitors are taking readings from city areas, and as you said they increase the temps, so the city is usually warmer by a few degrees, some days, Toronto is more than 10 degrees celsius warmer than its surroundings, so the info they use to brainwash people is corrupt, these cities are at least 4 times their size since i was born. this island heating is still not the cause, but it doesn't help. currently we take up less than 1% of the earths surface with cities, it's obvious water takes around 80%, so these numbers they give are bogus. i'd like you to check the parts per million concentration, you'll see it's not much at all, not enough to warrant the panic we see, the starving of peoples.

I am actually aware of this. I merely mentioned this to make a point that we do actually affect climate by our activities. Obviously the urban heating issue is only a localized affect, but it does show that our activities do have an affect. This is how powerful we've become as a life form, that we are able to affect the environment, rather then just reacting to it. we are able to affect matter, rather then just reacting to it. This is a great power, and as the famous saying from a famous comic book/cartoon/movie goes "with great power comes great responsibility."

BTW thanks for being a skeptic, it's forced me to have to do research to get specific info on the subject which I may not have otherwise done, so I have learned something new about this.

there is snow still in our forcast here in Southern Ontario for May 12th, a bit far off yet, but there is something going on here.
prairies are freezing their asses off, second coldest in history, how is that possible?

how many years of below average temps is needed to begin to get people to look outside the mainstream box and see with their own eyes, maybe have seconds thoughts of the carnage that will follow in trying to reduce fossil fuels, think about it people.

Here in Vancouver we're baking under record breaking heat. It got up to 24C at YVR and 28 where I live in Port Coquitlam (an inland suburb of Vancouver).

EDIT: to put the readers in a good mood, a video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAY1UoQYMHk

Loved that video, thanks for posting that.
I agree with what you have to say, thanks for digging up more supporting data there, I think you and I are both on the same page on this issue.

[quote"Chaos Shaman"]HOW MANY OF YOU DRIVE A CAR AFTER KNOWING IT IS DESTRUCTIVE IN EVERY WAY?[/quote] I don't drive a car. I either take public transit, ride my bike, or take some combination of the 2 (ie: bike'n'ride).

I think this one cuts worse the other way. Polluting industries have a lot to gain if they can prevent any sort of regulations capping their emissions or any public outcry against what they are doing, so they will willingly and eagerly spread all kinds of misinformation in order to convince people that what they are doing is not so bad. Worse yet, they apply this approach not just to climate change but to everything they do-- including toxins that are more harmful to life than CO2 will ever be. In that light, hypocrites like Al Gore are about the best thing that can happen to them. It makes people throw out an essentially good message because the messenger is so bad.

I couldn't agree more. In fact, guess who owns most of the major media outlets... if you guessed the same people who own the most polluting industries you're right. Guess who the main advertisers and sponsors of these same media outlets are... if you guessed the same industries that are the heaviest polluters, you are again right. In other words, these media outlets often have a vested interest in either discrediting points of view that would curtail the activities of big polluters or increase their direct (internal) expenses.

On the other hand, the media also views controversy as a souse of ratings and therefore profit, so presenting opposing opinions but not verifiable facts is another popular tactic of the media, as is reporting that everything is wrong, such as that the climate is changing and there's nothing we can do about it. In other words, yes there is a problem, but why bother even trying to fix it since we can't do anything about it anyways?

I'd love to also start discussing things we can do about climate change, pollution and other environmental issues that most of us can agree is a major problem. We know these things are a problem so let's start talking about solutions...

This statement is meaningless. The climate is not some binary thing that remains constant until it changes abruptly. It is a dynamic system and it is always shifting. Even at this very moment, changes are occurring, albeit at such a slow pace we will not notice the effects of the shift until years in the future.

Well said.

[Zyx]

http://www.alternet.org/environment/99- ... ing-points

[Seriously Unserious]

Excellent find Zyx.

[Chaos-Shaman]

great quotes Bit, and they can be applied to either side of the coin too.

it's a matter of view Sophia, they are all being paid, either from an oil company or from a government sponsored agency. it's money no matter how you look at it, they get paid for their work just the same, and they will not pay you if you question the CO2 theory.

DOES anyone believe for a second that they could be corrupt???. has anyone heard of a corrupt government with scandals before??? has eveyone closed their minds to the possibility that the theory could be wrong, hahaha, yeah, i've questioned it that's for sure, but most people don't.

Climate shifts are irregular, there is no pattern to them Sophia, i don't know where you got the pattern idea. it can be 30 years, 50 years, a 1000 years, it's not clockwork. i think it will be within the next 20 myself, and i draw that idea from the polar flip of the sun, in it's regualr 11 year cycle, and the earths, which is every half of a million years that has just occured last December. what i have noticed the last year is the consistant change in winds, retrograde weather systems, for example we just went through 9 days of straight easterly winds with no rain or clouds, i've never seen this before ever, it always rains within a couple days of east winds. so i find that odd, even last years hurricanes were retrograde, instead of forming off the coast of Africa and heading to the carribean, they were scooting up the Atlantic and then towards EU, and i've never seen that before either.

[Chaos-Shaman]

i just had a go at the info posted Zyx and i didn't see anything new in there, that info i know already, everyone knows already. now if we move towards an unbiased direction, we can have a better look at both sides. i expected to read what i read there, have heard and read it before. not much of it was concrete, just a pile of numbers being rearanged to suite who ever makes the comments.

i also prefer to hear what others say with their own words and i try to reframe from link posts, can't always, but i try. it is one of the reasons why i don't use caps, you know it's me and not a cut and paste, and there are other reasons too also life is not propper and in a box, to me, being near perfect or attempting to is a weakness and often something is missed while within this propper place due to expectations, like mentioned above. but i will read the other half of what my brain expects to know.

[Chaos-Shaman]

now for that comment on possible snow here in southern Ontario for the middle of May, well, it's going to happen, they have snow for this Monday, and i have never seen snow in May, EVER. of course there has to be a CO2 story behind it somewhere

a simple question. is everyone here 100% sure about the CO2 AGW story to be 100% true, does everyone here think that there can be no other reason?. you see, if you say yes, you live within the box i refer to, if you have one doubt you live outside the box, this is where i live. it is not cut and dry as most want it to be, not even close. can be easily mislead if we all think in the closed minded view. imagine if we all still believed the world was flat, well, you all know you were put to death for even opening your mouth about that it is not. i believe something similar is with the CO2 story, so let time tell the truth.

in all respects of hope and goodness, i hope AGW is not as sinister as it is made out to be, instead of everyone insisting the world is dying, blah blah, believe me, it will outlive us, and continue long after we're gone. the next generation of life will be burning our remains too, hehehe. they'll say, hey man, they should have concentrated on how to stop those rocks from hitting the earth or some other giant danger that is SURE TO COME. we are not here to take care of the planet in other words, but this message is often stated. we're a pest, yes, so is most everything else in a different perspective view, and GOD is not going to punsih anyone, does not work that way.

what man is doing is what he is suppose to do, and we're just the same as any other animal, exactly the same. some don't agree with that statement. having explored other realms of possibilities it gives an unique perspective or is that a unique one

know this, i do not think i am right about something that is not proven, but like other scientists, i put it out there. i have yet to see anything that's going to solidify AGW as 90% man made, not yet.

hey SU, awesome you don't drive a vehicle, me too. i've done more to save the planet than most. everyone else who does drive, just remember the CO2 spewing out (Al GORIES COMMENT ON CANADAS OILSANDS) in those traffic jams, and it's all your fault! this usually covers more than half the working class out there. i insist that if you care enough that one should stop the consumptions of oil energy. does that make sense?

[Chaos-Shaman]

i didn't expect this kind of reponses from the community. i wonder, being a skeptic of course, if this is nothig more than a play, one of how to gather the community together.

well, i respect this effort.

i care for people, i'd do just about anything to help others, but be damned if i am going to let fear and money control me to the point where i can't think outside the box. i didn't choose the path i'm on with that in mind, if i did i never would have discovered much of what i know today, which lead me to shamanism. if i had of gone down the path of what everyone else does i'd be concerned more about who won the hockey game, or the curve of that hockey stick if you know what i refer to.