More Global Cooling/Warming/Change hoax.

The beauty of being a Conservative is that we don't go blindly wherever our leaders may lurch in a moment of weakness.

Newt was highly damaged by Liberal liars lying liberally back in the ethics assassination he underwent. It cost him everything at the time, and yet he was innocent. Even CNN exonerated him;


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxYucZPzvkw

Does your wife ever resent your wood for Nancy?


Nick,

Here is a consevative who believes..................

<TABLE style="WIDTH: auto" class=ts><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=2>Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich Commercial on Climate Change ...

<TR><TD style="PADDING-RIGHT: 8px; PADDING-TOP: 4px" vAlign=top width="1%">

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
 
Last edited:

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
Does your wife ever resent your wood for Nancy?QUOTE] Posted by Bob

Nick,

Here in our discussion about global warming, we have a tape of the consrvative's poster child! The great hope of the republican party, saying not only that he believes that global warming is real, he believes it so much that he makes this plea with The Liberal House Speaker.

Here we have conservative leader's proclamation that not only is global warming real, but that it is a real problem that needs to be adressed.........

Do conservatives want to discuss it, want to make a comment, want to explain how Mr Gingrich could be so wrong.............

NO!!!!!

The conservative reaction is to make odd personal attack, bring my wife into the discussion in an attempt to personally belittle me!

Are the good folks were on our site OK with this?

Are the other conservatives here OK with this type of activity?

Will any of you condemn this type of activity?

Does anyone else have a problem with wifes being brought into the discussion in this way?
 
Last edited:
The conservative reaction is to make odd personal attack, bring my wife into the discussion in an attempt to personally belittle me!

Jim,

"An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it. Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as a logical fallacy."

Unfortunately, it's not a solely Conservative trait, having said that the evidence is plain to see as to who resurrected it.

Strong & bitter words indicate a weak cause.--Victor Hugo, discussion is an exchange of knowledge; argument is an exchange of ignorance. It is fair to hear both sides of an argument, it is heavenly to hear the end of it.

I should have taken note myself of that last one.
 
Relax, Jim. We have scientists telling us now that the earth hasn't gotten hotter in fifteen years, and you bring out Newt Gingrich's years old, flawed opinions. He's not a scientist, you know.

How can you be taken seriously. As far as Nancy goes, you bring up that flawed woman every chance you get, the curious just want to know.
 

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
Newt was highly damaged by Liberal liars lying liberally back in the ethics assassination he underwent. It cost him everything at the time, and yet he was innocent. Even CNN exonerated him;Posted by Bob

*********************

Gee Bob, is that what they are now telling you, and you believe them?

The vote was 395 against Gingrich and 28 for Gingrich, with a majority of Republicans voting against Gingrich.

The only lier here is you!!!!!!


House Reprimands, Penalizes Speaker

[SIZE=-1]<!--plsfield:byline-->By John E. Yang[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]<!--plsfield:credit-->Washington Post Staff Writer[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]<!--plsfield:disp_date-->Wednesday, January 22 1997; Page A01 [/SIZE]
<!--plsfield:description-->The House voted overwhelmingly yesterday to reprimand House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and order him to pay an unprecedented $300,000 penalty, the first time in the House's 208-year history it has disciplined a speaker for ethical wrongdoing.
The ethics case and its resolution leave Gingrich with little leeway for future personal controversies, House Republicans said. Exactly one month before yesterday's vote, Gingrich admitted that he brought discredit to the House and broke its rules by failing to ensure that financing for two projects would not violate federal tax law and by giving the House ethics committee false information.

"Newt has done some things that have embarrassed House Republicans and embarrassed the House," said Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.). "If [the voters] see more of that, they will question our judgment."
The 395 to 28 vote closes a tumultuous chapter that began Sept. 7, 1994.
 
Last edited:
Watch the video before you type, Jim. Clinton's IRS exonerated Gingrich for the only charge, amongst many that were levied against him, which had even a hope of being prosecuteable. Fox News didn't even make it up, its CNN reporting.

CNN Report On Newt's IRS Exoneration Over Ethics Charges (1999) - YouTube

I must say, this is really weird, you're attacking the character of someone you started out using of an example of someone who agrees with you on global warming.
 

Jeff Young

GT40s Supporter
The issue was he lied to the investigating committee -- Congress never could agree if he violated the tax code. They did agree he lied during the investigation.

Watch the video before you type, Jim. Clinton's IRS exonerated Gingrich for the only charge, amongst many that were levied against him, which had even a hope of being prosecuteable. Fox News didn't even make it up, its CNN reporting.

CNN Report On Newt's IRS Exoneration Over Ethics Charges (1999) - YouTube

I must say, this is really weird, you're attacking the character of someone you started out using of an example of someone who agrees with you on global warming.
 

Jeff Young

GT40s Supporter
NASA seems to disagree.

NASA Report: Greenhouse Gases, Not Sun, Driving Warming | Global Warming & Solar Cycles | LiveScience


Hi,

Really difficult decision as to whether to post this or let sleeping dogs lie, but in any debate it is important to get the story from both sides so here goes. Also, I believe we have had a period of global warming reduction in glaciers etc, but this was mainly down to the natural heating and cooling of the earth over the millennium.

It is one opinion albeit, opposed by other experts (as the article points out) an interesting one with no proof as to who the "experts" are, and it is "The Daily Mail"!!!!.

So children please keep any debating civil please. :) and hopefully Mike will not read this.;)

We may have had a mild winter so far, but new figures suggest that we could be heading for a mini ice age of the type that hasn't occurred since the 17th century.

New figures issued by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit indicate that the planet has not warmed for the last 15 years.

This means that we could experience a dramatic drop in temperature of the type not seen since the late 1600s.

The Daily Mail reports that the sun is now heading towards a 'grand minimum' in its output, which means we are likely to experience cold summers, freezing winters and a shortening of the season available for growing food.

Experts say that we are now at the peak of 'Cycle 24' - which is why last week's solar storm resulted in sightings of the aurora borealis much further south than usual.

But sunspot numbers are running at less than half of those seen during cycle peaks in the 20th century and experts at NASA believe that Cycle 25, which is due to peak in 2022, will be considerably weaker.

According to a paper published by the Met Office, there is a 92 per cent chance Cycle 25 and those taking place in the following decades will be as weak, or weaker than, the 'Dalton minimum' of 1790 to 1830. During this period, temperatures in parts of Europe fell by 2C.

It is also possible that the solar energy slump could be as deep as the 'Maunder minimum' between 1645 and 1715, the coldest part of the 'Little Ice Age' when the Thames and the canals of Holland froze solid.

So far there is no evidence of this happening but, even if it does, the Met Office claims that the consequences would be minimal because the impact of the sun on climate is far less than man-made carbon dioxide.

However, solar experts believe that the effects could be more dramatic.

Henrik Svensmark, director of the Center for Sun-Climate Research at Denmark's National Space Institute, says: "World temperatures may end up a lot cooler than now for 50 years or more.

"It will take a long battle to convince some climate scientists that the sun is important. It may well be that the sun is going to demonstrate this on its own, without the need for their help."
 

Pete McCluskey.

Lifetime Supporter
The Climate Scare/Green Energy Bubble will be the defining feature of our age. Never before have so many people wasted so much money and time on climate fables, alarmist handouts and energy toys.

Already it has spread further, distracted more people and wasted more community resources than the South Sea Bubble, the Tulip Mania or Y2K. Future generations will read in wonder how sensible people like Germans, British, Spanish, Danes, Californians, Australians and Kiwis lost their ability for critical thinking.
:stunned:
 

Terry Oxandale

Skinny Man
Pete,

I pray and hope you are spot on. I've seen other scares in the past, but none has endured, gained momentum and support as much as this one has, and held such significant impacts if the end matches forecasts or modeled results.
 

Dave Lindemann

Lifetime Supporter
Maybe this year is a fluke? Nothing political here, I don't have a clue as to what is causing it or what the future holds but I live in Minnesota - normally in January and February we see temps WELL below zero (F). This year the temps are in the 30's and even 40's above! I'm not complaining but this isn't "normal".
Dave L
 
Pete,

I pray and hope you are spot on. I've seen other scares in the past, but none has endured, gained momentum and support as much as this one has, and held such significant impacts if the end matches forecasts or modeled results.

Again, Terry, why does one side need to alter data to get the results they want??
 
Maybe this year is a fluke? Nothing political here, I don't have a clue as to what is causing it or what the future holds but I live in Minnesota - normally in January and February we see temps WELL below zero (F). This year the temps are in the 30's and even 40's above! I'm not complaining but this isn't "normal".
Dave L

Every time you hear "breaking a hundred year old record (this case 178 year)," ask yourself what would have caused that.


"The "Monthly Weather Review" from February 1878 reported prairie fires in Minnesota, Dakota, and Kansas. In that same month active insects in Iowa, grasses sprouting in Dakota, and the ice cover in Duluth harbor broken up by heavy winds were all reported."

Minnesota's "Year Without a Winter"
 

Terry Oxandale

Skinny Man
Again, Terry, why does one side need to alter data to get the results they want??

Same answer I gave before to this ad nauseum question:

Anyway, back to my point. Like everything else, science doesn't have an 'immune' pill it can take to completely avoid the above trend which appears to have saturated society. Just as it was prior to the enlightenment, science has those few within, that feel the appearance of science and actual science are separate things, and [that] hiding one justifies the other.

I would add to that answer that the reason anyone would become politically motivated to alter scientific data would be for the same reason one's politically motivated response is to ignore seemingly convincing scientific data. And that is the reluctance to face that data in its own right, and subsequently, alter it to suit one's own believes or faiths that would otherwise contradict that data. In doing so, this (in either case above) indicates a mind that is ruled by whats already in it, rather than one willing to accept something that could improve it.
 
Last edited:

Terry Oxandale

Skinny Man
Every time you hear "breaking a hundred year old record (this case 178 year)," ask yourself what would have caused that.


"The "Monthly Weather Review" from February 1878 reported prairie fires in Minnesota, Dakota, and Kansas. In that same month active insects in Iowa, grasses sprouting in Dakota, and the ice cover in Duluth harbor broken up by heavy winds were all reported."

Minnesota's "Year Without a Winter"


Or...

THE DECEMBER WITH THE LOWEST AVERAGE MINIMUM TEMPERATURE
IN DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES WAS DECEMBER 1878...WITH AN AVERAGE LOW OF 41.9 DEGREES.

I guess even I, as I'm nearly falling asleep at the keyboard, can throw out some insignificant deviation-from-the-norm data, and use it to support whatever argument I want...yawn...Goodnight.

OMG! I just realized I got sucked into the vortex that destroys those that cast an eye on these threads! This forum ought to called The Medusa rather than The Paddock. Time for a sabbatical!
 
Last edited:

Pete McCluskey.

Lifetime Supporter
The Climate Scare/Green Energy Bubble will be the defining feature of our age. Never before have so many people wasted so much money and time on climate fables, alarmist handouts and energy toys.

Already it has spread further, distracted more people and wasted more community resources than the South Sea Bubble, the Tulip Mania or Y2K. Future generations will read in wonder how sensible people like Germans, British, Spanish, Danes, Californians, Australians and Kiwis lost their ability for critical thinking.
:stunned:

This was intended as my last word on this subject. And it is.:lipsrsealed:
 
I've seen this chart before Bob , and others that show the same plots but goes back farther when the swings were a lot larger . One such chart was in the beginning of one of the global warming movies .
What got me was with all the large swings , and temps lower than in medieval , the commentator gets really emotional and insistent that every thing before the last little move up in the chart was natural occurrence , but the last move up in temp is all mans fault .
And its interesting about NASA's report , when a decade or so ago they reported the sun may have as much to do with temps rising , as all the planets in the solar system had similar rises in temp .
I still hold to that theres more greed in this equation than actual harm .
 
Back
Top