• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

How Silly is Climate Change Denial?

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

We can easily discard EVERYTHING Tyger, Constance, Burnt, Maudib and others have posted in reference to the CAGW scam. They are unable to defend their positions because they have not done the 10+ years of research some of us have done to uncover the truth about this scam.
Thanks for participating.
 
Ice forces earliest closure EVER of upper Mississippi
Ice forces earliest closure EVER of upper Mississippi

Halts shipments of corn, soybeans, wheat, fertilizer, salt and other goods from the most northern reaches of the nation’s busiest waterway. 20 Nov 2014 – Ice surrounding locks and dams on the upper Mississippi River near Minnesota’s Twin Cities have forced the earliest winter closure on record, says text is article from Reuters Records date back to 1969. “There’s so much ice through the whole system,” said Bryan Peterson, navigation manager for the Army Corps of Engineers’ St. Paul district. “They’re getting the barges they can out and not risking getting stuck there all winter.” The shipping season typically ends around the beginning of December on upper portions of the Mississippi River in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa and Illinois. See entire article: Ice to close upper Mississippi from November 20, earliest on record| Reuters Thanks to George Martinez for this link

 
Is Global Warming Causing More Snowstorms?

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2014/11/is-global-warming-causing-more-snowstorms/

Lancaster, NY received 6 feet of snow in the recent storm. (AP – Gary Weipert)It has become axiomatic (and fashionable) that any change we see in nature is caused by global warming climate change. Global warming was going to make snow a thing of the past. Until someone looked out the window and decided global warming causes more snow. The epic Buffalo, NY storm this week was still in progress when that opportunistic organization Climate Central announced that more lake effect snow could be expected with global warming. SIGHHH. Except that the Great Lakes were unusually cold this year, after near record cold last winter. Then, an even more unusual cold blast of air that started over eastern Siberia made it’s way to the U.S. and the cooler lake waters were not enough to depress the lake effect snow machine: over 6 feet of snow has fallen south and east of downtown Buffalo this week. So, in what universe does a cold winter, a cool summer, cold lake water, and an unusually cold fall air mass result from global warming? Not in our universe. The computerized climate models that provide the basis for climate change proclamations produce less snow with warming. Yes, a warmer world has more water vapor in the atmosphere to feed snowstorms, but you need atmospheric circulations driven by large-scale temperature contrasts to form low pressure systems. And since the equator-to-pole temperature contrast has decreased in recent decades, we should be seeing less storminess. There has been no substantial trend in Northern Hemisphere wintertime snow cover since records began in the late 1960s, but spring snowcover has decreased, due to spring tending to arrive earlier in a slightly warmer world. What DOES affect Northern Hemisphere weather patterns are known climate cycles: the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), and the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), which can change our average winter weather for about 30 years…before changing again. In recent years, we have entered the negative phase of the PDO, which could mean winters more typical of the 1960s and 1970s for the next 20+ years. But no one really knows. On shorter time scales, El Nino and La Nina, as well as the Arctic Oscillation, can strongly impact individual winters. But when people immediately point to ‘global warming’ anytime something unusual happens, it is (in my opinion) just intellectual laziness — or money-driven advocacy. It’s just weather, folks.
 
Our 0.00013% co2 contribution to the global warming problem is causing early lake and river freezing, catastrophic snow storms, a cool summer, cool fall with early snow, fewer sunspots, new glaciers, record antarctic ice, greener deserts, record crop harvests and babies all over the world are being born naked... run away! Stop exhaling!

Maudib where are you when we need you to explain all of this!?!?
 
It's still going..:) 'Pixel as tenacious as ever, will the opposition respond ? Now for the glorious halftime performance of some 'snake swallower' before we resume with a heated debate.
 
They can't respond. It's like trying to defend Billy Meier. At this point they will just look really stupid. All that copy pasting by Tyger only made him lose credibility with anything else he posts in any thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
In lieu of your inability to answer any past challenges beyond smug declarations and deflecting questions let's talk lunatic fringe:

pixelsmith said:
Populations of all living things tend to also self regulate.
Click to expand...
As predicted, your callousness knows no bounds. What do you suggest - that we start to hire protectionist, nationalist death squads or simply wait for our continued stress on the planetary system to unleash more disease, cancers, radical weather, toxins etc. to kill us off in a more unpredictable manner?
 
Not all of it is garbage to be fair, but none of it confronts the ''the claim'' of catastrophic climate change, they wont face up to the claim being bogus.
They would rather focus on the minutea, and pretend they are addressing ccc.
 
It's a religion that helps them feel better about themselves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
They couldn't even answer 2 questions posed to them.
Maybe if we trade questions we get somewhere.
Fire away Burnt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
pixelsmith said:
They couldn't even answer 2 questions posed to them.
Maybe if we trade questions we get somewhere.
Fire away Burnt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Sorry but that's just troll behaviour. You've had the same sets of questions put out to you over and over and you refuse dialogue; you evade, deflect and insult; consequently, troll.
 
Where do you stand burnt on catastrophic climate change due to man made global warming.

please, and i mean please, i just want to now clearly and concisely your position on the catastrophic element, do you believe the claim is bogus or true..
 
Manxman,

Are we having an effect on the planet - yes. Is our effect on lifeforms, including ourselves catastrophic -yes.

Regarding carbon: we know little and we study and speculate. We know that carbon output has increased substantially, but we're not clear on where the carbon sink is to account for all our output. Theories abound. Does the planet have a way to balance the increased carbon? Don't know. Is there an increase in the atmosphere, and in water - yes. Are trees consuming more or are they getting more nitrogen - not sure. Has deforestation combined with increased fossil fuel carbon output caused problems - I believe so. Will it be catastrophic? The indicators are there, but we understand very little about climate and about where all our extra carbon is going. Ocean acidification appears to be on the rise. Carbon in the atmoshere is also in the rise and one possible effect could be global warming. These are complex events on a planet that has radically given birth to an incredible diversity of life - including intelligent life.

Are we messing with that delicate situation that gave rise to us humans - yes. Do we know to what extent - no. We can only look at what is taking place and surmise that our carbon output is playing a role in changes in weather, glaciation, pollution of water sources, acidification of sea waters and that this is also interacting with our general neglect of our role as caretakers on the planet. We pollute and piss all over it, burying our shit in any old hole in the ground or ocean making nuclear wastelands all over the place.

Do we have proof - big evidence of carbon caused disaster? Well we can see China and the US getting together to agree on carbon reduction for mutual benefit. Perhaps all the tree huggers are onto something in recognizing our net effect on air quality, disease increase and immune system compromises is a recognition of our catastrophic impact on the natural world of which climate is an intricate part. We are part of that climate creation, and just how significant will be our effect is still to be seen as we still don't have answers.

What I argue categorically against is the model that says "everything's dandy; let's do nothing about our carbon output and argue for the Koch brothers and multi-nationals." I've yet to see anyone put out a dollar figure on green taxes and how much it's supposedly screwing us over royally, up against the dollar figures of preserving a clean environment and eliminating the toxic conditions that have resulted in an increase in cancer, respiratory and immune system diseass.

I do not see these things in isolation and to argue only that singular point, "climate change has nothing to do with global warming" is a simplistic and inaccurate approach to what humans get up to on this planet. It's a very sophisticated and interconnected set of systems. Excluding one discussion point only sounds like conspiracist and debunking thinking. - and that's exactly what the industrialist grinchs would like us to be doing, dancing on the stage of god, or spitting the dummy as you would say.
 
i also find the inability to take on the more sophisticated questions and challenges posed to record sea ice, the interconnectivity of systems etc. while constantly riding the merry horse of carbon output to be not just boring and childish but irresponsible in the grand scheme of what we get up to and our net impact on the life systems and life forms on this planet.
 
Last edited:
Burnt State said:
Sorry but that's just troll behaviour. You've had the same sets of questions put out to you over and over and you refuse dialogue; you evade, deflect and insult; consequently, troll.
Click to expand...
I ignored your regurgitated talking points because you bored me to death.
Feel free to try again with questions based on newer research.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Burnt State said:
i also find the inability to take on the more sophisticated questions and challenges posed to record sea ice, the interconnectivity of systems etc. while constantly riding the merry horse of carbon output to be not just boring and childish but irresponsible in the grand scheme of what we get up to and our net impact on the life systems and life forms on this planet.
Click to expand...
Carbon output is the foundation of the CAGW movement. You should know this. Without that the whole scam crumbles.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top