Yeah – if its warmer its global warming, if its cooler its global warming if it stays the same its global warming – you are an idiot

The US in particular has a sizeable population of global warming sceptics. They believe that man-made global warming is fake and fabricated purely so that special interests can gain from it financially.
Here is some of the common evidence employed by global warming sceptics:

1) Statistics are misleading or contrary to global warming:
Glaciers in Greenland and Antarctic ice have been shown in the last few years to be actually getting thicker, not thinner. All we ever hear about is the North Pole, but never about these other two important indicators of global warming.
Statistics show that the error rate associated with taking temperature samples is greater than the claimed global temperature rise.
NASA was once caught red-handed faking data about global warming. They simply took the temperature data for September and used this to give the official record of the temperature in October that year, and then claimed that October was the hottest year for decades.

2) We are being lied to for personal gain:
A few decades ago, back in the 70′s, the same governments and scientists tried to scare us with stories of the impending ice age, and now we are supposed to listen to similar false fears.
Many companies made a lot of money from the ozone layer scam. This has also since proven to be false, but the media which gave us a big scare at the time has since remained silent.
Everyone knows that big scares always mean big profits for government connected companies. For instance, GE owns NBC, which is brainwashing us with constant global warming stories. However, GE makes a huge profit from the sale of green products such as windmills and solar panels to governments.

3) Natural factors are much more important than man-made factors in realising CO2 into the atmosphere:
The ocean and volcanoes are much bigger sources of CO2 and other such greenhouse gases than humans. If the CO2 count is increasing, the influence of man is minimal.

The global warming is fake movement is a healthy one it always pays to be sceptical about what scientists and governments tell you. However, on this one I believe that the global warming sceptics have been misguided, and by the forces that are much stronger than GE or any such alternative energy company. The sceptics themselves are subject to propaganda from the most powerful companies in the world: the oil companies, for whom the global warming debate is a matter of survival. These oil companies have extremely strong ties to the government and the press in the US, and for this reason the US is the home of the global warming sceptic.

For more info on global warming go to:
wikipedia
globalwarming.org

u r stupid

You’re a riot! Thanks for the chuckle!

“The reason we have more snow is not because it is colder; it is because there is more water in the atmosphere when it is cold outside–basic first grade science.”

Is that what you are using to argue for anthropomorphic global warming, basic first grade science? Saturation vapor pressure is actually proportional to temperature. Warm air has a much higher saturation point than cold air. In other words, a greater distance between molecules means warm air is capable of holding considerably more moisture than cold air. Basic first grade science with a little cloud physics for good measure.

I have a bridge for sale if you are interested

Yes, and if you don’t believe him, check the source of his information at the University of East Anglea, U.K.

No – not second grade science – it is third rate science. Junk science. Nice how you start, with the very engaging “Fools claiming this weather puts an end to the global warming debate should bother to get a little education” and end with the only truth in your output: “The figures are completely meaningless”.

Please stop the shrill cries of your own denial – the IPCC report, the models and the AGW cronies have withered in the glare of close investigation.

At least you admit that you function on a “second grade science” level, but unfortunatley it’s not that simple. And, the headline that you’re regurgitating about last year’s “warmest global temps” is more distortion of the “facts” by the global warming fanatics. While global SURFACE temperature readings may have been the highest (or actually 2nd highest), the temperature in the upper atmosphere (that would be evidence of your beloved “global warming”) has actually still not increased since 1998, and has actually declined a bit. If you listen to the folks you would call “deniers”, the surface temperature readings are likely skewed by the location of temp stations in developed areas (heat-island effect) or of out right manipulation of the data (like the lovely pic of the weather station with the BBQ under the recording equpment). I know some of that is beyond the 2nd grade leve, but facts sometimes work that way. So, the fact is it’s NOT getting warmer in the upper atmosphere where actual greenhouse-effect warming from C02 that you all sceam about would be occurring. The surface warming that you’re quoting from the headlines is no more important to our long term “climate” than the seasonal weather that you’re discounting as due to the winter tilt of the earth (and you’ are correct on that part, by the way).

Come on AL, your days of blowing hot air up the world’s ass are over. Find another cause or go back to your energy wasting mansion in Tennessee. Or better yet fly all over the world in your private jet and help warm up the air that is making our winter bitterly cold. p.s. could you please loan me some money to help pay my $700 electric bill last month?

Yeah – if its warmer its global warming, if its cooler its global warming if it stays the same its global warming – you are an idiot

I guess green house gases were responsible for Greenland being warm enough to grow wheat and corn in the Middle ages, hence the name GREENland.

Take away the grant money and expence accounts of the Global Warmers and see how many continue to support faux science.

My goodness, I was told in the 70s that we were going to get more snow because it was getting colder and a new ice age would soon be upon us. Now you are telling me it is getting warmer and we will get more snow. Nonetheless 2010 was tied with 2005 as the warmest year since records were kept in 1880. I think you know that 130 years is less than a drop in the bucket when looking at global temperatures of the earth and projecting or predicting from such a small sample is perilous at best. The non data driven historical record drawn from literature, art, folk tales, and monestary records indicate that there were times when things were warmer than now in past human history and, or course, much colder too. Not to get carried away, but sea bed core samples suggest the earth was approx 1 degree centigrade warmer than now about 1000 yrs. ago.

Help fight CONTINENTAL DRIFT!!!!

That’s great! Is it man made? The Earth has epoc history of warming and cooling. In fact the most respected climatologist in the world is forcasting a “mini ice age” startin within 50 years for the planet. The man made global warming theory is just that “a theory”, or a way for learning institutions to get more government/corporate funding by those who benefit. How much did Al make on his video?

First, this is not first grade science and you are incorrect about the melting ice caps putting more moisture in the atmosphere. Humidity is a function of the AIR’s ability to hold that moisture, not how much is available (typically). On a global level, there is always more water available to evaporate than the air can accommodate. This is why we have oceans instead of low deserts. Second, if this were a question of more snow verses no precipitation, your argument could hold water, so to speak, but no one has said anything about this being a WETTER year or two, simply that there is more snow than normal. You can only get more snow instead of rain if it is cold enough to snow, which is why it rarely snows in the summer.

1 gallon is approx. 8#, so approx. 240g/ton. At $.07, that equates to approx. $17. That would suggest that the brine is approx. 1/4th the cost, but the unknown in this story is how much net coverage for each method, and the effectiveness of each method. Offhand, I’d say that the solid mixture would yield more coverage per sq. ft. than the liquid approach, but you would have to conduct testing to validate.

1 gallon = aprox 8 pounds. 2000 pounds = 1 ton. 2000 divided by 8 = 250 gallons. 7 cents a gallon = 17.50 per ton. The question is, how much does a ton of salt treat versus how much does 250 gallons treat? Without that info, it is just a math problem solving nothing.

you should go to walmart and get yourself a new brain.

Global warming is a very real threat and once the planet is frozen solid to its core it will be too late to keep us from burning up…at least that’s the NEW explanation after a decade of cratering ocean and global temps forced the eco-terrorists to shovel boatloads of egg off their faces….

Yellow snow. I hate Yellow Snow.

And not only that, but you can practice writing your signature with it.

Very Lucid Idea Bruce!

Another idea…….use the GPS systems they already have and hammer them with it. Although I am sure they cant fire them due to contract verbage.

You can’t just convert liquid ounces, which is a volume measurement, to pounds, which is a measurement of weight.

use sand only , it polutes nothing and gives traction needed, snow and ice sliding on top of pick juice = slip sliding away. Plus its cheap.

You beat me to DT. I think the public works director may need to sit in on his kids third grade math class. Either that or commission a government study to determine the necessary atomic weight of street salt and its potential for dilution into a solution of hydrogen and oxygen. But not before they determine how many parts of hydrogen and oxygen are necessary to create a solution suitable to dilute said amount of street salt…..

good idea but need higher percentage of salt

Along these lines, take Gov. Island and flood it with salt water and come back in a year. Tadaaaa………..free salt!!!

Yeah this reporting is as bad as something you can read at Yahoo! news.

Pathetic!

better for the water system big shot

whats the max IQ allowance for government employees ?