What will be hot when NASA's "new mission" to look at the navel global warming ...? confirms the work of MIT climatologist Dr. Richard Lindzen, former guru of the NASA Remote Sensing UAH Dr. Roy Spencer?
Since 2008, Drs. Lindzen and Spencer have published documents PEER examined using satellite data now show that IPCC models greatly overestimate the effect of CO2 on temperature and the temperature of the atmosphere is a fraction of that provided by the IPCC and the normal variability ...
When science proves not to be "settled" and refutes Algor and global warming, then? Will Algor money in carbon credits or will Algor cohort and often criticized NASA GISS director James Hansen just sit on the data or destroy it in part Climategate Two?
Hide decline:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEiLgbBGK ...
NASA moon to the earth shock "navel"
http://bigjournalism.com/rtrzupek/2010/0 ...
Spencer Braswell paper showing atmospheric COLD weather than expected
http://www.drroyspencer.com/Spencer-and- ...
product support:
http://www.drroyspencer.com/research-art ...
Lindzen paper-Choi
http://www.leif.org/EOS/2009GL039628-pip ...
That is why PT Barnum said there is a sucker born every minute. You can not talk to people to believe a hoax.
I have trouble getting people to believe that fraud is part of a scheme pryamid. The government refers to it as social security,
they are responsible for Bush again.
They will have to cope with the NOAA:
http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?report=gl ...
Keep it until the Earth no longer support human life.
global warming is real, but like all connservatives you see a giant raging fire, but the spirit if ur turn around its not there
Nothing, because it will not happen.
However, I wonder what kind of observation you will make when they are misrepresented?
Note that Spencer has recently said that Lindzen (Choi and his partner) were wrong:
http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2009/1 ...
Imagine a new type of fraud and the party in Copenhagen?
Did you pay for auto insurance? Why? Just in case. . .
Well, what is wrong to take measures to reduce emissions, "just in case"? I mean, if they are right, when they have what it takes to convince you, it will be too late.
I'm of the school "prevention is better than cure". I do not know if I believe it or not, but what is the harm in taking steps to ensure that we are not really destroy the earth? Because if we are, then we're f ** ked if we continue to do what we do.
They will blame on racism and George Bush.
This is the standard response to any Radical Left.
Why do you hate clean air and so much water? This is not just a question of climate change is a matter of maintaining industrial toxins in our air and water.
Thus, your request is that progressives gave false information that diluted their results. You proved nothing against global warming, just that it's possible.
Posted on June 22, 2010.
