The ozzie man says no you can not complain if you are not participating in the system you must go down to the voting booth and have your name crossed off and then if you wish to have a protest vote i will allow you to write a insult across the the voting paper as that will mean you are participating and have made a Donkey vote . If Enough of you vote this way then a new election can be called as no one party will have a majority .It also really tells the polly's to stop there crap and start working together .

If people don't vote then you can say anything like you pointed out about Husseling hassin did buy saying what he said .

---

Clyde that was a interesting article however i will point out that he worked for British Petroleum and i have to be a little sceptical about what he says . Remember the gulf problem and all the B/S involved with that .

He mentions the feed back loops but forgets one of the most important feed back loops that will do more harm than CO2 and that is Methane Hydrates . If we only had to worry about the Co2 then we probably have enough time to solve some of the problems but because of the Methane releases that have been occurring since 1980 we are in far more trouble than we would be if it was only what he talks about in the article





you will notice the WTF events and Methane is 20 times worse than Co2

---

If people don't vote then you can say anything like you pointed out about Husseling hassin did buy saying what he said .

70 Percent DID NOT VOTE. So, A Majority DID NOT VOTE. I VOTED with The Majority. We, The People, Decided, In This Election, To NOT VOTE. Therefore, 'it' Can Be Said, People Don't Vote, and Therefore, I Can 'Say' Anything I Like.

I DENY Methane Hydrates. Methane Hydrates will Stay Locked Up in their ICY Abodes and Not Bother HuWoMan, except for The Occasional Bubbling Up, Lighting Off, Singed Hair, and Once In Awhile in The Triangles, sinking A Ship.

Otherwise, YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWN to Methane.

' '

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

Mister Gooba Gaba you are forgetting the permafrost of Siberia and northern Canada and that is melting so the Methane Hydrates are not just at the bottom of the ocean my friend .

70% didn't vote i thought it was only 60% so you are saying all those people have just given up and handed the power to those whom understand the voting rules .

Yes you can say whatever you wish but who's gona listen after all you didn't participate and there fore what you say is just noise .

I find it funny is was the Liberal party (Republicans) that brought in compolsary voting and because it hasn't quiet helped them they are now calling for it to be repealed . Wonder if they have leart that if there are less participating in the voting then they don't need to convince as many people to win

AKA : J.W.B won with only 35% of the vote not 51% of the population .And look where that lead he only had to convince 30-40% of the people as only 70% voted . Easy to win when you don't need to convince 30% of the people to vote for you .

---

Mister Gooba Gaba you are forgetting the permafrost of Siberia and northern Canada and that is melting so the Methane Hydrates are not just at the bottom of the ocean...

Please AussieTheScienceMan, I Don't Forget, I Leave Out On Purpose. Besides, Big Daddy PolarVortex will Take Care of The Permafrost in The Frozen North.

Extremist Said: '____________________________________________________'

Dr. HOHUM Yawns.

' '

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

Clyde, that report has been posted here before. Those that have large sums invested in the CO2 lobby position poo-poo any report that says man did it, but not by CO2. Unfortunately, their lobby seems to be as unbiased as a fossil fuel person is in their eyes.

As others have said, I have no doubt man can globally influence the climate of earth. I also have no doubt man has influenced the climate. However I have serious doubts as to how man did this or that there is a single overwhelming method that man did to influence it. Such statements are seen as heresy by the CO2 lobby a/k/a warmists.

---

... As others have said, I have no doubt man can globally influence the climate of earth. I also have no doubt man has influenced the climate. However I have serious doubts as to how man did this or that there is a single overwhelming method that man did to influence it. Such statements are seen as heresy by the CO2 lobby a/k/a warmists.

What is this? You softening your stance?

As for the excess CO2 in our atmosphere, you just need to look at the isotope mix to see where it came from... And the isotope mix clearly shows the added CO2 to be from what our industry has burnt over the last two hundred years. Worryingly, the greater proportion is from merely since WWII.


And let me guess your next claim is that we are all too late to clean up our act and that we are already cooked?...

Well, we have time yet. The question becomes how soon vs how much extra-costly later.


Meanwhile, the methane hydrates are a very dangerous joker to gamble for our atmosphere and planet... Just one example is that a shift in the gulf stream could warm places not warmed for thousands of years to then melt and release those thousands of years of accumulated methane hydrates... Somewhat of a reckless gamble beyond the atmospheric gamble already being played onwards...



All on our only one planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

I don't know if you were breast fed but probably not.

Now, there's no need for that!

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

hey Goba Gaba the poler vortex is over north America , Alaska , not Siberia so it's not freezing as much as it is where the poler vortex is .

So we still gota worry about the methane being released it that part of the world .

---

What is this? You softening your stance?

Been my stance all along. You may have just opened your eyes for the first time.

---

Glenn, PJ and Gary...

Care to comment on these previous posts:

While searching for the data that showed the Medieval Climate Optimum of about 1000 years ago was about 2ºC warmer than the last 2000 year average temperature, and the Little Ice Age of 500 or so years ago was about 2ºC cooler, I happened on a new bit of research that casts doubt on our ability to seperate GHG-AGW effects from natural variability over this time period.

Abstract:

According to the early anthropogenic hypothesis, land clearing and agriculture caused emissions of greenhouse gases to begin to alter climate as early as 7000 years ago (Ruddiman, 2003). Climate-model simulations based on the CO2 and CH4 concentrations proposed in the hypothesis suggest that humans caused a global mean warming of 0.9 to 1.5°C before the start of the industrial era. Additional pre-industrial effects on land surface reflectance (changes in albedo resulting from forest clearance) may have cooled climate enough to cancel 0.2 to 0.3°C of this warming effect, leaving a net early anthropogenic warming contribution of between 0.7°C and 1.2°C. This proposed early anthropogenic warming is comparable with, and likely larger than, the measured 0.85°C warming during the last 150 years. If the simulations based on the early anthropogenic hypothesis are correct, total anthropogenic warming has been twice or more the industrial amount registered to date.

And the following link:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/climate-science-is-not-settled-1411143565?mod=WSJ_hp_RightTopStories

Yes, CLYDE...

'Warmism' is such a religion nowadays that they can't even accept a strong statement of support from a scientist because he is one of their 'Devils' (former employee of 'Big Oil').

Also the 'Warmists' complain when their OWN methods are applied to sources of anthropogenic CO2 emissions OTHER than 'fossil fuel use'.

One of the hallmarks of Religion is the blind acceptance of logical inconsistencies in the belief system in question.

If one does not blindly accept the Warmist Dogma, one is labeled a 'Denier' (similar to the old heretic label), and the Warmists are even angling to have 'Deniers' jailed (modern version of 'Burning at the Stake').

Nobody Expects the Spanish Warmist Inquisition!

MethaneMan said:

hey Goba Gaba the poler vortex is over north America , Alaska , not Siberia so it's not freezing as much as it is where the poler vortex is .

As You Know MethaneMan, The Northern Polar Vortex CIRCLES The Pole and Siberia has 'its' OWN VORTEX To Cool Thangs Down. So, Go Cut Out A Hunk of Perma fO yO Collection, and Relax.

Dr.HOHUM Rolls His Eyes Again and In The Upward Roll, Looks To Heaven and Asks: 'Geezy Peezy, 'is' This Dude fO Real?

HOHUM. Someone Else 'is' Banging Their Head Against A Lava DRum DRum.

''

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

Glenn, PJ and Gary...

Care to comment on these previous posts:

While searching for the data that showed the Medieval Climate Optimum of about 1000 years ago was about 2ºC warmer than the last 2000 year average temperature, and the Little Ice Age of 500 or so years ago was about 2ºC cooler, I happened on a new bit of research that casts doubt on our ability to seperate GHG-AGW effects from natural variability over this time period.

Abstract:

According to the early anthropogenic hypothesis, land clearing and agriculture caused emissions of greenhouse gases to begin to alter climate as early as 7000 years ago (Ruddiman, 2003). Climate-model simulations based on the CO2 and CH4 concentrations proposed in the hypothesis suggest that humans caused a global mean warming of 0.9 to 1.5°C before the start of the industrial era. Additional pre-industrial effects on land surface reflectance (changes in albedo resulting from forest clearance) may have cooled climate enough to cancel 0.2 to 0.3°C of this warming effect, leaving a net early anthropogenic warming contribution of between 0.7°C and 1.2°C. This proposed early anthropogenic warming is comparable with, and likely larger than, the measured 0.85°C warming during the last 150 years. If the simulations based on the early anthropogenic hypothesis are correct, total anthropogenic warming has been twice or more the industrial amount registered to date.

And the following link:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/climate-science-is-not-settled-1411143565?mod=WSJ_hp_RightTopStories

Clyde, Kudos for actually doing the search. ;o)
To be honest, I think we are actually on the same page but there are a lot of 'chicken little' proponents looking for worst possible scenario. Sea level IS rising, it's probably natural and normal, just slightly accelerated by human action

---

I'm not a complete idiot, but, I'm working on it.
I have an opinion and I'm not afraid to use it

Can someone please explain what is causing this in Siberia .....



If not Methane then what is doing this ?

Notice all the dirt around it . It's been blown out so can't be a sink hole !

I wait in anticipation on the excuses form the Brainiac dieners whom accuse me of ignoring facts .

---

MethaneMan says:

Can someone please explain what is causing this in Siberia .....

Sorry MethaneMan, Not A Methane Explosion

The Siberian Hole. Oh Yeah, 'it's' ONLY 100 Feet Across and 130 Deep

"For now we can say for sure that under the influence of internal processes there was an ejection in the permafrost," Plekhanov said. "I want to stress that it was not an explosion, but an ejection, so there was no heat released as it happened."

That would seem to support the theory held by Dr. Chris Fogwill, a polar scientist at the University of New South Wales. Fogwill told the Sydney Morning Herald that he believes the crater formed due to a geological formation called a hydrolacccolith, or pingo. According to Fogwill, a pingo is just a large chunk of ice that forms into a small hillside. Eventually, that ice can push through the earth, and when it melts, leave behind a large hole, similar to the one discovered in Siberia.

I Like This Hole.


Gooba Gabba

' '

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

Excuse no.1 Thanks Clyde

---

I did not say it was a explosion i said it blow out which is not a explosion i did not say any thing about there being heat either .

Your explanation is a fair one so i will give you cudos for that .

However look again at the sides they slop in ward , if it is what you say then it would not have sides that slop inwards . Only some sort of ejection would do that , so it would look more like a sink hole than a ejection of some thing .

Maybe that Ozzie needs to look a bit harder at it .

Edit: Excuse no.2

---

MethaneMan Says:

However look again at the sides they slop in ward , if it is what you say then it would not have sides that slop inwards . Only some sort of ejection would do that , so it would look more like a sink hole than a ejection of some thing .

Alright, I've Had 'it' with you. You Are A Frickin' Idiot.

Play Your Game Here, I'm Withdrawing from Communicating to your Idiot Posts.

Play On Whacko.

' '

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

Clyde are you serious your asking me what ozzie !

give you a clue New South Wales is my home state which is in Australia and the man studying at the uni of N.S.W must be a resident of our country or he would not be working here and therefor i call him a ozzie .

---

Oww Gooba Gaba don't get the poo poo's because you lose the argument mate .

And you would also need to explain the methane chart i put up if we don't have to worry about Methane releases .

Unless you want me to believe all the cows and sheep around the world suddenly Fart and belch at the same time and that explains the sudden release ?

---