Global Warming is all hysteria and a liberal hoax.

* 2007 tied for the hottest year on record. http://www.giss.nasa.gov... Your argument was largely cut and pasted from: http://www.dailytech.com... Global Warming is a general global heating trend, whereas Climate Change is changes in climate due to global warming. Heat changes things. Ocean and air currents are all driven by heat. These currents change as the heat changes. The weather is thrown completely out of whack. So we see things like Baghdad seeing it's first snow in all of recorded history, which in Baghdad, means a hell of a lot. We see extreme cold and extreme hot but we also see average weather as hotter than typical. Global warming is about global average temperature rising. Not about heat waves of cold snaps. http://www.globalwarming101.com... This hasn't been the coldest 12 months in a long time by any measure. In fact, 2007 tied for the hottest year on record. Your cut and pasted claim is, rather measuring the difference between January 2007 and January 2008 and noticing the swing in temperature is massive. This is because January 2007 was HOT. It honestly was balmy and hot whereas this winter is fairly frozen. The weather is fairly random (any old timers want to point out how often you had unusual weather when you were young... about never? Now it's several times a year). It's winter. It gets cold in winter. Last winter it didn't get cold. It was downright warm. Whereas this winter is cold. The difference between a really hot winter and a cold winter is a lot. 2007 is tied for the hottest year on record. Solar activity dropped back in 1985. It dropped and has stayed low... and we've had a decade of record high temperatures. For a few years the trend looked pretty close, but the graphs quickly diverged as the heat shot up and the solar activity dropped. The number of people who believe something doesn't change anything at all. A massive amount of people believe in ghosts and aliens. Cows do not burp propane. That's one of the dumbest things I've heard in a long while. Cows do fart methane and methane is a greenhouse gas. However the nonsense report that it is more responsible than the tons of CO2 is pathetic and wrong. PETA is actually in favor of killing all the cows, and never breeding any more. --- It took about five years for our arctic ice to melt to the feeble amount we have today. That's pretty fast. Suddenly we actually do have a north west passage, and can swim around the north pole. Our climate patterns are haywire. And outside of the Bush appointed leader of NASA the real climate scientists are actual scientists and believe the data. There have been a number of studies about other factors for warming, all of them have come up with only a fraction of what we need to explain the warming we are seeing. Though, there are warming factors like city island effects etc, they aren't crap compared to a massive blanket of CO2. We've run computer models for years and so far they have pretty consistently under-estimated the damage. In fact, we keep underestimating the damage at every turn. The figures from a decade ago about the worst case scenario, which the deniers claimed were only added to make it look *REALLY* scary, are underestimates. The UN report is conservative on most of it's numbers. And Gore point was that if Greenland melted it would release that amount of water. And he's right. He did not in fact say that it would, as the current predictions don't call for Greenland to break up and slide into the ocean. Ten years ago, scientists were saying we would have a sharp rise in temperature. WE HAD A SHARP RISE IN TEMPERATURE! What models did they use for that? The same models which say we're in for more of the same. In a general sense, don't you think that supporting position when the chief scientists in the field disagree with you, should set off a bs detector? Aren't the arguments against the proposition a heck of a lot like arguments for lies? The computers are broken, all the scientists are wrong, it's a conspiracy and they refused to fund the alternative science? I mean, the anti-vaxers, the HIV deniers, the creationists... really think about it... the arguments are pretty well the same. There is a massive conspiracy for some reason which results in the foremost scientists in the field being wrong, all evidence is explained away as being this or that, and a lot of anecdotal stories about some supposed flaws are tossed around. In reality, the underlying science to the greenhouse effect is pretty clear. * CO2 is a greenhouse gas. * We are releasing huge amounts of CO2. * Greenhouse gases work to retain heat (much like a greenhouse). * The global temperature is rising. -- Skeptical Inquirer, July/August, Volume 31, Issue 4 Pg. 40: No scientist to date has made a strong case (i.e., one supported by a large number of his colleagues who publish in the refereed journals) for any observation(s) or mechanism(s) that can explain the current rapid global-warming trend by invoking natural causes. Arguments for solar forcing, for forcing by internal modes of the climate system (natural processes that operate within the Earth system itself), and for the urban heat-island effect, have either failed to offer hard evidence or have been completely discredited. Nor do Earth's long-duration, quasi-periodic, dynamical motions explain the current rapid temperature rise. In contrast, global warming forced by a growing atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide, is based on sound science that refers to a mechanism that is well understood and universally accepted by the scientific community. Models that incorporate this and many other known processes support this conclusion, and the models themselves, while still in need of improvement, are becoming increasingly reliable for making global predictions. The probability is extremely high that human-generated greenhouse gases, with carbon dioxide as the major offender are the primary cause of well-documented global warming and climate change today.