Limbaugh claims that "global warming is a lie; global cooling is in full swing"
June 15, 2009 2:52 pm ET
From the June 15 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
I mean, has Rush suddenly become an environmentalist overnight?
Somehow I doubt it.
If a glacier grows, it is "despite" global warming. If a glacier shrinks, it is "caused by" global warming.
Junk science.
This is what you guys seem to fail to understand. It is possible for somewhere to be cooler, and somewhere to be warmer, and then when you average it all out (remember, global), it shows data of warming greater than expected.
...one of only a few...
Unfortunately, this doesn't support the point you seem to be vainly trying to make.
Reverse it....there you go.
Um... yes? And? When objects fall, they do so because of gravity. When they float or rise, they do so despite gravity. Are you claiming that gravitation is junk science?
They can't explain why it happens. They cannot prove that global warming doesn't exist, nor can they disprove it. It's an interesting article, BUT IT'S NOT SCIENCE.
The "this" to which Rivera is referring is the expansion of one glacier while total global glacial mass is decreasing. "This" is not climate change.
So when you "say they can't explain why it happens", you're right about this specific glacier. When you say "they cannot prove that global warming doesn't exist, nor can they disprove it", that's where you're straying. Every scientific claim is, of course, subject to potential falsification.
But are you seriously suggesting that scientists haven't measured warmer average global temperatures over the last century?
And when you say "IT'S NOT SCIENCE", you seem to be trying to speak simultaneously of the article and the scientific research being done on that glacier and of global climatology in general all at once. The article is, of course, not science. But that has nothing to do with the scientific validity of the research conducted on the glacier or on the global climate.
they've even changed their rhetoric to 'climate change' and dropped the global warming charade.
many of you in here have forgotten the term intellectual dishonesty.
And finally, FACT: if George Will, GHWB, Bill O'Reilly or some other GOP stalwart were championing climate change instead of Al Gore, every Republican would be an adamant supporter. GOP denial is just political vitriol for who is championing the message. Me? I back SCIENCE, not politics.
Randy
A FACT? Really? Nice projection.
I've had the same thought my self. Brought on by complaints that its all a con to make lots of money for liberals. Clinging to industry paid opinions while ignoring reputable (climatologist) sources. If you throw out the evil liberal parts of their arguments, there's very little left over.
Do you really want Americans to DIE, jpeagle21, tbone, etc. If so, keep arguing junk science and keep right on deying reality. At least the military brass and the liberal majority is on the ball to save your a**.
1) CO2 IS a greehouse gas. (This has been known since the 1800's)
2) We pump millions of tons of it into the atmosphere. (Not in disupte.)
3) We continue to deforrest (not in dispute) and as the ocean's PH livel rises (it has) it also has less ability to remove CO2 form the air. So we put more and more out there, and we reduce the environments ability to remove it.
4) The warming trend predicted by points 1-3 has been observed of the past 100 years, acceperating more in the past 50, and even more the past 20.
The scientific debate is not about the casue, and has not been for some time, but rather about how long we have to fix it, and how long before it's a full-blown catastrophe.
Your junk science will never reconcile your conclusions with those facts. Your wrong. Ignorance is not a point of view.
http://www.skepdic.com/climateskeptics.html
Ri-ight. Here's a crazy suggestion: rather than listen to "the loons", let's pay attention to, oh, I don't know, maybe the science of climatology?
I assume you're referring to record high temperatures in 1998 which were the result of a strong El Nino event. If you look at the linear trend of annual average temperatures since then, you'll find that the Earth is still warming over time.
The scholarship in this book demonstrates overwhelming scientific support for the position that the warming of the twentieth century was moderate and not unprecedented, that its impact on human health and wildlife was positive, and that carbon dioxide probably is not the driving factor behind climate change.
The authors cite thousands of peer-reviewed research papers and books that were ignored by the IPCC, plus additional scientific research that became available after the IPCC’s self-imposed deadline of May 2006.
THE oceans have remained alkaline during the Phanerozoic (last 540 million years) except for a very brief and poorly understood time 55 million years ago.
Rainwater (pH 5.6) reacts with the most common minerals on Earth (feldspars) to produce clays, this is an acid consuming reaction, alkali and alkaline earths are leached into the oceans (which is why we have saline oceans), silica is redeposited as cements in sediments, the reaction consumes acid and is accelerated by temperature (see below).
In the oceans, there is a buffering reaction between the sea floor basalts and sea water (see below). Sea water has a local and regional variation in pH (pH 7.8 to 8.3). It should be noted that pH is a log scale and that if we are to create acid oceans, then there is not enough CO2 in fossil fuels to create oceanic acidity because most of the planet’s CO2 is locked up in rocks.
When we run out of rocks on Earth or plate tectonics ceases, then we will have acid oceans.
In the Precambrian, it is these reactions that rapidly responded to huge changes in climate (-40 deg C to +50 deg C), large sea level changes (+ 600m to -640m) and rapid climate shifts over a few thousand years from ’snowball’ or ’slushball’ Earth to very hot conditions (e.g. Neoproterozoic cap carbonates that formed in water at ~50 deg C lie directly on glacial rocks). During these times, there were rapid changes in oceanic pH and CO2 was removed from the oceans as carbonate. It is from this time onwards (750 Ma) that life started to extract huge amounts of CO2 from the oceans, life has expanded and diversified and this process continues (which is why we have low CO2 today.
The history of CO2 and temperature shows that there is no correlation.
Ask your local warmer:
1. Why was CO2 15 times higher than now in the Ordovician-Silurian glaciation?
2. Why were both methane and CO2 higher than now in the Permian glaciation?
3. Why was CO2 5 times higher than now in the Cretaceous-Jurassic glaciation?
The process of removing CO2 from the atmosphere via the oceans has led to carbonate deposition (i.e. CO2 sequestration).
The atmosphere once had at least 25 times the current CO2 content, we are living at a time when CO2 is the lowest it has been for billions of years, we continue to remove CO2 via carbonate sedimentation from the oceans and the oceans continue to be buffered by water-rock reactions (as shown by Walker et al. 1981).
The literature on this subject is large yet the warmers chose to ignore this literature.
These feldspar and silicate buffering reactions are well understood, there is a huge amount of thermodynamic data on these reactions and they just happened to be omitted from argument by the warmers.
When ocean pH changes, the carbon species responds and in more acid oceans CO2 as a dissolved gas becomes more abundant.
Royer, D. L., Berner, R. A. and Park, J. 2007: Climate sensitivity constrained by CO2 concentrations over the past 420 million years. Nature 446: 530-532.
Bice, K. L., Huber, B. T. and Norris, R. D. 2003: Extreme polar warmth during the Cretaceous greenhouse? Paradox of Turonian ∂18O record at Deep Sea Drilling Project Site 511. Palaeoceanography 18:1-11.
Veizer, J., Godderis, Y. and Francois, L. M. 2000: Evidence for decoupling of atmospheric CO2 and global climate during the Phanerozoic eon. Nature 408: 698-701.
Donnadieu, Y., Pierehumbert, R., Jacob, R. and Fluteau, F. 2006: Cretaceous climate decoupled from CO2 evolution. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 248: 426-437.
Hay, W. W., Wold, C. N., Soeding, E. and Floegel, S. 2001: Evolution of sediment fluxes and ocean salinity. In: Geologic modeling and simulation: sedimentary systems (Eds Merriam, D. F. and Davis, J. C.), Kluwer, 163-167.
Knauth, L. P. 2005: Temperature and salinity history of the Precambrian ocean: implications for the course of microbial evolution. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 219: 53-69.
Rogers, J. J. W. 1996: A history of the continents in the past three billion years. Journal of Geology 104: 91-107.
Velbel, M. A. 1993: Temperature dependence of silicate weathering in nature: How strong a negative feedback on long-term accumulation of atmospheric CO2 and global greenhouse warming? Geology 21:1059-1061
Kump, L. R., Brantley, S. L. and Arthur, M. A. 2000: Chemical weathering, atmospheric CO2 and climate. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 28: 611-667.
Gaillardet, J., Dupré, B., Louvat, P. and Allègre, C. J. 1999: Global silicate weathering and CO2 consumption rates deduced from the chemistry of large rivers. Chemical Geology 159: 3-30.
Berner, R. A., Lasagna, A. C. and Garrels, R. M. 1983: The carbonate-silicate geochemical cycle and its effect on atmospheric carbon dioxide over the past 100 million years. American Journal of Science 283: 641-683.
Raymo, M. E. and Ruddiman, W. F. 1992: Tectonic forcing of late Cenozoic climate. Nature 359: 117-122.
Walker, J. C. B., Hays, P. B. and Kasting, J. F. 1981: A negative feedback mechanism for the long term stabilization of the Earth’s surface temperature. Journal of Geophysical Research 86: 9776-9782.
Berner, R. A. 1980: Global CO2 degassing and the carbon cycle: comment on ‘Cretaceous ocean crust at DSDP sites 417 and 418: carbon uptake from weathering vs loss by magmatic activity.” Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 54: 2889.
Schwartzman, D. W. and Volk, T. 1989: Biotic enhancement of weathering and the habitability of Earth. Nature 311: 45-47.
Berner, R. A. 1980: Global CO2 degassing and the carbon cycle: comment on ‘Cretaceous ocean crust at DSDP sites 417 and 418: carbon uptake from weathering vs loss by magmatic activity.” Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 54: 2889.