http://news.yahoo.com/worlds-hottest-temperature-declared-130739700.html You get your "scientific data" from these sources over several decades, but the data is never scrutinized...its just accepted as fact. Only because this temperature set a record was it scrutinized and found false (and it only took them 90 years to check it out). How many other records would be found inaccurate if they were all double checked? I mean, if they make a mistake on the worlds highest recorded temperature, what are the odds they are a few degrees off on regular normal temperatures?
LOS ANGELES (MCT) â Arctic sea ice is shrinking at a rate much faster than scientists ever predicted and its collapse, due to global warming, may well cause extreme weather this winter in North America and Europe, according to climate scientists. Last month, researchers announced that Arctic sea ice had dwindled to the smallest size ever observed by man, covering almost half the area it did 30 years ago, when satellites and submarines first began measuring it. http://www.morrisdailyherald.com/20...ctic-ice-may-trigger-extreme-weather/a84bkzl/
They meant for the records to be inaccurate and show global warming. How else are they supposed to ask for more research money?
well, then there's a 50-50 chance they're right... or how about, if they're right, it could be a disaster, but if they're wrong, what have we really lost? a little money perhaps i don't see the big deal at least being a little concerned, about our little planet too much politics, it seems i admit, i'm a democrat at heart, so i do lean towards the planet marc
Actually a whole fucking lot more than a little money. Oh I'm more than a little concerned, but overpopulation has far more to do with our problems than fossil fuels and that isn't going to be corrected by carbon taxes either. Jay