More evidence that global warming is a hoax

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2738653/Stunning-satellite-images-summer-ice-cap-thicker-covers-1-7million-square-kilometres-MORE-2-years-ago-despite-Al-Gore-s-prediction-ICE-FREE-now.html

There was open water at the north pole in 1962... two US subs surfaced and took pictures.

Btw... much of that new ice is on water. That could raise sea levels incase anyone needs a crisis to promote an agenda.

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/1952-shock-news-open-water-at-the-north-pole/

Who could have guessed that we have competent informed scientists among us? LOLOL

Population control is tied to the roots of the agenda... though it's not mentioned in polite company anymore.

People are bad for the earth.

by ZVUGKTUBM Today at 1:58 pm
I have a hard time with the current climate change arguments, and I have a strong science background (BA/MS). My problem is mostly with the political agenda that is hopelessly intertwined with the movement. The powers behind the politics are pursing an agenda of weakening national sovereignty among nations and curtailing individual freedom. This goes hand in glove with the movement to establish a world governing body where no countries exist.
-----
Hell froze over again ... We agree

People are bad for the earth.

There seems to be merit in this simple statement . . . . we need only look at the destruction of our ecosystems, rivers, oceans . . . virtually nothing can escape the endless appetite for satisfying our human 'needs'.

knothead wrote:People are bad for the earth.

There seems to be merit in this simple statement . . . . we need only look at the destruction of our ecosystems, rivers, oceans . . . virtually nothing can escape the endless appetite for satisfying our human 'needs'.

And yet, we are part of Earth's ecosystem.

Markle wrote:

knothead wrote:People are bad for the earth.

There seems to be merit in this simple statement . . . . we need only look at the destruction of our ecosystems, rivers, oceans . . . virtually nothing can escape the endless appetite for satisfying our human 'needs'.

And yet, we are part of Earth's ecosystem.  

And so is the ebola virus.

Wordslinger wrote:

Markle wrote:

knothead wrote:People are bad for the earth.

There seems to be merit in this simple statement . . . . we need only look at the destruction of our ecosystems, rivers, oceans . . . virtually nothing can escape the endless appetite for satisfying our human 'needs'.

And yet, we are part of Earth's ecosystem.  

And so is the ebola virus.

I would think you would support the Ebola virus. After all it wipes out humans and therefore a lesser impact on earth.

Markle wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

Markle wrote:

knothead wrote:People are bad for the earth.

There seems to be merit in this simple statement . . . . we need only look at the destruction of our ecosystems, rivers, oceans . . . virtually nothing can escape the endless appetite for satisfying our human 'needs'.

And yet, we are part of Earth's ecosystem.  

And so is the ebola virus.

I would think you would support the Ebola virus.  After all it wipes out humans and therefore a lesser impact on earth.

That's your problem: incorrect thinking. I'm for birth control and free abortions, not genocide or plagues.

Wordslinger wrote:

Markle wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

Markle wrote:

knothead wrote:People are bad for the earth.

There seems to be merit in this simple statement . . . . we need only look at the destruction of our ecosystems, rivers, oceans . . . virtually nothing can escape the endless appetite for satisfying our human 'needs'.

And yet, we are part of Earth's ecosystem.  

And so is the ebola virus.

I would think you would support the Ebola virus.  After all it wipes out humans and therefore a lesser impact on earth.

That's your problem: incorrect thinking.  I'm for birth control and free abortions, not genocide or plagues.  

How are free abortions anything BUT genocide? They give them free in your beloved Communist China too.

Arctic Ice Cap Expands by 41 Percent in Two Years; Al Gore Thought It Might Be Gone by Now

Ice, ice baby. That's what they have a lot more of in the Arctic.

The UK Daily Mail, one of those British tabloids the left has despised going back to the Clinton administration and its paranoia about a right-wing media conspiracy, reports from authoritative sources — the kind the U.S. establishment press uses when it seems to support the hoax known as human-caused global warming — that the Arctic ice cap has expanded rapidly in the past two years. In doing so, it has made up all of what was lost between 2009 and 2012 with a slight margin to spare. Seven years ago, former Vice President and leading global warming false alarmist Al Gore predicted that "It could be completely gone.

Myth of arctic meltdown: Stunning satellite images show summer ice cap is thicker and covers 1.7million square kilometres MORE than 2 years ago...despite Al Gore's prediction it would be ICE-FREE by now
- Seven years after former US Vice-President Al Gore's warning, Arctic ice cap has expanded for second year in row
- An area twice the size of Alaska - America's biggest state - was open water two years ago and is now covered in ice
- These satellite images taken from University of Illinois's Cryosphere project show ice has become more concentrated

The speech by former US Vice-President Al Gore was apocalyptic. ‘The North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff,’ he said. ‘It could be completely gone in summer in as little as seven years. Seven years from now.’

Those comments came in 2007 as Mr Gore accepted the Nobel Peace Prize for his campaigning on climate change.

But seven years after his warning, The Mail on Sunday can reveal that, far from vanishing, the Arctic ice cap has expanded for the second year in succession – with a surge, depending on how you measure it, of between 43 and 63 per cent since 2012.

To put it another way, an area the size of Alaska, America’s biggest state, was open water two years ago, but is again now covered by ice.

The most widely used measurements of Arctic ice extent are the daily satellite readings issued by the US National Snow and Ice Data Center, which is co-funded by Nasa. These reveal that – while the long-term trend still shows a decline – last Monday, August 25, the area of the Arctic Ocean with at least 15 per cent ice cover was 5.62 million square kilometres.

This was the highest level recorded on that date since 2006 ... and represents an increase of 1.71 million square kilometres over the past two years – an impressive 43 per cent.

Other figures from the Danish Meteorological Institute suggest that the growth has been even more dramatic. Using a different measure, the area with at least 30 per cent ice cover, these reveal a 63 per cent rise – from 2.7 million to 4.4 million square kilometres.

... as well as becoming more extensive, the ice has grown more concentrated, with the purple areas – denoting regions where the ice pack is most dense – increasing markedly.

Crucially, the ice is also thicker, and therefore more resilient to future melting.

In that Nobel acceptance speech, Gore infamously said:

... the earth has a fever. And the fever is rising. The experts have told us it is not a passing affliction that will heal by itself. We asked for a second opinion. And a third. And a fourth. And the consistent conclusion, restated with increasing alarm, is that something basic is wrong.

We are what is wrong, and we must make it right.

No sir. Your assertions are "what is wrong," and the only way to "make it right" is to back away from them and face the truth. Another key element of the truth is that there has been no net global warming, human-caused or otherwise, for 17 years and 10 months.

Sadly, the Daily Mail's dispatch proves that relying on the U.S. establishment press in the hope of being fully informed is a futile enterprise. The chances that they will call out Gore for his fearmongering are between slim and none.

It doesn't matter if climate change is scientific fact or if it's communist-muslim-homosexual-atheist-obama-democrat-progressive-left wing propaganda.

Why?  Because if it is indeed scientific fact, there is never going to be enough will and gumption to make the economic sacrifices to deal with it anyway.

One thing is pretty certain.  Neither rush limbaugh or al gore will live long enough to experience whatever is coming.  They will both live in the lap of energy abundance for the remaining life they have.
And hopefully so will you and I.   But if it is real,  we can't say that about your grandchildren. For them, time will tell.