To all you glowbull whiner warm mongering doomsdayers:
STOP SCARING MY KIDS YOU FREAKS!
The theory is dead because:
It's 23 years old so time's up.
La Nina is stronger than all the magical forces of glowbullwarming.
It's cooling.
And when consultants in white lab coats you obedient greenzis call "scientists", PR firms, pandering politicians and corporate media all agree on ANYTHING, be suspect, very suspect.
This cultural fad of modern day witch burning will be viewed in history as another WMD scam from hell.
You evil misery loving lefties who naturally cling to fear and victimizing are being childishly selfish in you hopes for the END OF THE WORLD.
History will laugh and curse you all warmies.
If you pathetic cry babies love the planet so much, at least be happy that the climate crisis never arrived after a quarter of a century of warnings and celebrate Rachel Carson's accomplishments and work to PRESERVE, not SAVE and RESCUE our poor little helpless 5 billion year old planet froma a non existent crisis with needless fear and ignorance.
Lead environmentalism down the RESPONSIBLE road, not your cave man like road of fear back into a the dark age of thinking.
Get ahead of the curve because the tide is turning quickly.

Fascinating rant mememine69

La Nina is a strong forcing, certainly. Increases in Co2 just increases the global temperature of all the other naturally occuring phenomena, but does not replace them. Normal forcings still occur, it's just Co2 is often stronger.

It is warming, not cooling. Cite data or retract. 1998 was an exceptionally hot La Nina year, so only picking one year for your data set is cherrypicking. EG: It's as if you just said the GFC has gone away because Australia avoided a "technical recession". ;-)

Have you met any climate scientists? Have you read how many independent climate organisations have studied this separately from all the others? Have you got any idea how much money a GENUINE scientific book that ACTUALLY finally disproves global warming would make? Have you any idea how COMPETETIVE scientists can be, like any other profession, out to make their own mark on the world by disproving the dominant paradigms and make their name and careers?

I personally do not hope for the END OF THE WORLD but do see the potential for the end of this civilisation's prosperity and "business as usual".

"History will laugh and curse you all" **sceptics**... is what I think you meant to say. ;-)

Your cave man accusations are just ridiculous: most greenies I know are arguing for more rail, renewable energy, some rezoning of our cities, recycling, and maybe a little redesigning. The average European uses half the oil of the average American (or Australian for that matter) but are they "cave men?" It's about living smarter, not retreating to the cave.

But go ahead, have a good rant. Just don't try submitting this visual chewing-gum to the scientific review process, you don't really have any ammo in your clip there pal.

"The theory is dead because:
It's 23 years old so time's up."

Shouldn't that be over a 100 years?

"La Nina is stronger than all the magical forces of glowbullwarming.
It's cooling."

Hey mememine - I'm trying not to giggle insanely but thanks for the humour anyway. Psst...poor little Nina died last year:

3 June 2009 - BOM:

"All international climate modes predict further warming of the Pacific Ocean SST, with the majority of the models forecasting the development of El Niño conditions later in 2009.

"The probability of the development of an El Niño event in 2009 is now much higher than one month ago and it is significantly higher than the climatological probability of about 20-25%. Recent forecasts from the POAMA model, run daily at the Bureau of Meteorology, show a steady warming with El Niño conditions developing by mid-winter. Pacific conditions and model predictions will continue to be monitored closely for any further indications of an event."

Sad little chap aren't you mememine! Is it merely ignorance, or is truth irrelevant to you?

You warmies wish for this misery despite waiting through 23 years of the UN"s theory and 19 IPCC reports. Oh look, no climate crisis. Now who is crazy?
History will not be kind to you pathetic Doomsdayers. You modern day witch burners and climate pussies expect our climate to be like the inside of an indoor shopping mall?
Climate Change IS real indeed yes!!
It's also known as weather. Get over it and stop scaring my kids you cowardly freaks.
Protect our world, not save it with needless fear from a false crisis that has distracted us from real pollution.
Glowbull Warming, the new WMD scam.

Mememine69 is expressing significant frustration that appears to be on the increase in the public domain. Rather than attempting to understand this feeling, Protagoras describes this as a “fascinating rant”. To quote Q&A, “pot meet kettle”.

There is no doubt that the debate has reached an acrimonious stand off, we have Al gore, hooray! We have Ian Plimer, boo! There is the IPCC, hooray! We have the NIPCC, boo!

Even Q&A agrees that the public debate is not about science, logically that has to be true because we are not qualified scientists. Some are of course, like Ian Plimer and Q&A who are geologists, but because they are qualified scientists, they cannot be public domain. So do we “believe” Plimer or do we believe Q&A? Since they, like the rest of the scientific community, cannot agree, we can self evidently conclude that the science is not settled.

So where does that leave the unqualified public? Even within scientific academia the rivalry is evident as they publicly attack each others’ credibility. Q&A starts off as an equal with Ian Plimer; Q&A then presents his credentials as better than those of Plimer and finishes with the suggestion that Plimer has << done a disservice to science and to the community at large >>. How on earth can the public get past this contrary scientific opinion and the academic rivalry?

It would be great if we could nominate these two as our “champions” for the opposing opinions. Since we are not qualified to “fight” this contest, why can’t Plimer vs. Q&A be on the Billboard?

Each could nominate say 20 issues for debate and formally respond to each other. There are plenty of fans on OLO to support our nominees and we might learn much. How about it? Put the money where the mouth is.

mememine69

The world isn't going to end - it will do very well with or without homo sapiens. Just that we are going to run out of fossil fuels and we are polluting everything and we can't continue this indefinitely. We need to change our M.O.

Please listen to following talk:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2009/2592909.htm