Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
'Climategate' - A New Angle On Global Warming  
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 6653 times:

I was once told - in a lecture on 'security' - that sending a radio message 'in clear' was the equivalent of sending a letter without bothering to put it in an envelope. And I think most of us realise that sending an email is even LESS secure.

But not, apparently, the scientists at the British University of East Anglia, who are deeply involved in the 'climate change industry.' They sent hundreds of emails to each other hatching plans to falsify and distort their research findings, and even suppress results which did not support their case - their claims that not only is 'global warming' occurring at a rapidly-increasing rate, but that there is no shadow of doubt that it is 'man-made,' rather than a natural phenomenon.

Some hundreds of their emails were duly hacked, and have now been published in full. The Head of the University's Climatic Research Unit, Professor Phil Jones, has already been stood down; and further academic 'scalps' will undoubtedly follow.

Many of the emails appear to be concerned with getting round the inconvenient fact that global temperatures appear not actually to have been increasing during the last ten years or so. Significant quotes are:-

"I've just completed Mike's Nature [the science journal] trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie, from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."

"I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow %u2014 even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"

"The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't... Our observing system is inadequate."

"Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise."


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/env...s-the-most-contentious-quotes.html

Plenty more on the net if you do a search.

Topical issue here in Australia, where, within the last couple of days, we just narrowly escaped a multi-billion-dollar additional taxation programme on carbon generation in all its forms (by the skin of our teeth, it was literally just a matter of a very few votes not going the government's way in the Senate).

My own position on 'global warming' has always been that it is high time the world made a determined effort to restrain, and if possible reduce, levels of atmospheric pollution, because of the health risks; but that I have never been at all sure that it is the result of 'global warming' (merely because it is an historical fact that the world has experienced many pretty substantial variations in temperatures, both ways, over the centuries). As recently as the early 19th. Century, for example, people used to skate on the River Thames in London (which has never frozen over in living memory) every winter, while during the same period Royal Navy explorers were pictured walking around on icefloes in the Northwest Passage in their ordinary uniforms.

Anyway, the emails appear to confirm what most of us probably sensed long ago - that a 'global warming industry' has grown up, and that (like all other industries) it has produced the usual proportion of crooks and charlatans on both sides of the argument...........

[Edited 2009-12-04 08:21:14]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
208 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6631 times:



Quoting NAV20 (Thread starter):
that sending a radio message 'in clear' was the equivalent of sending a letter without bothering to put it in an envelope.

Aren't they called "postcards"? Having a good time on vacation wish you were here? wink   duck 

Quoting NAV20 (Thread starter):
Anyway, the emails appear to confirm what most of us probably sensed long ago - that a 'global warming industry' has grown up, and that (like all other industries) it has produced the usual proportion of crooks and charlatans on both sides of the argument...........

As I prepare to go out and brush the snow off my trucks windshield in preperation to leave for work several hours early due to the unprecedented 2nd straight snowfall in as many years here in Houston, Texas I shall ponder your post to take my mind off all those idiots that think that 4X4 means "exempt from laws of physics"!!  cold 


User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8942 posts, RR: 40
Reply 2, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6627 times:

This is a decent op-ed from one of the scientists whose email was stolen:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB3000...48704107104574571613215771336.html


We'll see how this develops, but I agree with much of what he says. As I've heard numerous times before, everyone is bias, no exceptions. Everyone knows to expect oil companies and the like to be bias in their self-interest, but one should never assume the other lobby, regardless of who they work for, to be free of bias. I think the difference here is that it's pretty obvious which way oil companies would lean. When it comes to publicly-funded research, it isn't so clear cut because it can literally lean in any way.



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently onlineDerico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4297 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6622 times:

I think it's pretty childish for people to just act like an ostriche and bury their head in the sands based on a couple of emails. Or to score political points.

I've never believed in the outright alarmism or hysteria of global warming, but I do think human activities affect the world, either climatically, or in terms of pollution, health, etc.

To me you have two very political sides: one that's anti-development, and used ''Global Warming'', to stop all kinds of development economically. And now you have a new reactionary wing that uses Global Warming as a conspiratorial concept to try to destroy any environmental safeguards.

Right now, there is no happy medium were economics are considered in a comprehensive way alongside protecting finite resources and human (and yes, animal), wellbeing. It's all about pointing fingers and ideology. Ridiculous.



My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
User currently offlineArrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2676 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6602 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting NAV20 (Thread starter):
My own position on 'global warming' has always been that it is high time the world made a determined effort to restrain, and if possible reduce, levels of atmospheric pollution, because of the health risks; but that I have never been at all sure that it is the result of 'global warming' (merely because it is an historical fact that the world has experienced many pretty substantial variations in temperatures, both ways, over the centuries).

That pretty well sums up my position on this, too. But I'm not at all surprised by what is now coming out from the "scientific" community embroiled in what has become more of a religious debate than a scientific debate. The commitment to scientific method developed over more than 100 years has been largely abandoned in favour of PR and advocacy.

As a journalist, I've seen this happen in everything from environmental studies on logging effects to sea lice infestations of fish farms. It's all done under the rubric of "the end justifies the means" and that has now replaced scientific method in discourse. It makes it impossible for uneducated louts like me to know who to trust and believe any more.

I think it is exceedingly healthy that this is being exposed for all to see, and one can hope that out of it will come a return to the true principles of scientific method. One can also hope that the move to reduce energy consumption and therefore a whole range of pollutants will also continue -- that is a good thing in itself.

Quoting DXing (Reply 1):
I shall ponder your post to take my mind off all those idiots that think that 4X4 means "exempt from laws of physics"!!

Thanks for my laugh of the day. We don't agree on much, but on this you're right on the money. And on the same theme, Whistler/Blackcomb opened in mid-November this year, two weeks early, and had a total of 560 cm of snow (about 20 feet) for a record November snowfall. Must be warm snow.



Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5977 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6590 times:

Please read the following, it provides a bit of insight to what the emails are discussing and what the explanations for them are.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack/
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...ives/2009/11/the-cru-hack-context/
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/wheres-the-data/
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...ves/2009/12/cru-hack-more-context/

Personally I think it's a new low in the history of science, that one side have stooped so low as to employ illegal methods just to win the argument. One thing that is worth pointing out, is that since the emails are purportedly a random selection, that means someone must have gone through them and picked out the emails, data etc. that they wanted to present. In other words, we're not getting the whole lot.


User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6586 times:

Nav 20 that is a great post ...not because we agree but because it is logical. Look I don't want factories pumping out pollution either , I want us to be responsible stewards of the earth. I just don't agree that we need to go to a over arching "state" regulatory mandate system and increase taxes to do it.

I concede that some laws are required ... but if we let them run wild they will be seriously hampering industry and raising the costs of doing business.

The global warming cabal in a nutshell is trying to do one thing ... kill small and medium size industry. They want to raise the costs so that only huge multinational corps can afford to play . They know that they can control large multinationals with unions and lobbyists... that is the program. Al Gore wants every corporation in the world to pay him funny money every time they want to expand or add capability.... its a mafioso program ..period.



You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
User currently onlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8400 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6566 times:



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 6):
I just don't agree that we need to go to a over arching "state" regulatory mandate system and increase taxes to do it.

It seems like you don't acknowledge that cutting Co2, and increasing forestry is probably necessary to save the world.

The nice thing about this issue is, it will work out. Eventually the facts will come out (one way or another) and we will do whatever is necessary.

But, if we all do decide Co2 is a major problem, then of course the govt will "tax" it because that is how people control pollution. Bush's "voluntary reductions" idea was cute but has no hope of actually working. Govt regulation has done wonders to decrease pollution worldwide. We forget how successful the concept is. It is what keeps us safe, and yet some people deride this as a "tax" or "intrusion" or whatever. Exactly, that's what a government is. It governs.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19378 posts, RR: 58
Reply 8, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6550 times:

This is all very concerning. Science is based on facts. When you have to lie to make your point, then you poison all science, everywhere.

That said, the fact that this happened does not make global warming invalid. It simply adds to the confusion.

The fact remains that we are pulling vast quantities of carbon out of the ground, where it has not been part of the ecosphere for hundreds of millions of years, and we are dumping it back into the ecosphere. At the same time, we are inhibiting the ecosphere's ability to buffer that carbon by deforestation.

Furthermore, it is obvious to even the casual observer that the climate is changing all over the world. In Southeastern Michigan, it was typical every year when I was 12 and younger to go cross-country skiing on local lakes, and for snow to fall in large quantities around late November/early December and stick until March. Today, the lakes rarely freeze over and when they do, not enough for safe walking. Similar observations have been made all over the world. Glaciers are receding faster than they are advancing, ice shelves in the Antarctic are perilously close to breaking off, and the levels of Arctic ice during the summer are decreasing.

Whether carbon dioxide is as much of a contributor to global warming as we thought, it will still be important for us to control it. But we also do have to investigate the real cause of this climate change. The change is real. Nobody can deny that. This whole controversy muddies the cause, however.


User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 16
Reply 9, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6544 times:



Quoting Flighty (Reply 7):
then of course the govt will "tax" it because that is how people control pollution.

 redflag  No , the fed sets standards and passes laws if the people and their Representatives support it. We do not tax in order to change behavior.... that is another left wing idea that is totally contrary to the constitution. If you believe that , then any cause deemed proper by the federal government can be taxed into policy rather than constitutional procedures being followed.

In other words ... would you support a right wing tax on abortions or gay marriage.? See my point ? Say the right wing takes power and says , sure you can get a abortion but its going to cost you 25% more tax ? Would that be good ? Policy though taxation is wrong!



You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
User currently offlineMrocktor From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1668 posts, RR: 50
Reply 10, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6542 times:



Quoting CPH-R (Reply 5):
Please read the following, it provides a bit of insight to what the emails are discussing and what the explanations for them are.

Please disclose that RealClimate.com is the site belonging to the people implicated in fraud according to the emails disclosed. Citing it as a source without that disclaimer could lead to people here thinking you are trying to deceive them.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):
This is all very concerning. Science is based on facts. When you have to lie to make your point, then you poison all science, everywhere.

 checkmark 

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):
At the same time, we are inhibiting the ecosphere's ability to buffer that carbon by deforestation.

Not true. New growth is a net CO2 sink, where old growth is at best CO2 neutral (decomposition of biomass puts out CO2).

There are plenty of good reasons to not pollute (and I mean actual polutants - stuff that causes harm, not CO2), and plenty of good reasons not to cut down forests willy nilly. No need to engage in pseudo-science to support the efficient use of resources.


User currently offlineAvent From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6497 times:



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 9):
We do not tax in order to change behavior....

Yes we do - alcohol and tobacco being examples that both republican and democrat administrations regularly increase both for revenue and usage control reasons.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19378 posts, RR: 58
Reply 12, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6490 times:



Quoting Mrocktor (Reply 10):

Not true. New growth is a net CO2 sink, where old growth is at best CO2 neutral (decomposition of biomass puts out CO2).

New growth buffers more CO2 than old growth, but old growth still does buffer some. Or so I was taught in my college eco classes. Certainly, deforestation is not helping the process, especially when a lot of that wood is being burned.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 9):
We do not tax in order to change behavior....

We don't? That's news to me. And here I thought alcohol and tobacco taxes had something to do with it. Let alone tax breaks for couples with kids...


User currently offlineArrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2676 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6485 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 12):
New growth buffers more CO2 than old growth, but old growth still does buffer some. Or so I was taught in my college eco classes. Certainly, deforestation is not helping the process, especially when a lot of that wood is being burned.

Old growth is considered carbon-neutral -- takes in about the same as it puts out, and the older it gets the more it puts out. Newly planted forests are good carbon sinks for about 150 years (depending on species, geography etc.).

You're right -- if the wood is being burned that takes all that carbon built up over decades and pumps it back into the atmosphere in hours. If, on the other hand, it is used for lumber, then a well-run, sustainable forestry operation can generate carbon credits by aggressively replanting what it logs -- which is what happens here. General rule of thumb in BC is four trees are planted for every one cut down.

Deforestation occurs when you knock down the forest and build a shopping centre, or turn the land over to agriculture. That's a problem.



Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
User currently onlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8400 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6484 times:



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 9):
would you support a right wing tax on abortions or gay marriage.? See my point ?

No... a tax is an ok way to augment the accounting for the "true" financial picture. If there were a financial reason to talk about taxing gay marriage (fact is, it's already taxed because gays are treated unequally by tax laws AFAIK), then fine.

We tax cigarettes. Partly on the rationale that they increase health care costs (although that is untrue).

It is about accounting. If you damage the environment, someone else has to clean it up (if the law so declares). So, to keep an even balance sheet you need to pay for cleanup. Otherwise you are stealing a resource. It just depends on what your standards are for poaching and / or similar. It is illegal to shoot too many deer when you go deer hunting. In an industrial context, it would be wise to trade such permits in a market, if deer are worth $10B each for example. Then it is really important to keep track of them, and allocate soberly.

Maybe your view is that environmental damage is not the legal responsibility of companies or citizens, and it never should be. That is a perfectly okay viewpoint, but maybe it will change if global warming is revealed to be undeniably true. At that point, there is an alternative financial model that does take environmental drawdowns / debts into account. In that model, such cleanup costs must be paid as a business expense, like sewage, OSHA standards, fire escapes, etc.

Just to mandate cuts would not be efficient.


User currently offlineAvent From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6474 times:

Quoting Mrocktor (Reply 10):
Please disclose that RealClimate.com is the site belonging to the people implicated in fraud according to the emails disclosed.

And please disclose that no fraud has been proven in these emails that have been taken out of context, and also that the emails do not constitute published scientific results, and while you're at it, the emails were provided by anti global warming thieves.

Isn't disclosure fun!

[edit to correct spelling]

[Edited 2009-12-04 13:35:55 by avent]

User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 16, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 6378 times:



Quoting Avent (Reply 15):
And please disclose that no fraud has been proven in these emails that have been taken out of context, and also that the emails do not constitute published scientific results, and while you're at it, the emails were provided by anti global warming thieves.

Avent, with respect:-

1. A tenured head of department at a (reasonably-distinguished) university has already been stood down. Agreed, it doesn't 'prove' anything (yet) but, to coin a phrase, 'there's no harmful and visible discharge of carbon into the atmosphere without fire'...  Smile

2. The issue appears to be that the emails were about the direct opposite - a lot of them are concerned with a conspiracy to make sure that scientific results that didn't support the 'global warming is all the fault of big business' case were NOT published.

3. Your reference to 'anti-global warming thieves' (which term I take to refer to quite a few of us contributing to this thread) is duly noted. But I think you probably meant 'PRO-global warming thieves'?  Smile

One thing that has always struck me about the 'global warming is all the fault of industry' thesis is that it's an open invitation to people to over-indulge their (entirely natural and human) jealousy of the rich, privileged business guys who seem to do nothing but drive round town in big cars and enjoy lots of first-class air travel all over the world.

On the other hand, I am fond of irony, as you'll probably have noticed. And I find it richly ironic that Professor Phil Jones, over the last few years, has probably spent a lot more time than the rest of us jetting about in the stratosphere (at other peoples' expense) attending conferences to press for, among other things, restrictions on aircraft emissions......

I suspect that those days are over for him, for some time at least. When the powers-that-be have completed their investigations into his conduct, my hunch is that he'll maybe have to buy himself a secondhand bike so he can travel down to the Labour Exchange to collect his dole.

Though if that does happen, he'll at least be able to claim credit for having reduced his own personal 'emissions' to the absolute minimum!  Smile



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 17, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6364 times:



Quoting NAV20 (Reply 16):
On the other hand, I am fond of irony, as you'll probably have noticed. And I find it richly ironic that Professor Phil Jones, over the last few years, has probably spent a lot more time than the rest of us jetting about in the stratosphere (at other peoples' expense) attending conferences to press for, among other things, restrictions on aircraft emissions......

His Emails were extremely dumb and I suspect any professional organization of which he might have been a member would be examining its codes of ethics re his continued membership. I know Aus IMM would be.

However, it is a bit early to leap to judgment. As Avent writes, at this stage they are as much a confection of his opponents as they are a striking example of anti science forces. The CRU is under a cloud but WADR Nav, it has not yet gone the way you confidently forecast for EADS some years ago.

Just a caution to some of those leaping up and down with untrammeled joy, the records under attack would also be about the same as those being used to support theories of global cooling.  gnasher   grumpy 

And as I keep on saying, to support continued reliance on fossil fuels is madness, because we will soon run out of cheaply recoverable fossil fuels. Even the dreaded coal. Coking coal first - probably within 10 years there will be a decline - and then steam coals not long after and of course where the likes of EXXON-Mobil think the reserves are to support increases in oil production up to 120 million barrels a day are? Who knows, they don't. What are they smoking there? You could move to oil shales, but none of you would be willing to pay for it. So whether the global warming panic does it, or the inevitability of limited reserves does it, the carbon future is limited. Best get used to it.

Must write to a friend at SASOL!!


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 18, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6346 times:



Quoting Baroque (Reply 17):
WADR Nav, it has not yet gone the way you confidently forecast for EADS some years ago.

These things take time, Baroque.  Smile We'll have a better idea which way the investigation of THAT stuffup is going in a few weeks.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1adc331e-dd4f-11de-ad60-00144feabdc0.html

Mind you, that's only the civil case. Any criminal proceedings will come even later.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineWindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2707 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 6334 times:



Quoting NAV20 (Reply 16):
One thing that has always struck me about the 'global warming is all the fault of industry' thesis is that it's an open invitation to people to over-indulge their (entirely natural and human) jealousy of the rich, privileged business guys who seem to do nothing but drive round town in big cars and enjoy lots of first-class air travel all over the world.

 Big grin This must be a first for me Nav. Reading your post and agreeing with most everything in it. Thanks for the reasonable voice in the discussion. I must admit I was quite shocked to read it.

They are all hypocrites Nav. They Alarmist burn more CO2 than the average person yet they want to limit us.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 17):
Who knows, they don't. What are they smoking there? You could move to oil shales, but none of you would be willing to pay for it. So whether the global warming panic does it, or the inevitability of limited reserves does it, the carbon future is limited. Best get used to it.

Then what spend trillions to stop using fossil fuels? We do all know that it is at the best a medium term use for us. Use the money to combat poverty/AIDS/Cancer and anyhing else that afflicts this planet. To think we can control the temps is madness and arrogant. Controlling CO2 will only do one thing and that is control the masses and our freedoms.

If the enviros had not stopped Nuke plant construction in this country our CO2 level would be lower today. So a large chunk of the blame needs to be heaped on them.



OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13032 posts, RR: 12
Reply 20, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 6323 times:

What about the fact that some global warming/climate change research has funding from major corporations including oil and coal producers? As a result, you may have scientist trying to please their funders rather than being unbiased. Then you have other researchers who are trying to go for academic glory, with the resulting personal and financial rewards from supporting Global warming concepts. Add to this the ability over the last 20-30 years to measure our atmosphere to more minute and accurate degrees and as to past patterns as well as the use of computer modeling with it's issues can cause confusion. If there has been academic/scientific malfeasance, than those persons can be punished in various ways.

Still, good long-term science work has sometimes involved major challenges from those with opposing or varying views and is part of the scientific process and is important to assure accuracy. Scientists will have to 'tweak' factors to study the 'what if's'. You also have to deal with the andonital or short-term 'evidence' that often counters theories on global warming/climate change from patterns of warmer that normal or colder than normal tempatures, ice on local lakes, snow/rain amounts and so on that presents challanges to the average person.

There has been plenty of natural climate change cycles in the past as discussed in various books, science TV documentary programs and historical evidence. From about middle ages to about 1400-1500, there was a warm period allowing settlements in southern Greenland and eastern Canada. They had to disband them when the climate became colder. That cold cycle then ran from the 1500's to about the mid-1800's. The problem is the unknown factors from the exponential growth of the numbers of humans and burning of carbon based products that may be changing our climate since the beginning of the age of industrialization in the early to mid-1800's mainly in Europe and North America. Still, there is much evidence over the long term that were are in an overall natural 'warming' cycle.

Hopefully some balance as to the study of climate change will develop to prevent wrong headed moves that destroy rather than save lives.


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 21, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 6312 times:

Not much point in apportioning blame when there are not enough (cheap) carbon fuels to go round. Might be better to do something positive other than moan about the unfairness of it all?

User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12128 posts, RR: 52
Reply 22, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 6305 times:



Quoting PPVRA (Reply 2):
This is a decent op-ed from one of the scientists whose email was stolen:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB3000....html

It really only says he still supports the theory of man-made global warming.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):
Furthermore, it is obvious to even the casual observer that the climate is changing all over the world. In Southeastern Michigan, it was typical every year when I was 12 and younger to go cross-country skiing on local lakes, and for snow to fall in large quantities around late November/early December and stick until March. Today, the lakes rarely freeze over and when they do, not enough for safe walking. Similar observations have been made all over the world. Glaciers are receding faster than they are advancing, ice shelves in the Antarctic are perilously close to breaking off, and the levels of Arctic ice during the summer are decreasing.

Whether carbon dioxide is as much of a contributor to global warming as we thought, it will still be important for us to control it. But we also do have to investigate the real cause of this climate change. The change is real. Nobody can deny that. This whole controversy muddies the cause, however.

Houston, TX has had more snowfall so far this year than Chicago, IL.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl//6750042.html

Not sure wher Ski-Brule resort is, but they are reporting snow on thr ground between 6" and 26", depending on elevation. Apparently this is not machine made snow.

http://www.onthesnow.com/michigan/ski-brule/skireport.html#

Quoting Mrocktor (Reply 10):
Quoting CPH-R (Reply 5):
Please read the following, it provides a bit of insight to what the emails are discussing and what the explanations for them are.

Please disclose that RealClimate.com is the site belonging to the people implicated in fraud according to the emails disclosed. Citing it as a source without that disclaimer could lead to people here thinking you are trying to deceive them.



Quoting Avent (Reply 15):
please disclose that no fraud has been proven in these emails that have been taken out of context, and also that the emails do not constitute published scientific results, and while you're at it, the emails were provided by anti global warming thieves.

Isn't disclosure fun!

Disclosure is fun. But, even though some of the hacked quotes are selected, there is still enough information that supporters of the man-made GW theory to prove they entended to discredit, through fradulent data and denying "peer-review" to those who support the opposite theory.

Keep in mind, that neither theory has been scinentificly proven. But also keep in mind, that these few scientist have probibly damaged science's image with the general population for decades to come.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 17):
His Emails were extremely dumb and I suspect any professional organization of which he might have been a member would be examining its codes of ethics re his continued membership. I know Aus IMM would be.

Isn't that a little late now? Why hasn't these professional organizations been policing their mambers and ethics up to now? I don't know what these organizations have for an ethics policy, I assume it is similar to other organizations policies, but the strenght of the ethics policies do not seem to be the issue here. The issue seems to be enforcement of those ethics policies, or in the case the apparent lack of enforcement.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 17):
Just a caution to some of those leaping up and down with untrammeled joy, the records under attack would also be about the same as those being used to support theories of global cooling

That is just it, my friend. Both sides of the GW debate only have theories, neither is proven. But one side used out right fraud to try to convince politicians and the population they were right. These guys, and their political cronies have jumped right out into a taxing scheme to advance their political agendas, and reduce political, and scientific, opposition to it.

Quoting Windy95 (Reply 19):
Controlling CO2 will only do one thing and that is control the masses and our freedoms.

that is soooo correct.

Quoting Windy95 (Reply 19):
If the enviros had not stopped Nuke plant construction in this country our CO2 level would be lower today. So a large chunk of the blame needs to be heaped on them.

Correct.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 21):
Might be better to do something positive other than moan about the unfairness of it all?

Perhaps, but here in the US, the silence of the news media, except FoxNews, is deafining. We cannot do something positive if the news and facts are withheld because of the news media's political agendas.

http://mrc.org/press/releases/2009/20091204124643.aspx


User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 16
Reply 23, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 6300 times:



Quoting Avent (Reply 11):
Yes we do - alcohol and tobacco being examples that both republican and democrat administrations regularly increase both for revenue and usage control reasons.

And it is not right . They do it because they can get away with it and it singles out citizen users who pay more for their goods. That is the problem with communal care bestowed on us by the government.. they will find some reason to take from someone to help someone else.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 12):
We don't? That's news to me. And here I thought alcohol and tobacco taxes had something to do with it. Let alone tax breaks for couples with kids...

I understand the idea of it Doc .... but I do not agree that the government should be able to tax a certain group higher or lower depending on their life style choices. Nor should it even be a issue ... why does the fed even need to tax certain things higher. If they were not involved in every aspect of out lives there would be no need for it .

Quoting Flighty (Reply 14):
Maybe your view is that environmental damage is not the legal responsibility of companies or citizens

If the guideline's and laws are clearly stated then the fines that the company pay for violating them go to remedy the damage. But the bureaucracy can not survive on fines alone ..they need a steady cash flow to roll in every month ,,,so they tax them.



You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
User currently offline4holer From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2997 posts, RR: 9
Reply 24, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 6284 times:

Just sitting here wondering to myself, as to a hypotherical situation.
As I made clear in the last thread, I don't believe in AGW and am appalled at the cap and trade BS. But I'm wondering if I would be so opposed to a system by which a smaller, non-crippling tax on fossil fuels would be enacted, and the fund created by this would not go to less developed nations or Gore-ish traders of credit, but instead to an alt-fuel jackpot, if you will. A research pot of gold for a company or country to perfect an economic alternative, such as nuclear fusion or whatever. Or to fund such projects. I still don't love it, but it is much more acceptable than corrupt wealth distribution schemes. I don't know...



Ghosts appear and fade away.....................
25 DocLightning : Yes, and that's completely not right. The parts of the theory that hold that global warming will lead to an increase in bizarre and severe weather ha
26 Windy95 : Ski- Brule is in the UP. Climate change is the remake of the global warming theory. Climate change is when they went to the chaos theory because the
27 DocLightning : And it's true. We have been seeing more extreme weather than in the past, and more bizarre weather, like Houston getting more snow than Chicago.
28 Windy95 : At the end of the year Chicago will have way more snow that Houston. Has it never snowed in the Houston area in the last say 2000 years? Can you show
29 Post contains links Windy95 : Speaking of Big Oil. A new article out showing one of the emails linking Jones and Co. to Big Oil. Climategate: CRU looks to “big oil” for support
30 Avent : Actually, you have hit upon two fundamental and critical underlying issues. First, there is the delusion that scientists are perfect and that any slo
31 Post contains links CPH-R : Hiding the data Denying peer-review Both from one of the persons whose private emails have been stolen and published without context: http://www.real
32 Mham001 : Yes and no. Many newer cigarette taxes are justified by throwing that money at Stop Smoking campaigns and the supposed increased health care costs. A
33 DXing : Global warming is causing my heating bill to go up so far this year. It has snowed in Houston before in December. This is just the earliest on record
34 DocLightning : The common objection to Global Warming is "we had a cold day here!" There is a difference between Global and Local. A global warming can make certain
35 DXing : True, and as I described, without looking at any data my personal impression is that the past two winters have been cooler than the previous four tha
36 Longhornmaniac : Source? Lots of scientists would disagree with you. Cheers, Cameron
37 DXing : Lots of priests, rabbi's, and mulllah's would disagree with anyone that says that God doesn't exist. These emails may show that the "science" of glob
38 Longhornmaniac : There is absolutely no evidence that these emails indicate any sort of global fraud regarding global warming. One thing is for certain, however. Skep
39 DXing : As the global warming religion has done the same to attempt to discredit those that don't believe as they do. As more and more of us will wait for re
40 PPVRA : He denounces the Al Gore type excessive alarmism/absolutism/radicalism and that's the good thing about the article. He also touches on the politics a
41 TheRedBaron : Climate is way too complex to predict with our current technology. I smile when they declare that 1932 was the hottest year on record. Compared to wha
42 Avent : What altered data?
43 Post contains links Mrocktor : Source. Exxon Mobil (a.k.a Big Bad Wolf): 23 million US$ US taxpayer: 79 billion US$ Yes, lets blame those corporations. No, thats not what those ema
44 Post contains links KC135TopBoom : Still burying your head in the sand? Correct. Correct. Therein is the modivation for the "scientists" (who fudged data). They are trying to protect t
45 Post contains links Windy95 : Let the hypocritical propaganda show begin!!!!!!!!!!! Our tax dollars at work. I do not suppose these bearucrats are staying at the sleep Inn and eati
46 KC135TopBoom : OMG, no, it was in 1997, that was 12 years ago. I guess we are all dead now.
47 Post contains links Windy95 : The Fiction Of Climate Science Gary Sutton, 12.04.09, 10:00 AM EST Why the climatologists get it wrong. http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/03/cli...intelli
48 Avent : Where? And I don't consider opinion as to what terms like 'trick' mean since scientists use tricks all the time at their discretions whether its in c
49 Post contains links CPH-R : http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54 This guy has done some pretty good videos on the science and the myths behind climate change, all done in 'down
50 Avent : I think this is getting to the heart of the matter - it's the politicization of the issues that's the main problem - not the science. In this sense,
51 4holer : I know I said I wasn't going to continue to engage you, but how many times are you going to defend the emails when people mention the programmer code
52 Mrocktor : Fair enough. From the HARRY_READ_ME.txt file, which is a veritable trove of quotables: That comment regards truncating the tree ring data set in orde
53 Post contains links CPH-R : Might as well throw this out there http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...ives/2009/11/the-cru-hack-context/
54 Post contains links Windy95 : The CIA’s ‘global cooling’ files Maurizio Morabito5 December 2009 http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/al...he-cias-global-cooling-files.thtml
55 Post contains links and images Avent : Seemed like the right call back then given the data available, but it looks like GW, presumably driven by additional manmade CO2 emissions, overwhelm
56 Mrocktor : Are you kidding? Version 2.1 was complete rubbish but "presumably" 3.0 is A OK? Considering they don't even have the original data anymore, 3.0 is "p
57 Avent : Dunno. I hadn't heard about that piece of code until now, and need to think about it.
58 Avent : I'm curious - what are your qualifications to judge one over the other? I certainly couldn't and would defer to the experts (and yes, I understand th
59 Avent : So how is that fraudulent? If they believe there is a problem with the data from tree rings on that time frame, what's wrong with them truncating the
60 Mrocktor : There are official CRU statements to the effect that the original data has been destroyed and only "value added" data retained. Go find them. I'm don
61 KC135TopBoom : The question comes up; "why is tree ring data good before 1960, but unrelaible after 1960?" The CRU should include all data, including the tree ring
62 Avent : And that is a good question that I'd expect is being studied or is a high priority. They might not understand yet 'why' the data divergesd, but if th
63 Avent : OK, so one university screwed up and didn't keep the raw data. This does not undermine GW. So you have none. Just as I thought. So they are working w
64 Mrocktor : Yeah. Because results without data are valid. Oh wait. No. It means that all the results that refer to or are based on the discredited studies must b
65 NAV20 : In at least partial agreement, Baroque. My own feeling is that both sides of the global warming argument are barking up the wrong tree. We probably b
66 KC135TopBoom : Isn't the CRU the repository for all the data collected? Aren't they responsible for the data? They are for sure responsible for "adjusting" the data
67 Avent : Again you are showing how little you understand research. That the raw data is missing does not render the reduced data invalid. Only if they needed
68 Mrocktor : It makes the results non reproducible, and thus impossible to validate when suspicion of manipulation is cast uppon them. True or false? No, I don't
69 Avent : It doesn't make the results non-reproducible; it means one has to work off the reduced (calibrated and possibly filtered for noise suppression) data.
70 David L : That depends on how and why the data was "reduced". Nice euphemism but those aren't the reasons for the "reduction" of the data discussed in the e-ma
71 Avent : Indeed. There's no euphemism there, and I offered a possibility, not a certainty.
72 Avent : Actually, I have to offer a correction here. There was no data loss. The CRU didn't keep all the data it used, but the raw data should still exist at
73 4holer : Thank you again for your well thought out points, which should be obvious to anyone with an open mind. However, while your statement about the anti-g
74 Baroque : I was about to IM you on that. The loss of data seems to be considerably/entirely exaggerated. I cannot se how U East Anglia would ever be given a ch
75 Mrocktor : I'm not trying to do that. I agree entirely. When you have to pull out the pink unicorns on Saturn example, you are dealing with religion. They didn'
76 Post contains links KC135TopBoom : But the "missing raw data" does make it difficult for "peer review", which you say is the gold standard in science. Don't jump to any conclusions the
77 Avent : Not at all true. First off, peer review is normally reserved for the processes of publishing your work in refereed journals. The referees cannot veri
78 Windy95 : What chapter of the global warming bible is that from?
79 Post contains links KC135TopBoom : Oh, I see, so those scientists who peer reviewed all this stuff before it was published are "in on it". As far as "assess whether the research appear
80 Post contains links NAV20 : Fun article here. Australia may be in danger of losing its dominating status in world cricket, but we undeniably remain in first place by a distance w
81 Theredbaron : Still cold in Mexico city, but we are going to die anyways so what do I care if I freeze or burn. Now I think that all this info and telling us that 6
82 Avent : I'm not at all sure what you see, but it is certainly not the difference between peer-reviewed research, and reproducible research that I described.
83 Baroque : There did seem to be a bit of a familiar agenda in the so-called scientific appraisal and then I clicked on a link in that site and got: TAKE A STAND
84 Baroque : Reviewing manuscripts. Information time. Certainly spelling is checked although not usually via the spelling check because grammar and sentence constr
85 Post contains links KC135TopBoom : Isn't that what "per-deim" is for? You haven't done that already? I have read your replies to this thread. You mean you didn't click on these link to
86 4holer : Someone quoted this in comments at Wattsupwiththat and I think it nails it. And we've seen it from some on this thread. “I know that most men, incl
87 Avent : And how do we determine 'scientifically valid proof'? Through smearing the professional scientists as being 'warmists' and liars and through wallowin
88 Mrocktor : Data, methods, results. Or, in other words, science. It's not science when you skip the first two - no matter what you think.
89 4holer : You've repeatedly been told what scientifically valid proof consists of. You choose not to hear it. I don't need to smear any "professional scientist
90 Windy95 : Or smearing professional scientist as "deniers", "flat earthers" or greedy big oil shills and wallowing in lunatic fringe anti-bush mythology? it is
91 Avent : Yes, and just because you say they skipped 'the first two', doesn't make it so. And it's still ludicrous for people to pontificate about how science
92 EA772LR : They had at last count, 140 private jets, and 1200 limos at that 'Global Warming Alarmist Festival 2009'...the hypocrisy boils my blood!
93 Post contains links and images CALTECH : There is really no new angle, just follow the money of the great man made global hoax. No wonder Algore and this guy, among many, are pushing the Grea
94 Windy95 : You continue to bury your head in the sand over the "few" dissenters. Just because you continue to say it does not make it so. The real agenda behind
95 Post contains links Windy95 : Sarkozy and Brown Say Banks Should Pay for Climate Change Friday, December 11, 2009 http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,580037,00.html U.N. Bodies Wa
96 EA772LR : Humanity's largest Hoax/Scam... !!!!!MAN ENDS THE WORLD VIA SELF-PRODUCED GLOBAL WARMING!!!!!
97 Post contains links Windy95 : More denial and subterfuge from the Hoaxers http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/11/...lists-questions-about-climategate/ Also After climate talks, scient
98 Post contains links NAV20 : Having quoted "The Australian" previously, it's only fair that I should quote my distinguished local paper, the "Melbourne Age." As it happens, it 'to
99 Baroque : You might be a bit less "modestly pleased" if you were to work out not the predicted future growth, but the known historic past of who contributed wh
100 Post contains images NAV20 : The odd thing is, Baroque, that I 'started academic life' as an historian, and you have a scientific background........ Couldn't agree more that the
101 Baroque : We can definitely agree 110% on that (see the tally of votes for Obama and McCain in another thread!). The main problem is folk acting like the monke
102 NAV20 : Cheers, mate........ Confess to having a 'funny feeling' that we - meaning Australia - may very soon find ourselves in the hot seat. After all, we se
103 KC135TopBoom : Just follow the money and there is your answer. But, don't follow the Copenhagen Hookers, as they are giving free "servicing" to any Climate Deligate
104 Post contains links Longhornmaniac : An interesting article from the AP. Windy, does this satisfy your request for an independent review? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34392959/ns/us_news-e
105 Baroque : Reading the last two paras is instructive. Once again, some of their wording is to say the least unwise, but then again, just having read this and th
106 Mrocktor : Show me, don't tell me. Where is the raw data? Where are the assumptions for the "adjustment"? Where is the model? Where is the model's code? Who ind
107 Theredbaron : In 2 months the winter olympics will be held in Canada, if the games are disrupted by record lows and big snowstorms, the media will not say its beca
108 Post contains images NAV20 : More than that, Mrocktor, it requires the right technology. And, at the present moment, we have only one available and proven technology that can rep
109 Post contains images Theredbaron : just to chill out this a little more: Record Events for Sun Dec 6, 2009 through Sat Dec 12, 2009 Total Records: 2601 Rainfall: 992 Snowfall: 815 High
110 Baroque : As far as one can tell, the dangers of radioactivity appear to be greatly exaggerated. Here are some scattological data on life expectancy if you get
111 Baroque : Next snow in the Snowy Mtns expected Thursday or early Friday this week, preceded by a couple of days of very hot weather. System normal.
112 Post contains links and images NAV20 : I vividly remember, Baroque, learning that the percentage UK death-rate among coal-miners (mostly Welsh and Scottish) was higher than that in the Arm
113 Post contains links Baroque : More scatology but this time I cannot source it. The comment about Welsh miners and black lung is likely true. But it was also true that the death ra
114 Mrocktor : = human effort (in the long run) Yes. They won that discussion too, to our loss.
115 Post contains links Theredbaron : Talking about climategate, here a reporter asking about the said Emails etc. Nice to see how they handle legit questions: enjoy http://www.youtube.com
116 EA772LR : The whole Global Warming/Climategate bandwagon is crashing. It was IMHO one of the greatest attempted scams in modern history.
117 Averageuser : Aren't you happy the nightmare is now safely over and people will swiftly return to their normal pre-2009 mindset?
118 KC135TopBoom : The libs, news media, and AGW scare mongers are still pressing ahead with their scam as if they have not been caught. They want the control. They wan
119 AverageUser : Oh yes, everybody let's join the fight and smash the capitalists. Not only do they control the media, they also want to control your thoughts! Follow
120 4holer : Finally some honesty. In all seriousness, however, as I stated earlier in the previous thread. I believe alot of well-meaning people are being had. I
121 Longhornmaniac : Link? You and others continue to say that, but I've yet to see compelling scientific evidence that it's true. There's a bit of a double standard, isn
122 4holer : My argument goes to the first sentence of your reply, about compelling evidence. As has been stated, it is the burden of those forwarding a theory to
123 Dreadnought : Actually, yes. It's like "Innocent, until proven guilty". The status quo is always, by default, what will continue unless you convince the jury that
124 Longhornmaniac : Therein lies the real problem. You seem like a pretty reasonable guy, 4holer, and at least you are capable of having an honest discussion about this,
125 Longhornmaniac : But that isn't the double standard I'm discussing. I'm talking about the actual presentation of scientific evidence. On the one hand, the science tha
126 Dreadnought : Doesn't matter. The defence does not need to provide any evidence. It is up to the prosecution to present believable evidence.
127 Longhornmaniac : Like I said in post 124, I fundamentally disagree with who shares the burden of proof in this debate. Additionally, irrespective of who the burden of
128 Dreadnought : Sorry, but we are not asking you to hamstring your economy, and to make billions of dollars of reparation payments to developing countries for the "c
129 Baroque : And some of us are watching you hamstring it even more effectively by inaction.
130 Baroque : It appears a reminder that a perfectly sound case has been made for AGW. Opponents are invited to take the same data and prove the opposite, but they
131 Post contains links KC135TopBoom : Therein is the problem, it is only a theory. Theories, by definition, are far from being proven. We do not need to can our economy for a theory. I am
132 Post contains links Baroque : That cutting carbon usage will can your economy is just a theory and as it happens much has been written that it is not necessarily true. So off you
133 AverageUser : The basic idea behind the various "save the planet" schemes is the same as the capitalist's scheme: to maintain a stable platform for the industry to
134 Mrocktor : This thread has taken a turn to comedy. 1. The "forcing" capability of CO2 has not been proven on a planetary scale 2. The positive feedback mechanis
135 KC135TopBoom : Oh really? We already know capitalism works, and works very well. Are there problems, and rocks the economy goes over? Yes, and the current worldwide
136 Baroque : Do let us know when your refereed paper to this effect is published so we can all read it and be illuminated. Until then there are rather more reason
137 Post contains images Mrocktor : Is this the new "peer reviewed"? Your shennanigans get exposed and you change the word? "Global Warming" becomes "Climate Change", "peer reviewed" be
138 Post contains images NAV20 : Try to calm down, guys! Trouble is, I reckon that you're BOTH right. On oil, of course it's going to run out. And I know enough about markets to be m
139 Post contains links Baroque : Not an engineer by a country mile, but two words, dry and granite. http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...d=0CDoQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=&f=false Don't ev
140 Post contains links AverageUser : No, you will not do no such dumping. When it comes to the final disposal in granite, Swedish and Finnish solutions are currently the most advananced.
141 NAV20 : Only meant in fun, AverageUser, and in the interests of an enjoyable debate. But - if nuclear power (which I agree is overwhelmingly-condemned in ter
142 Baroque : Well the NM salt is probably better than the Hutchison Salt (KS) bed which they did want to use - it is not very thick and it is like a gruyere chees
143 AverageUser : To me and the majority of the gang here at least nuclear is in, and we'll be able to utilize the (fossil) fuels to the full in the combination distri
144 Baroque : A much higher price for carbon. God, I begin to sound like the Mad Monk. For readers other than Nav, the Mad Monk is the current leader of the Aus op
145 NAV20 : As someone who started my (brief) academic life as a student (and later part-time lecturer) at LSE, Baroque, I need only to say, "Higher prices=reduc
146 Baroque : No, that does not necessarily follow, because you can shuffle matters around. Have you ever noticed the high unemployment in the UK arising from high
147 AverageUser : We need to sack those traditional economists, and replace them by people who appreciate that we're in fact consuming not for ourselves, but on top of
148 Post contains links CPH-R : Interesting reading regarding the failure that was COP15, and what caused it to become a failure: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...penhagen-clim
149 4holer : Kind of similar to the push to sack traditional scientists and replace them with ones that "appreciate" the global Green philosophy and whose conslus
150 Post contains links KC135TopBoom : " target=_blank>http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...lynas Well, I would not put a lot of credit in what a news reporter is saying. Mark Lynas, has
151 Post contains links Theredbaron : ok.. we are officially 2 days into winter, but I guess earth has been in winter for the last 40 days. check this : http://www.natice.noaa.gov/ims/loop
152 Post contains links CPH-R : Erh...? Gordon Brown and David Milliband are saying the same thing, China blocked and cut anything resembling targets and the like from the final agr
153 Danfearn77 : The thing that gets me is we are pledging to spend billions, perhaps trillions, on something i think we have little impact over. The world has always
154 Post contains links KC135TopBoom : Ahh, no, we are not in the middle of winter. Winter officially began this year on 22 Dec., we are just three days into it. You are right, climate is
155 Theredbaron : We are not in the middle of winter, more like 3 days into it... Not thousands in fact we are running out of time its been 11500 years since the last
156 Post contains links CPH-R : http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-stopped-in-1998.htm Interesting that the BBC article makes absolutely no mention at all of 1998 being
157 Baroque : Yep we are consistent offenders and guess what our new year resolution is. We are going to put out another fib right on this topic really soon now!
158 KC135TopBoom : Well, at least no one is putting out that "hocky stick" chart any more. You know the one that conveniently forgot the global warming from abot 900 AD
159 AverageUser : I think I can fill in the details for you. The scientist in question was one Sven Knutsson, the abbot of Langenkirk monastery on the Hebrides. He was
160 Post contains links Windy95 : More profit by the Alarmist. And why is a former railway engineer with a PhD in economics in charge of the IPCC. I thought you needed to be a climatol
161 Post contains links Windy95 : Texas State Climatologist: “IPCC AR4 was flat out wrong” – relied on flawed WWF report http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/2...wrong-relied-on-fl
162 Post contains images Windy95 : And here are the un-massaged temps for the whole of Northern Australia covred by the IPCC Not much warming here and nothing close to the massaged Tem
163 Post contains links and images Windy95 : No out of control unprecedented warming here.
164 Post contains links and images AverageUser : But if I go to http://www.bom.gov.au and ask for the data for Darwin airport, with a linear trend over the whole, I get this: Amazing, is it not?
165 Post contains links KC135TopBoom : Not really. I thought you guyd said the climate is global, yet you site one local area station. Correct, here is the location of just a few of the 22
166 Post contains links Baroque : The link you do not seem to want to give produces WordPress.com 404 — File not found. You can create your own free blog on WordPress.com. http://wa
167 Post contains links Baroque : It is there at http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpre...09/12/darwin_zero4.png?w=510&h=395 but no supporting data that I can find. Just an unsourced una
168 Post contains links KC135TopBoom : I have been researching this, my friend. http://www.chron.com/commons/readerb...=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12
169 Post contains links and images AverageUser : Trying to rehost the chart in #164 Anyone can fly around in NA with the excellent application and try to locate a station that does not show a warming
170 Baroque : Just one question there KC, how long has the Northern Territory in Australia been part of the Himalayas? I know it is the Indo-Australian Plate, and
171 Post contains images Windy95 : Once again look at the difference between the raw data and the massaged data that the CRU came up with There has been no warming in Darwin or NA with
172 Post contains links Windy95 : 877 new snowfall records set or tied in the USA in the last week http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/2...-tied-in-the-usa-in-the-last-week/ December sh
173 KC135TopBoom : I'm sorry, I thought we were talking globally, and not the local weather in Darwin, or even expanded to the whole of the NT. But, either way, it does
174 Post contains links Baroque : Almost certainly the high Tibetan Plateau does affect our weather and right down to SE Aus too but it is getting a bit indirect by then. The surge of
175 KC135TopBoom : I would suspect it is the other way around, just as the Pacific Ocean effect weather/climates in NA and SA, and the Atlantic Ocean effects Europe's a
176 Baroque : It may do but it can be argued that the main driver for the monsoon is not the warm Indian ocean water but the hot air over the Tibetan Plateau. For
177 AverageUser : Which North Australian station(s) do not show a warming trend when you use the official Australian statistics tool I gave the link to? The firewall's
178 Post contains links CALTECH : Mother Nature not going along with 'their' plan, not conforming to 'their' 'hockey stick' charts. Manmade global warming climate change trumped by oth
179 Post contains links Baroque : The persistent high over the N Atlantic is the cause of the cold in the UK http://news.bbc.co.uk/weather/foreca...20kingdom&pageSize=10®ion=world I
180 Post contains links CALTECH : So record lows are business as usual, but somehow record highs are catastrophic. Interesting twisted logic by the man made global hoaxers. Global warm
181 Post contains links Theredbaron : check this link http://www.kusi.com/home/78477082.html?video=pop&t=a By the way in Mexico city we have had 4 days of mild rains and one digit temperat
182 Post contains links Windy95 : Correct CALTECH, Lows are normal, highs are "abby normal". Here is an example of a "localized" "micro-climate" that is experiencing "normal" weather
183 AverageUser : " target=_blank>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ear....html Did you notice that your year was stuck in 2008? If you want to be trendy in reporting w
184 Post contains links CALTECH : How did that record cold Copenhagen summit go ? Just showing that for two years the writing has been on the wall. The e-mails confirmed it, and now m
185 Post contains links Baroque : Not exactly climate but a little more than weather, then again, I suppose this must be more of the scam. The world data for 2009 is close to appearing
186 Post contains links Baroque : Also worth posting is a link to access the data. Accessing Australia's climate change datasets The Bureau of Meteorology is responsible for collecting
187 Post contains links Theredbaron : ok if Australia temps are all AGW pushers got to base its fears. how about Peru? Peru is almost at the same latitude as Australia and... http://www.gu
188 CALTECH : Australia is just suffering some minor 'regional' warming. Mount Baw Baw had some snow accumulation two weeks into summer recently, a uncommon event.
189 Windy95 : No the reason climate change became the term is because the alarmist new the gig was up with lowering temps. Had to stop calling it "warming". And th
190 Post contains links Baroque : No, there will be 4 or 5 cooler. Or the other way round, it will be one of the warmest of the 21st century. Not so http://www.summitsun.com.au/news/l
191 Post contains links and images AverageUser : The transition has been started already. Traditional icebreakers sail awfully, which comes with their hull shape, adapt poorly to other jobs, and bin
192 Post contains links CALTECH : Mars should be a hot planet if CO2 is the cause of any global warming. Mars atmosphere is what, 95% or more CO2, and it is cold, so very cold on Mars
193 CPH-R : Interesting ending to that story: "By mid next week it will be a distant memory as winds turn hot northerly. It should get close to 40 degrees during
194 Post contains links Dreadnought : Using circumstantial evidence. http://www.accuweather.com/news-weather-features.asp?#extremes The coldest winter in 25 years, and apparently more to
195 CALTECH : A more interesting end to the Copenhagen Denmark Man Made Global Warming Summit was the record cold and snowfall.
196 Theredbaron : Still raining in Mexico city, we are now at 5 C and expected 2C at midnight, 120 municipaltis are being warned for cold temps for the next 4 days. I t
197 DXing : ??? There has a been a surface high floating over Greenland for the past few weeks but it's a pretty tame one. Meanwhile one low after another has ma
198 Baroque : Since I wrote that, the Greenland high has indeed drifted E and become a Scandinavian High. So late this week the highest forecast temps for Norway w
199 Post contains links and images AverageUser : Here's the reason for the Copenhagen etc weather: warm air trapped over the Arctic -- remember the warm autumn conditions there in 2009. (and "warmth"
200 Post contains images Derico : Darn, flooding rains in Brazil, Bolivia, Peru, Australia.... Huge cold and snow simultaneously in North America, Europe and Asia. In Argentina it's wa
201 Post contains links Baroque : Parts of. Temps apparently are above average in W Alaska, E Canada, Med and soon in the N of Norway. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8447262.stm a
202 Derico : Sure, I meant to say the really populated continental regions. The northern jet stream is incredibly amplified at the moment but it happens that the r
203 Post contains links and images CALTECH : "They ' keep trying to explain it away with more charts, but as can be seen, 'they' just keep changing the numbers to suit their arguments. Top 10 GIS
204 CALTECH : Such good points. But why is Russia and the United States planning and building NEW Icebreakers if man made global warming is melting all the ice as
205 AverageUser : Because of the very melting of the Arctic ice which will (and already has) opened up new possibilities for Arctic shipping. The U.S. ones are obsolet
206 Baroque : Added to which, forecast maps for Monday on the BBC weather maps show a "warm" air mass (well above zero) entering Mid Norway and spreading across in
207 Dreadnought : All I know is that right now it is so cold in the U.S. that today I saw a Democrat today with his hands in his OWN pockets...
208 SA7700 : This thread has run its course and will be locked for further comments. Any posts made after this post, will be deleted for housekeeping purposes only
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Will Ferrell As Dubya On Global Warming posted Sun Sep 17 2006 22:48:10 by Tbar220
George W Bush On Global Warming posted Fri Feb 24 2006 20:17:36 by Lutenist
Triumph Takes On Global Warming =D posted Fri Nov 25 2005 05:17:34 by Tbar220
Bush On Global Warming: Deal With It. posted Mon Jun 3 2002 05:35:48 by Heavymetal
New Study On Potential Effects Of Global Warming posted Mon Oct 30 2006 19:09:39 by Mir
Global Warming - Not Only On Earth Now posted Sat Mar 17 2007 07:05:07 by NWA742
Global Warming Has A New Convert posted Fri Aug 4 2006 01:47:39 by Halls120
What Happened To Global Warming? (Part 2) posted Sat Nov 7 2009 03:16:53 by ManuCH
What Happened To Global Warming?, BBC posted Sat Oct 10 2009 07:23:47 by KC135TopBoom
New Carry-on Bag - Advice/suggestions Needed posted Fri Apr 17 2009 09:44:10 by BMIE70