Global Warming? are humans to blame?

[pdwiley]

Originally Posted by Petros

I also notice that most on this thread that hold the strongest opinions about human caused global warming are generally not trained in science, and appear to have no motivation to read the actual studies and examine the raw data. They would rather trust the opinion of strangers that they think are reliable.

I find it all interesting reading, and the politics of it often entertaining. I have looked for hard data, a cause and effect link, and it is just not there. I am not a "denier", we many have a problem or we many not. I have not seen an convincing long term evidence. I want to see data, give me data!

Nicely written. I agree completely.

FWIW I'm currently working on data from the Southern Ocean and we are going to pretty extreme lengths to nail down the whole calibration issue and data reliability so people in the future can know just *how* we got those engineering numbers that get published. It isn't simple and the devil is definitely in the details, as you'd well know.

PDW

[Frosty]

To quote the director of the Movie Titanic.

He said we are all in the Titanic as this huge machine is out of our control heading towards the ice burg and its just too big to stop or turn it. the steerage and the famous rich all in the same predicament.

He said global warming can not be stopped and is our next Titanic of human stupidity.

The steerage passengers are the worlds poor that will suffer first from drought and starvation and of coarse the rich will survive on best till they too die.

Like the Titanic very few lifeboats exist and fewer work.

[hoytedow]

The lifeboats were only there for the rich. The passengers in steerage were the last to be notified if in deed they were at all.

Now instead of notification we just get propaganda and smoke and mirrors. Lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, yacht, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, boat, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, kanu, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, raft, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, punt, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies.

[Boston]

ahhhaaahhahahhahah wrong again Bouncy, damn yur consistent its virtually inevitable that the deniers squad misrepresent the data in order to try and bolster there BS.

for instance, when Petros talks about torturing data, what he's really commenting on is calibration, which is a subject the Berkley study was specifically intended to address, and it did. as you can see in the following, it can easily be seen that after the deniers funded study was said and done, and after they accounted for all the data collection sites where they claimed the urban island effect was skewing the data. There study agreed very well with the previous three, it actually came up with a tad more warming than was expected. So yes, the dedicated researchers who are studying climate science are torturing data, torturing it to reduce inaccuracy and demonstrably so, again, for instance, how is it that four major studies, all using different data calibration methods ended up all producing almost identical findings ? If climate scientists really are "torturing data" to show false warming ( ya gotta love the "its a gigantic conspiracy approach )

doesn't bode well for the torturing data argument now does it



and then there's Hoyt, who seems to be occasionally having some kind of palsy attack with his keyboard, and you don't think this is worth checking every morning riiiiiiiiiiight <--------- example of palsy

Hey Hoyt, its not to early to be calling it morning yet is it ?

Anyway thanks again folks, some laughs, an easy game of find the flaw, a couple comedians, even the standard "dats rightt George" and of course, Bouncy thinking that this isn't the best morning comedy show going

Cheers folks
have a great day
B


PS

can anyone define what a primary forcing agent is in the climate system and what a feedback is? Hint, water vapor is a feedback, CO2 is a primary forcing agent. If that ones stumping anyone here's another, Can anyone define what other effect CO2 could have on the atmosphere, other than warming ?

let the denial begin ;-)

PPS
Sums it up nicely Frosty, fortunately other than in the US, where the agnotology campaign can't rear its ugly head as effectively there is a growing awareness to the importance of getting the situation under control.

sea
Derailing Durban's climate change conference
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...nge-conference

With the US dragging its feet at the Durban climate change conference, the influence of a powerful industry lobby is worrying

[hoytedow]

It is always morning somewhere.

I don't believe anything that comes from Berk-sleaze commies.

[Yobarnacle]

Quoting Boston
"when Petros talks about torturing data, what he's really commenting on is calibration, which is a subject the Berkley study was specifically intended to address, and it did. as you can see in the following, it can easily be seen that after the deniers funded study was said and done, and after they accounted for all the data collection sites where they claimed the urban island effect was skewing the data. There study agreed very well with the previous three, it actually came up with a tad more warming than was expected. So yes, the dedicated researchers who are studying climate science are torturing data, torturing it to reduce inaccuracy and demonstrably so, again, for instance, how is it that four major studies, all using different data calibration methods ended up all producing almost identical findings ? If climate scientists really are "torturing data" to show false warming ( ya gotta love the "its a gigantic conspiracy approach )

doesn't bode well for the torturing data argument now does it [end quote]

Very interesting point, Boston. All the data ends up pointing to GW.
Not before the "corrections", only after "correcting" does ALL the data indicate compliance with the warm-mongers theories.
What's the probability that ALL error in all data is unidirectional innaccurate and needs to be tweaked only in one direction? Infinitely SMALL!
How foolish does someone have to be, to swallow this absurdity?

[Yobarnacle]

quoting Boston
its virtually inevitable that the deniers squad misrepresent the data in order to try and bolster there BS. [end quote]

Misrepresent the data? I think you are confused Boston. It's your hero with clay feet, Hansen, who keeps getting caught manipulating the data!


Political spin inserted in scientific theory!
The miniscule tiny% of CO2 is forcing the 95% of greenhouse gas, water vapor. Vapor is just a feedback, a result of CO2!
Pure hype and BS! Putting the spin on the facts untill they're upside down.
You will have water vapor with or without CO2!
Water vapor is the greatest and most powerfull greenhouse gas. It traps most of the heat.
If increased water vapor is a feedback from warming, then water vapor causes water vapor, since it's the largest, by 100s of magnitudes, retainer of heat.
It must feedback on itself using your fuzzy logic!

And the warm-mongers think WE are stupid!
Of course without man made CO2, they have NO excuse for political change!

[Yobarnacle]

"If climate scientists really are "torturing data" to show false warming ( ya gotta love the "its a gigantic conspiracy approach )" Boston, is here quoted.

Conspiracy as in, ya'll had a big meeting and colluded together? No!

Are all Global Warmer Activists also Collectivists? Resounding YES!

Collectivists believe individuals must be subservient to the more important good of society and the world.

Collectivism is big powerfull central government, and reduced or no individual rights to self determine.

So, yes. It's a conspiracy by the collectivist elite, preaching the "Larger GOOD', to their collectivist disciples, who adopt it as gospel.

They have used many strategems to further a one world government where they are the masters.
Socialism, Facism, Communism, all are variants of collectivism.
All tried to use a political religious like fervor to control the world.
While collectivists almost universally deny God, they deliberately emulate religions, because they know the power over minds of powefull religions in history.

The global warming religion/philosophy is their latest political creation, and world domination is their continued agenda.

Is it any surprise that almost all college professors are "liberal" , a modest claim, considering how far "left" they REALLY are!
Any surprise the former socialist activists are now GW activists?

It's no laughing matter!
The USA is under attack! From without, but more insidious, from TRAITORS within!
If the shoe fits, wear it!

[Yobarnacle]

Boston posted this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...nge-conference
"Greenpeace highlighted these corporations and corporate umbrella groups for their presence in Durban, and for their actions throughout the global-climate-change negotiating process, in undermining meaningful progress. The full report, titled "Who's holding us back? How carbon-intensive industry is preventing effective climate legislation", details how these corporations not only derail national legislation on climate change across the globe, but are also gaining privileged access to the global negotiations like these crucial United Nations talks in Durban."


Their agenda proclaimed. Not just here. Everywhere! Over and over. They intend to JAM societal reform down our throats over the pretext of global warming!

"There is a growing consensus here in Durban that the United States is the main impediment to progress at these crucial talks. A consortium of 16 of the major environmental groups in the US wrote a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who directly oversees the US climate negotiations. They pointed out that, while President Barack Obama originally campaigned on a promise to lead in global climate negotiations, "three years later, America risks being viewed not as a global leader on climate change, but as a major obstacle to progress."

I hope we stop this collectivist takeover, or our freedom is doomed. Because of a .8 degree C rise in global average temperature over 150 years! How sad and ridiculous!

[BPL]

Your fear mongering of scientists' supposed collective agenda doesn't prove the calibration of the graph is incorrect.

[Yobarnacle]

Originally Posted by BPL

Your fearmongering of scientists' supposed agenda is not an effective proof that the calibration is wrong.

As normal to global warmists, you get the cart before the horse.

Phenomenon doesn't explain your theories.
The tiniest % of green house gas doesn't cause the 95% of green house gas.

And I'm not using fear to prove anything. YOU FOLKS USE FEAR TO JUSTFY SOCIAL CHANGE!

I showed the before and after charts that were changed. That's facts.
I have showed the fuzzy logic of global warmists to be unsound.
I have quoted the political agenda of global warmists from their own literature and mouths.

My proving these things are real, is what CAUSES the FEAR. What GW activists are DOING is causing fear!
Fear in GW adherrents that we're pedal to the metal rushing towards doom!
And fear in the rest of us, they're trying to change our society, our world, and eliminate freedom! Over insignificant anomalies!
The fear doesn't prove nor is intended to prove, or can anything except make us more vigilant.
Fear is the RESULT of the PROOFS! not are the proofs!
It's the natural re-action of realizing an enemy is in the process of, and making progress, destroying our freedom and our country!

You should know better than try an inept spin on me.

[Yobarnacle]

I'm not against science or scientists. I'm not against scientists having political opinions.

We are all many things, fulfill many roles, but have to separate our activities related to those different roles.

It's well and good to be a husband and a father, untill you try to be a husband to your children!

Being a scientist And a political activist, isn't a credible thing!

Global warming activists aren't science activists, they're political activists!

Could you even define a science activist? Maybe a school teacher encouraging students to appreciate science as a career opportunity.

[Yobarnacle]

http://www.minnesotansforglobalwarmi...es-hansen.html

under the Freedom of Information Act. The disclosure revealed that Dr. Hansen received between $236,000 and $1,232,500 in outside income in 2010 relating to his taxpayer-funded employment, which included:

• Between $26,008 and $72,500 in honoraria for speeches;

• Between $150,001 and $1.1 million in prizes;

• Just under $60,000 in the form of in-kind income for travel to his many outside-income generating activities

Christopher Horner, ATI's director of litigation. "It also shows that Dr. Hansen continues to enjoy a healthy level of earnings that supplement - and for his curious exploitation of - the taxpayer-funded position he holds."

As ATI detailed in its current lawsuit against NASA in federal court in Washington, Dr. Hansen admits this income began after he escalated his public - and often political - global warming advocacy, for which outside parties have spectacularly rewarded him.


From the horse's (arse) mouth, Dr Hansen before a congress commitee testified:

"About two weeks after my article was published in nature (A leading science journal.), my assistant thought there might be a problem with my hand calculator. She noticed that regardless of the numbers I punched in, the answer always came out to be 88888888.88" said Dr. Hansen. "She changed the batteries and I haven't gotten one answer of 8888888888.88 since, so my calculations must be right."

Dr. Hansen said he didn't remember when his hand calculator had started to behave strangely or how many of his articles were invalid because of this. When asked by Senator James Inhofe (Republican-Oklahoma) if this meant that most of his research was invalid, DR. Hansen defended himself by stating "Of course not. The findings came out the way I wanted them to, so I know they must be right."

http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.c...dline=s2i16540

Of course this last is a spoof, but it's pretty accurate depiction of Hansens ethics, if demeaning of his intelligence. Global warmists NEVER accuse deniers of low grade intelligence!

This is global warmings BIG DOG, that Boston loves to quote!
Such pristine logic!
How smart is it to credit as truth ANYTHING this clown says?

Hear him yourself advocate for action!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPCFx...ayer_embedded#!

[CatBuilder]

Originally Posted by Yobarnacle

I'm not against scientists having political opinions.

I am. Politics and science do not mix. There is the truth (what scientists are after) and then there is politics. They cannot be combined in any way.

[Yobarnacle]

Originally Posted by CatBuilder

I am. Politics and science do not mix. There is the truth (what scientists are after) and then there is politics. They cannot be combined in any way.

I believe as private citizens, scientists have the right to many other interests and opinions, including, politics and religion.

But I agree! Getting INVOLVED in politics, I'm certain the less than admirable ethics of politics are bound to infect the "science" supporting the political objective.