What Do We Think About Climate Change

[hoytedow]

ExxonMobil spent a lot of money feeding the crocodile(DNC) as well in the misbegotten hope of being eaten last.

[Guillermo]

"Robert Watson, chief scientist at Defra, the (UK's) environment ministry, who chaired the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) from 1997 to 2002, was speaking after more potential inaccuracies emerged in the IPCC’s 2007 benchmark report on global warming.

The most important is a claim that global warming could cut rain-fed north African crop production by up to 50% by 2020, a remarkably short time for such a dramatic change. The claim has been quoted in speeches by Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman, and by Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general.

This weekend Professor Chris Field, the new lead author of the IPCC’s climate impacts team, told The Sunday Times that he could find nothing in the report to support the claim. The revelation follows the IPCC’s retraction of a claim that the Himalayan glaciers might all melt by 2035.

The African claims could be even more embarrassing for the IPCC because they appear not only in its report on climate change impacts but, unlike the glaciers claim, are also repeated in its Synthesis Report.

Its lead authors include Pachauri himself.

In it he wrote: “By 2020, in some countries, yields from rain-fed agriculture could be reduced by up to 50%. Agricultural production, including access to food, in many African countries is projected to be severely compromised.” The same claims have since been cited in speeches to world leaders by Pachauri and Ban."

Excerpted from: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7017907.ece

Cheers.

[Marco1]

Originally Posted by troy2000

Eddy, anyone who calls the same people fascists in one breath and socialists in the next is mudslinging and name calling.

I'm not wading into the scientific debate here, but you're obviously trying to politicize the debate and take it out of the realm of science.

There are obviously political ramifications to the debate, but the science of it doesn't stand or fall on the names you sling at the scientists involved.

Hi there Troy, can I ask you a question?

Why do you believe in antropogenic global warming?

Answer: Because you choose to believe one side of the story over another.
That is it.

It is your personal choice, like I made my own personal choice and so did everyone on this thread unless the collected data and made each their own research and calculations.

So it all comes down to who is the most credible right?

Who is easier to be believed, a world wide organisation who has roots in every concievable governemt and left wing political parties, the UN and all the scientist on the payroll....
Or an smaller yet ever growing group of sceptics who risk their career and get their funds blocked and their work unpublished because of what they want to uncover?

It is a rather simple choice.

The only reason global warming has still so many acolites is becuase there is a vast number of people who feel empowered by this new wave of majority dissenting. They, with the religious fervour of the Spanish inquisition have finaly found a way to legaly burn witches. The bastard who has a 10 room house is the same bastard who has 3 cars in the garage and finally you can nail the bastard for warming up the planet and starve the poalr bear, and sink the pacific islands.
The fact that this is all ********, is irrelevant. It is too good to pass. And it is too good to pass by all the politicians also.

So those who sincerely want to "do something" are being used, (whats new) and are marching in front and telling us all that the future is hay roofs kero lamps and goats and chucks in your garden. Honestly I had enough of the whole green ********. It is time people wake up and get a real job.
Sorry not refering to you since I don't know you.

Ah...before I forget...if there is someone here who represents the oil industry, the coal industry, the gas industry or any other industry who is affected by the global warming alarmist, please, pretty please, contact me. I will endevour to work for our (yours and mine ) cause for a small donation towards my phone/internet bill.

GREEN IS ROTTEN, LONG LIVE CONCRETE AND DIESEL

[Guillermo]

I don't agree the GW discussion is basically a problem of a left-right world-wide struggle nowadays, as facts do not support that. I know many people and organizations in both sides defending or rejecting the man-made GW theory. Even the Catholic Church, particularly the Pope Benedictus XVI, has positioned itself whithin the voices supporting the need to control climate, worried by the increasing poverty of thousands of millions of people.

In my opinion what is happening is that we live in a world that has built the pernicious habit of moving itself only around alarmism and media mastheads. GWA is only one more in the growing list of such alarmisms, like the DDT, avian influence, swine flu, etc, hysterias. We no longer pursuit truth and liberty, but the clearing of our consciences to hide the guilty self-indulgence of our wealthy societies and the irrational and out of proportion panic to our own death and pain.

Some no qualms and power yearning organizations take advantage of such a poor moral condition and initiate and feed up that kind of global hysterias based in poor/incomplete science or even plain lies, to frighten the crowds of "tontos útiles" around the world and so force short term focused politicians to throw into their hands huge amounts of money. The UN WHO's treatment of the swine flu is a good example of such scaring methods. And GWA is another one, which is going to be substituted, sooner or later, by a GCA (Global Cooling Alarmism).


Cheers.

[hoytedow]

Thank you Marco1 for my new signature line,"GREEN IS ROTTEN, LONG LIVE CONCRETE AND DIESEL".

[fasteddy106]

While Troy fixates on the $23 million ExxonMobil spent on research the rest of you can enjoy this post from JoNova.........

is a new comment on the post "Pitman: paid $190,000 a year to throw baseless insults". http://joannenova.com.au/2010/02/pit...eless-insults/ Author: Louis HissinkComment:twawki: Scientific facts are established by experimental verification by other scientists - and if the theory passes muster, then it is codified into a physical "law" and becomes an engineering problem. Debate starts when the theory can't be easily tested experimentally - and often it's a debate about semantics but generally means the theory is not being studied with the right ideas. In terms of climate science and as Jo put on an earlier thread, "how to create a crisis graph in 6 simple steps", the bit that climate science can't explain in terms of the standard model of the solar system, (nuclear powered radiating sun providing ALL the energy that reaches the earth as radiation) is then attributed to CO2. In the plasma model the sun and earth, as well as the rest of the solar system, are part of a large interconnected electrical system in which energy is transferred via the enormous Birkeland currents now identified by the THEMIS mission to the sun and from the sun and solar system to the Earth. The auroras are simply evidence of electric currents passing into and out of the Earth system, and these currents are routinely measured in millions of amperes. The auroras glow as a result of those electric currents increasing in power density. Sunspots are electric discharges on the sun's photosphere, and when they become minimal or absent, means that the electrical power driving the sun has decreased in power density. And we know historically that this cycle is about 22 years. Electric currents passing through matter generate thermal effects, radiation etc. Climate science focusses on solar radiation as the sole source of energy - well, solar radiation is a bit like a temperature meter - if it glows hot the higher the temperature and hence energy put into the system, and if gets less bright, then the temperature is dropping. Where we have gone off the rails in science is assuming that the temperature meter IS the energy source. It isn't, its the underlying electric currents in the plasma of space that are the sources of the energy that powers the sun and indirectly the earth. Add electricity to the mix and the "grey area we can't explain" becomes explicable. Except that AGW was never about the science in the first place, and that's why there is so much debate. See all comments on this post here:http://joannenova.com.au/2010/02/pit...ults/#comments

[fasteddy106]

Thinking about Troy's denial of a conspiracy and his complaints about ExxonMObil's paltry $23 million research spending brought me to this article, now here is some conspiracy and real spending to worry about......

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...ious-ways.html

[fasteddy106]

Time for a little humor..........

A Congressman was seated next to a little girl on the airplane when he turned to her and said, 'Let's talk. I've heard that flights go quicker if you strike up a conversation with your fellow passenger.'

The little girl, who had just opened her book, closed it slowly and said to the total stranger, 'What would you like to talk about?'

'Oh, I don't know,' said the congressman. 'How about global warming or universal health care', and he smiles smugly.

OK, ' she said. 'Those could be interesting topics. But let me ask you a question first. A horse, a cow, and a deer all eat the same stuff - grass. Yet a deer excretes little pellets, while a cow turns out a flat patty, and a horse produces clumps of dried grass. Why do you suppose that is?'

The legislator, visibly surprised by the little girl's intelligence, thinks about it and says, 'Hmmm, I have no idea.'

To which the little girl replies, 'Do you really feel qualified to discuss global warming or universal health care when you don't know ****?

[Guillermo]

Although galciers have been already extensively debated, these figures had not been posted before in this thread, as far as I could found. I think they are of most interest because they clearly show how glaciers around the globe have been retreating since the coming out of the LIA.

And this from the hands of an article published at Science magazine and cited 162 times.

SOURCE: Extracting a Climate Signal from 169 Glacier Records. Oerlemans (2005a). Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research, Utrecht University, Princetonplein 5, 3584 CC Utrecht, Netherlands.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1107046

First attached figure: Global temperatures from 1600 derived from the lengths of glaciers.

Second attached figure: Composite average of up to 169 glaciers worldwide (the number varies in different time periods).


Cheers.

[Boston]

constructed a temperature history for different parts of the world from 169 glacier length records. Using a first-order theory of glacier dynamics, I related changes in glacier length to changes in temperature. The derived temperature histories are fully independent of proxy and instrumental data used in earlier reconstructions. Moderate global warming started in the middle of the 19th century. The reconstructed warming in the first half of the 20th century is 0.5 kelvin. This warming was notably coherent over the globe. The warming signals from glaciers at low and high elevations appear to be very similar.

sure has

Ill have to do better than just skim that article but in the end he is in full agreement with the increased melt as being indicative of increased warming.

Galatian food
I picked up a bunch of shrimp and fresh veggies yesterday and started spicing some fresh cold pressed olive oil
thought I'd try a few things

once that olive oil has a chance to soak up some of that Chili oil then Ill try some grilled shrimp in spiced oil over some kind of salad thing with maybe some seared tuna

I looked up Galatian food and dam that stuff looks good

oh
FM did not provide me with the desired calculations concerning how he justifies eq 4 despite being asked multiple times; which he says will not add up because Kiehl and Trenberth’s 1979/2009 was not representative of the same kind of model system he used. He has not responded to my request that he elaborate on the methods used to justify an equation that is not in equilibrium to represent a system that is by definition in equilibrium within the confines of Kerchhoff's Law. The values used for years to represent the parameters defined in eq 4 FM randomly redefines without justification.

remind you of any one ?
kinda like what you guys are saying about Mann and his hockey stick

[Boston]

oh
There is simply no justification for suggesting that there is anything less than a multi million dollar disinformation campaign being staged by industry against the science of global warming

its a campaign that is widely studied in numerous universities and the example of the tobacco industries campaign against smoking regulation is a classic for runner of the energy industries campaign

the basic premise is that there is no debate within the scientific community and so the energy industry wages its disinformation campaign in the political arena, an arena were bribery in the form of lobbyist actions and campaign contributions take the place of science and fact.

whole study even has a name

( have we forgotten so soon or was it willful ignorance )

agnotology

Agnotology,

formerly agnatology, is a neologism for the study of culturally-induced ignorance or doubt, particularly the publication of inaccurate or misleading scientific data. The term was coined by Robert N. Proctor,[1][2] a Stanford University professor specializing in the history of science and technology.[3] Its name derives from the Neoclassical Greek word ἄγνωσις, agnōsis, "not knowing" (confer Attic Greek ἄγνωτος "unknown"), and -λογία, -logia.[4] More generally, the term also highlights the increasingly common condition where more knowledge of a subject leaves one more uncertain than before.

A prime example of the deliberate production of ignorance cited by Proctor is the tobacco industry's conspiracy to manufacture doubt about the cancer risks of tobacco use. Under the banner of science, the industry produced research about everything except tobacco hazards to exploit public uncertainty.[4][5] Some of the root causes for culturally-induced ignorance are media neglect, corporate or governmental secrecy and suppression, document destruction, and myriad forms of inherent or avoidable culturopolitical selectivity, inattention, and forgetfulness.[6]

Agnotology also focuses on how and why diverse forms of knowledge do not "come to be," or are ignored or delayed. For example, knowledge about plate tectonics was delayed for at least a decade because key evidence was classified military information related to underseas warfare.[4]

basically its the corporate oligarchies answer to the science

[Marco1]

Agnotology also focuses on how and why diverse forms of knowledge do not "come to be," or are ignored or delayed.

A lot like supressing or falsifying data or making up scare stories about Himalya glaciars, area 51, polar bears dying by the millions, pacific islands sinking to the center of the earth, the boogy man with sinus inflamation, rain in Africa stopping and start going upwards, the Amazon drying up, the lock ness monster giving birth, the crop circles as a new language....

the term also highlights the increasingly common condition where more knowledge of a subject leaves one more uncertain than before.

"I know that I don't know" as proclamed by Socrates is much older than any "university study". I would add somthing to the other part of the statement about ********ology and that is to be applied to most self proclamed "green"
a little knowledge is a dangerous thing

[Marco1]

PS

Reciepe for Jam Crostata. Italian version of short bread with jam cake.
I found that most reciepe of this dish are rather crappy so I modified it to what it is supposed to be. The true blue 4/3/2/1 pasta frolla.
Try it you will love it


* 400 g flour, half self raising half not.
* 300 g sugar
* 200 g unsalted butter
* 1 egg and 2 yolk
* The grated zest of a lemon

2 cups of Plum Jam. If it is acidic, better, otherwise Rasperry Jam will do.

Cut the butter cold from the fridge into little cubes, place in a food processor and mix the flour and butter into a sandy consistence

Combine with the sugar and egg without kneeding much at all handling them as little as possible to keep the butter from melting. Leave to rest for an hour in the fridge or leave for the net day, it improves with age.

Once the dough has rested, butter a flat-bottomed pan about 12 inches across (if you have one elegant enough to double as a serving dish, use it),

Roll the dough out somewhere between a quarter and a half inch thick; work quickly, without working the dough overmuch lest it become crumbly upon baking. Set aside the cuttings to make decorative strips.

Spread jam on the dough in the pan. Roll the cuttings, cut the sheet into half-inch strips with a serrated pastry wheel, and lay the strips in a crosshatch pattern over the jam. When you've finished laying out your strips of dough, lay a thin ring of dough around the border of the crostata and tamp it down with a fork to pattern the crostata's rim.

Bake the crostata for about 30 minutes, starting with a cold oven DO NOT preheat your oven, 170 C or 160 if fan forced,...or until the dough begins to brown. Do not let it overbake.

[Boston]

tracking coal money in politics

http://coalmoney.priceofoil.org/

tracking oil money in politics

http://oilmoney.priceofoil.org/

you aint going to learn
what you dont want to know

cheers
B

[Marco1]

My dear Mr B

What you are pointing out is nothing new. Industries of all walks of life have always paid their way with party donations, bribes, funding of any way imaginable to all the shades of politics in the known world. That is a fact of life and human nature at it's less likable state.

However....

Do you really think that the money paid to politicians by the energy industry can even remotely compare to 1/1000,000 of what is spend to LIE to the public using advertising campigns funded with tax money in order to pass legislation that will tax us even further in order to achieve nothing at all?

I think that the thought behind this gargantuan Con Job has been epitomised by a well known Canadian...

"No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits...climate change provides the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world" Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister.

And to contrast, a quote from our very own Penny Wong, from inside her Prussian Uniform...
"You are going to get an ETS, if you like it or not"

Green is rotten...Long live CONCRETE AND DIESEL !!"