Close

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 11
Results 301 to 313 of 313

Thread: Global Warming?

  1. #301
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    6918

    Default

    visit-red-300x50PNG
    I had a

    tough time deciding if this should go in this thread or in one of the political threads. It does have a lot to do

    with the state of politics in the world because global warming is justifiably a political issue instead of a

    scientific one, at this

    point.

    Bel.
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ibd/20100125...100125issues01

    Climate Flimflam Flaming

    Out

    – Mon Jan 25, 6:41 pm ET
    Environment:

    The United Nations makes a claim that can't be supported by science, and U.S. researchers ignore temperature data

    from frigid regions. The crack-up of the global warming fraud is picking up

    speed.

    With so much of the science behind climate change coming under attack,

    especially among scientists, it's been a harsh winter for the global warming

    crowd:

    In late November, thousands of e-mails from the Climate Research Unit of

    the University of East Anglia were leaked to the public. The evidence strongly suggests that researchers colluded to

    prove the global warming scientific "consensus" by rigging, burying and destroying data that ran counter to their

    political agenda.

    Last week, the public learned that claims made by the U.N.'s

    International Panel on Climate Change were not based on science, but on speculation. Specifically, the IPCC's 2007

    report said the Himalayan glaciers will be gone by 2035 due to man-made global

    warming.

    The claim, used at the U.N. Copenhagen climate change conference in

    cold and snowy December to rush through a restrictive greenhouse-gas-emissions treaty, was not based on a scientific

    study. It was based on a telephone call that a reporter had with a scientist who was

    speculating.

    The IPCC has withdrawn the claim. Murari Lal, the scientist who

    included the contention in the U.N. report, admitted that he knew it wasn't based on peer-reviewed scientific

    research.

    Also in the last week, it was revealed that U.S. researchers working

    for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are excluding temperature data from cold regions for a

    database used by the U.N. in its global warming scare campaign.

    Canwest News

    Service, a Canadian agency that also owns a chain of newspapers, reported Friday, "In the 1970s, nearly 600 Canadian

    weather stations fed surface temperature readings into a global database assembled by the U.S. National Oceanic and

    Atmospheric Administration. Today, NOAA only collects data from 35 stations across

    Canada.

    "Worse, only one station -- at Eureka on Ellesmere Island -- is now

    used by NOAA as a temperature gauge for all Canadian territory above the Arctic

    Circle.

    "The Canadian government, meanwhile, operates 1,400 surface weather

    stations across the country, and more than 100 above the Arctic Circle, according to Environment

    Canada."

    Canwest also reports that Americans Joseph D'Aleo, a meteorologist,

    and E. Michael Smith, a computer programmer, say that the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies has "reduced the

    total number of Canadian weather stations in the database" and has "cherry-picked" the stations.


    The NASA agency uses data from "sites in relatively warmer places, including

    more southerly locations, or sites closer to airports, cities or the sea -- which has a warming effect on winter

    weather."

    In a paper published on the Science and Public Policy Institute Web

    site, D'Aleo and Smith say the "NOAA ... systematically eliminated 75% of the world's stations with a clear bias

    toward removing higher-latitude, high-altitude and rural locations, all of which had a tendency to be

    cooler.

    "The thermometers, in a sense, marched toward the tropics, the sea and

    to airport tarmacs."

    Then, just last weekend, we find that same 2007 IPCC

    report included another phony claim: that "the rapidly rising costs" of natural disasters since the 1970s is linked

    to global warming.

    British newspapers reported Sunday that that assertion was

    neither peer-reviewed nor published in a scientific paper when the IPCC report was issued. When the paper that the

    claim was based on was published in 2008, its authors said:

    "We find

    insufficient evidence to claim a statistical relationship between global temperature increase and catastrophe

    losses."

    Now the IPCC says it is "reassessing the evidence."


    All threads of fiction unravel eventually, and the deterioration flies out of

    control as the end nears.

    Is this what we are seeing with the contention that

    man-made greenhouse-gas emissions are causing the planet to overheat?

    We

    can't see into the future, but this myth has taken so many hits from the truth that its survival is in

    doubt
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  2. #302
    Phero Guru Rbt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Midwest US
    Posts
    1,579
    Rep Power
    5598

    Default

    Aside:

    I saw in a publication

    aimed at the printing industry, that at this confrence they created special hotel room keycards out of wood, to tie

    in with "going green."

    Turns out these special wood keys were anything but "green" according to this article.

    The felled a near perfect tree, not a more "common" one, selected (only) the finest "clear" wood sections to make

    the keys, and it turns out these keys are not reusable nor are they considered recycleable. Aluminum or even steel

    would have been a better, "greener" value. And they could have been made from already recycled materials, not new

    vigin (wood) material.

    <sigh>

    Politicians. Corporate thought.

    Phooey.
    The opposite of love isn't hate.
    It's apathy
    .

  3. #303
    Moderator idesign's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Middle Kingdom
    Posts
    2,398
    Rep Power
    4784

    Default

    The science of AGW I think is

    definitely unraveling, but not the politics. Like you said Bel, its too entwined with ideology, and that on a

    global scale.

    It'll continue to be pushed, much in the same way that Obama keeps pushing his programs on an

    unwilling and increasingly angry population. True, False, Right, Wrong, it makes no difference to them.

    Of

    course this ties in directly with Bel's post quoting Lord Monckton. He's been at the forefront of AGW criticism

    for a long time, as well as other less than well known goings on. I've been doing some reading along these lines

    and hope to pull together some ideas soon. There's just so much out there, and weeding through the chaff takes

    time. And there is a lot of chaff.

    Taxes on financial transactions will be a key feature though. The financial

    industry is the latest bad guy in the world, making them an easy target for the opportunistic Left. More blood

    sucked from the private sector to the public, and everyone cheers.


  4. #304
    Phero Guru Rbt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Midwest US
    Posts
    1,579
    Rep Power
    5598

    Default

    "And this is how liberty dies...



    to thunderous appaluse."

    (Who said Star Wars wasn't also a political commentary...)
    The opposite of love isn't hate.
    It's apathy
    .

  5. #305
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    6918

    Default

    Many

    people denied or ignored the ongoing allegations of fraud and corruption in the global warming debate. Its nice to

    be

    vindicated.

    Bel.
    http://www.timesonli<br /> <br /> ...cle7004936.ece
    From The Times


    January 28, 2010



    (University of East Anglia)
    Professor

    Phil Jones, the unit's director, stood down while the inquiry took place

    The

    university at the centre of the climate change row over stolen e-mails broke the law by refusing to hand over its

    raw data for public scrutiny.


    The

    University of East Anglia breached the Freedom of Information Act by refusing to comply with requests for data

    concerning claims by its scientists that man-made emissions were causing global warming.



    The Information Commissioner’s Office

    decided that UEA failed in its duties under the Act but said that it could not prosecute those involved because the

    complaint was made too late, The Times has learnt. The ICO is now seeking to change the law to allow prosecutions if

    a complaint is made more than six months after a breach.




    The stolen e-mails , revealed on the eve of the Copenhagen summit, showed how

    the university’s Climatic Research Unit attempted to thwart requests for scientific data and other information, and

    suggest that senior figures at the university were involved in decisions to refuse the requests. It is not known who

    stole the e-mails.


    Professor Phil

    Jones, the unit’s director, stood down while an inquiry took place. The ICO’s decision could make it difficult for

    him to resume his post.


    Details of the

    breach emerged the day after John Beddington, the Chief Scientific Adviser, warned that there was an urgent need for

    more honesty about the uncertainty of some predictions. His intervention followed admissions from scientists that

    the rate of glacial melt in the Himalayas had been grossly exaggerated.




    In one e-mail, Professor Jones asked a colleague to delete e-mails relating to

    the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.




    He also told a colleague that he had persuaded the university authorities to

    ignore information requests under the act from people linked to a website run by climate sceptics.



    A spokesman for the ICO said: “The

    legislation prevents us from taking any action but from looking at the emails it’s clear to us a breach has

    occurred.” Breaches of the act are punishable by an unlimited fine.




    The complaint to the ICO was made by David Holland, a retired engineer from

    Northampton. He had been seeking information to support his theory that the unit broke the IPCC’s rules to discredit

    sceptic scientists.


    In a statement,

    Graham Smith, Deputy Commissioner at the ICO, said: “The e-mails which are now public reveal that Mr Holland’s

    requests under the Freedom of Information Act were not dealt with as they should have been under the legislation.

    Section 77 of the Act makes it an offence for public authorities to act so as to prevent intentionally the

    disclosure of requested information.”




    He added: “The ICO is gathering evidence from this and other time-barred cases

    to support the case for a change in the law. We will be advising the university about the importance of effective

    records management and their legal obligations in respect of future requests for information.”



    Mr Holland said: “There is an apparent

    Catch-22 here. The prosecution has to be initiated within six months but you have to exhaust the university’s

    complaints procedure before the commission will look at your complaint. That process can take longer than six

    months.”


    The university said: “The way

    freedom of information requests have been handled is one of the main areas being explored by Sir Muir Russell’s

    independent review. The findings will be made public and we will act as appropriate on its

    recommendations.”
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  6. #306
    Moderator idesign's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Middle Kingdom
    Posts
    2,398
    Rep Power
    4784

    Default

    Indeed Bel, and further, more

    important vindication will be had when certain individuals are voted out of office, both in the UK and here. The UN

    and EU are just sad stories.

    The EU countries have capitulated their sovereignty to a mindless body and the UN

    has long been a committee-think org striving for justice through mediocrity. Such morally equivocating bodies can

    only, in the end, use wealth as their measure of justice as its the only currency within their power to control.

    Their ideal is false, you cannot make a small man large by bringing a big man down.

    The end result of every

    policy proposed by AGW enthusiasts is the enriching of large political groups with power. Their focus is energy,

    who's costs impact every aspect of life, from food to housing to the ability to freely circulate in one's domain.



    The silver lining is in fact that the AGW crowd is being debunked. The coming storm is in the fact that current

    power players don't give a rat's a$$ what about true or false, the fix is in.


  7. #307
    Moderator idesign's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Middle Kingdom
    Posts
    2,398
    Rep Power
    4784

    Default

    Lovelock: 'We can't save the planet'





    Professor James Lovelock, the scientist who developed Gaia theory, has said it is too

    late to try and save the planet.

    The man who achieved global fame for his theory that the whole earth is a

    single organism now believes that we can only hope that the earth will take care of itself in the face of completely

    unpredictable climate change.

    Interviewed by Today presenter John Humphrys, videos of which you can see below,

    he said that while the earth's future was utterly uncertain, mankind was not aware it had "pulled the trigger" on

    global warming as it built its civilizations.

    'We're not really

    guilty. We didn't deliberately set out to heat the world'

    What is more, he predicts, the earth's climate

    will not conveniently comply with the models of modern climate scientists.
    As the record winter cold testifies, he

    says, global temperatures move in "jerks and jumps", and we cannot confidently predict what the future holds.




    'The world doesn't change its climate conveniently'

    Prof Lovelock

    does not pull his punches on the politicians and scientists who are set to gain from the idea that we can predict

    climate change and save the planet ourselves.
    Scientists, he says, have moved from investigating nature as a

    vocation, to being caught in a career path where it makes sense to "fudge the data".



    'Science has changed in our lifetime'

    And while renewable energy technology may make good

    business sense, he says, it is not based on "good practical engineering".



    Renewable technology 'doesn't really work'

    At the age of 90, Prof Lovelock is resigned to his own fate

    and the fate of the planet. Whether the planet saves itself or not, he argues, all we can do is to "enjoy life while

    you can".

    Trying to save the planet 'is a lot of nonsense'


  8. #308
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    6918

    Default

    Interesting video. Long but

    well worth the time.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zOXmJ4jd-8
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  9. #309
    Moderator Mtnjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    SAN DIEGO
    Posts
    2,481
    Rep Power
    6736

    Default Oops!!

    'Climategate'

    review clears scientists of dishonesty



    London, England (CNN) -- An independent report

    released Wednesday into the leaked "Climategate" e-mails found no evidence to question the "rigor and honesty" of

    scientists involved.
    The scandal fueled skepticism about the case for global warming just weeks before world

    leaders met to agree a global deal on climate change at a United Nations conference in Copenhagen last

    December.
    Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite.
    --Lazarus Long

  10. #310
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    6918

    Default

    Yeah, I read that and was not

    impressed. Have you actually read their report? It sounds more like a whitewash to me.
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  11. #311
    Stranger
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    i hate summer it's so hot now!

  12. #312
    Administrator Bruce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Eugene, Oregon
    Posts
    7,109
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Where are you? Still cool here in Oregon.
    To enjoy good health, to bring true happiness to one's family, to bring peace to all, one must first discipline and control one's own mind. If a man can control his mind he can find the way to Enlightenment, and all wisdom and virtue will naturally come to him.

    - Buddha


    Yoga in Eugene
    Fair Trade crafts from Peru

  13. #313
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    6918

    Default

    103 degrees here in north texas today.
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 11

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Global Warming?
    By belgareth in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-31-2005, 12:51 PM
  2. GLobal Warming...interesting!
    By belgareth in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-13-2005, 03:44 PM
  3. Global warming news
    By DrSmellThis in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-04-2004, 07:58 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •