The man made global warming fraud is further doomed

[calfoxwc]

http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/146138

 

CLIMATE CHANGE IS NATURAL: 100 REASONS WHY

 

Climate change campaigners: 100 reasons why climate change is natural and not man-made

Tuesday December 15,2009

 

HERE are the 100 reasons, released in a dossier issued by the European Foundation, why

climate change is natural and not man-made:

 

1) There is “no real scientific proof” that the current warming is caused by the rise

of greenhouse gases from man’s activity.

 

** EXPRESS NEWS: 100 REASONS WHY GLOBAL WARMING IS NATURAL**

 

2) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than

0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.

 

3) Warmer periods of the Earth’s history came around 800 years before rises in CO2 levels.

 

4) After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global

temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.

 

5) Throughout the Earth’s history, temperatures have often been warmer than now and

CO2 levels have often been higher – more than ten times as high.

 

6) Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time.

 

7) The 0.7C increase in the average global temperature over the last hundred years

is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends.

 

8) The IPCC theory is driven by just 60 scientists and favourable reviewers not the 4,000

usually cited.

 

9) Leaked e-mails from British climate scientists – in a scandal known as “Climate-gate” -

suggest that that has been manipulated to exaggerate global warming

 

10) A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater

share of climate change during the past hundred years.

 

11) Politicians and activiists claim rising sea levels are a direct cause of global warming

but sea levels rates have been increasing steadily since the last ice age 10,000 ago

 

12) Philip Stott, Emeritus Professor of Biogeography at the School of Oriental and African Studies

in London says climate change is too complicated to be caused by just one factor, whether CO2

or clouds

 

13) Peter Lilley MP said last month that “fewer people in Britain than in any other country

believe in the importance of global warming. That is despite the fact that our Government

and our political class—predominantly—are more committed to it than their counterparts in

any other country in the world”.

 

14) In pursuit of the global warming rhetoric, wind farms will do very little to nothing to

reduce CO2 emissions

 

15) Professor Plimer, Professor of Geology and Earth Sciences at the University of Adelaide,

stated that the idea of taking a single trace gas in the atmosphere, accusing it and finding

it guilty of total responsibility for climate change, is an “absurdity”

 

16) A Harvard University astrophysicist and geophysicist, Willie Soon, said he is

“embarrassed and puzzled” by the shallow science in papers that support the proposition

that the earth faces a climate crisis caused by global warming.

 

17) The science of what determines the earth’s temperature is in fact far from settled or understood.

 

18) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas,

unlike water vapour which is tied to climate concerns, and which we can’t even pretend to control

 

19) A petition by scientists trying to tell the world that the political and

media portrayal of global warming is false was put forward in the Heidelberg

Appeal in 1992. Today, more than 4,000 signatories, including 72 Nobel Prize

winners, from 106 countries have signed it.

 

20) It is claimed the average global temperature increased at a dangerously fast rate

in the 20th century but the recent rate of average global temperature rise has been

between 1 and 2 degrees C per century - within natural rates

 

21) Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski, Chairman of the Scientific Council of the Central

Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw, Poland says the earth’s temperature

has more to do with cloud cover and water vapor than CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

 

22) There is strong evidence from solar studies which suggests that the Earth’s current

temperature stasis will be followed by climatic cooling over the next few decades

 

23) It is myth that receding glaciers are proof of global warming as glaciers have been

receding and growing cyclically for many centuries

 

24) It is a falsehood that the earth’s poles are warming because that is natural variation

and while the western Arctic may be getting somewhat warmer we also see that the Eastern Arctic

and Greenland are getting colder

 

25) The IPCC claims climate driven “impacts on biodiversity are significant and of key relevance”

but those claims are simply not supported by scientific research

 

 

 

 

[Kosar_For_President]

Heck, any answers to these?

 

You remind me of the Steeler fans in here.

[heckofajobbrownie]

So Cal cuts and pastes some bullshit, and you want me to spend my time going through every one of those each time he does? And what good would it do? Is Cal (or you, or Steve) going to suddenly say, "Oh, yeah. I guess I was wrong about that."

 

I've seen hundreds of these types of lists. They're all designed to convince lay people (you, me, etc.) who don't understand the science that the science isn't there. Because the science is often pretty complicated, and if you get someone who already wants to believe that global warming is a hoax and you give them a few things to say, like "There is 'no real scientific proof' that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from man’s activity" it gives them something to say in a political forum. That doesn't mean it'd pass the laugh test with actual scientists, and trust me, this doesn't.

 

To give you an example, John just said in the other thread that global warming isn't an issue, it's a hypothesis. The idea is to suggest that AGW theory is just a guess someone has, rather than what it is - a theory that is backed by a mountain of observable, peer-reviewed data from scientists working independently all over the world.

 

Or take #1 on this list - "No real scientific proof". Well, this is true, but also irrelevant. And also misleading. Proof is a mathematical concept. There's no "proof" that global warming is caused by man. There's evidence. Lots and lots of evidence. So right off the bat you should know this list is trying to mislead you.

 

Or take #2. The entirety of human history gives you an irrelevant measurement for what we're dealing with today. All it produces is a number so someone can go around and say, "Hey, someone told me this number and it seems really small! It's got lots of decimal places and everything. Maybe global warming isn't happening!" But all we're concerned with now is the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere and how we're changing it. That's just something we measure. And we are changing it. There's no disputing that part. What you're worried about is getting to concentrations so high, 450 or 500 ppm, that you have sizable and irrevocable climate change. Because once you put that much CO2 into the atmosphere it doesn't go anywhere. It stays there.

 

Kosar, each of these points is 100% clueless, like #6, or 100% specious. It's not an impressive effort. It just is for someone like Cal. You should be different.

 

Or look at it this way: we're all having a political argument because we're not qualified to have a scientific one. These are not questions that are difficult for scientists.

 

And how am I like the Steelers fans on here?

 

 

[calfoxwc]

because you are deliberately being dense,

 

and you are completely soaked in Egypt, that's why.

 

All of your rationalizaiton goes for naught, when you immediately

 

categorize any information and all information to the contrary of your BS,

 

as BS.

 

And, therefore, you lose, just like the Steelers and steeler fans did.

 

Why, you may as well have a bighead poster of Whines Hard or Bigfoot Ben on your wall, Heck.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Look at #21. Does that sound convincing to you, Kosar?

 

You've got thousands of scientists in Copenhagen right now. You've got the science academies of every single nation on the planet signing on to the theory of AGW, including our own, even during the Bush administration.

 

And this list would have you believe that one scientist is Poland is to be believed, even though his arguments about the contributions of water vapor have been looked at and dismissed.

 

But hey, we got a scientist who says something else! Look over here!

 

Or take the example of a scientist named Dwain Deets.

 

Deets was an engineering executive with NASA Dryden Flight Research Center for more than 37 years and formerly served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden. He received the Presidential Meritorious Rank Award in the federal government's Senior Executive Service (1988). In 1986, Deets was awarded the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics, a distinguished speaking engagement sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA).

 

Well, Deets also believes all three World Trade Center skyscrapers were brought down with a controlled explosion.

 

Yet an overwhelming number of scientists do not believe that. Because it's crazy and unsupportable.

 

#21 isn't much different than the example I just gave you.

[calfoxwc]

I don't know. Heck's scientists finally find ONE tree in Siberia that they can use for mmgw evidence,

 

and that is good enough for him, and the rest.

 

Cherry picking is only good when it suits their purposes.

[osusev]

Seriously there is so much here to rebut but....... This is like religion if you already have a position you probably are entrenched so it really is not productive to argue over

[heckofajobbrownie]

Uh-huh.

 

This list isn't even good hackery. You've got to be really unfamiliar with the science and the theory to be taken by this stuff.

 

There was a recent and serious attempt to point out the manipulation of climate data by a skeptic who isn't a total clown and that got a lot of play in conservative circles last week, but only for a day or two because it turns out he was way off in his criticism as well. But at least it was the type of criticism/fact check that might have been useful and needed a response.

 

This stuff is just ridiculous.

[calfoxwc]

To minimize the scientific impact of climategate, is just incredibly intellectually dishonest.

 

Anyone who really cares about the TRUTH, regardless of the politics, is concerned about the deliberate

 

falsification of information based on cherry picked, manipulated data.

 

Anything else is simply like the followers of Charles Manson calling for him to be freed because

 

he was God.

 

I those of us who really care about right and wrong are surrounded by idiots.

[Pumpkin Eater]

Come on global warming supporters, have you forgotten freshman science already?

 

Any experiment/ study that involves deliberate bias is invalid.

 

for a study or experiment to be valid it cannot be influenced by deliberate bias.

 

The climate-gate emails show that MMGW researchers are deliberately adding bias to their research.

 

 

game over for MMGW.

 

[heckofajobbrownie]

I'd be worried about "the deliberate falsification of information based on cherry picked, manipulated data" too. But the emails don't show that. You just want them to.

[osusev]

Come on global warming supporters, have you forgotten freshman science already?

 

Any experiment/ study that involves deliberate bias is invalid.

 

for a study or experiment to be valid it cannot be influenced by deliberate bias.

 

The climate-gate emails show that MMGW researchers are deliberately adding bias to their research.

 

 

game over for MMGW.

 

lol... deliberate bias..... If it was not for the Mountain load of science from every other discipline from all over the world that every major science organization and university all over the world has reviewed and replicated i might see the emails as an issue.... seriously... emails..... freshman "science" I tend to forget that collegiate level courses in "science" all are now contained into one course....lmao or do you mean elementary level education?

 

this does NOTHING to overwhelming amount of independent verified data from every major field.

[Westside Steve]

lol... deliberate bias..... If it was not for the Mountain load of science from every other discipline from all over the world that every major science organization and university all over the world has reviewed and replicated i might see the emails as an issue.... seriously... emails..... freshman "science" I tend to forget that collegiate level courses in "science" all are now contained into one course....lmao or do you mean elementary level education?

 

this does NOTHING to overwhelming amount of independent verified data from every major field.

 

 

One thing you said earlier rang a bell for me Sev.

You likened this to religion and I see a similarity.

Humans like to band together under a generated cause or belief.

Sports fans, Protestants, ethnic groups etc.

It's like the evangelist missionaries, Jehovas Witnesses et al, who get so frustrated that people are blind to what they firmly believe is true.

How can anyone sit by idly while the end of the world draws near on a spiritual or environmental level?

It's got to be distressing. If you believe the danger to the world or the soul.

 

The "imminent danger" isn't very clear nor is the salvation of any action the Europeans and leftists propose.

Even you believers can't tell me.

You allow people at the helm of the movement get away with gross exaggerations.

No wonder you get angry when trying to convert unbelievers.

 

How different are the movers and shakers in private jets and limos and mansions cryuing aboput green issues and Jimmy Swaggard picking up hookers?

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

This is a great post because it gets at the real problem with your argument.

 

What's the difference between what missionaries believe, or what a Jehovah's Witness believes, and what AGW proponents believe?

 

And you've really got to stop it with the "end of the world" argument. Nobody serious is talking wildly about the end of the world. It's a straw man.

 

You've got some people in certain island nations who realize that this probably means the end of their country, but that's about as existential as it gets.

 

I'm also wondering what it would take you, Steve, to come to the conclusion that the predictions are correct, especially since they're already coming in on the faster side. What would it take? If global temperatures resume the same sort of spike upwards that we saw in the 90s? Would that do it?

 

2010 is going to be a moderate El Nino year. Not as big as 1998, but bigger than the last one in 2005, if memory serves. We should see temperatures pop up again. You might even see a new record. Would that do it?

 

What do you need to see?

 

[Westside Steve]

And you've really got to stop it with the "end of the world" argument. Nobody serious is talking wildly about the end of the world. It's a straw man.

 

I'll get to the rest later but no, Sev, it's not a straw man at all.

From the president to Gore to the celebrity alarmists the peril is overstated constantly.

Did you see the ridiculous film they played at the opening of this summit?

"Please Save The World" ???

 

The film DAY AFTER TOMORROW?

"It could happen" said Gore.

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

No, what you're doing is the equivalent of arguing immigration reform and focusing on the people who think Mexicans are trying to re-take the American Southwest, and on the fact that some of these people might benefit from the immigration they oppose. Or continually pointing out that people who wanted to address the ozone hole used refrigerators and hair spray too, and then insisting that any effort to change the way refrigerators or hair spray work will be useless because no one is willing to sacrifice their refrigerators and hair pray.

 

That's all you do in this debate - focus on people who are fighting global warming but fly in private planes, and "the end of the world" people.

 

Over and over and over and over.

 

You've fouled off a pitch and started out of the batters box, but instead of getting back in and taking another pitch you're taking a triumphant lap around the bases as if you hit a home run.

 

But we're plenty used to this by now. The man who can dismiss an entire field of study with two gruff and incongruous sentences highlighted in bold, topped off with an emoticon. Who then claims he's exposing bullshit.

 

But I am interested - what would it take to convince you?

[Pumpkin Eater]

lol... deliberate bias..... If it was not for the Mountain load of science from every other discipline from all over the world that every major science organization and university all over the world has reviewed and replicated i might see the emails as an issue.... seriously... emails..... freshman "science" I tend to forget that collegiate level courses in "science" all are now contained into one course....lmao or do you mean elementary level education?

 

this does NOTHING to overwhelming amount of independent verified data from every major field.

 

Independent verified data... You mean like the emails discussing locking those scientists who don't believe in the fairy tale of MMGW out of peer review?

 

I'm actually taking my Biology 101 final later this week. I'm back in school to enter the medical field since my BS degree in Civil Engineering is worthless at this point. Of course the scientific method was the first thing they taught for both courses of study... hence freshman science.

[Westside Steve]

But I am interested - what would it take to convince you?

 

Of what Sev and Heck?

 

What exactly is it I don't understand or believe?

And what would you ask me to do then, were I to become enlightened?

 

 

While you're at it do a google search for Gobal Warming imminent peril or something similar.

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

Nevermind.

[osusev]

Steve I did not make any statement directly toward you that was heck.

 

Both sides of this issue believes they are right.... However one side is based upon data that has to be peer reviewed, independently replicated and verified on top of working with the smartest people in virtually every major scientific discipline and university,organizations in the world..... The other is backed by industry money produced pr and political/social ideology......

 

Call me skeptical but I think I will side with those who by the nature of their industries have to prove and subject themselves to oversight by the smartest people in the world. Rather than money based industries who are being pointed at as being responsible... Along with ideology based politics.....

 

Hard decision I tell you. Not to mention what's wrong with listening to data backed caution from the worlds leading universities and scientific organizations from every scientific field? Not doing so based upon "gut" feeling and pr paid for by industry seems well dumb

[Westside Steve]

Steve I did not make any statement directly toward you that was heck.

Yes.

I was just talking to both of you.

 

Both sides of this issue believes they are right.... However one side is based upon data that has to be peer reviewed, independently replicated and verified on top of working with the smartest people in virtually every major scientific discipline and university,organizations in the world..... The other is backed by industry money produced pr and political/social ideology......

 

Call me skeptical but I think I will side with those who by the nature of their industries have to prove and subject themselves to oversight by the smartest people in the world. Rather than money based industries who are being pointed at as being responsible... Along with ideology based politics.....

 

Hard decision I tell you. Not to mention what's wrong with listening to data backed caution from the worlds leading universities and scientific organizations from every scientific field? Not doing so based upon "gut" feeling and pr paid for by industry seems well dumb

 

OK

I guess you could also say you believe the "scientific community" whose funding depends on the whims of the "environmentalists."

Or the international community that wants the USA to cut them a check.

 

 

But since neither side expects any real legislation to come from the Danish dog and pony show I should expect we'll be be well past the tipping point to within my lifetime.

 

What do you think the "world leaders" will (or can) do and how much do you think it will help?

 

Heck's too grumpy to think about it .

 

WSS

 

 

 

 

[Westside Steve]

"nevermind"

 

Typical.

 

Come on professor, tell me exactly what I don't get about GW.

Tell me what I wrongly think and what I should believe.

 

WSS

[Pumpkin Eater]

To minimize the scientific impact of climategate, is just incredibly intellectually dishonest.

 

Anyone who really cares about the TRUTH, regardless of the politics, is concerned about the deliberate

 

falsification of information based on cherry picked, manipulated data.

 

Anything else is simply like the followers of Charles Manson calling for him to be freed because

 

he was God.

 

I those of us who really care about right and wrong are surrounded by idiots.

 

It's unfortunate to hear MMGW supporters clucking around about loads of independent verified evidence when these emails prove that there was a deliberate bias injected into a very significant portion of that evidence. Most of the evidence that they point to only shows that the earth WAS going through a warming phase, which no one disputes; the earth has been going through cyclical temperature changes for billions of years. What they ignore is that the earth has been cooling the last ten years. Their loads of evidence that support MMGW is junk science, as proven by the captured emails and the deliberate lack of unbiased peer review.

[osusev]

Steve in "theory" these world leaders want to do something.....however in practice each leader has to answer to some sort of influence...... meaning MONEY.

 

Like the "health care reforms".... which at this point is a dog and pony show for PR with some Minor reforms that influence peddling will stop any real reforms. Humans imho dont want to sacrifice immediate comfort or resources (money) for something they will not be alive to deal with.....

 

personally the answer lies in innovation that is linked with monetary reward for the innovators and monetary gain for the consumers (cheaper) with governments hopefully pushing in a direction....

 

IMHO unless all of the major industrialized nations are faced with catastrophic disasters they will not stop polluting... quite frankly people who dont believe that pumping toxins into our atmosphere has any effect are like flat earthers. the magnitude of what those effects actually are are pointing to trends not absolute facts yet....... either way It is totally irresponsible to ignore the POTENTIAL for massive problems for our children and future generations.... its funny to me that the "conservatives" in the U.S. belong to the side that oppose and deny.... its totally hypocritical. I would rather be "conservative" CONSERVE making up part of that term and bet on the smartest people and organizations in the world rather than politicians and industry backed pr........

 

Like I said provide data and peer reviewed studies that have been replicated to provide backing to a position.... the other side just uses signatures and pr along with titles..... CONSERVatives....lol.

[Westside Steve]

Steve in "theory" these world leaders want to do something.....however in practice each leader has to answer to some sort of influence...... meaning MONEY.

 

Sure.

And if any world leaders are on the receiving end of that money of course it sounds like a good idea.

Come on Sev, borrowing 30 billion from China to give the third world to combat GW effects (not until 2020) does exactly what?

That's beyond even Heck's projected tipping point.

 

Like the "health care reforms".... which at this point is a dog and pony show for PR with some Minor reforms that influence peddling will stop any real reforms. Humans imho dont want to sacrifice immediate comfort or resources (money) for something they will not be alive to deal with.....

 

That bill is truly garbage and I'm to the left of many here on it.

The Dems really should be ashamed to force this shit through.

 

personally the answer lies in innovation that is linked with monetary reward for the innovators and monetary gain for the consumers (cheaper) with governments hopefully pushing in a direction....

 

And that will be the case with or without any international boondoggles. Ironically China will build all or most of the solar wind etc stuff since we've taxed US manufacturing out of competition.

 

IMHO unless all of the major industrialized nations are faced with catastrophic disasters they will not stop polluting...

 

Probably not.

And even if those "disasters" came to pass the mammal population will continue to skyrocket.

 

quite frankly people who dont believe that pumping toxins into our atmosphere has any effect

 

And that statement is no different than saying that you think the world will end next week.

Sure it has an effect. How serious? How long do we have? How will sending a check to the third world is 202o stop it?

 

 

are like flat earthers. the magnitude of what those effects actually are are pointing to trends not absolute facts yet....... either way It is totally irresponsible to ignore the POTENTIAL for massive problems for our children and future generations.... its funny to me that the "conservatives" in the U.S. belong to the side that oppose and deny.... its totally hypocritical. I would rather be "conservative" CONSERVE making up part of that term and bet on the smartest people and organizations in the world rather than politicians and industry backed pr........

 

Well rest easy. US industry will continue to give way to China or anyone else who's willing to make the stuff we want cheap.

And we'll buy it.

 

Like I said provide data and peer reviewed studies that have been replicated to provide backing to a position.... the other side just uses signatures and pr along with titles..... CONSERVatives....lol.

 

Couild be Sev. But since I don't buy that any of the "solutions" will make a dent I just don't care enough to get too excited.

And I really don't give a shit about Obama's tap dance for the Eurotrash.

 

 

To be honest I'm more worried by the poplation growth than most other stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Population_Bomb

And nobody cares about that.

It's just not the disaster du jour.

 

WSS

[osusev]

well steve most of your positions I agree with, I dont think 30 billion will do squat in Africa or South America...... they need to eat which means farming or selling wood, etc.... its all pr bs.

 

This "reform" on health care is such a piece of garbage ( A MAJOR victory for the health insurance companies) let see penalize the rest of americans for not buying overinflated, inefficient paper pushing middle financial money using industry and than forcing them to buy from those same companies...... what happened to Monopolies being illegal?..... yet they still get an exemption? why exactly? I thought competition fosters innovation in a "fair free market economic system".......

 

Oh you mean you cant denied for pre existing conditions..... sure they will just jack up the copay and premiums so high you will deny yourself and still go bankrupt.......

 

ooooo the 100 billion dollar "contribution" for the pharm industry..... sure when you add 30 million more and keep their overinflated prices in place that contribution is a balloon mirage..... just jacked up prices to include this "contribution=passed on the the U.S. consumer" I like the anti protectionism policies used when they are convenient.... sure let chinese manufactured good flow into the country yet drugs...... (manufactured by the same companies overseas and relabeled) cant flow in because of "safeties".... like the safety of the domestic system actually works...(whens the last time you saw a law firm add... pushing for you to call IF you used durg x)..... nevermind that Canadien/Mexican pharms are already being bought over the internet and by travel........

 

This is such BS I cant even wrap my mind around the PR snow job the Obama and Dems are trying to pass off as "progress"....... BS....... I call it like I see it..... Mccain was right about one thing. for sure to lower costs TORT REfORM is absolutely necessary..... BS.... Obama is a lawyer and does not want to do anything to hurt is professions lobbyists........

 

I do like Obama, I understood this was next to impossible with all the lobbying money to pass in congress.... the political reelection realities in congress was used by the lobbyists very effectively...... BS....

[Westside Steve]

I do like Obama, I understood this was next to impossible with all the lobbying money to pass in congress.... the political reelection realities in congress was used by the lobbyists very effectively...... BS....

 

Well Sev, I don't like him and this is an excellent reason why.

Lobbyists money is chumpchange compared to the bribes to recalcitrant Democrats to vote for this shit.

He is the lobbyist here.

 

It will make things worse for every American.

 

WSS

[osusev]

i dont think it will make things worse, rather incremently insignificant...... I will wait to see the bill once the house and senate reconcile a final version.... it still has a shot at being somewhat effective...

[Westside Steve]

i dont think it will make things worse, rather incremently insignificant...... I will wait to see the bill once the house and senate reconcile a final version.... it still has a shot at being somewhat effective...

 

Effective? How.

Americans who worry about health care are shocked by the costs.

Now they will be higher.

Anyone can go through open enrollmant with pre existing conditions now.

It's just terribly expensive.

I don't see that will change.

Except that Medicare will be even worse.

 

It's a fallacy that those not covered today will be covered for free.

 

The ER uninsured are almost all Medicaid patients.

No change there.

 

The claims (fear tactics) made by the proponents are false.

WSS

[osusev]

the reason why I am waiting is because the House bill is much better than the crap that just came out of the senate...... I am curious on how they are going to reconcile the bills because the liberals in the House are much more in power than the liberals in the Senate..... The senate is now run by the republicrats Nelson and Lieberman....