Global Warming backdown

[Moonbox]

It's not that much of a mystery to the scientists, though, who have built models with CO2 and solar factors being the chief drivers. They haven't tried to say it's CO2 alone that drives temperature, as that would be overly simplistic.

The problem is that the 'scientists' haven't been able to explain or predict any of the outside variables. They can't even really explain why temperatures cooled in the 60's and 70's. If they can't explain that, how can they explain the natural factors, and what significance they play, in the warming over the last decade and a half???

My point is that their 'models' are based on fantasy and assumptions. They don't even understand the data they're putting in, so how can we expect them to make accurate predictions and models?

The scientists don't understand solar output, ocean currents, weather, the relation of Co2 to plants and their robustness and innumerable other factors. The globe was something like 10 degrees colder 6000 years ago than it is today. The 10-15 years of Global Warming data, and the amount the planet has warmed since then, is statistically insignificant.

We don't know enough to make huge decisions. The matter obviously deserves plenty of attention and further research as none of us want our kids living in a wasteland, but things like Copenhagen are blatant abuses of people's fears and ignorance.

Edited February 12, 2010 by Moonbox

[Michael Hardner]

The problem is that the 'scientists' haven't been able to explain or predict any of the outside variables. They can't even really explain why temperatures cooled in the 60's and 70's. If they can't explain that, how can they explain the natural factors, and what significance they play, in the warming over the last decade and a half???

The models don't have to be spot on accurate for a given date. But they calculate correlations over long periods of time.

My point is that their 'models' are based on fantasy and assumptions. They don't even understand the data they're putting in, so how can we expect them to make accurate predictions and models?

They're not based on fantasy and assumptions, they're based on real data. They understand things to a point, but no natural science can explain things 100%.

The scientists don't understand solar output, ocean currents, weather, the relation of Co2 to plants and their robustness and innumerable other factors. The globe was something like 10 degrees colder 6000 years ago than it is today. The 10-15 years of Global Warming data, and the amount the planet has warmed since then, is statistically insignificant.

They have modeled temperatures back further than 6000 years ago. I don't know what you mean by 10 to 15 years of Global Warming data.

We don't know enough to make huge decisions. The matter obviously deserves plenty of attention and further research as none of us want our kids living in a wasteland, but things like Copenhagen are blatant abuses of people's fears and ignorance.

It has received plenty of attention and research. But the information is poorly communicated, and small errors, discrepancies and disagreements are blown way out of proportion by right-wing media. We know as much as we could be expected to know, and the findings are pretty much as conclusive as you would expect them to be.

Given the situation, we still can't build consensus that there is even a problem.

As such, I think the problem is mainly with communication.

[eyeball]

Half the issue people have with Global Warming theory are the rabid zealots who start wetting themselves if anyone so much as QUESTIONS canonical GW theory.

What's the other half of the issue?

Whatever it is, in the wake of Climate-gate my ability to trust scientists of any stripe in any official capacity whatsoever is probably forever shattered.

I know how you feel, half the issue I have with our economic/political systems are the rabid zealots who wet themselves if anyone so much as questions the canonical theories that underpin these.

The other half of my issue of course is the impact that adhering to these is having on human beings, not to mention the planet.

[William Ashley]

Did you even listen to that interview? The money quote is "I have absolutely no vested interested in the IPPC process" and yet he has spent his entire career associated with this issue.

There are many, many people who are now utterly confused by what is happening. They are scrambling to deal with skepticism.

William Ashley, surely you are aware of this. You can no longer simply claim that it is a dog and then sit back and have everyone accept your pronouncement.

Take a look at these BBC poll results.

Or how about this?

The Times

And yes, that is the same Pachauri who flies from NY to Delhi for weekend cricket matches and writes soft-porn bodice rippers.

You can BS and deny all you'd like but until you explain where all the polar ice has gone, your spew will not nudge me the slightest to your insanity. Popular sentiment does not equate reality.

here take a look at this article from a week ago

http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Arctic+vanishing+fast+researcher/2532081/story.html

Edited February 12, 2010 by William Ashley

[Moonbox]

The models don't have to be spot on accurate for a given date. But they calculate correlations over long periods of time.

They're not based on fantasy and assumptions, they're based on real data. They understand things to a point, but no natural science can explain things 100%.

They have modeled temperatures back further than 6000 years ago. I don't know what you mean by 10 to 15 years of Global Warming data.

Any modelling back that far is based on giant assumptions. Our data even the last few hundred years is AT BEST testimonial, disregarding the last century or so. Core samples etc tell us very little. There are plenty of things we have no way of understanding about what the world was like 1000's of years ago and thus any 'modelling' done going backwards are based on tremendous assumptions.

But the information is poorly communicated, and small errors, discrepancies and disagreements are blown way out of proportion by right-wing media. We know as much as we could be expected to know, and the findings are pretty much as conclusive as you would expect them to be.

Total rubbish. Climate science is still in its infancy and we know very little. We have trouble predicting weather from one day to another. That's pretty telling of our ability to predict long term climate phenomena.

Given the situation, we still can't build consensus that there is even a problem.

For good reasons.

As such, I think the problem is mainly with communication.

Particularly in the way mainstream media and asshats like Al Gore have mobilized the masses through sensationalism and fear-mongering.

[Michael Hardner]

Any modelling back that far is based on giant assumptions. Our data even the last few hundred years is AT BEST testimonial, disregarding the last century or so. Core samples etc tell us very little. There are plenty of things we have no way of understanding about what the world was like 1000's of years ago and thus any 'modelling' done going backwards are based on tremendous assumptions.

Our data is testimonial ? What about proxies ?Where are you getting this from ?

Particularly in the way mainstream media and asshats like Al Gore have mobilized the masses through sensationalism and fear-mongering.

Nobody should be quoting Al Gore to prove anything. But mainstream media mistakes cut both ways. And your quotes seem to show that you're just as prone as anybody to fall into the pits of disinformation.

[eyeball]

And your quotes seem to show that you're just as prone as anybody to fall into the pits of disinformation.

Or push people in as the case may be.

[Bugs]

Margaret Wente is one of those people who accurately expresses the moods of Toronto's chattering classes ... those people who define what 'fashionable' is, in the realm of culture and acceptable thinking, to those multitudes who have little clue ... but who want to appear to have all the fashionable attitudes and opinions. She is the choirmaster who give the signal for the great Toronto middle classes that it is now fashionable to pull their heads out of their asses.

Obviously, even these blasé creatures have standards.

In 2007 ... the [formerly] respected United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, made a shocking claim: The Himalayan glaciers could melt away as soon as 2035.

These glaciers provide the headwaters for Asia's nine largest rivers and lifelines for the more than one billion people who live downstream. Melting ice and snow would create mass flooding, followed by mass drought. The glacier story was reported around the world. Last December, a spokesman for the World Wildlife Fund, an environmental pressure group, warned, “The deal reached at Copenhagen will have huge ramifications for the lives of hundreds of millions of people who are already highly vulnerable due to widespread poverty.” To dramatize their country's plight, Nepal's top politicians strapped on oxygen tanks and held a cabinet meeting on Mount Everest.

But the claim was rubbish, and the world's top glaciologists knew it. It was based not on rigorously peer-reviewed science but on an anecdotal report by the WWF itself. When its background came to light on the eve of Copenhagen, Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the IPCC, shrugged it off. But now, even leading scientists and environmental groups admit the IPCC is facing a crisis of credibility that makes the Climategate affair look like small change.

[url="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-great-global-warming-collapse/article1458206/"[/url]

The movement is dead? Well, maybe ... except they're still working us for money. But that, surely, isn't the end of it. Crimes were committed. Come on, these people constructed a tissue of lies to deceive the world into making huge, wasteful expenditures -- all so they would get to play big-shot for awhile.

It's just the Margaret Wente is a doyen of the chattering classes, and her vocabulary doesn't include words like "lying bunch of bastards" -- although that hardly seems adequate.

It isn't as if she doesn't have standards -- it's just that she usually uses them on the kind of people who don't know which fork to use for their salad course. After all, on Ms. Wente's moral scale, these enviro-crooks have titles, academic degrees, and probably entry to all the best parties. They can't be all bad.

It takes guts for a journalist to speak the plain ordinary truth about people above the salt -- even it is a mouthful of euphemisms that blunts every opportunity for us to learn from this experience.

Perhaps we few who are less blinded by the accoutrements of social class and privilege, have the plain words that she lacks. We know the scandals aren't over yet, we scratch our heads when these enviro-creeps just stand around, as if they are still believable, as if they can be trusted, as if they are going to continue to get their funding.

She admits to all the necessary facts. She just can't say that these people are, in fact, criminals. She ignores the profits all these fat-cat liars managed to garner for themselves. India won't accept the word of it's own national, the academic hustler and charlatan, Raj Pachauri. (The Times discovered that Mr. Pachauri's own company has collected millions in grants to study the effects of glacial melting – all on the strength of that bogus glacier claim, which happens to have been endorsed by the same scientist who now runs the unit that got the money.)

Why can't we use the word CRIMINAL on this one? Why isn't fraud considered? It isn't as if these people are any more respectable than Col. Russell Williams, are they?

Until now, anyone who questioned the credibility of the IPCC was labelled as a climate skeptic, or worse. But many climate scientists now sense a sinking ship, and they're bailing out. Among them is Andrew Weaver, a climatologist at the University of Victoria who acknowledges that the climate body has crossed the line into advocacy. Even Britain's Greenpeace has called for Mr. Pachauri's resignation.

Who cares if the socially prominent goofs she cites are bailing out? Why are they to be thought of as honorable[/i ]scientists? If they were the genuine goods, seeking truth above all else, why were they fooled? Where were their critical faculties?

She goes on to recite the pieties, required of all members of the chattering classes, whenever they feel the urge to be critical of one of their own.

None of this is to say that global warming isn't real, or that human activity doesn't play a role, or that the IPCC is entirely wrong, or that measures to curb greenhouse-gas emissions aren't valid. But the strategy pursued by activists (including scientists who have crossed the line into advocacy) has turned out to be fatally flawed.

But that's just blather. In fact, she's lying to herself, as much as to us. The climate changes all the time, certainly when you measure down to the tenths of a degree Centigrade, it does ... and there is no reliable evidence of global warming whatever.

NONE!!!!! The only honest people involved in climate science were the skeptics. They ought to be recognized as heroes, and the lemmings ought to be discarded as useless, the kind that go along to get along.

In fact, the environmentalists in general, including these blue-ribbon liars, used every means at their disposal to gag their critics. They used their classrooms to propagate the lies, and forced their students, on pain of failure, to reproduce these lies. They have almost certainly tried (at least) to destroy academic careers, as well as used blackmail, extortion, and deceit to intimidate honest skeptics. Further, they tried to corrupt Science itself, when they knew the data was turning against them These people are despicable.

Margaret Wente is the kind of one-dimensional jerk that would catch a mouse, and return it to the back yard. She can't seem to finish the job, and let the squires of North Toronto know the truth in bald terms. Which is: YOU'VE BEEN PUNKED!.

Now it's a time for retribution.

Edited February 13, 2010 by Bugs

[Oleg Bach]

There is snow in Texas - Briton that is usually moderate was also snowed in - as is Washington DC - so I guess all the denying factions of global warming can jump for joy and continue to rape and plunder nature..and each other. BUT don't worry wait till summer comes and you will be cooking in your own sweat - we do not have global warming or cooling - we have a smack you kiss you mother nature seeking revenge through intense vacilation.

[Michael Hardner]

Wente is a journalist, but she's a print journalist so it's difficult to know whether she chatters. She is far right-of-centre when it comes to Toronto.

And... Is this Hymalayan example going to be reposted over and over again ? We already had 'Global Warming Backdown' from you.

I don't think we need to have this many threads on Global Warming...

[eyeball]

There is snow in Texas - Briton that is usually moderate was also snowed in - as is Washington DC - so I guess all the denying factions of global warming can jump for joy and continue to rape and plunder nature..and each other. BUT don't worry wait till summer comes and you will be cooking in your own sweat - we do not have global warming or cooling - we have a smack you kiss you mother nature seeking revenge through intense vacilation.

These are definitely good times for skeptics. It remains to be seen whether these are their halcyon days however.

[Oleg Bach]

Wente is a journalist, but she's a print journalist so it's difficult to know whether she chatters. She is far right-of-centre when it comes to Toronto.

And... Is this Hymalayan example going to be reposted over and over again ? We already had 'Global Warming Backdown' from you.

I don't think we need to have this many threads on Global Warming...

There are many threads because there are many different apologists that perk up on the subject - Most people are materialy and economically minded. When they hear global warming they imagine someone putting a plug in the smoke stacks of industry and thus putting a plug in their cash flow...So each person has their own excuse and many of them on why they do not need to change bad behaviour.

[Michael Hardner]

There are many threads because there are many different apologists that perk up on the subject - Most people are materialy and economically minded. When they hear global warming they imagine someone putting a plug in the smoke stacks of industry and thus putting a plug in their cash flow...So each person has their own excuse and many of them on why they do not need to change bad behaviour.

Except that I think our boy here started the other thread too.

[Oleg Bach]

Lesson number one Michael..Never say "think" - always say I believe or I firmly believe..I remember reading court documents where a witness filed a report that said - I think this happened and I think that happened...Well I think that Lady GA GA is coming over tonight dressed a french maid and is going to cuddle up - It's not going to happen. Small talk about this guy posting two threads or topics on the same matter does not matter. Don't sweat the small stuff.

[Michael Hardner]

Lesson number one Michael..Never say "think" - always say I believe or I firmly believe..I remember reading court documents where a witness filed a report that said - I think this happened and I think that happened...Well I think that Lady GA GA is coming over tonight dressed a french maid and is going to cuddle up - It's not going to happen. Small talk about this guy posting two threads or topics on the same matter does not matter. Don't sweat the small stuff.

I KNOW Bugs started the other thread:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=15855

[Oleg Bach]

I KNOW Bugs started the other thread:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=15855

Was wondering how you would react to my fatherly lecture. So what's up with you - are you going out to socialize a bit? Lately I have become disinterested with people - taking a less helpful approach I guess..so do you want to HELP Bugs - or do you just want to squish him?

[Michael Hardner]

Was wondering how you would react to my fatherly lecture. So what's up with you - are you going out to socialize a bit? Lately I have become disinterested with people - taking a less helpful approach I guess..so do you want to HELP Bugs - or do you just want to squish him?

I want him to be a good poster so I can enjoy myself here. I'm spending more time here lately. It is winter after all. I'm also jogging now, though... I know... and having the odd cigarette...

[Oleg Bach]

I want him to be a good poster so I can enjoy myself here. I'm spending more time here lately. It is winter after all. I'm also jogging now, though... I know... and having the odd cigarette...

Your a bright person.. don't worry about the vices - they will not kill you..Jogging might...so Micheal - what do you have planned for the future? Are you going to save the world?

[Michael Hardner]

Your a bright person.. don't worry about the vices - they will not kill you..Jogging might...so Micheal - what do you have planned for the future? Are you going to save the world?

Me saving the world ? Under some sci-fi scenario I suppose. I don't know why you're fingering me as a bright person among the many bright lights here. I sure don't think I stand out. Of course, flattery will get you everywhere.

[Oleg Bach]

Me saving the world ? Under some sci-fi scenario I suppose. I don't know why you're fingering me as a bright person among the many bright lights here. I sure don't think I stand out. Of course, flattery will get you everywhere.

I FIRMLY believe I will go out and get a coffee. I noticed you have some writing skill. Maybe you can take it more seriously...this is off topic a bit but who I know to be brilliant is Bush Cheney - From what I gathered he is a semi-retired black naval officer - who's father was a touring musican - who took him on the road on occassion - most don't like him because he is American - but once you gain his trust he is highly informative... anyway - Michael ... I sure wish that I was inclined to either go visit the X or go across the street and check out the club..but - I think I will drink coffee and smoke and lay low...talk to you later - It's good to make friends - thanks.

[Michael Hardner]

It's good to make friends - thanks.

Enjoy the small stuff, OB.

[Oleg Bach]

Enjoy the small stuff, OB.

To appreciate what you have leads to more of it. To take the small things for granted usually ends in the fact that you have nothing. The smile of a fine woman - the brilliant eyes of an infant..the sound of crows calling my name in the spring.

[Sir Bandelot]

there is no reliable evidence of global warming whatever.

NONE!!!!!

When massive 200 km long icebergs start floating towards a town near you, no reasonable person can deny something whacky is happening. It's only a question of why, and whether anything could or should to be done. If something has to be done, do we wait until the last possible minute (as we usually do) or would that be too late.

Pardon me if I think more research and intelligent debate is needed, less partisan hype.

[Bugs]

There is snow in Texas - Briton that is usually moderate was also snowed in - as is Washington DC - so I guess all the denying factions of global warming can jump for joy and continue to rape and plunder nature..and each other. BUT don't worry wait till summer comes and you will be cooking in your own sweat - we do not have global warming or cooling - we have a smack you kiss you mother nature seeking revenge through intense vacilation.

Eww ... I don't think that's anyone's answer. You should try to balance your cynicism a tad. No doubt there is great joy in a Shire, as these lying frauds get one-upped in this cruel way by Mother Nature ... but consider, before you float off on a cloud of sanctimony ... What reason do people now have to believe that global warming is a real threat to our immediate future as a species? Hmmm?

The people of the Shire have been gagged, and stifled in their doubts ... insulted ... and the Ringwraiths set upon them. Surely they can be excused a little exuberance because their oppressors have been revealed?

Nobody says we can't go back to conservation. In fact, it is because of 'environmentalism' that the world hasn't done much 'conservation' for a decade and more. The reason we have the biggest environmental blight in Canada, and possibly North America ... save Louisiana ... is because of Greenpeace!!!

I don't know why you give these enviro-deceivers any respect at all.

[Oleg Bach]

Eww ... I don't think that's anyone's answer. You should try to balance your cynicism a tad. No doubt there is great joy in a Shire, as these lying frauds get one-upped in this cruel way by Mother Nature ... but consider, before you float off on a cloud of sanctimony ... What reason do people now have to believe that global warming is a real threat to our immediate future as a species? Hmmm?

The people of the Shire have been gagged, and stifled in their doubts ... insulted ... and the Ringwraiths set upon them. Surely they can be excused a little exuberance because their oppressors have been revealed?

Nobody says we can't go back to conservation. In fact, it is because of 'environmentalism' that the world hasn't done much 'conservation' for a decade and more. The reason we have the biggest environmental blight in Canada, and possibly North America ... save Louisiana ... is because of Greenpeace!!!

I don't know why you give these enviro-deceivers any respect at all.

They mean well but have no experience. Growing up on the Oak Ridge Morraine - I experenced nature in it's rawest and most pristine form. The land mass was the oldest in north america - the ridge was the first thing expose after the glacieric melt. I knew kettle lakes where the water was pure as cool satin - there was mud between my toes as I explored the swamps and high ground..THEN I saw developement bury and pave over the largest and most pure water source in the world.

Nature was comforting for me _ I could grab a rock and drop down 60 feet to the bottom of a pure spring lake...I know what conservation is - because I saw and lived in what was meant to be conserved - the modern ones only know high def television...it is not their fault - How can they be accurate and appreciative of what they have never truely experienced?