Scientists Challenge UN and Gore

[wyly]

I don't think so. Certainly the AGW climate scientists are known because the smear campaigns against them have made them famous. I think people on both sides make the mistake of using weather in their arguments, though.

there is difference the deniers fail to comprehend...the denier world generally points to singular events as proof there is no warming...CC supporters point to singular events as part of an accumulation of singular events in a long term trend...

[wyly]

It's not as big of a mistake as some try to claim though.

Weather is the point on a graph, climate is the whole graph. The problem is, the pro-AGW crowd doesn't stick to using the real observed numbers. Last winter we had month after month of record cold temperatures all over the world, thousands of records were broken. At the end of the winter, the pro-AGW crowd proclaimed that it had been the HOTTEST winter on record, and their graph didn't look anything like the real weather that we actually had. The real numbers didn't give them the results they liked, so they just changed them. We've got the coldest winter ever already going on AGAIN right now, how much do you want to bet the AGW guys claim warming again at the end of the winter?

show us the data...we'll wait...

[wyly]

For if they exist then we should not be too quick to make extrapolations of present trends with the assumption that nothing will ever buck them! As I said, Mother Earth is a powerful lady! Surely her systems would have some inbuilt resistance to tampering...

there were long periods in the past where the atmosphere had very little oxygen but there was still life that metabolized the gas hydrogen sulfide, H2S very toxic to life today ...there is no single stable state for the biosphere, the earth's atmosphere and oceans evolve over time what is the norm today will not be the norm in 500 million or a billion yrs from now...quite likely that if there is life a billion yrs from now the atmosphere it breathes will be toxic to life alive today...

and then there is the GH tipping point, a point where the planet heats to a point there is no recovery, sometimes called the runaway greenhouse effect, which is believed may have happened on Venus...

[wyly]

This particular argument is really tedious. I mean... if people cant tell the difference between a peak or valley in a jagged line, and the trend of that line over time, that sorta kills the debate right there. Carrying on would be sorta like beating up a newborn child.

can't see the forest for the trees...

[Bryan]

Other than your own anecdotes, do you have any evidence of this?

I'm very surprised that I have to document this. People have incredibly short memories.

First, lets Google "2010 record cold"

http://www.google.ca/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=2010+record+cold&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&redir_esc=&ei=N3oQTe71OpSCsQPOz8HcAg

Any of that bring back memories? The daily, weekly, monthly temperatures all around the world, all year long were thousands upon thousands of new records for cold temperatures. Please, tell me you guys are not that brain damaged that you don't remember this, it was the top news story practically daily on even the most left leaning news sources.

Those are the points on the graph for 2010: down, down, down.

What about about Australia?:

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=2010+record+cold+australia&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

Yes, it was the coldest year ever there too.

So, what do the usual suspects Hadley-CRU, NOAA, and Goddard announce?

http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2010/12/climate_change

That's right, they turn around and tell us that 2010 was the warmest year on record!!!!!

Now look again at this chart:

http://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/original-size/20101211_WOC760.gif

Notice how according to Hadley, the hottest temps have supposedly been the last 15 years? Compare that to the interview that Phil Jones (the head of Hadley) gave to the BBC where he admitted that for the past 15 years there had been no statistically significant warming.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html

No warming in 15 years, during which time, Jones and his cronies have been bleating non-stop about runaway warming. They knew full well the whole time it wasn't true and they still continued to make the claim. It certainly puts the Climategate emails into perspective where Jones and other CRU members admitted to falsifying data, destroying evidence, rigging the peer-review process, and circumventing the scientific method.

Anyone who is paying attention can easily catch them lying. Try keeping track THIS winter. Watch the international news. Right now, all over the world, they are already breaking last winter's records, and are shaping up to have the coldest winter ever recorded, again. Anyone want to bet that at the end of the winter, Hadley will announce that THIS winter will have been one of the warmest on record?

[Pliny]

Oh, but they're only one player working towards globalization, sometimes called New World Order by paranoiacs. And fear is used as a motivator to change minds every day.

Is there or is there not concern about the climate?

Is there only one player concerned about climate change?

Maurice Strong was the man for the job to design the Kyoto accord. He was appointed because he had the correct view. He designed the corrupt Iraq food for oil scam as well and you would think that after that he would have been run out of town but no he appears to have gotten a promotion and is appointed as the driving force behind Kyoto.

Part of the problem is that issues are communicated as if everyone listening is an idiot. It's not true, only a significant minority are idiots, a majority don't care, another minority is smart but biased, and another small but important minority is smart, informed and open minded.

I think the majority care about the issue but they are waiting for all the debris to settle. A lot are contributing to a reduction in their energy consumption. So they are conscious of the issue and do care. What is confusing about the whole thing is the frenzy created by political infighting and over- reactive policies that appear to have nothing to do with a resolution of the scientifically presented problem. Creating a carbon tax or carbon trading? It allows players that can afford to pay the tax or trade carbon credits to just continue business as usual, and not only that, it kills any competition marginalized by the tax. It's a further encouragement for corporate polluters to move operations to developing countries where there is a surplus of credits and who knows what other unintended consequences they will bring into being.

I think the biggest problem is that the people communicating as though everyone is an idiot are the idiots.

[Pliny]

there is difference the deniers fail to comprehend...the denier world generally points to singular events as proof there is no warming...CC supporters point to singular events as part of an accumulation of singular events in a long term trend...

And you keep trying to make the argument about global warming. I think the 1.5 degree increase in temperature over the century is accepted as a trend. Pointing to that long term trend as the cause of any singular weather event is a stretch.

I think the biggest problem that AGW proponents have is GW is not scary enough. So now it has to be about "climate change" and every singular event can now be used as an indicator of proof. It is getting sad.

[wyly]

I'm very surprised that I have to document this. People have incredibly short memories.

First, lets Google "2010 record cold"

http://www.google.ca/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=2010+record+cold&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&redir_esc=&ei=N3oQTe71OpSCsQPOz8HcAg

Any of that bring back memories? The daily, weekly, monthly temperatures all around the world, all year long were thousands upon thousands of new records for cold temperatures. Please, tell me you guys are not that brain damaged that you don't remember this, it was the top news story practically daily on even the most left leaning news sources.

Those are the points on the graph for 2010: down, down, down.

What about about Australia?:

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=2010+record+cold+australia&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

Yes, it was the coldest year ever there too.

So, what do the usual suspects Hadley-CRU, NOAA, and Goddard announce?

http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2010/12/climate_change

That's right, they turn around and tell us that 2010 was the warmest year on record!!!!!

so australia has a few days of cold weather wowzer...when did anyone claim (other than the uninformed and scientifically ignorant) that there would be no cold weather? please dig that info up for us...australia occupies 1.5% of the globe how significant do you think that a few days weather are globally?...

Now look again at this chart:

http://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/original-size/20101211_WOC760.gif

Notice how according to Hadley, the hottest temps have supposedly been the last 15 years? Compare that to the interview that Phil Jones (the head of Hadley) gave to the BBC where he admitted that for the past 15 years there had been no statistically significant warming.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html

No warming in 15 years, during which time, Jones and his cronies have been bleating non-stop about runaway warming. They knew full well the whole time it wasn't true and they still continued to make the claim. It certainly puts the Climategate emails into perspective where Jones and other CRU members admitted to falsifying data, destroying evidence, rigging the peer-review process, and circumventing the scientific method.

I'll borrow from waldo who explained it so well...

waldo Posted 14 December 2010 - 01:55 PM

View PostKeepitsimple, on 14 December 2010 - 12:21 PM, said:

We now know that there has been a "lack of warming" since 1995 - or to put it in Phil Jones terms "not statistically significant".

gee, should one even bother to resurrect the "Intellectual Dishonest" thread that TrueMetis raised over this same nonsense from the Shadyone?

notwithstanding:

- the existence of all the other global temperature records that showed/show statistically significant warming,

- the fact the time period in the question raised to Phil Jones was a purposely crafted interval chosen by a renowned denier as fed to the BBC reporter,

- the CRU record has historically shown less warming (than all other global temperature records)... simply because it doesn't actually include temperature data from the Arctic (the area of the globe presenting the most dramatic warming),

- the existing trend showed warming @ 0.12C per decade

- statistical significance was lacking by only 2%

- statistical significance existed if the period of time was simply moved back a single year from 1995-2009 to 1994-2009

notwithstanding all of the above... Phil Jones has recently been asked to comment in response to a like question - to provide an update intended to include temperature data from the point of that BBC interview question. Gee... how come the mainstream media and denialsphere hasn't bothered to wildly echo and trump the fact that Phil Jones (as independently corroborated), now advises that the CRU data (1995-2010) does show warming at the statistically significant level. Go figure!

Anyone who is paying attention can easily catch them lying. Try keeping track THIS winter. Watch the international news. Right now, all over the world, they are already breaking last winter's records, and are shaping up to have the coldest winter ever recorded, again. Anyone want to bet that at the end of the winter, Hadley will announce that THIS winter will have been one of the warmest on record?

you suffer from the most common delusion, a cold day in your backyard translates to "the entire globe must be cold as well" next to saipan you may be the most uninformed person on this forum...as well the tin foil hat conspiracy still lives on, yup millions of scientists are lying because of some socialist plot to steal our money...

[waldo]

The real numbers didn't give them the results they liked, so they just changed them.

Other than your own anecdotes, do you have any evidence of this?

I'm very surprised that I have to document this. People have incredibly short memories.

congrats! You’ve extended upon a fine tradition of MLW denier ‘eyeballing’ temperature analysis… to now include the prowess of “Google search for cold temperatures”… well done! Imagine the temerity of scientists to base their analysis and related statements on actual temperature data from the historical global climatology network data.

yours is certainty a novel approach – one rarely encountered anymore… after all, no self-respecting denier actually presumes to challenge (global) warming itself. But you go steps beyond, as you’ve now moved into the conspiracy realm, while throwing in your claims of data manipulation/fraud, while attacking the integrity of world renowned organizations… uhhh… like NASA, like NOAA, etc. Yes! Well done, sir… well done! (for completeness sake, we’ll really need you to step-up and offer your assessment and placement of the satellite record and related organizations/scientists).

So, what do the usual suspects Hadley-CRU, NOAA, and Goddard announce?

http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2010/12/climate_change

That's right, they turn around and tell us that 2010 was the warmest year on record!!!!!

I’ve not seen those formal pronouncements… your own link speaks to the “likelihood” of 2010 becoming the warmest year on record. Certainly, once the December temperature anomalies are released, those pronouncements will arrive… or not, depending on the results. Certainly, there is strong expectation that 2010 will position within the top 3 warmest years.

Now look again at this chart:

http://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/original-size/20101211_WOC760.gif

Notice how according to Hadley, the hottest temps have supposedly been the last 15 years? Compare that to the interview that Phil Jones (the head of Hadley) gave to the BBC where he admitted that for the past 15 years there had been no statistically significant warming.

and… you give us further cause to remark on your exceptional ‘eyeballing’ prowess! Ever hear of liner trend analysis – what a concept, hey? But wait… hey now! Your eyeballing prowess seems to have missed 1990 coming in strong at #15!

this denier nugget has been dispensed with in other MLW climate change related threads … thanks to wyly for quoting a few of the summation points to you. I might add/reinforce a couple:

- Phil Jones answered a question… your described ‘admittance’ wasn’t a revelation… it was common knowledge (to those that track the data), as all data anomalies are regularly released month-to-month and available in the public domain. That question was purposely crafted by a renowned denier and presented to the BBC reporter to ask for Jones’ comment. It was intended to either ‘catch’ Jones offering comment contrary to the ‘common knowledge’… or trumpet the anticipated commentary. The question’s timeframe (1995-2009) is inordinately short in terms of proper trending practice, particularly as reflects upon longer-term influences within climatic events.

- the statistical significance for the CRU data over that short-term trending interval was at the 93% level

- all the other global temperature records (from NOAA, from NASA, from JMA, etc., present statistically significant warming to the 95% level, even within the inordinately short-term, denier cherry-picked trending interval period (1995-2009).

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html

No warming in 15 years, during which time, Jones and his cronies have been bleating non-stop about runaway warming. They knew full well the whole time it wasn't true and they still continued to make the claim. It certainly puts the Climategate emails into perspective where Jones and other CRU members admitted to falsifying data, destroying evidence, rigging the peer-review process, and circumventing the scientific method.

Anyone who is paying attention can easily catch them lying. Try keeping track THIS winter. Watch the international news. Right now, all over the world, they are already breaking last winter's records, and are shaping up to have the coldest winter ever recorded, again. Anyone want to bet that at the end of the winter, Hadley will announce that THIS winter will have been one of the warmest on record?

and, of course, you carry on the fine tradition of those British tabloids you quote from… in that same question series, over that same inordinate short-term purposely cherry-picked time interval (1995-2009), Phil Jones advised of the 0.12C per decade warming that had occurred within the CRU data… of the 93% statistically significant warming that had occurred. But the headlines carried forth… to which you parrot, “No warming in 15 years”. Notwithstanding all the other global temperatures records!

runaway warming??? Who speaks of runaway warming… and in what context? Name the names… quote the quotes. Your assessment of Hackergate is as accurate and baseless as the rest of your posted nonsense.

Edited December 22, 2010 by waldo

[Saipan]

there is difference the deniers fail to comprehend...the denier world generally points to singular events as proof there is no warming...CC supporters point to singular events as part of an accumulation of singular events in a long term trend...

Let's see.

[Saipan]

no self-respecting denier actually presumes to challenge (global) warming itself.

So where are the "deniers" and where is the "warming"?

[Michael Hardner]

Is there or is there not concern about the climate?

Is there only one player concerned about climate change?

Maurice Strong was the man for the job to design the Kyoto accord. He was appointed because he had the correct view. He designed the corrupt Iraq food for oil scam as well and you would think that after that he would have been run out of town but no he appears to have gotten a promotion and is appointed as the driving force behind Kyoto.

The Carbon trading system was adapted from the system designed under Republican administration. Why not blame them ?

I think the majority care about the issue but they are waiting for all the debris to settle. A lot are contributing to a reduction in their energy consumption. So they are conscious of the issue and do care. What is confusing about the whole thing is the frenzy created by political infighting and over- reactive policies that appear to have nothing to do with a resolution of the scientifically presented problem. Creating a carbon tax or carbon trading? It allows players that can afford to pay the tax or trade carbon credits to just continue business as usual, and not only that, it kills any competition marginalized by the tax. It's a further encouragement for corporate polluters to move operations to developing countries where there is a surplus of credits and who knows what other unintended consequences they will bring into being.

I think the biggest problem is that the people communicating as though everyone is an idiot are the idiots.

That's quite a condemnation. I remember the anti-George Bush types used to paint GWB as alternately an evil schemer and an idiot. But which one is it ? You can't really be both.

[Pliny]

The Carbon trading system was adapted from the system designed under Republican administration. Why not blame them ?

Ok. If that's where it was designed. Strong attempted to implement it globally and you further make my point it isn't a single player.

It's all about the environment. Isn't that everyone's concern? If it isn't we will crush you.

That's quite a condemnation. I remember the anti-George Bush types used to paint GWB as alternately an evil schemer and an idiot. But which one is it ? You can't really be both.

Right. I guess those anti-GWB types were the idiots.

[Michael Hardner]

Ok. If that's where it was designed. Strong attempted to implement it globally and you further make my point it isn't a single player.

It's all about the environment. Isn't that everyone's concern? If it isn't we will crush you.

We will crush you ? Hmmm...

Right. I guess those anti-GWB types were the idiots.

Those who had to build a caricature to attack were, especially when the caricatures weren't even consistent.

[waldo]

So where are the "deniers" and where is the "warming"?

notwithstanding your standard irrelevant and/or nonsensical trolling one liners... those beaking off about "the warm-up"... I most certainly choose not to enable you further. Bugger off!

[GostHacked]

runaway warming??? Who speaks of runaway warming… and in what context? Name the names… quote the quotes. Your assessment of Hackergate is as accurate and baseless as the rest of your posted nonsense.

I thought this was one of the things the AGW supporters and scientists are warning us about.

Is the Guardian one of your go to sites?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2005/aug/11/science.climatechange1

"When you start messing around with these natural systems, you can end up in situations where it's unstoppable. There are no brakes you can apply," said David Viner, a senior scientist at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.

Not sure if Hansen is one of your go to guys .. but ..

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2008/12/nasa-scientist-warns-of-runawa.html

However, he also made another striking prediction. According to Hansen, human activity is causing greenhouse gas levels to rise so rapidly that his model suggests there is a risk of a runaway greenhouse effect, ultimately resulting in the loss of oceans and of all life on the planet:

[Guest TrueMetis]

Never mind

Edited December 21, 2010 by TrueMetis

[Bryan]

you suffer from the most common delusion, a cold day in your backyard translates to "the entire globe must be cold as well"

It was everyone's backyards, all year long. It was the coldest year on record all over the globe, and the AGW hysterians got caught lying, again.

[Michael Hardner]

It was everyone's backyards, all year long. It was the coldest year on record all over the globe, and the AGW hysterians got caught lying, again.

On one side we have "Bryan" for coldest year on record, on the other side we have NASA saying it's the warmest year on record.

Who to believe... who to believe....

[jbg]

On one side we have "Bryan" for coldest year on record, on the other side we have NASA saying it's the warmest year on record.

Who to believe... who to believe....

Given the amount of real estate that the Pacific Ocean and its eastern shore covers, it is hard to believe, with a strong La Niña in progress that last year was particularly warm.

[Saipan]

NASA saying it's the warmest year on record.

Where?

[Michael Hardner]

Where?

See our previous posts on the topic.

[Bryan]

On one side we have "Bryan" for coldest year on record, on the other side we have NASA saying it's the warmest year on record.

Who to believe... who to believe....

A already posted a link to that claim from another source (the Economist), but thank you for reinforcing my point.

Edited December 22, 2010 by Bryan

[Michael Hardner]

A already posted a link to that claim from another source (the Economist), but thank you for reinforcing my point.

Your link had 3 sources that all put 2010 at the top, with an added blurb from you that shows you misunderstand statistics as far as I can see. 2010 can be the hottest year on record, without having a trend (at 95% confidence level) that says there's a significant warming trend.

Those two things don't contradict each other.

[Bryan]

Your link had 3 sources that all put 2010 at the top, with an added blurb from you that shows you misunderstand statistics as far as I can see. 2010 can be the hottest year on record, without having a trend (at 95% confidence level) that says there's a significant warming trend.

Those two things don't contradict each other.

You appear to misunderstand something called reality. We had a downward trend worldwide all year, only to have Jones and Hansen call that an increase. Who is their statistician, George Orwell?