The Great Green Con #1 GW Forecasts Wrong Again

[scribblet]

Here we go again, global warming or no global warming.

Okay, I do believe there is climate change happening, but the earth has warmed up out of ice ages before when there where no humans around. IMO there is too much hyperbole and fear mongering from the 'greenies' but we should also do what we can to stop pollution and clean up our act. That goes without saying but some of this new technology such as wind turbines are costing us more and someone is making a killing from this... follow the money.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294560/The-great-green-1-The-hard-proof-finally-shows-global-warming-forecasts-costing-billions-WRONG-along.html

The Great Green Con no. 1: The hard proof that finally shows global warming forecasts that are costing you billions were WRONG all along

No, the world ISN'T getting warmer (as you may have noticed). Now we reveal the official data that's making scientists suddenly change their minds about climate doom. So will eco-funded MPs stop waging a green crusade with your money? Well... what do YOU think?

The Mail on Sunday today presents irrefutable evidence that official predictions of global climate warming have been catastrophically flawed.

The graph on this page blows apart the ‘scientific basis’ for Britain reshaping its entire economy and spending billions in taxes and subsidies in order to cut emissions of greenhouse gases. These moves have already added £100 a year to household energy bills.

[Michael Hardner]

Here we go again, global warming or no global warming.

Consider the source though - this is tabloid press at its finest. Should we take this article seriously at all ?

[bush_cheney2004]

Great post......somebody here is not going to be very happy !! Time to make some popcorn......

[Michael Hardner]

Great post......somebody here is not going to be very happy !! Time to make some popcorn......

I don't think it would be too difficult for Waldo to smack this one out of the park, given the source. Just at first glance, I can see them bandying the "95% confidence" term, as though climate science had invented statistics, so I know where this one is going.

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't think it would be too difficult for Waldo to smack this one out of the park, given the source. Just at first glance, I can see them bandying the "95% confidence" term, as though climate science had invented statistics, so I know where this one is going.

Let's just let it play out as expected...far more entertaining that way. Please resist the urge to squelch spirited discourse (always staying withing forum rules, of course).

The 95% confidence interval has been "bandied" about by the alarmists as well, so all is fair.

Edited March 26, 2013 by bush_cheney2004

[DogOnPorch]

Global warming schwarming...it's stuff like this that must stop. It does look yummy.

[Shady]

Let's just let it play out as expected...far more entertaining that way. Please resist the urge to squelch spirited discourse (always staying withing forum rules, of course).

The 95% confidence interval has been "bandied" about by the alarmists as well, so all is fair.

Exactly. It reminds me of Obi Wan Kanobi. Nothing to see here, move along.

[BubberMiley]

Okay, let me get this straight, Climate change is real, but it's a con because it isn't real...but it's real, obviously. So it's the "greenies" conning us with something real. Maybe it's not "man-made" but how can we know? It must be a scam, but it's real. You can't deny reality. Even if the evidence suggests we could do something, we'd better not do something, because what if it's all just the lefties?

Even though, of course, it's real.

I think I get it.

[Michael Hardner]

Let's just let it play out as expected...far more entertaining that way. Please resist the urge to squelch spirited discourse (always staying withing forum rules, of course).

The 95% confidence interval has been "bandied" about by the alarmists as well, so all is fair.

It's a term from statistics, though, so it's inaccurate to attribute someone's misunderstanding of that to climate science.

Spirited discourse works best when you start out with good information, although we can discuss this too.

[WWWTT]

Spirited discourse works best when you start out with good information

I think you hit the nail on the head here with noting the "information" that is being used.

What is "good information"?

At one time many products that are now "banned" started out as good products(asbestos related is one example)

And because this issue is inherently prone to so many circular arguments,I have chosen to calculate the efficiency of my time away from global warming.

WWWTT

Edited March 26, 2013 by WWWTT

[eyeball]

Global warming schwarming...it's stuff like this that must stop. It does look yummy.

Is that silt or plankton?

[WWWTT]

I would think it is silt.

I know the yellow river in China has the name because of the natural sediment it carries.

WWWTT

[eyeball]

If it's natural then why is DOP concerned about stopping it?

[Bitsy]

This is how one of the sources quoted in the article responds:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/mar/20/response-mail-on-sunday-great-green-con-climate-change

[DogOnPorch]

If it's natural then why is DOP concerned about stopping it?

It's not silt...lol. China claims it was 'dye' from upriver. Those affected are less confident of that explanation. Stopping pollution is a no brainer.

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=china%20red%20river&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=FdRRUZPWIcmWiQL37oGwDg&biw=1375&bih=649&sei=HdRRUcTqJoeTiAKax4DoBg

[scribblet]

People who question the narrative are drowned out by the the lock step ranting of the man made global warming zealots. Notice we don't hear much from Al Gore anymore, other than how many millions he's making off his green investments and other holdings.

Forget the 'source', is it right or not. Consider we've had fewer major hurricanes over the past few year but we heard similar arguments being made years ago about a coming ice age. The weather will keep changing, always has but can man change it.. not IMO. The jury is still out..

and in Alaska http://www.benthamscience.com/open/toascj/articles/V006/111TOASCJ.pdf

The First Decade of the New Century: A Cooling Trend for Most of Alaska

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/20130325/overnight-snowfall-anchorage-could-shatter-winters-single-day-record

Forget global warming, Alaska is headed for an ice age

Alaska Climate Research Center at the University of Alaska Fairbanks said in "The First Decade of the New Century: A Cooling Trend for Most of Alaska."

[scribblet]

Let's just let it play out as expected...far more entertaining that way. Please resist the urge to squelch spirited discourse (always staying withing forum rules, of course).

The 95% confidence interval has been "bandied" about by the alarmists as well, so all is fair.

Ahh, but spirited discussion is only acceptable if the source is from one of their choosing.

I notice what comes out of the woodwork today too. -

[BubberMiley]

People who question the narrative are drowned out by the the lock step ranting of the man made global warming zealots. Notice we don't hear much from Al Gore anymore, other than how many millions he's making off his green investments and other holdings.

Forget the 'source', is it right or not. Consider we've had fewer major hurricanes over the past few year but we heard similar arguments being made years ago about a coming ice age. The weather will keep changing, always has but can man change it.. not IMO. The jury is still out..

Right. And you're not denying it,,,you're just questioning whether it's real. Gotcha.

[GostHacked]

It's not silt...lol. China claims it was 'dye' from upriver. Those affected are less confident of that explanation. Stopping pollution is a no brainer.

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=china%20red%20river&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=FdRRUZPWIcmWiQL37oGwDg&biw=1375&bih=649&sei=HdRRUcTqJoeTiAKax4DoBg

Usually this is known as Red Tide, as associated with some algae bloom. But this .. yeeeshh.. pollution indeed.

[DogOnPorch]

Usually this is known as Red Tide, as associated with some algae bloom. But this .. yeeeshh.. pollution indeed.

That isn't an algae bloom. But, as you can see from the photos provided, folks are trying to get a meal from this river. Yuck. The Ganges is another river that is toast.

[scribblet]

Right. And you're not denying it,,,you're just questioning whether it's real. Gotcha.

I've never denied that the climate could be changing, only that any change today is totally caused by humans. I don't believe it is and I certainly don't believe that we can stop it. I've never said we should keep on polluting either, but I do question the hyperbole and fear mongering. I question how people are not allowed to discuss the other side. People such as Lord Moncton who says, “In the 16 years we have been coming to these conferences, there has been no global warming,” gets booted from the U.N.

Science should be open minded when searching for answers, but too often, it is a close-minded politically correct (and financially rewarding) search for their own subjective reality .

[BubberMiley]

I've never denied that the climate could be changing, only that any change today is totally caused by humans.

How did your open mind reach the conclusion that it is not caused by humans?

[Hudson Jones]

I remember the incident around the river in China. There has been no real explanation. Here is more information on the red river:

Rivers have turned bright red before in fast-industrializing, pollution-plagued China. A 2008 incident on the Han River, a Yangtze tributary, was blamed on a permanganate spill; the chemical is used in tanning, metal cleaning and bleaching. Last year, an illegal recycling plant dumped red dye from plastic bags and wrappers into the Jian River. The source of the Yangtze’s new hue is not yet established. Algae can create what is known as a “red tide,” but that is a saltwater phenomenon. A deadly earthquake in the upper Yangtze valley did precede the sudden discoloration of the river. Western scientists (and conspiracy theorists) declared themselves skeptical of natural explanations for the lurid colour.

Official Chinese news sites reported that local environmental officials in Chongqing found no evidence of dangerous substances in the water. They ascribed the red colour provisionally to higher-than-normal outflows of iron-rich silt from upstream, and promised that results of their follow-up “would be announced to the public in a timely manner.” But offshore, business and local news websites hinted at a cover-up, noting that pollution is an acknowledged problem along the Yangtze, whose basin contains more than a tenth of the human race. The Yangtze River dolphin, or “baiji,” a freshwater cetacean indigenous to the river, was declared “functionally extinct” in 2006.

[Hudson Jones]

Scribblet is one of the last few holding onto the notion that there is no climate change and that our activities are not contributing to the environment. She has, for some reason, decided to become the mouthpiece for corporation who want to squeeze as much money as possible from the status quo which is obviously harming our environment.

Most of these old and archaic, anti-science thoughts will be drowned out by our children. I just hope we do not reach the tipping point, where earth becomes depleted from over logging, soil contamination, water contamination and the loss of the ozone layer.

[scribblet]

Scribblet is one of the last few holding onto the notion that there is no climate change and that our activities are not contributing to the environment. She has, for some reason, decided to become the mouthpiece for corporation who want to squeeze as much money as possible from the status quo which is obviously harming our environment.

Most of these old and archaic, anti-science thoughts will be drowned out by our children. I just hope we do not reach the tipping point, where earth becomes depleted from over logging, soil contamination, water contamination and the loss of the ozone layer.

Except that I never said the climate isn't changing... try reading.