71
   

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

 
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Mar, 2008 05:34 pm
Considering it is your latest attempt at misrepresenting information I thought I would include the disclaimer for the Minority report. It is one of the very first parts of the report before any of what you quoted.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport#report
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Mar, 2008 06:26 pm
parados wrote:
By the way ican....
You left off the disclaimer included at the very beginning of the MINORITY committee report that states as follows..
Quote:

[Disclaimer: The following scientists named in this report have expressed a range of views from skepticism to outright rejection of predictions of catastrophic man-made global warming. As in all science, there is no lock step single view.]


So it seems these scientists are only questioning the predictions of catastrophic man made warming. They aren't questioning if the warming exists or even if it is man made. They are ONLY questioning predictions of "catastrophe."

All the MINORITY did was take statements of scientists out of context and then ican extended that claim to they were somehow skeptical of global warming. It is nothing else. These scientists did not testify for this report. They were not asked to be in the report. Their statements were just given meaning that may in no way reflect their actual opinion on global warming.

...

Quote:

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=927B9303-802A-23AD-494B-DCCB00B51A12
...
May 15, 2007
...
Climate Momentum Shifting: Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming - Now Skeptics

Growing Number of Scientists Convert to Skeptics After Reviewing New Research

Following the U.S. Senate's vote today on a global warming measure (see today's AP article: Senate Defeats Climate Change Measure,) it is an opportune time to examine the recent and quite remarkable momentum shift taking place in climate science. Many former believers in catastrophic man-made global warming have recently reversed themselves and are now climate skeptics. The names included below are just a sampling of the prominent scientists who have spoken out recently to oppose former Vice President Al Gore, the United Nations, and the media driven "consensus" on man-made global warming.

The list below is just the tip of the iceberg. A more detailed and comprehensive sampling of scientists who have only recently spoken out against climate hysteria will be forthcoming in a soon to be released U.S. Senate report. Please stay tuned to this website, as this new government report is set to redefine the current climate debate.
...

Quote:

http://www.upi.com/International_Intelligence/Analysis/2007/05/10/analysis_un_calls_climate_debate_over/6480/

Analysis: U.N. calls climate debate 'over'


Published: May 10, 2007 at 7:15 PM
Print story Email to a friend Font size:By WILLIAM M. REILLY
UPI U.N. Correspondent
UNITED NATIONS, May 10 (UPI) -- A former chief of the U.N. World Health Organization who also is a former prime minister of Norway and a medical doctor has declared an end to the climate-change debate.

Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland, one of U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's three new special envoys on climate change, also headed up the 1987 U.N. World Commission on Environment and Development where the concept of sustainable development was first floated.

"This discussion is behind us. It's over," she told reporters. "The diagnosis is clear, the science is unequivocal -- it's completely immoral, even, to question now, on the basis of what we know, the reports that are out, to question the issue and to question whether we need to move forward at a much stronger pace as humankind to address the issues."
...

Quote:

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport#report
FULL SENATE REPORT: U.S. Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007

December 20, 2007

This report is in the spirit of enlightenment philosopher Denis Diderot who reportedly said, "Skepticism is the first step towards truth."

[Disclaimer: The following scientists named in this report have expressed a range of views from skepticism to outright rejection of predictions of catastrophic man-made global warming. As in all science, there is no lock step single view.]

Aah! There it is in the full Senate report. Clearly, what is primarily disputed is:
Quote:
... Man-Made Global Warming ...


In other words, it is not global warming that is being disputed. What is being disputed is the theory that humans are causing global warming.

That is exactly what I have been disputing ever since I joined this discussion. In particular, for the past month or so, I have been disputing the theory that humans have caused the 0.6365°K increase in average global temperature 1975 to 2005.

One more time for you, Parados:


ican has been disputing the theory that humans have caused the 0.6365°K increase in average global temperature 1975 to 2005.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Mar, 2008 06:31 pm
ican,

Why don't you post your graphs again with lines drawn for 1975 and 2005. Straight lines measured to designate the exact years. Are you going to admit you made up your figure you say came from the graphs or are you going to hope everyone forgets how wrong you are.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Mar, 2008 06:35 pm
parados wrote:
ican,

Why don't you post your graphs again with lines drawn for 1975 and 2005. Straight lines measured to designate the exact years. Are you going to admit you made up your figure you say came from the graphs or are you going to hope everyone forgets how wrong you are.

I think it long past time for you, parados, to face up to the truth and admit how wrong you have been and are now.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Mar, 2008 06:53 pm
If I am wrong then the person that originally made those graphs is wrong because as included in the Soon published article they are clearly what I said. Those graphs are much clearer with 1975 clearly marked and the w/m^2 marked in 1/10ths.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Mar, 2008 07:59 pm
INTERESTING!

http://www.biocab.org/Calentamiento_Global_en_la_Edad_Media.jpg
Temperature and CO2

http://www.biocab.org/Comparison_Solar_Irradiance_Espa_ol.jpg
Temperature & CO2 & Irradiation
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Mar, 2008 08:11 pm
McGentrix wrote:


A Sun Myung Moon's Washington Times editorial is your source for scientific data today, McG. Bravo.

Here's the second paragraph of text from ARGO's home page...

Why do we need Argo?

Quote:
We are increasingly concerned about global change and its regional impacts. Sea level is rising at an accelerating rate of 3 mm/year, Arctic sea ice cover is shrinking and high latitude areas are warming rapidly. Extreme weather events cause loss of life and enormous burdens on the insurance industry. Globally, 8 of the 10 warmest years since 1860, when instrumental records began, were in the past decade.
http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Mar, 2008 08:31 pm
Quote:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jnjYmtmAnaPQ4YWKA6WpWdm2X8yAD8VKJ0NO0
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Mar, 2008 08:45 pm
blatham wrote:
A Sun Myung Moon's Washington Times editorial is your source for scientific data today, McG. Bravo.


Dang! I keep forgetting that only salon.com is an authoritative voice. Will I never learn?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Mar, 2008 08:50 pm
McGentrix wrote:
blatham wrote:
A Sun Myung Moon's Washington Times editorial is your source for scientific data today, McG. Bravo.


Dang! I keep forgetting that only salon.com is an authoritative voice. Will I never learn?


Learning ain't your thing, McG. But perhaps you play the bongos.
0 Replies
 
username
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Mar, 2008 11:54 pm
Loved okie's claim that Argo data shows the oceans are cooling. The authors (Lyman, et al) of the original paper that made that claim in 2006 had to make a correction last year that they had discovered two problems with the instruments that required reinterpretation of the data. And when the corrections were made, the supposed cooling disappeared. Do try to keep up, okie.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/04/ocean-cooling-not/
http://oceans.pmel.noaa.gov/Pdf/heat_2006.pdf
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Mar, 2008 06:52 am
ican711nm wrote:

It is interesting because you will notice that the solar radiation has not increased by 1w/m^2 since 1975.

Or can't you read this graph either ican? If not I will be happy to find a better graph of the source which in this case was Lean.




Oh, heck - here is the data itself...
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/climate_forcing/solar_variability/lean2000_irradiance.txt

The only increase is from low to high in the 11 year cycle and that is only 1.1 w/m^2. We are presently in a low that is comparable to 1975 based on Lean's numbers which you claim are "interesting."
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Mar, 2008 10:07 am
OUR NEW SPOKESPERSON FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE Laughing
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


Quote:
Sun Myung Moon is the leader of the Unification Church, which he founded on May 1, 1954 in Seoul, South Korea. Moon is also the founder and leader of the global Unification Movement which owns, operates or subsidizes many for-profit corporations and other organizations involved in political, mass-media, and other activities.

He is well-known for holding Blessing ceremonies, which are often called "mass weddings", and for founding The Washington Times newspaper in 1982.[1]

Moon has said he is the Second Coming of Christ, the "Savior", "returning Lord", and "True Parent". He teaches that all people should become perfected like Jesus and like himself, and that as such he "appears in the world as the substantial body of God Himself." [2][3] Rolling Eyes

Moon has been among the most controversial modern religious leaders,[4][5] and has been widely criticized.

0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Mar, 2008 02:26 pm
hamburger wrote:
OUR NEW SPOKESPERSON FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE Laughing
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


Quote:
Sun Myung Moon is the leader of the Unification Church, which he founded on May 1, 1954 in Seoul, South Korea. Moon is also the founder and leader of the global Unification Movement which owns, operates or subsidizes many for-profit corporations and other organizations involved in political, mass-media, and other activities.

He is well-known for holding Blessing ceremonies, which are often called "mass weddings", and for founding The Washington Times newspaper in 1982.[1]

Moon has said he is the Second Coming of Christ, the "Savior", "returning Lord", and "True Parent". He teaches that all people should become perfected like Jesus and like himself, and that as such he "appears in the world as the substantial body of God Himself." [2][3] Rolling Eyes

Moon has been among the most controversial modern religious leaders,[4][5] and has been widely criticized.



And this related really to global warming how?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Mar, 2008 02:33 pm
It goes back to B;athams referencing he ownership of the Washington Times. Obviously that means he wrote the article and now Hamburger is making some kind of point that only he is aware of.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Mar, 2008 02:40 pm
McGentrix wrote:
It goes back to B;athams referencing he ownership of the Washington Times. Obviously that means he wrote the article and now Hamburger is making some kind of point that only he is aware of.


No, Hamburger and I don't agree all that often, but deceit I don't think is in his DNA or MO. But it could be related to Bernie's post as those kinds of posts frequently seem to imply much more--to Bernie--than what is actually said.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Mar, 2008 02:42 pm
username wrote:
Loved okie's claim that Argo data shows the oceans are cooling.

When did I claim that, user? I think I merely thanked McGentrix for citing the article and said it was interesting, and then I said if the news had been the opposite, it would have been front page news.

By the way, couldn't you have gotten somewhat creative on your name, instead of "username?" Just kidding, but it does make me wonder about your creativity, etc.?
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Mar, 2008 02:46 pm
okie wrote:
By the way, couldn't you have gotten somewhat creative on your name, instead of "username?" Just kidding, but it does make me wonder about your creativity, etc.?


Now that was a truly bizarre comment....
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Mar, 2008 02:48 pm
Foxfyre wrote:

And this related really to global warming how?

If you can't argue with the message, you undermine the messenger. Similar to if anyone that has ever been involved in capitalism cannot fund a global warming research project. You are automatically disqualified by liberals that believe only government is unbiased! Which is a big stretch to say the least.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Mar, 2008 02:50 pm
old europe wrote:
okie wrote:
By the way, couldn't you have gotten somewhat creative on your name, instead of "username?" Just kidding, but it does make me wonder about your creativity, etc.?


Now that was a truly bizarre comment....

No sense of humor, oe? Let user speak for himself or herself. Am I the only one that notices somebody's "username?" Besides, as "okie," I have suffered much "injustice" here. I may need to go to Obama's church and see what could be done about it.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.68 seconds on 10/10/2024 at 04:23:16