Al Gore Lies About Gloabl Warming Scandal

[dogtowner]

Now, you're no longer talking about science, but politics. The two are very different things.

Yes, the science indicates that global warming is happening, beyond question. The cooler than normal winter in parts (no, not in all of the northern hemisphere) of the world does not negate 20 or 30 years of scientific observation. Yes, science does say that human activities are almost certainly accelerating the change, so there is a small chance that new data could cast doubt on the human contribution. Most of the scientists do not think that will happen, but it is a possibility.

Now, you bring up politics, which is another matter entirely. The odds that we will do anything to mitigate global warming are pretty small. Such an effort would entail global cooperation that is unprecedented in human history. The chances that we could reverse the process, even if we were able to limit greenhouse gasses (which is unlikely) approach zero.

So yes, you do have a point that such as cap and trade as a fix to the problem is probably not going to help, and could cost even more money and increase government power.

But, what you're doing is arguing apples and road apples, two different things. It is not necessary to try to refute scientific observation and experimentation in order to espouse a particular political belief.

There is evidence that the globe warmed a degree or so over the last 100 years. There is also evicence that this warming has ceased over the last ten years or so. This despite the continued increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. That IS some new data that impacts the theory significantly.

I think everyone except polititians, the UN skimmers and 3rd world dictators agree that cap-n-trade is useless as a means of doing anything about this.

 

[PLC1]

There is evidence that the globe warmed a degree or so over the last 100 years. There is also evicence that this warming has ceased over the last ten years or so. This despite the continued increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. That IS some new data that impacts the theory significantly.

This is the most recent data I could easily find, but it is definitely within the last decade:


NOAA REPORTS 2006 WARMEST YEAR ON RECORD FOR U.S.

Jan. 9, 2007 � The 2006 average annual temperature for the contiguous U.S. was the warmest on record and nearly identical to the record set in 1998, according to scientists at the NOAA National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. Seven months in 2006 were much warmer than average, including December, which ended as the fourth warmest December since records began in 1895.

I think everyone except polititians, the UN skimmers and 3rd world dictators agree that cap-n-trade is useless as a means of doing anything about this.

No doubt there are others, but the fact is that cap and trade isn't going to do much, particularly not without international cooperation.

Even if we did limit greenhouse gasses, the result would not be a reversal of climate change.

Everyone who looks at the science of global climate change understands that we have a challenge ahead. The only ones trying to ignore the evidence are those who are coming from a political perspective.

 

[dogtowner]

This is the most recent data I could easily find, but it is definitely within the last decade:


NOAA REPORTS 2006 WARMEST YEAR ON RECORD FOR U.S.

so we agree that warming has ceased then, thats good.

No doubt there are others, but the fact is that cap and trade isn't going to do much, particularly not without international cooperation.

Even if we did limit greenhouse gasses, the result would not be a reversal of climate change.

Everyone who looks at the science of global climate change understands that we have a challenge ahead. The only ones trying to ignore the evidence are those who are coming from a political perspective.

I'd think it would be interesting to know why warming ceased while CO2 increased. Other scientists are looking into this and have some ideas developing.

Nothing is settled, best to keep your mind open and a box of salt nearby.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

so we agree that warming has ceased then, thats good.

is any wounder people like you don't believe? you don't even have the slightest clue do you? you sounds like one of the idiots who says global warming is not real, then sites todays WEATHER

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/1000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.svg

 

[dogtowner]

is any wounder people like you don't believe? you don't even have the slightest clue do you? you sounds like one of the idiots who says global warming is not real, then sites todays WEATHER

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/1000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.svg

PLC links an article that CONFIRMS that warming has ceased. What exactly is the problem other than it flies in the face of CO2 theory ?

 

[chestnut]

Don't you get it.

It has to exist or the last 10 - 15 years has been a bunch of lies. And the libs are enough trouble with the public for the other lies about health care, and the stealfroumus.

Funny libs.. they thin that because they say it is so... it is!

 

[dogtowner]

Don't you get it.

It has to exist or the last 10 - 15 years has been a bunch of lies. And the libs are enough trouble with the public for the other lies about health care, and the stealfroumus.

Funny libs.. they thin that because they say it is so... it is!

Hey, I'll give them credit for even noticing its a degree or so warmer.

But considering its gone up or down far more than that without the apocolyptic consequences they cite, its hard to work up much 'give a ****'.

 

[Sihouette]

Is there something confusing about the term "PERMAfrost"? Perma [from permanent] and frost. Permafrost is not supposed to melt. And yet it is melting at record rates.

So there you go. Either google-earth's satellites are lying showing houses sinking off their foundations into erstwhile permafrost sinkholes or global warming is real.

So which is it? Are the satelleite images false or are they real? *waits for the lunatic fringe to respond that the emporer's clothes are "fanstastic!" ]*

 

[GenSeneca]

But, what you're doing is arguing apples and road apples, two different things.

You are confusing cause and effect. Its the warmers who are claiming the science is settled, the debate is over (theres a consensus you know) so its time for deniers to shut up and let the warmers take political action.

It is not necessary to try to refute scientific observation and experimentation in order to espouse a particular political belief.

I'm doing just the opposite, I'm acknowledging the scientific observation and experimentation - which the warmers dismiss - because it proves the science isn't settled, the debate is not over, and politically, the proposed solutions are more deleterious than they are helpful.

 

[asur]

A student wrote -

Great, so why are you cherry picking Antarctica?

We are exposing holes in the CO2 global warming theory
by exposing facts the hoaxers avoid. Antartica provides one example.

Silhouette - the permafrost photo you provided is
from where? It could be from
a planned home destruction site for all we know.
You need to follow class rules and provide evidence
only from legitimate sources.

If you want photos of Russian Weather, examine
these photos, which indicate it is very
cold and snowy this winter on 2009/2010.

Russian inhabitant - "It seems that this winter Mother Winter has rolled round too fast and it’s really overboard. Few weeks ago frost came to Russia and now it looks like it’s on its way westwards, straight to Eastern Europe. All this time temperature on thermometer seldom fell below -20C (-5F.) Because of that any road was clogged up to the brim every singe day. And now, when frost almost droppedRussia off and left just a bunch of two or three feet high snowbanks here and there, it seems that Ukraine and the rest of Eastern Europe countries just began feeling this snow frenzy."

MrSheepish mentioned cherry pickin and Silhouette cherry picked Siberia.


OK, we've analyzed the US,and Antartica. Now lets visit Russia and Siberia.
This takes us into our next class starting shortly.

 

[asur]

Exhibit 13. Is it getting colder in Russia? ClimateGate II


Russia is one large land mass.
Approximately 12% of the world’s land exists there and it is a significant component
of global temperature stats. But can we find reliable temperature data for Russia?

Maybe, but not from Climate Hoaxers!!

 

[asur]

Exhibit 13 continued. Is it getting colder in Russia? ClimateGate II

IEA president and Cato senior fellow Andrei Illarianov — the former chief economic advisor to Vladimir Putin claims it's necessary to recalculate all global temperature data in order to assess the real rate of temperature change during the last century. Global temperature data will have to be modified because the calculations used by Copenhagen Conference on Climate Change analysts are based on HadCRUT research.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=515652

ClimateGate II:
Climategate II involves the Hadley Center for Climate Change at the British Meteorological Office in England.

Hadley's scientists cherry-picked data from Russian monitoring stations in a manner that overrepresented urban stations (affected by urban heat island effect) and underrepresented rural, especially Siberian, stations.

The consequence: a fabricated, falsely strong signal of global warming for Russia, an area large enough to greatly affect the global average estimates. Hadley's mistreatment of the data created an apparent 2.06C rise in temperature since 1860, while the full Russian raw data show 1.4C rise instead.

Well maybe not even an increase! It turns out the temperature measurement
business is not so scientific in Russia. The monitoring stations are created differently today than years ago.
There weren't many years ago, and they aren't evenly distributed around Russia even today.
Some claim Russian stations are susceptible to nearby direct heat pipes and urban heat
that exists to close to the sensors.

In this class, we can't trust the Russian data that the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and National Aeronautics and Space Administration uses, (NASA) as well did. Thanks to Jones and the other Climate Warming Hoaxers!

 

[asur]

Exhibit 13 continued. Is it getting colder in Russia? ClimateGate II

Theoretically we can download the data from all Russian stations at
http://hadobs.metoffice.com/crutem3/ and recalculate the temps ourselves.
Then we would know who is accurate here. Perhaps in a future class?

Well the chap from TheMigrantMind has attempted this.

http://themigrantmind.blogspot.com/2009/12/siberia-isnt-warming.html

He found that data was missing, for certain
months, but used what he could. His results show
over the longer term Siberia is not heating up
so much. Hmm..

Let's look at the Climategate emails now:

From: Phil Jones <p.jones@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "Michael E. Mann" <mann@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: have you seen this?
Date: Wed Mar 31 09:09:04 2004

Mike,
Yes, but not had a chance to read it yet. Too much else going on. Ed has a paper
reworking Esper et al. as you'll know. If you're going to Tucson, I suggest you talk to
Keith about it then - don't email him as he's too busy preparing to go and marking essays.
Jan is in one of our EU projects. Seems that Keith thinks Jan is reinventing a lot of
Keith's
work, renamed the RCS method and much more. Jan doesn't always take in what is in
the literature even though he purports to read it. He's now looking at homogenization
techniques for temperature to check the Siberian temperature data. We keep telling him the
decline is also in N. Europe, N. America (where we use all the recently homogenized
Canadian data). The decline may be slightly larger in Siberia, but it is elsewhere as
well.
Also Siberia is one of the worst places to look at homogeneity, as the stations aren't
that
close together (as they are in Fennoscandia and most of Canada) and also the temperature
varies an awful lot from year to year.
Recently rejected two papers (one for JGR and for GRL) from people saying CRU has it
wrong over Siberia. Went to town in both reviews, hopefully successfully. If either
appears
I will be very surprised, but you never know with GRL.
Cheers
Phil
Cheers
Phil
At 11:20 30/03/2004 -0500, you wrote:

Phil,
Have you seen this piece of crap by Esper?
The JGR paper, which Scott is supposed to be finalizing, demonstrates quite convincingly
that the greater amplitude of Esper et al is due to spatial and seasonal sampling,
mike
______________________________________________________________
Professor Michael E. Mann
Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22903
_______________________________________________________________________
e-mail: mann@xxxxxxxxx.xxx Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137
[1]http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jones@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
NR4 7TJ



In the email above we can see that Jones was proudly rejecting reviews or questioning
of his Siberian data. Apparently he preferred to hide the data. Yet it would make logical
sense to question his data or at least provide a reason for the sample selected. Why did
Jones feel he was above explaining it?

Jones has since admitted all the data wasn't used, and again why?
If it actually reinforced his global warming case, we'd suspect he would have used it.
It seems he'd want to use as much as practically possible to make a stronger case.
But he didn't!

Now the Russians and other scientists are now stating it would weaken his
case to include all the data. Hmm...

 

[PLC1]

so we agree that warming has ceased then, thats good.







I'd think it would be interesting to know why warming ceased while CO2 increased. Other scientists are looking into this and have some ideas developing.

Nothing is settled, best to keep your mind open and a box of salt nearby.

Say, dogtowner, did you happen to notice the date on that link I found?

Here's a more up to date one:



2007 to be 'warmest on record'

The world is likely to experience the warmest year on record in 2007, the UK's Met Office says.

So, no, the warming hasn't stopped. That last one was from 2007. Look for more in the future as well.

But, it is quite possible that warming might decrease, or at least slow down a bit, while CO2 increases. There are other factors, of course. The hypothesis is that CO2 is accelerating global warming, not that it is the only cause.

 

[dogtowner]

Is there something confusing about the term "PERMAfrost"? Perma [from permanent] and frost. Permafrost is not supposed to melt. And yet it is melting at record rates.

So there you go. Either google-earth's satellites are lying showing houses sinking off their foundations into erstwhile permafrost sinkholes or global warming is real.

So which is it? Are the satelleite images false or are they real? *waits for the lunatic fringe to respond that the emporer's clothes are "fanstastic!" ]*

Google earth looks down, its from a satellite.