Hell freezes over: Koch's scientists confirm that climate change is REAL!

[PLC1]

Oh my....same old same old...do you ever learn?

See my post #66 in this thread. Read the column I attached and may the Force be with you.

Oh, I have learned, yes indeed. I've learned that when it comes to subjects like global warming or evolution, there is no amount of proof that can sway the naysayers.

 

[PLC1]

NASA counters the purported heat trapping ability of greenhouse gasses. They a scientific organization ?

CERN demonstrates solar activity can produce the effect. How about them ?

NASA? Yes, I suppose they could be considered to be a scientific organization. I thought they were one of those government run agencies that can't be trusted, but since you brought them up, here's their website. I can't find where they're saying that global warming is a hoax, however. Maybe I missed it.

CERN.. hmmm. CERN? The European Organization for nuclear research?

Here's their website. i don't see anything there about global warming either, but why would there be? It really has nothing to do with nuclear research.


Were you just trying to find scientific organizations of any sort? There are lots of them out there.

Here's the Koch study:

Koch-funded global warming proof goes unnoticed
Work bankrolled by the right-wing magnates finds support for global warming -- too bad the media doesn't care

Must be that left wing media ignoring what the right wing is doing again, right?

or is that left?

Sometimes I get confused as to which is supposed to be which.

 

[dogtowner]

NASA? Yes, I suppose they could be considered to be a scientific organization. I thought they were one of those government run agencies that can't be trusted, but since you brought them up, here's their website. I can't find where they're saying that global warming is a hoax, however. Maybe I missed it.

I reported it on this board. Here is a Firbes story I found right quick.

CERN.. hmmm. CERN? The European Organization for nuclear research?

Here's their website. i don't see anything there about global warming either, but why would there be? It really has nothing to do with nuclear research

they do a lot more than nuclear work. they are europe's version of Bell Labs. also reported on this board but here's a quick find.

Were you just trying to find scientific organizations of any sort? There are lots of them out there.

just offering a challenge to your assertion

Here's the Koch study:

that study did not validate the basics of the claim, only the math. see earlier in this thread to see what did not get looked at but which they did note (warning not positive stuff for warmers).
.

Must be that left wing media ignoring what the right wing is doing again, right?

or is that left?

Sometimes I get confused as to which is supposed to be which.

I can't imagine why. we do a great job of sorting it out for you.

 

[PLC1]

I reported it on this board. Here is a Firbes story I found right quick.

Firbs story? Oh, yes, the right wing blog. Let's see, it says..

study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxidetrap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.

So, "far" less global warming than "alarmists" have claimed. "Alarmists"? Even the right wing bloggers are no longer claiming that global warming isn't real, or that human activities aren't accelerating it?

they do a lot more than nuclear work. they are europe's version of Bell Labs. also reported on this board but here's a quick find.

That one isn't on the CERN website, but at last, it isn't a right wing blogger's notions either. It says:

Global warming skeptics argue that only a portion, possibly a small portion, of recent warming is due to man-made CO2 and greenhouse gasses. Climate alarmists have, in turn, argued that all of 20th century warming, and more, was due to anthropogenic effects (if the “and more” is confusing, it means that some scientists believe that certain man-made and natural cooling effects actually reduced man-made warming below what it might have been.)

I do remember this one. Actually, global climate scientists, not "alarmists" and not "skeptics" have been saying all along that a part of global warming is due to human activities. There are no "alarmist" scientific organizations claiming that "all of 20th century warming, and more, was due to anthropogenic effects". Yes, there is some question as to just how much human activities are accelerating the trend. "all and more"?? More than 100%? Like most of the silly bloggers and pundits, that one doesn't make a lot of sense either.

just offering a challenge to your assertion

Then, let's try to find a scientific organization that says that global warming is not real. so far, nothing.

that study did not validate the basics of the claim, only the math. see earlier in this thread to see what did not get looked at but which they did note (warning not positive stuff for warmers).

.

"warmers"?

Is that leg warmers, or mittens, or just what?

I can't imagine why. we do a great job of sorting it out for you.

well, you do have to have the right eyewear. Let's see, where did I put my left/right 3D glasses? I'm sure they're here somewhere.

Just to clarify.. is the current acceptable position of real conservatives:

1. Global warming isn't real, or

2. It's happening, but human activities don't have anything to do with it?

I've given up trying to divine how this is a right vs. left issue.

 

[dogtowner]

Firbs story? Oh, yes, the right wing blog. Let's see, it says..



So, "far" less global warming than "alarmists" have claimed. "Alarmists"? Even the right wing bloggers are no longer claiming that global warming isn't real, or that human activities aren't accelerating it?



That one isn't on the CERN website, but at last, it isn't a right wing blogger's notions either. It says:



I do remember this one. Actually, global climate scientists, not "alarmists" and not "skeptics" have been saying all along that a part of global warming is due to human activities. There are no "alarmist" scientific organizations claiming that "all of 20th century warming, and more, was due to anthropogenic effects". Yes, there is some question as to just how much human activities are accelerating the trend. "all and more"?? More than 100%? Like most of the silly bloggers and pundits, that one doesn't make a lot of sense either.



Then, let's try to find a scientific organization that says that global warming is not real. so far, nothing.


.

"warmers"?

Is that leg warmers, or mittens, or just what?




well, you do have to have the right eyewear. Let's see, where did I put my left/right 3D glasses? I'm sure they're here somewhere.

Just to clarify.. is the current acceptable position of real conservatives:

1. Global warming isn't real, or

2. It's happening, but human activities don't have anything to do with it?

I've given up trying to divine how this is a right vs. left issue.

Originally Posted by PLC1
Fat people, weight watchers, twinkies, politics, everything but a scientific organization that counters global warming theory.

moving the goalposts P. those two counter the theory and they're scientific organizations. the science is not settled.

 

[Dr.Who]

It's not that you can't do it any more, it's that you never could name such an organization.

What scientific organization holds the opinion that the Earth is not warming?

What one says that the warming is not being accelerated by human activities?

Or is it really a matter of science vs pundits?

"Research findings published by none other than CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, in the journal Nature which holds cosmic rays and the Sun, not human activities, responsible for global warming, isn't exactly what Gore would welcome right now.

CERN, which created and operates the Large Hadron Collider, has now built a stainless steel chamber that precisely recreates the Earth's atmosphere. In this chamber, 63 CERN scientists from 17 European and American institutes demonstrated that cosmic rays promote the formation of molecules which grow in Earth's atmosphere and seed clouds, making it cloudier and cooler.

"Because the sun's magnetic field controls how many cosmic rays reach Earth's atmosphere (the stronger the sun's magnetic field, the more it shields Earth from incoming cosmic rays from space), the sun determines the temperature on Earth," Lawrence Solomon, director of Energy Probe, wrote about the experiment. []

CERN's CLOUD is headed by Jasper Kirkby, who said in 1998 that global warming may be part of a natural cycle in the Earth's temperature, which made global warming alarmists restless. "The global warming establishment sprang into action, pressured the Western governments that control CERN, and almost immediately succeeded in suspending CLOUD. It took Kirkby almost a decade of negotiation with his superiors, and who knows how many compromises and unspoken commitments, to convince the CERN bureaucracy to allow the project to proceed. And years more to create the cloud chamber and convincingly validate the Danes' groundbreaking theory," Lawrence Solomon says.

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/206...xperiment-sun-cosmic-rays-chambor-cloud-c.htm

 

[Dr.Who]

I'd suggest black market Twinkies and ice creme operations. as the government bans, entrepreneurs will fill the need. remember prohibition ?

Oddly enough I find that Twinkies are a much healthier junk food for my diabetic daughter than just about anything next to it on the shelf. Ho Ho's, donut sticks, banana muffins, and even the weight watchers snacks all have much more grams of fat per serving which spike her blood glucose levels. Twinkies only have 4.5 grams of fat per serving which is often a third or even a fourth of what other snacks have. If we let politicians make the rules the weight watchers product would probably be the only one on the shelf and my daughter would not get her relatively healthy twinkies.

 

[dogtowner]

"Research findings published by none other than CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, in the journal Nature which holds cosmic rays and the Sun, not human activities, responsible for global warming, isn't exactly what Gore would welcome right now.

CERN, which created and operates the Large Hadron Collider, has now built a stainless steel chamber that precisely recreates the Earth's atmosphere. In this chamber, 63 CERN scientists from 17 European and American institutes demonstrated that cosmic rays promote the formation of molecules which grow in Earth's atmosphere and seed clouds, making it cloudier and cooler.

"Because the sun's magnetic field controls how many cosmic rays reach Earth's atmosphere (the stronger the sun's magnetic field, the more it shields Earth from incoming cosmic rays from space), the sun determines the temperature on Earth," Lawrence Solomon, director of Energy Probe, wrote about the experiment. []

CERN's CLOUD is headed by Jasper Kirkby, who said in 1998 that global warming may be part of a natural cycle in the Earth's temperature, which made global warming alarmists restless. "The global warming establishment sprang into action, pressured the Western governments that control CERN, and almost immediately succeeded in suspending CLOUD. It took Kirkby almost a decade of negotiation with his superiors, and who knows how many compromises and unspoken commitments, to convince the CERN bureaucracy to allow the project to proceed. And years more to create the cloud chamber and convincingly validate the Danes' groundbreaking theory," Lawrence Solomon says.

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/206...xperiment-sun-cosmic-rays-chambor-cloud-c.htm

these guys are as close as we have to the pure scientists of bygone times. so much we don't know but at least its better than the outright deceit from East Anglia Mann and company in the states.

 

[palerider]

moving the goalposts P. those two counter the theory and they're scientific organizations. the science is not settled.

Moving the goalposts is his only option; like any religious zealot. He has no interest in reality, climate change is a matter of faith for him. He only accepts information from church approved and sanctioned sources and claps has hands over his ears, closes his eyes, and screams LA LA LA at the top of his lungs if he is exposed to anything that challenges the approved dogma.

 

[Gipper]

Moving the goalposts is his only option; like any religious zealot. He has no interest in reality, climate change is a matter of faith for him. He only accepts information from church approved and sanctioned sources and claps has hands over his ears, closes his eyes, and screams LA LA LA at the top of his lungs if he is exposed to anything that challenges the approved dogma.

What I find so unsettling about Warmers is their complete acceptance of the dogma. It sets a frightening precedent. History shows that many people can be easily convinced to believe whatever they are told by the elite.

For example, most of the German people of the Nazi era believed the lies resulting in millions of deaths and terrible suffering. The same applies to China, Russia, Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea, etc. And even more unsettling is the elite left have a long track record of lying. And yet, the warmers still believe the left. CRAZY!

The consequence of worldwide acceptance of AGW will be a new dark age for all but the most elite...funny how that happens. But the warmers will gladly accept the horrors of the new dark age just as the Germans and others accepted their fate.

How is it that otherwise intelligent people can so easily fall prey to lies promoted by the elite left?

 

[dogtowner]

What I find so unsettling about Warmers is their complete acceptance of the dogma. It sets a frightening precedent. History shows that many people can be easily convinced to believe whatever they are told by the elite.

For example, most of the German people of the Nazi era believed the lies resulting in millions of deaths and terrible suffering. The same applies to China, Russia, Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea, etc. And even more unsettling is the elite left have a long track record of lying. And yet, the warmers still believe the left. CRAZY!

The consequence of worldwide acceptance of AGW will be a new dark age for all but the most elite...funny how that happens. But the warmers will gladly accept the horrors of the new dark age just as the Germans and others accepted their fate.

How is it that otherwise intelligent people can so easily fall prey to lies promoted by the elite left?

I would have thought that in the face of the revelations about the shenanigans and the counter evidence that they would at least open their minds about it.

 

[PLC1]

moving the goalposts P. those two counter the theory and they're scientific organizations. the science is not settled.

they are scientific organizations. They have not countered the theory of global warming. There is nothing on either of the websites I posted even suggesting that global warming theory is wrong. Some of the pundits have questioned their findings, of course, but that 's pundits.

It is a matter of silly pundits vs every scientific organization on Earth. When NASA or CERN or even one of the privately funded organizations says, "Hey, wait a minute! here's some new evidence!" Then that will be time to rethink the issue. So far, all of the evidence confirms the basic findings.

You didn't answer my question. Is the current hoaxer dogma:

1. There is no global warming, or
2. There is, but human activities play no part in it at all?

 

[dogtowner]

they are scientific organizations. They have not countered the theory of global warming. There is nothing on either of the websites I posted even suggesting that global warming theory is wrong. Some of the pundits have questioned their findings, of course, but that 's pundits.

It is a matter of silly pundits vs every scientific organization on Earth. When NASA or CERN or even one of the privately funded organizations says, "Hey, wait a minute! here's some new evidence!" Then that will be time to rethink the issue. So far, all of the evidence confirms the basic findings.

they did present new data that counters the central theory surrounding CO2. be it ultimately right or wrong, it does present legitimate question.

You didn't answer my question. Is the current hoaxer dogma:

1. There is no global warming, or
2. There is, but human activities play no part in it at all?

I was not given a title of Climate Change Hoaxer that I'm aware of. But speaking for myself:

1. there was some warming which ceased around 1998 despite continually increasing CO2.
2. since the central theory that CO2 has a direct and predictable effect is in question, there is no direct evidence that man has a role.

 

[PLC1]

they did present new data that counters the central theory surrounding CO2. be it ultimately right or wrong, it does present legitimate question.



I was not given a title of Climate Change Hoaxer that I'm aware of. But speaking for myself:

1. there was some warming which ceased around 1998 despite continually increasing CO2.
2. since the central theory that CO2 has a direct and predictable effect is in question, there is no direct evidence that man has a role.

Thank you. Now I know just what your position is.

Let's examine your dogmas one by one:

Warming ceased around 1998:

World Meteorological Organization and NOAA both report: 2000-2009 is the hottest decade on record

I believe that was after 1998. What else can we find?

There's this:

The climate story of the decade is that the 2000s are on track to be nearly 0.2°C warmer than the 1990s. And that temperature jump is especially worrisome since the 1990s were only 0.14°C warmer than the 1980s (see datasets here). Global warming is accelerating, as predicted.

The central theory that CO2 has a direct and predictable effect is in question.

A quick google of the above sentence brings up this site right at the top, right after the inevitable come ons and ads:

An enhanced greenhouse effect from CO2 has been confirmed by multiple lines of empirical evidence. Satellite measurements of infrared spectra over the past 40 years observe less energy escaping to space at the wavelengths associated with CO2. Surface measurements find more downward infrared radiation warming the planet's surface. This provides a direct, empirical causal link between CO2 and global warming.

The CO2 link to warming is as predictable as opening the door of a car that has been sitting in the sun and finding it warmer than the air outside. The cause is basic science, taught in elementary school.

But, of course, all of that just might be liberals lying to us. That hotter car just might be caused by a wormhole to Hell or something. There is, after all, no source of heat inside the car is there?

 

[dogtowner]

Thank you. Now I know just what your position is.

Let's examine your dogmas one by one:

Warming ceased around 1998:

World Meteorological Organization and NOAA both report: 2000-2009 is the hottest decade on record

I believe that was after 1998. What else can we find?

There's this:

all have been found lacking in truth

The central theory that CO2 has a direct and predictable effect is in question.

A quick google of the above sentence brings up this site right at the top, right after the inevitable come ons and ads:



The CO2 link to warming is as predictable as opening the door of a car that has been sitting in the sun and finding it warmer than the air outside. The cause is basic science, taught in elementary school.

But, of course, all of that just might be liberals lying to us. That hotter car just might be caused by a wormhole to Hell or something. There is, after all, no source of heat inside the car is there?

NASA disagrees