Climate Change & Global Warming

[KOYAANISQATSI]

To pollute or not to pollute is one thing but as to our standing in making the winters warmer; we don't.

 

And dont forget, you put those who can control this in power....

 

[ArabiaTerra]

^^^^^ More nonsense from Koy, there.

 

For those of you that are interested, the Climate Change FAQ from New Scientist is a pretty good primer on the subject.

 

And this article debunks the most common lies told by deniers.

 

And finally, an article on what to expect if we don't deal with this, complete with scary map.

[KOYAANISQATSI]

Just the usual crap and scare mongering from AT there, to make sure you accept the latest carbon tax crap fest with ease.

The quotes I used from true scientists who are not on the gw payroll, you will note, carry a lot more relevence than the ad hom tripe AT and shetlandpeat and their space 1999 pill theorys do.

You used to believe in Atlantis and UFO's AT because you saw about them on the telly and it shows you have not progressed far. You should learn to entertain ideas and not accept them with blind faith, until you know the facts.

I hope one day you realise that what is said on the BBC may not be the exact way reality operates, but as said in previous article, I wont hold my breath.

 

"Global warming deniers" I like it; has a nice ring to it. Where do I sign?

[KOYAANISQATSI]

you have no opinions of your own, hence the quotes, person attacks and bully tactics.

 

The whole man made global warming theory is put using an appeal to an authority that ought to know better and when it comes to "person attacks and bully tactics," this is the Modus operandi of GW mass debaters all over:

 

David Bellamy; I remember him. He retired in 1992. Then, ten years later, he got bored of retirement and started to make bizarre claims about climate science from conspiracy sites he'd found on the internet. Then he decided that the reason he wasn't on TV any more was because of these bizarre claims, rather than the fact he retired and was old. A sad tale indeed.

 

I've had a look at both sides and have made up my own mind thanks.

When it came to the Great Global Warming Swindle, it was pretty bloody obvious.

 

And here's a clue to vapour trails and suchlike.

 

I will continue to go with the things which I can see with my eyes to be true, while you can fret over any piggywiffle that Al gore has infected your fragile little mind with. Next time your thumbing your way through an IPCCBS science paper; try leaving the lights on.

[ArabiaTerra]

Just the usual crap and scare mongering from AT there, to make sure you accept the latest carbon tax crap fest with ease.

The quotes I used from true scientists who are not on the gw payroll, you will note...

I almost spilled my tea, this made me laugh so much. Koy, your so-called true scientists are nothing of the sort. I checked those names and their claims. One third are not who they claim to be, one third have been proven to be wrong and the final third have been proven to be liars.

 

I check the facts I post on this thread, and I provide links to the sources where I can. I would appreciate it if you would do me the courtesy of doing the same.

[paulb]

it really does not matter wether its happening or not were all doomed. The next ice age is due soon so don't worry be happy were all going to be icicles soon. If your both so bothered go and do something about it. lets reforest Shetland that would be a good start.

[ArabiaTerra]

Just to expand on my last post, lets look at Koy's "true scientists":

“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.†- Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.â€

Dr Simpson is not a climate scientist, she is a meteorologist and furthermore she is also quoted as saying:

we must act on the recommendations of Gore and the IPCC because if we do not reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and the climate models are right, the planet as we know it will in this century become unsustainable.

Conclusion: Misrepresentation.

"Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.†- UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

Dr Itoh is not an IPCC scientist. He is an "expert reviewer". This means that he requested a copy of the report to review as anyone could have done. He is as much an IPCC scientist as I am.

 

Conclusion: Fraud.

“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,†- Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.

As it says in the quote, then man's a geologist, not a climate scientist.

 

Conclusion: Fraud

“The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.†- Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico

This guy is a theoretical physicist, not a climate scientists. It's funny, Koy. If this guy was talking about Physics you would be calling him wrong because he isn't spouting your Electric Universe theory, but as he's talking about the climate....

 

Conclusion: Fraud.

“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.†- U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.

A weatherman, not a climate scientist. Are you beginning to see a pattern here?

 

Conclusion: Fraud.

“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.†– . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.

At last, a quote about the science itself, but notice, it's not from a climate scientist. And the quote? It's been debunked here, if anything global warming will increase the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere, making things worse.

 

Conclusion: Wrong.

“For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.

The planet is not cooling. The long term trend is still up. The only way it can be said to be cooling is by comparing temperatures to 1998, an exceptional El Nino year. This quote is not just wrong, it's a deliberate lie. And note, another non climate scientist.

 

Conclusion: Fraud and a Liar.

“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.†- Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.

This is a good one. When James Hansen of NASA first brought global warming to the public's attention in 1988, he was basing his predictions on computer models. So how have his predictions stood up? Very well actually. He based his models on three possible CO2 scenarios, exponential growth, linear growth and a peak in 2000 followed by a decrease. The actual emissions growth has been linear. Hansen's predictions using the linear model are within 10% of the actual measurements over the last 25 years which is within the margin of error. In other words, his computer models were spot on.

 

Conclusion: Fraud (not a climate scientist) and a Liar.

“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.†- Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.

“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.†- Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.

These are just meaningless political speculation, not science.

 

Conclusion: Fools.

“CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another….Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.†- Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.

This is just wrong. More conspiracy theory claptrap.

 

Conclusion: Fool and a Liar.

“The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.†- Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata.

A palaeontologist, not a climate scientist spouting more political rubbish, professional jealousy perhaps?

 

Conclusion: Fool.

 

So, to sum up, why don't you see if you can find some actual climate science from some actual climate scientists to back up your scepticism* Koy. Something I can't rubbish with 15 minutes at a keyboard. Then I might take you seriously.

 

*Of course, you won't, because there isn't any to find.

[KOYAANISQATSI]

Does what it says on the tin:

 

Dr. Joanne Simpson

 

http://climatesci.org/2008/02/27/trmm-tropical-rainfall-measuring-mission-data-set-potential-in-climate-controversy-by-joanne-simpson-private-citizen/

who is among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.

 

Arun D Ahluwalia

 

http://arundeep.ahluwalia.googlepages.com/cvarunahluwalia,professorofgeology

Professor of Geology

 

Dr. Kiminori Itoh

 

http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=1461

award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist

 

Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Manuel_Velasco_Herrera

theoretical physicist and researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico

 

Stanley B. Goldenberg

 

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Goldenberg/index.html

meteorologist with the Hurricane Research Center in Florida.

 

Dr. Geoffrey G. Duffy

 

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/09/04/even-doubling-or-tripling-the-amount-of-co2-will-have-little-impact-on-temps/

a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University  of Auckland, NZ. Duffy received the New Zealand Science and Technology Silver Medal, in 2003 from The Royal Society of New Zealand.  And has published 218 journal, peer-reviewed papers and conference papers including 10 patents and 62 technical reports.

 

Dr. William M. Briggs

 

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/1309

specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society’s Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review. 

 

Briggs, a visiting mathematics professor at Central Michigan University and a Biostatistician at New York Methodist Hospital, has a new paper coming out in the peer-reviewed Journal of Climate which finds that hurricanes have not increased number or intensity in the North Atlantic.

 

Geologist Dr. David Gee

 

http://www.iceagenow.com/Another_Prominent_Scientist_Dissents_from_Warming_Fears.htm

perhaps one of the most prominent and accomplished scientists attending the conference in Oslo. Gee, currently a professor at Dept. for Geosciences of Uppsala University in Sweden, was awarded the European Geosciences Union award for his scientific leadership of EUROPROBE, a multidisciplinary research project that brought hundreds of senior scientists, postdocs and doctoral students together to study tectonic structures within Europe.

 

EUROPROBE was a project of the International Lithosphere Program and the European Science Foundation. Gee has led geologic expeditions to such locales as Svalbard, Novaya Zemlya, Severnaya Zemlya, the Polar Urals and the Taimyr Peninsula and has authored numerous scientific papers. He also chairs a Swedish Research Council committee.

 

You guys must be losing it if the best you can do is revert to personal smears against experts.

[ArabiaTerra]

You guys must be losing it if the best you can do is revert to personal smears against experts.

Not one of whom is an expert climate scientist.

 

You don't ask an astronomer about DNA, so why do these guys have any credibility when talking about the climate?

 

Edit: I'll be quite happy to tackle some actual science when you post some, as it is, all you've posted is random quotes from random non-climate scientists. Give me something real to attack and I'll happily do it.

[KOYAANISQATSI]

How many climate scientists would find funding or favour if they went up against the cold front of the man made global warming lobby?

 

"I was shocked by the statement and I think the administrator ought to resign. I don't see how he can be the effective leader of a science agency if he doesn't understand the threat of global warming," said Michael Oppenheimer, a Princeton University atmospheric scientist and lead author of some of the latest reports issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC. The international body, made up of thousands of climate scientists is considered one of the most authoritative bodies on global warming.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=3229696&page=1

[Malachy]

How many climate scientists would find funding or favour if they went up against the cold front of the man made global warming lobby?

 

There are plenty of oil companies willing to pay climate scientists good money for doing exactly that. But most climate scientists presumably prefer to stick to science rather than prostitution.

[sheepshagger]

Having spent most of my life working for the evil oil companies I would beg to differ Malachy, fact is we need oil wheather it is heating up the planet or not, we are not going to stop using it any time soon so why would they waste their money.

The oil companies are run by accountants and they will only spend money when they can see it improving the balance sheet, that is why for a product that is used every minute of every day there is very little advertising.

[ArabiaTerra]

How many climate scientists would find funding or favour if they went up against the cold front of the man made global warming lobby?

 

"I was shocked by the statement and I think the administrator ought to resign. I don't see how he can be the effective leader of a science agency if he doesn't understand the threat of global warming," said Michael Oppenheimer, a Princeton University atmospheric scientist and lead author of some of the latest reports issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC. The international body, made up of thousands of climate scientists is considered one of the most authoritative bodies on global warming.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=3229696&page=1

Gotcha! From the exact same report:

Several other NASA climate scientists contacted by ABC News echoed Hansen's comments, saying an overwhelming majority of their colleagues believe global warming is an urgent issue that society should be addressing. The scientists asked that their names not be used because they did not want to jeopardize their careers.

So the scientists didn't want to be named in case they lost their jobs. Hardly sounds like a pro AGW conspiracy to me. Face it Koy, you can't produce any climate scientists who don't believe in AGW, you can't find any evidence that AGW isn't happening and you've just blown your whole conspiracy out of the water with your own "evidence".

 

Case closed, methinks.

[KOYAANISQATSI]

Several other NASA climate scientists contacted by ABC News echoed Hansen's comments, saying an overwhelming majority of their colleagues believe global warming is an urgent issue that society should be addressing.

 

erm, it's abc tech news.

Who the hell phones up and says an overwhelming majority of us think the media consensus is correct but we're afraid our NASA boss will sack us if we say so.

 

Utter tosh.

[Deorccwen]

^^^ Birch, hazel and willow used to grow in Shetland. But that was before a combination of climate change (to a cooler, wetter climate) in the Bronze Age and several hundred years of inhabitation by people and sheep turned the soil into peat. I've no idea how well these trees would grow in Shetland now... Any gardeners out there?