Thread: Global Warming...Fact or Fiction?

Originally Posted by Marko

just looking at the results of the pole. Interesting..
I wonder why your so less likely to be inclined to beleive in AGW if your American.

There's also a direct link between being a socialist and believe in global warming.

Americans are less likely to be a socialist than Europeans.

Europeans are also keen on wallowing in guilt

Originally Posted by Marko

I wonder why your so less likely to be inclined to beleive in AGW if your American.

I can't speak for all Americans Marko, but I can assure you that there are a whole lot of Americans who don't question it one bit.

What you see on WAB isn't representative of Americans as a whole. Most of us have some degree of respect for the scientific method, several of us have science degrees. Less so for the population as a whole.

Do you have to "believe" in chemistry? Not really, right? Chemistry just is. It follows the scientific method. Verifiable, repeatable. You put your hypothesis out there and let other people try to shoot it down.

Climatology isn't like that. Data is kept private and massaged to fit the theory, models are tweaked again and again to get the desired outcomes. There's a clique mentality to it all. If you're not in the club, you're an enemy.

It's very political- because there's a huge economic component to it. Universities have a much better chance for funding if they can put a global warming spin on their studies. That's where the money is.

Big finance loves it because they want that carbon exchange so bad they can taste it. They can devise all kinds of new schemes based on carbon credits, carbon credit swaps, carbon credit default swaps, and so on.

Liberals love it because it fits into their worldview of mankind's pursuit of commerce and wealth by exploiting natural resources as something evil.

Governments love it because it represents a whole new way to tax the populace.

Honest scientists hate it because it degrades the scientific method, which is the one thing they hold sacred. But they have learned to keep silent- they don't know how to fight the propaganda, and they are averse to getting involved in that sort of seamy business anyway. They have learned that they will be ridiculed as a "denier", and speaking out against it isn't exactly a smart career move.

Don't you think it's odd that the proponents have declared "the debate is over"? The "science is in", as they say?

In real science, the debate is never over. There's always the opportunity to challenge the established beliefs. Always.

AGW isn't like that. It's not science, it's ideology.

Originally Posted by highsea

Honest scientists hate it because it degrades the scientific method, which is the one thing they hold sacred. But they have learned to keep silent- they don't know how to fight the propaganda, and they are averse to getting involved in that sort of seamy business anyway. They have learned that they will be ridiculed as a "denier", and speaking out against it isn't exactly a smart career move.

Don't you think it's odd that the proponents have declared "the debate is over"? The "science is in", as they say?

In real science, the debate is never over. There's always the opportunity to challenge the established beliefs. Always.

AGW isn't like that. It's not science, it's ideology.

That hits the nail on the head. Before it was AGW it was a Global Cooling scare.

There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.

The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a degree – a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars’ worth of damage in 13 U.S. states

.Newsweek, April 28, 1975

It seems like they always have to have some "threat" to scare the general populace with and crusade against.

Originally Posted by BadKharma

That hits the nail on the head. Before it was AGW it was a Global Cooling scare.
.Newsweek, April 28, 1975

It seems like they always have to have some "threat" to scare the general populace with and crusade against.

Heh...I bet they got funding to study the "global cooling" phenomenon and came up with "global warming." Further studies show the earth's climate is "changing." Gee...when has the climate remained the same for extended periods of time?

Bad Data, No Biscuit!

What are the odds that yet another chunk of data used by the Carbonistas all these years is actually pure shite? Oh, about 100%. Courtesy of In the MIDDLE of the RIGHT, (hat tip to Borepatch, of course) we now know that bad satellite data has been included in the Carbonistas' datasets for years, and that they've known it was bad for years.

"The snuffed out satellite had been run continuously up until being taken offline soon after my article went viral (August 10, 2010) in which I exposed the full extent of how seriously degraded it’s sensors were. The automatic readings had been contaminated by hundreds, if not thousands, of false and absurdly high temperature readings, some as high as 612 degrees Fahrenheit (boiling point of water is 212 F.). We now know NOAA was aware of these outrageous anomalies at least since 2006 but they were not remedied ( see below)."

Now, for years I've been labeling people as fools for getting sucked into the "global warming" cult simply because it was not scientific, but I never disputed the temperature numbers they were given. I didn't believe them, mind you, but I never disputed them. Couldn't prove they were false, so I never argued that point. But I always figured there were lots of bad data in there because there was never any scientific evidence to support those numbers; and again, the Left - and "global warming" is a prime cult of the Left - will stop at nothing to further its agenda.

If the rallying cry of the Libertarian Right is "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch", or TANSTAAFL, then certainly the countercry of the Liberal Left must be "The Ends Justify All Means". or TEJAM.

This guy makes a good point:

How many BILLIONS of dollars have been spent to mitigate the effects of the non existent issue of global warming? How many taxpayer dollars have been spent (actually, wasted) working with this erroneous data?

Were I in charge, those same scientists, technicians, and especially administrators, would be forced to pay back every dollar that was spent for all those years for which erroneous data was provided. Salaries, operating costs, and any other expenses. Somehow, I doubt that this will be the case.

My bet is that few of them will even be forced to resign. I'd like to stand them up against a wall. But then again, I have been told that I lack tolerance....

Originally Posted by dalem

...What are the odds that yet another chunk of data used by the Carbonistas all these years is actually pure shite?

I don't know dale, I measured the temperature in my shop yesterday, and it was over 170 degrees.

Now, I'll admit- the area I measured was the tiny space right between the cylinders on my motorcyle, immediately after I finished a ride. But you know? It's still a big concern and I need to watch these shop temperatures real careful because if it gets that hot everywhere, I won't be able to get any work done.

/\

SCIENCE!!!!!

-dale