NOW the Apocalypse has begun in Greece...

[pixelsmith]

DID I EVER SAY THERE WAS NO WARMING OF THE EARTH?!?....................... no.

DID YOU EVER PRODUCE THAT SMOKING GUN EVIDENCE?!?!........................ no.

i will be to work soon where i can look at ALL the "evidence" you guys have posted so far. I will assume this is the evidence that is used to advise global leaders of the need for massive taxation and to regulate CO2 emissions.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

DID I EVER SAY THERE WAS NO WARMING OF THE EARTH?!?....................... no.

Really? So why are we arguing? Are you just trying to be annoying?
Have fun.

 

[pixelsmith]

Please, provide some.
Here's some I've looked at:

Frequently Asked Questions - AR4 WG1

WWF - Scientific proof: climate change is happening now

And watch a video:

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/XkEys3PeseA&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/XkEys3PeseA&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

OMG... where to start...
First link... IPCC AR4?... really? Do you really want to use the IPCC as a valid source? Seriously? This alone tells me you have not done enough research. The IPCC's documents are extremely flawed... They have had to withdraw several claims, ie: melting Himalayan glaciers, African agriculture problems, Amazon rainforests problems, Dutch geography, and results of damages from extreme weather events, manipulated hockey stick graph...etc, etc, etc... BTW- the IPCC has about 10 people that are full time and have a chairman who has conflicts of interest and also just published his cute porn book about a climate scientists who has an affair or some such non sense.. The IPCC is NOT a well respected source nor a scientific research facility. They received much of their information from the now discredited scientists involved in the climategate scandal.

WWF?!? seriously? do you know anything about this group? why would you use them as an official source of climate information when you have the settled science and consensus of so many scientists?!?... lets actually SEE this science and how they arrived at it... oh thats right... the dog ate the data.

Video... OMG... WTF?!? this guys starts right off with lies. First he assumes CO2 is a deadly poisonous gas that will surly kill us all. There is no evidence of that what so ever. CO2 is a minor trace gas that does very little warming and is best known as natures fertilizer and is also responsible for life on Earth. It has been far higher in concentrations for most of this planets life. Plants begin to die off at levels around 200 ppm, we are thankfully boosting those levels back up to a level that plants enjoy and produce more.

He says the sea ice is declining... when in fact it is growing right now, sea ice grows and shrinks constantly, there is no danger what so ever in that regard.

He says the polar bears will lose because of this decline in sea ice and that there is NO ADAPTION.... wtf?... Polar bears became polar bears thru adaption...DUH

So we should geoengineer the planet. (Chemtrails) He "knows" it will work because volcanos cool the earth. He wants to mess with the planet's atmosphere because of a non proven theory that CO2 concentrations are warming the planet to catastrophic levels. He continues to talk about CO2 as if it were a lethal gas.

He uses all this OLD information starting back in the 50's was it? Between the 50's and 70's the climate change we were worried about was GLOBAL COOLING. I am no genius but I thought cooling is the opposite of warming....

Then he plants a nice little seed, we can't do anything because we have no "global governance". (NWO)

He then briefly mentions the next bogus boogy man in line, Ocean Acidification... oh boy... don't get me started on that...

...and finally, altho not a real big deal but never the less somewhat disturbing considering the education this guy is supposed to have... the graph at about 12:40, on the right side states "Geoengineering to take the edge of the heat... s/b OFF.

WOW.. no wonder the warmist side has completely lost the fight for this scam/scheme. Sorry for such a short review of your materials. Maybe we can go over finer points of your smoking gun evidence later.

Thanks for trying, at least you are trying to educate yourself.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

First he assumes CO2 is a deadly poisonous gas that will surly kill us all. There is no evidence of that what so ever.

So you're not human? C02 is poisonous to humans - look it up.

I guess there's no point in me even trying anymore because you'll call any source I provide flawed.

Also, like you said, at least I'm trying. You've shown me nothing to support your views. At least you're keeping me entertained.

 

[Kieran]

You're being slapped in the face with tons of evidence and you're refusing to look at it. You have yet to provide any valid argument that there's NO warming of the Earth.
I can understand people like Cotton that feel as though people are profiting from global warming fears, that's a valid concern. But to completely deny that there is any heating of the Earth going on is just hiding your head in the sand.

I remember, a while back, reading a different thread concerning this subject. Schuyler, a former poster here presented a good case against climate change. However, i read other interesting evidence, which refute the claims, he made back then. To both camps on the issue, both made valid points, at different times during that Particular debate.
However, the last word will rest with the Planet, if we continue to pollute as we do, It might just toss us to one side, and repair itself, without giving a damn about us(what we believe or not believe) might not matter. The planet's existence is roughly four billion years old and it safe to say the planet, was not created for us, as a home to do, what we wish. The planet looks like it does for a reason and starve the oxygen and Co2 and we cease to be here. I rather live in a healthy fossil free world, if we could and what is so wrong, with changing the status quo. When it helps us and the planet?

I wonder often about this> In the past did a human species exist before or recorded history and they impacted the climate so much. That the climate changed for the worse for them and they were effectively wiped out because of it (flood myth) Maybe the flood myth was a climate disaster of staggering proportions. The theory i guess is> Ancient humanoid's were messing with Fuels that in the long term caused their destruction. Highly speculative, but a similar species to us in the past, would probably used resources that were available to them once they reached a level of development keen to or own and probably face the same problems that our World suffers today( by having used these resources)

 

[The Pair of Cats]

Kieran.
I was just thinking the same thing re: Schuyler. He had uncovered a series of emails which purportedly pointed to certain scientists colluding to fudge the figures thereby exaggerating man's effect on the climate.

 

[Kieran]

Kieran.
I was just thinking the same thing re: Schuyler. He had uncovered a series of emails which purportedly pointed to certain scientists colluding to fudge the figures thereby exaggerating man's effect on the climate.

That was Part of the case Schuyler put forward. These Emails caught them out and it can't be denied. They were messing with the data coming in and changing it to suit their point of view. When things like this happen, it does hurt the case, for the opposite pro side.

 

[pixelsmith]

So you're not human? C02 is poisonous to humans - look it up.

I guess there's no point in me even trying anymore because you'll call any source I provide flawed.

Also, like you said, at least I'm trying. You've shown me nothing to support your views. At least you're keeping me entertained.

in concentrations of 10,000 ppm in confined spaces you might have a problem, the current level is about 388 ppm, a typical office cubicle can be around 4000 ppm. every time you exhale you emit CO2. if you are so concerned about CO2 there are ways of permanently halting those emissions from your body.

---------- Post added at 04:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:32 PM ----------

Kieran.
I was just thinking the same thing re: Schuyler. He had uncovered a series of emails which purportedly pointed to certain scientists colluding to fudge the figures thereby exaggerating man's effect on the climate.

I have every one of those emails. If anyone wants them you are welcome to them.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Yeah, you should watch this video - he explains it a lot better than I can:

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/uXesBhYwdRo&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/uXesBhYwdRo&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Those infamous letters have been well accounted for by the scientific community. And after the extreme weather of the past year, it's hard to question the possibility that something serious is going on.

 

[pixelsmith]

explains what?
I think at 1:10 it is pretty clear was Phil Jones was saying. "I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report Kevin and I will keep them out somehow - even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"

Download the FOIA zipped file and read for yourself. It is quite clear in the email and the data files what they were up to.

---------- Post added at 05:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:05 PM ----------

Those infamous letters have been well accounted for by the scientific community. And after the extreme weather of the past year, it's hard to question the possibility that something serious is going on.

Gene, with all due respect, NO they have not been well accounted for. Have you read the 2000 plus emails and looked over the fudged data complete with programmer notes admitted HEAVY altering of the data to achieve a desired result? Here is an excerpt from the actual data files.

....with missing values set appropriately. Uses mxd, and just the ; “all band” timeseries ;****** APPLIES A VERY ARTIFICIAL CORRECTION FOR DECLINE********* ; yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904] valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,$ 2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,’Oooops!’ Some code removed here for brevity. ; ; Now normalise w.r.t. 1881-1960 ; mknormal,densadj,x,refperiod=[1881,1960],refmean=refmean,refsd=refsd Some code removed here for brevity. ; ; APPLY ARTIFICIAL CORRECTION ; yearlyadj=interpol(valadj,yrloc,x) densall=densall+yearlyadj ; ; Now plot them

One e-mail message, apparently from CRU director Phil Jones, references the U.K.’s Freedom of Information Act when asking another researcher to delete correspondence that might be disclosed in response to public records law: “Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise.” Another, also from Jones: global warming skeptics “have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone.” (Jones was a contributing author to the chapter of the U.N.’s IPCC report titled “Detection of Climate Change and Attribution of Causes.”)

The data manipulation is the real smoking gun as well as the deletion of the Mediaeval Warming Period , the Little Ice Age, etc...
The infamous Hockey Stick graph that AlGore used to scam the public as well as Congress left out some crucial data (MWP, LIA) in order to show this rapid curve. They frikkin lied. Period.

Gene your comment about the weather basically makes a good point. Weather changes all the time. Altho the "warmists" will say weather is not climate and just because it is colder or warmer, it means nothing. Climate is supposed to be what we go by, however, climate is measured typically in 30 year increments and over 30 years ago John Holdren and climatologists of the time were warning us about the looming Ice Age. Holdren said by 2000 we would all die from a massive tidal wave caused by a giant ice chunk breaking off the south pole. Now over 30 years later we are hearing him say that warming is actually what we need to worry about. Whatever way the wind blows I guess.. I would have stuck with the ice age fear mongering because that is most likely what we will experience. Ice ages come at about 10,000 year cycles and we are now due.

---------- Post added at 05:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:41 PM ----------

With all you CAGW supporters here why can't even one of you provide these actual scientific documents from these scientists that have arrived at their consensus?!? We have tons of their own data showing how they hide, fudge and manipulate the whole corrupt process but not one shred of the actual scientific data used to convince government that we need to control CO2 emissions.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

The data has been published for years and endorsed by the vast majority of the scientific community. Even if you say they are mistaken, and even the best thought-out theories may be wrong, that's no reason not to observe an environmentally safe lifestyle.

 

[pixelsmith]

Producing the data/proof I have requested seems to have all of you stumped. You can't find it, you will not find it, "they" lost it. Literally. So maybe we need to start with some basics and what you might be able to produce, can someone here show me where this CO2 concentration data was collected?

---------- Post added at 05:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:54 PM ----------

The data has been published for years and endorsed by the vast majority of the scientific community. Even if you say they are mistaken, and even the best thought-out theories may be wrong, that's no reason not to observe an environmentally safe lifestyle.

Well stated, I totally agree, where have I said I didn't? I reduce, reuse and recycle daily. I pick up litter daily. I conserve energy when I can. Gene what in your view constitutes "an environmentally safe lifestyle"?

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Producing the data/proof I have requested seems to have all of you stumped. You can't find it, you will not find it, "they" lost it. Literally. So maybe we need to start with some basics and what you might be able to produce, can someone here show me where this CO2 concentration data was collected?

Pixel, I don't feel like proving anything to you anymore because it's a waste of time. To you, this will be a sign of defeat, so be it. You're one guy on an internet forum that disagrees with the majority of the scientific community.

Well stated, I totally agree, where have I said I didn't? I reduce, reuse and recycle daily. I pick up litter daily. I conserve energy when I can. Gene what in your view constitutes "an environmentally safe lifestyle"?

I'm happy to hear that. I'm glad that the morons you seem to listen to don't dissuade you from doing that.

 

[pixelsmith]

Pixel, I don't feel like proving anything to you anymore because it's a waste of time. To you, this will be a sign of defeat, so be it. You're one guy on an internet forum that disagrees with the majority of the scientific community.



I'm happy to hear that. I'm glad that the morons you seem to listen to don't dissuade you from doing that.

I claim no victory over someone still in the dark and who does not seem to care for the future of our planet, resources and children. So rather than provide the proof provided by "the majority of scientists" which should be readily available, you choose to take flight.

Let me ask... does it not seem ODD that none of you can provide this information that is being used to create world wide policies and carbon trading scams?

 

[Angel of Ioren]

I claim no victory over someone still in the dark and who does not seem to care for the future of our planet, resources and children. So rather than provide the proof provided by "the majority of scientists" which should be readily available, you choose to take flight.

Let me ask... does it not seem ODD that none of you can provide this information that is being used to create world wide policies and carbon trading scams?

I'm not in the dark, and I know I'm not, but you think I am, and I'm fine with that.
However, I'm not sure where you get the idea that I don't care about the future of the planet. Where did you see that? Please enlighten me. I'm starting to think that you're putting me on or that you have some sort of problem. Sometimes I'm curious to see what people like you are like outside of internet forums. Can you take two steps without looking over your shoulder with all the conspiracies that are coming to get you? Sometimes you say something that makes me think you're quite intelligent, and then you bring it all crashing down again with an insane rant.

I provided some sources, you said they were a joke. I'm not going to post more links just for you to say they are wrong and/or biased.

I'm sure you think that the NWO is responsible for all of this, and they also caused 9/11, and that Obama was born on Mars or whatever. Keep living in that world and I'll keep reading your posts for the amazing entertainment value they give me.

 

[pixelsmith]

I'm not in the dark, and I know I'm not, but you think I am, and I'm fine with that.
However, I'm not sure where you get the idea that I don't care about the future of the planet. Where did you see that? Please enlighten me. I'm starting to think that you're putting me on or that you have some sort of problem. Sometimes I'm curious to see what people like you are like outside of internet forums. Can you take two steps without looking over your shoulder with all the conspiracies that are coming to get you? Sometimes you say something that makes me think you're quite intelligent, and then you bring it all crashing down again with an insane rant.

I provided some sources, you said they were a joke. I'm not going to post more links just for you to say they are wrong and/or biased.

I'm sure you think that the NWO is responsible for all of this, and they also caused 9/11, and that Obama was born on Mars or whatever. Keep living in that world and I'll keep reading your posts for the amazing entertainment value they give me.

Sorry I have been a bit fragmented. I am very busy in my garden because I have lost a lot of my personal time due to organizing a Blues Festival and working 2 jobs; a photography studio and a Tae Kwon Do studio both of which I own and wear all the hats. I barely have time to eat, evening meals are typically at about 10 pm. This forum helps me keep my sanity believe it or not.
I am not paranoid, do not look over my shoulder and you and I would most likely be great friends if we hung out. I have always stepped to the beat of a different drummer and have little time for accepting things as fed to me. The debate is never over.
I was in your camp for awhile. I handed out over 100 copies of An Inconvenient Truth paid for by myself because I was so sure Al Gore et al was right. Then he said, "The debate is over" and I knew something was wrong. Coming from a science crazy family, I knew that statement flew in the face of the Scientific Method.
If you want to believe Polar Bears are unable to adapt to climate change, that a life giving essential gas is something we need to pay taxes on, etc... fine. Just keep researching and you will find out too that it is all a big scam.

Remember to reduce, reuse, recycle and ask a lot of questions.

 

[1stEarthBattalion]

Whoops apocalypse.

Why is no one going oi - the banks have just tapped into a direct feed straight into the taxing system and robbed us blind for some pretty big snouts to continue feeding from the trough. And remember they all pleaded poverty (sorry people you missed your chance to take to the streets and have a revolution because they played on your good nature - apart from the heroic greeks) while emptying the coffers and forcing the little people out of thier homes.

Did no one notice that a game was afoot when a bank in Dubai asked for a bail out!!!!!

As for global warming - technology is the only way out on this one and we need it fast or a lot of people are going to suffer, especially in africa. Whomever or whatever is causing it is not as important as trying to solve or manage it. We can not stop carbon emissions without switching away from oil and petrol as it is unfair to expect the developing countires to stop having cars etc so the developed world can play with jetboats, suv's, and rollar coasters. If we help them introduce this modern tech every one can benefit. The problem is of course greed - the tech will be held onto until a huge profit can be gained.

I suppose a drive agains Greed would solve more problems than many would care to admit lets hope the tech is introduced to stave off the nightmare of having to do without.

Oh AJ when are the wars for freshwater due to start?

 

[pixelsmith]

The scam is exposed almost daily...

NASA Charged in New Climate Fakery: Greenhouse Gas Data Bogus by John O'Sullivan
NASA Charged in New Climate Fakery: Greenhouse Gas Data Bogus by John OSullivan, guest post at Climate Realists | Climate Realists

Shocking new evidence of a NASA scientist faking a fundamental greenhouse gas equation shames beleaguered space administration in new global warming fraud scandal.

Caught in the heat are NASA's Dr. Judith Curry and a junk science equation by the space agency’s Dr. Gavin Schmidt creating disarray over a contentious Earth energy graph.

The internal row was ignited by the release of a sensational new research paper discrediting calculations crucial to the greenhouse gas theory.

NASA in Internal Spat over Data

Hot on the heels of my recent scoop that the U.S. space agency may have suppressed evidence from the Apollo Moon landings that invalidated the greenhouse gas (GHG) theory, an internecine fury among NASA employees over fudged equations is set to further embarrass the current U.S. Administration’s stand on global warming.

Word is getting round that junk equations were threaded into the GHG theory to artificially inflate the heating effect of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by a factor of two.

The spark to this cataclysmic revelation was lit in April 2007 after a public gaffe (see below) by the space administration’s Dr. Gavin Schmidt, who fronts popular pro-global warming website, ‘Real Climate.’

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Sorry I have been a bit fragmented. I am very busy in my garden because I have lost a lot of my personal time due to organizing a Blues Festival and working 2 jobs; a photography studio and a Tae Kwon Do studio both of which I own and wear all the hats. I barely have time to eat, evening meals are typically at about 10 pm. This forum helps me keep my sanity believe it or not.
I am not paranoid, do not look over my shoulder and you and I would most likely be great friends if we hung out. I have always stepped to the beat of a different drummer and have little time for accepting things as fed to me. The debate is never over.
I was in your camp for awhile. I handed out over 100 copies of An Inconvenient Truth paid for by myself because I was so sure Al Gore et al was right. Then he said, "The debate is over" and I knew something was wrong. Coming from a science crazy family, I knew that statement flew in the face of the Scientific Method.
If you want to believe Polar Bears are unable to adapt to climate change, that a life giving essential gas is something we need to pay taxes on, etc... fine. Just keep researching and you will find out too that it is all a big scam.

Remember to reduce, reuse, recycle and ask a lot of questions.

Pixel,

Blues festival? Tae Kwon Do? Photography? Dude, you sound like my kind of guy to be honest with you, and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you've been fragmented as of late.
I'm with you on the Al Gore stuff. I have respect for him, and I was a fan of an inconvenient truth, but after finding that some of his data was skewed, I was disappointed. However, I'm not buying that al of the data is flawed.
I still don't agree with half the stuff you post, but as I've said many times on this forum, that's why I like coming here.