The stimulus is working!

[spence]

Global climate change is a fraud because it was cold in Australia.

Yea Bryan, he's really got you there

-spence

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by spence

Global climate change is a fraud because it was cold in Australia.

Yea Bryan, he's really got you there

-spence

It goes right in line with my opinion of how the average American follows any news item.

They perceive what is happening right this moment, and that observation is fact. Have an unseasonably cool month in June - there's no way Global Warming exists. Longer than typical Indian Summer in February - Global Warming is going to murder our children tomorrow.

The average person doesn't have the capability to look at trends - here-and-now emotional responses are all many are capable of.

Perfect example is the direct corollary some people use when comparing what the stock market has done *today* and how the economy is doing. Market goes up, and the economy is improving. Next day the Market goes down, and we're headed for a depression.

There's very little critical thinking, just single observations then comments.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Global climate change is a fraud because it was cold in Australia.

Yea Bryan, he's really got you there

-spence

as usual Spence, you completely invent a fraudulent statement, where is your integrity? "Global Climate Change" is occuring all of the time(this may be alien to you) it began changing as soon as the atmosphere was formed and will continue until a wayward meteor destroys the planet unless we do it first.....the POINT is that 1998 was deemed the hottest year ever and has been followed by year after year where the "culprits" of supposed global warming have increased every year in the atmosphere and the planet has cooled????...I cited Australia to show that not only here but across the planet(even on the other side) RECORD cold temps for extended periods are constantly being recorded ...this cannot possibly be occuring if "THE PLANET HAS A FEVER" that began ten years ago when the planet was the hottest that it has ever been and it was "only going to get worse" ...NOT...it's that simple, you can throw out all of your gobligook but you cannot explain this fact....you are perpetuating the greatest SCAM in the planet's history...SHAME ON YOU!

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by scottw

[COLOR="Blue"]as usual Spence, you completely invent a fraudulent statement, where is your integrity

fraud (frôd) n.
1. A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.
2. A piece of trickery; a trick.
3.
a. One that defrauds; a cheat.
b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.

How exactly?

Anyone can find specific locations where temperatures have been statistically low for a period of time. It doesn't change the fact that the Average Global Temperature is up.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

How exactly?

Anyone can find specific locations where temperatures have been statistically low for a period of time. It doesn't change the fact that the Average Global Temperature is up.

Jimmy, time to move onto "another(the next) stimulus"...should be a winner

JD...10 years after the planet began burning up there should be NO record low temperatures ANYWHERE...the problem with liars (Al Gore) is that they have to constantly lie to cover up the big intitial lie, while it's be immensely profitable for him, it is global deceit and will be proven so, the AGW nuts are just hoping to shove their agend up your butt as quickly as possible so that they can take credit as the cooling continues for magically fixing everything as we all shiver because oil is banned and the windmill won't turn

you must have a really high IQ ?

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by scottw

JD...10 years after the planet began burning up there should be NO record low temperatures ANYWHERE...the problem with liars (Al Gore) is that they have to constantly lie to cover up the big intitial lie, while it's be immensely profitable for him, it is global deceit and will be proven so, the AGW nuts are just hoping to shove their agend up your butt as quickly as possible so that they can take credit as the cooling continues for magically fixing everything as we all shiver because oil is banned and the windmill won't turn

you must have a really high IQ ?

10 years? In global climate terms, 10 years isn't even a speck on the radar.

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

as usual Spence, you completely invent a fraudulent statement, where is your integrity? "Global Climate Change" is occuring all of the time(this may be alien to you) it began changing as soon as the atmosphere was formed and will continue until a wayward meteor destroys the planet unless we do it first.....the POINT is that 1998 was deemed the hottest year ever and has been followed by year after year where the "culprits" of supposed global warming have increased every year in the atmosphere and the planet has cooled????...

You sure got me Dr. Science. I guess the fact that 2008 saw one of the warmest months on record and that the yearly averages look like this:



Seem to support your sceintific theory that the Earth is indeed entering a dramatic period of cooling contrary to increasing output of greenhouse gasses.

I'm guessing you either stopped your education at the 8th grade, or really didn't pay attention in high school statistics.

I cited Australia to show that not only here but across the planet(even on the other side) RECORD cold temps for extended periods are constantly being recorded

...this cannot possibly be occuring if "THE PLANET HAS A FEVER" that began ten years ago when the planet was the hottest that it has ever been and it was "only going to get worse" ...NOT...it's that simple, you can throw out all of your gobligook but you cannot explain this fact....you are perpetuating the greatest SCAM in the planet's history...SHAME ON YOU!

Only an idiot would measure climate change with a 10 year sample, or perhaps someone out to ignore science and make a political point.

RIROCKHOUND sure called that one.

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

[COLOR="Black"]

Only an idiot would measure climate change with a 10 year sample, or perhaps someone out to ignore science and make a political point.

RIROCKHOUND sure called that one.

-spence

you have it backward, this is all about politics and has very little to do with science, is Al Gore a Politician of a Scientist?...why is the solution massive government take over of industry and meddling into every aspect of our lives together with massive taxation??? Because this is nothing more that a STATIST tool to acquire more power...

there are an awful lot of PHD idiots running around that dipute this data and "SCIENCE", but just like welfare, it's become a cottage industry for the left....time will tell, just hope we can recover from the damage that will be done ....

BTW..it's GLOBAL WARMING, climate change is a cop out, this began as global warming, didn't you see the movie?... and is not new, the left has run with coming ice ages and then the global burning up every 25 years for the last century, they've tried this crap before, just can't seem to make up their minds...


NOPE, WE"RE SCREWED....OBAMA RULES THE PLANET TEMPERATURES
Philip Webster, Political Editor, in L’Aquila
President Obama and other leaders backed historic new targets for tackling global warming last night in an agreement designed to pave the way for a world deal in the autumn.

For the first time, America and the other seven richest economies agreed to the goal of keeping the world’s average temperature from rising more than 2C (3.6F).

They also agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 80 per cent by 2050 as they strove for a worldwide deal at Copenhagen in December.
better start "eliminating" a lot of people

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by scottw

you have it backward, this is all about politics and has very little to do with science, is Al Gore a Politician of a Scientist?

I don't know why you continue to reference Al Gore. Aside from by you, he hasn't been referenced once in this post. And no, I didn't see the movie.

You, sir, are conflating the topic.

As a note, a PhD doesn't immediately make you the definitive source for reliable information.

[spence]

That's because ScottW has been blinded by the punditry. He doesn't understand the difference between science and politics so to him they are one in the same. All a fraud...

Classic ostrich head in the sand syndrome.

Wow, Bryan sure nailed this one.

-spence

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

As a note, a PhD doesn't immediately make you the definitive source for reliable information.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

You sure got me Dr. Science. I guess the fact that 2008 saw one of the warmest months on record and that the yearly averages look like this:



Seem to support your sceintific theory that the Earth is indeed entering a dramatic period of cooling contrary to increasing output of greenhouse gasses.

I'm guessing you either stopped your education at the 8th grade, or really didn't pay attention in high school statistics.


Only an idiot would measure climate change with a 10 year sample, or perhaps someone out to ignore science and make a political point.

RIROCKHOUND sure called that one.

-spence

Actually, there are many such graphs of varying and similar time periods that conflict with yours. And there are various "interpretations" of your and other graphs. There is an immense amount of information and chatter, pro and con Global Warming/Climate Change. You can pick and choose whatever suits your agenda, leaving out contradictions and make a solid appearing argument either way. Most of the studies actually contradict your position.

In geologic time, 120 years is also too short to prove anymore than what occured in that 120 years, wherein, by the way, man-made use of fossil fuels were not a problem for half the graph. Also, the beginning of the graph enters on a downstroke indicating a higher level of warming before MMGW. It also shows another drop and leveling of temps at the time when MMGW might reasonably begin to show some effect. Then a big 20 YEAR spike and then the beginning of the present temp drop into a predicted 30 year cooling. This graph has no significant indication of Man Made Global Warming.

Global temps peaked in 1998 and have been cooling each year since. The warming and cooling were predictable due to HUNDREDS OF YEARS of historical trends and observation of the impact of variations in solar activity on global temperature. Global temps are falling even though atmospheric CO2 levels continue to increase. Antarctica had the most ice ever recorded at the end of 2008. When adding the April 2009 ice extent at both polls together, there was the same amount of polar ice as 30 years ago. According to NASA, the earth's oceans have been cooling since 2003 and may be entering a 30 year cooling period.

Here are excerpts from a few abstracts in peer reviewed studies and/or major scientific journal articles disputing Man-Made Gobal Warming (CAPS are mine):
(1) "Some researchers say the data make SOLAR VARIABILITY the LEADING HYPOTHESIS to explain the 1500 YEAR oscillation of climate seen since the last ice age, and that the sun could also add to the greenhouse warming of the next few years."
(2) "A review of the recent referred literature FAILS TO CONFIRM quantitatively that CO2 radiative forcing was the prime mover in the changes in temperature, ice sheet volume, and related climatic variables in the glacial and interglacial episodes of the past 650,000 years . . . atmospheric CO2 variations generally FOLLOW changes in temperature and other climatic variables rather than preceding them."
(3) "The authors indentify and describe the following global forces of nature driving the earth's clilmate: (1) solar radiation as a dominant external energy supplier to earth, (2) outgassing as a major supplier of gasses to the world ocean and the atmosphere , and, possibly, (3) microbial activities generating and consuming atmospheric gases at the interface of lithosphere and atmosphere . . . the writers SHOW THAT HUMAN INDUCED CLIMATIC CHANGES ARE NEGLIGIBLE."
(4) "Several recent studies claim to have found evidence of large scale climate changes attributed to human influences. These assertions are based on increases of correlation over time between general circulation model prognostications and observations as derived from a centered pattern correlation statistic. We argue that the results of such studies ARE INAPPROPRIATE because of limitations and biases in these statistics which leads us to conclude that THE RESULTS OF MANY STUDIES EMPLOYING THESE STATISTICS MAY BE ERRONEOUS and, in fact, SHOW LITTLE EVIDENCE OF A HUMAN FINGERPRINT IN THE OBSERVED RECORDS."
(5) "The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that authors trace back to the traditional works of Fourier 1824, Tyndall 1861, and Arrhenius 1896, and which is still supported in global climatology, ESSENTIALLY DESCRIBES A FICTITIOUS MECHANISM, in which a planetary atmosphere acts as a heat pump . . . according to the SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS SUCH A PLANETARY MACHINE CAN NEVER EXIST. Nevertheless, in almost all texts of global climatology . . . it is taken for granted that such mechanism is real . . . in this paper the popular conjecture is analyzed and . . . THE ATMOSPHERIC GREENHOUSE CONJECTURE IS FALSIFIED.

31,000 American scientists signed a petition against global warming.

According to the National Climate Data Center, 2008 temperatures in the U.S.A were below the 115 year average.

April 2009 temps were 0.8f below the 20th century average.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by detbuch

In geologic time, 120 years is also too short to prove anymore than what occured in that 120 years, wherein, by the way, man-made use of fossil fuels were not a problem for half the graph.

31,000 American scientists signed a petition against global warming.

I don't have time to go point by point right now.

1. Are you a geologist?
2. I hate this quote. a. How many of the 31,000 were/are have a background in climate, climatology, geology or some other science where this is THEIR field... b. how many WOULDN'T sign it!

[scottw]

that's just American scientists...but go ahead and find a way to dismiss them all....they're probably all idiots...right Spence and JD?

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by scottw

that's just American scientists...but go ahead and find a way to dismiss them all....they're probably all idiots...right Spence and JD?

Never said that. I said having a PhD doesn't make you a definitive source. Hell, there is a whole list of reputable scientists that either think Global Warming is not happening, is a natural occurrence, or could possibly benefit us.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...global_warming

Keep in mind, there was also a laundry list of scientists that argued man would never walk on the moon or develop a cure for cancer (we're pretty darn close).

However, people that use this as evidence against climate change *are* idiots. "It was 46 degrees outside last night in the middle of July. There's no way Global Warming exists."

[scottw]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

I don't have time to go point by point right now.

1. Are you a geologist?
2. I hate this quote. a. How many of the 31,000 were/are have a background in climate, climatology, geology or some other science where this is THEIR field... b. how many WOULDN'T sign it!

hey Rock, this guy is a GEOLOGIST...

Global warming is the new religion of First World urban elites

Geologist Ian Plimer takes a contrary view, arguing that man-made climate change is a con trick perpetuated by environmentalists

By Jonathan Manthorpe, Vancouver SunJuly 28, 2009

Ian Plimer has outraged the ayatollahs of purist environmentalism, the Torquemadas of the doctrine of global warming, and he seems to relish the damnation they heap on him.

Plimer is a geologist, professor of mining geology at Adelaide University, and he may well be Australia's best-known and most notorious academic.

Plimer, you see, is an unremitting critic of "anthropogenic global warming" -- man-made climate change to you and me -- and the current environmental orthodoxy that if we change our polluting ways, global warming can be reversed.

It is, of course, not new to have a highly qualified scientist saying that global warming is an entirely natural phenomenon with many precedents in history. Many have made the argument, too, that it is rubbish to contend human behaviour is causing the current climate change. And it has often been well argued that it is totally ridiculous to suppose that changes in human behaviour -- cleaning up our act through expensive slight-of-hand taxation tricks -- can reverse the trend.

But most of these scientific and academic voices have fallen silent in the face of environmental Jacobinism. Purging humankind of its supposed sins of environmental degradation has become a religion with a fanatical and often intolerant priesthood, especially among the First World urban elites.

But Plimer shows no sign of giving way to this orthodoxy and has just published the latest of his six books and 60 academic papers on the subject of global warming. This book, Heaven and Earth -- Global Warming: The Missing Science, draws together much of his previous work. It springs especially from A Short History of Plant Earth, which was based on a decade of radio broadcasts in Australia.

That book, published in 2001, was a best-seller and won several prizes. But Plimer found it hard to find anyone willing to publish this latest book, so intimidating has the environmental lobby become.

But he did eventually find a small publishing house willing to take the gamble and the book has already sold about 30,000 copies in Australia. It seems also to be doing well in Britain and the United States in the first days of publication.

Plimer presents the proposition that anthropogenic global warming is little more than a con trick on the public perpetrated by fundamentalist environmentalists and callously adopted by politicians and government officials who love nothing more than an issue that causes public anxiety.

While environmentalists for the most part draw their conclusions based on climate information gathered in the last few hundred years, geologists, Plimer says, have a time frame stretching back many thousands of millions of years.

The dynamic and changing character of the Earth's climate has always been known by geologists. These changes are cyclical and random, he says. They are not caused or significantly affected by human behaviour.

Polar ice, for example, has been present on the Earth for less than 20 per cent of geological time, Plimer writes. Plus, animal extinctions are an entirely normal part of the Earth's evolution.

(Plimer, by the way, is also a vehement anti-creationist and has been hauled into court for disrupting meetings by religious leaders and evangelists who claim the Bible is literal truth.)

Plimer gets especially upset about carbon dioxide, its role in Earth's daily life and the supposed effects on climate of human manufacture of the gas. He says atmospheric carbon dioxide is now at the lowest levels it has been for 500 million years, and that atmospheric carbon dioxide is only 0.001 per cent of the total amount of the chemical held in the oceans, surface rocks, soils and various life forms. Indeed, Plimer says carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, but a plant food. Plants eat carbon dioxide and excrete oxygen. Human activity, he says, contributes only the tiniest fraction to even the atmospheric presence of carbon dioxide.

There is no problem with global warming, Plimer says repeatedly. He points out that for humans periods of global warming have been times of abundance when civilization made leaps forward. Ice ages, in contrast, have been times when human development slowed or even declined.

So global warming, says Plimer, is something humans should welcome and embrace as a harbinger of good times to come.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by scottw

hey Rock, this guy is a GEOLOGIST...

One nitwit's opinion that you found on the web doesn't really prove anything.

He certainly has some screws loose with this gem:

(Plimer, by the way, is also a vehement anti-creationist and has been hauled into court for disrupting meetings by religious leaders and evangelists who claim the Bible is literal truth.)

It's one thing to publish opposing articles, it's another to disrupt meetings and whatnot. Right way and wrong way.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Most of the studies actually contradict your position.

What's my position?

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

What's my position?

-spence

hands on the ankles?

sorry ..too easy, have a great weekend buddy, try to go fishing, OK?

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

[


Only an idiot would measure climate change with a 10 year sample, or perhaps someone out to ignore science and make a political point.

RIROCKHOUND sure called that one.

-spence

the problem with your statement and thinking Spence is that YOUR definition of "SCIENCE" is only that science that you agree with or that forwards your position/agenda, you completely ingore and impune a wealth of science and scientists that disagree with Manmade Global Warming Theory, a completely media and politically motivated and driven agenda...whose head is in the sand?