Global Warming

[MasterPlaster]

@paul,
If you publically provide the accurate temperature readings for the years 1700 to 1800 I will send you a cheque for $1000.

I love polar bears as much as the next man but I don't like being lied to.

in the mean while, as much as I respect your scientific stance, I think this global warming issue is more like a religion to you.

These are some quotes from the people who started all this.

     "We are moving toward a New World Order, the world of communism. We shall never turn off that road." -- Mikhail Gorbachev (1987)

    "The threat of environmental crisis will be the 'international disaster key' that will unlock the New World Order." -- Mikhail Gorbachev (Monetary & Economic Review, 1996, p. 5)

    "My hope is that this charter will be a kind of Ten Commandments." -- Mikhail Gorbachev (Regarding 1992 Earth Summit in Rio)

    "The real goal of the Earth Charter is that it will in fact become like the Ten Commandments." -- Maurice Strong

    "The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history." -- David Rockefeller (NY Times, Aug. 10, 1973)

    "A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal." -- Ted Turner (1996)

"There is no greater advocate of perestroika than the president of the United States." -- President George Bush [Sr.] (November 22, 1989)

"The essence of perestroika lies in the fact that it unites socialism with democracy and revives the Leninist concept of socialist construction both in theory and in practice." -- Mikhail Gorbachev (Perestroika; 1988)


You can read more here:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Video:Environ-Mentalism:_A_New_Religion_for_a_New_Age

[Pirate88179]

Are you trying to say that glaciers are not retreating and thinning? That is simply not true. Quote from WikiPedia,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Glacier_Mass_Balance.png

"This figure shows the average rate of thickness change in mountain glaciers around the world. This information, known as the glaciological mass balance, is found by measuring the annual snow accumulation and subtracting surface ablation driven by melting, sublimation, or wind erosion. These measurements do not account for thinning associated with iceberg calving, flow related thinning, or subglacial erosion. All values are corrected for variations in snow and firn density and expressed in meters of water equivalent (Dyurgerov 2002).

Measurements are shown as both the annual average thickness change and the accumulated change during the fifty years of measurements presented. Years with a net increase in glacier thickness are plotted upwards and in red; years with a net decrease in glacier thickness (i.e. positive thinning) are plotted downward and in blue. Only three years in the last 50 have experienced thickening in the average.

Systematic measurements of glacier thinning began in the 1940s, but fewer than 15 sites had been measured each year until the late 1950s. Since then more than 100 sites have contributed to the average in some years (Dyurgerov 2002, Dyurgerov and Meier 2005). Error bars indicate the standard error in the mean.

Other observations, based on glacier length records, suggest that glacier retreat has occurred nearly continuously since the early 1800s and the end of the little ice age, but variations in rate have occurred, including a significant acceleration during the twentieth century that is believed to have been a response to global warming (Oerlemans 2005).

Data
These measurements are described in Dyurgerov (2002), updated in Dyurgerov and Meier (2005), and archived at the World Glacier Monitoring Service at the National Snow and Ice Data Center. [1]
[2] (ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/pub/DATASETS/NOAA/G10002/ (ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/pub/DATASETS/NOAA/G10002/))"

Come on, Wikipedia is not a valid source for any information.  It can be edited by anyone and credentials are not checked when edited.

The news today was that they discovered the source code used by the east Anglia university's Global warming model was rigged also.  The whole thing is a fraud.  England is going to pursue fraud charges against these people.  They destroyed all of their original data once the FOIA requests began to come in.  their reason?  they said they needed more room on their hard drives.  What kind of scientist destroys ANY original data prior to a peer review?  These guys were not scientist but simply scammers that, thankfully, have now been caught.

If you need me to post sources for the above, I will go look them up and edit this later.  It was all over the radio today on about 6 different shows and news programs.

Bill

[Pirate88179]

Ha ha, anyone seeing a pattern at this forum. It appears that "OU Movement" = Anti Global Warming = Pro Oil Movement. Maybe this is the secret behind the truck load of faked OU claims, and their truck load of supporters.     That would make a nice investigation, no?  Maybe Rush Limbaugh is behind this secret movement. 
[/quotPaul:

Paul:

With all due respect, the truth is not a secret movement.  We have been lied to about this for many years now and a lot of so-called scientist are going to wish they did not fake these numbers.  They might be credentialed but they let politics and money over rule the scientific method.  I doubt any of them will be able to get a job teaching grammar school science classes after this.

Bill

[Pirate88179]

It would be nice if everyone in the world was unbiased, but the hacked email incident is spreading such false information.  Gavin Schmidt, a research scientist with NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, who is unbiased about this topic, says the e-mails offer no damning indictment of climate researchers, and that bloggers are reading information in them out of context. Gavin just made a public statement,

Quote from Gavin Schmidt, a research scientist with NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies:

There are signs aside from global mean temperatures, including melting of arctic sea ice, rising sea levels, and a lot of other indicators.

Paul

Sorry for the repeated posts but, since you quoted me so many times from another topic, I feel the need to correct your posts as I read them.

The e-mail was not hacked.  That is totally incorrect.  That is not even the right term for it if that was what happened but it was not.  It was an inside job done by a disgruntled person working there.  So, no need to crack the system (the correct term) as they had a password and full legal access.  My source is not WIKI (no one I know quotes WIKI as a source, they all know better) but an interview with employees speaking for themselves on the radio.  They were there, the folks writing the WIKI stuff were not.

Also, why did Al Gore and company suddenly change the term "global warming" to "climate change" after numerous reports came in to show the planet had been cooling for quite some time now?  If the planet were indeed warming and if they actually had the science to back it up, why the sudden name change?  "Climate change" pretty much covers everything heating and cooling so, they could be right no matter what happens.  They would not do this if global warming were real.

You are correct in that I have not been posting enough sources for my info.  That is because I listen to the radio and hear it right from the people themselves in interviews.  But here are some:

Scientists dump data:    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece

Climategate.  This is the worst scientific scandal of our generation:   http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6679082/Climate-change-this-is-the-worst-scientific-scandal-of-our-generation.html

We pay a high price for misinterpreting evidence about climate change: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/6693394/We-pay-a-high-price-for-misinterpreting-evidence-about-climate-change.html

Global warming fraud and the future of science: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/global_warming_fraud_and_the_f.html

Global warming fraud.  Somebody needs to go to jail: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/17187

Documenting the global warming fraud:  http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/01/documenting_the_global_warming_1.html

Climategate exposes the global warming hoax:  http://english.pravda.ru/science/earth/30-11-2009/110832-climategate-0

Record lows dispel global warming myth:  http://www.newsmax.com/brennan/gore_global_warming/2009/08/04/243871.html




Bill

[PaulLowrance]

Come on, Wikipedia is not a valid source for any information.  It can be edited by anyone and credentials are not checked when edited.

I've worked with wikipedia for a long time. People who abuse wikipedia are banned. Wikipedia does not need "credentials" from  posters since they are not prejudice, but what wikipedia requires is peer reviewed references. If there are none, then the information will be removed from the wikipedia page, or a notice next to the statement will be placed. That is science! Not a bunch of claims to support ones own belief system.

Wikipedia provides peer reviewed references. No offense, but that's something you people could learn to do. Every person in at this forum that is making *claims* against global warming have not provided peer review references.

The news today was that they discovered the source code used by the east Anglia university's Global warming model was rigged also.  The whole thing is a fraud.  England is going to pursue fraud charges against these people.  They destroyed all of their original data once the FOIA requests began to come in.  their reason?  they said they needed more room on their hard drives.  What kind of scientist destroys ANY original data prior to a peer review?  These guys were not scientist but simply scammers that, thankfully, have now been caught.

You make it appear as if it's all of the scientists in the world. It was only a few. Also, you make it appear as if these people control all of the global warming data in the world. Nothing could be farther from the truth, as the data has been backed up and spread all around the world. Even Yahoo & many other companies have live weather data records.

If you need me to post sources for the above, I will go look them up and edit this later.  It was all over the radio today on about 6 different shows and news programs.

Bill, I guess you have mod rights in this area. If so, then I know you will not go back and edit *old* posts because that would be abusing your mod rights. What you probably meant was that you would make *new* posts showing the data, as that way people will see the data. Please, by all means post the data, but it *must* be from peer reviewed data.


Paul