Global Warming

[PaulLowrance]

@paul,
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.

That's odd since I'm the only one who's posting scientific data.

So far, those who oppose global warming are making claims, or have posted links to non-peer reviewed websites. Hmm, and you say I'm the one who's religious?  LOL

Paul

[PaulLowrance]

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

Bill, what you are doing is allowing a few scientists to fulfill your beliefs. That is wrong brother! There are countless videos from the media over the decades that have filmed the glaciers melting. Live weather data has been available and spread to countless companies for decades, which shows a pattern of heating.

Paul

[PaulLowrance]

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

I just looked at all of your links, and I don't see anything resemblying peer review. A bunch of claims. In all fairness, there was one web page in your links that showed some data,
http://www.newsmax.com/brennan/gore_global_warming/2009/08/04/243871.html

but the problem is, once again it's claims. So lets just *assume* the numbers taken from their claims are correct. That is, they listed a few places that were cold. Here's an example of one of their quotes, "Coolest July on record for Peoria and Lincoln in central Illinois."  Bill, man that's not science!  First of all that's a *peak*, not an average. Second of all, their list amounts to a speck on the entire global. Global warming is just that, the entire global warming up.

Paul

[PaulLowrance]

BTW, yesterday I voiced interest in obtaining some weather data from an unbiased source, perhaps yahoo. We can start off small, perhaps a few cities in the US to see if we can see a slow gradual warming over the fluctuations.

And not one single person replied back with interest. Where's the truth seeking here? Lets hope people do not seek to strengthen their beliefs, but who seek the truth.

Paul

[Pirate88179]

I've seen two moderators at this forum, both appear to be opposed too Global Warming. Therefore I cannot trust that my posts here will remain unedited, and therefore people can refer to the following blog page,

http://globalfreeenergy.info/2009/11/25/motives-to-hush-global-warming/

Regards,
Paul

Paul:

You have no basis in fact for making a post like this.  I find this very unscientific of you, seriously.  I know you are an intelligent guy but why would you make such an accusation with no facts to back it up?  I find this seriously insulting.

Here is a fact for you that you can easily verify here on this site. (OU.com)  In the Joule Thief topic are where I am a moderator (and ONLY in that area) as of a few minutes ago we have recorded there 11,354 posts.  Do you know how many posts I have removed since my time as moderator?  Care to guess? 

I have removed 5 posts.  That is 5 posts out of 11,354.  I keep very close track because I believe it is a serious thing to remove someone's post.  I have never done it without a prior warning and, in most cases like 4 prior warnings.  I have never removed a post because "someone did not agree with the moderator".  I removed posts that were making personal insults to other forum members...very nasty insults too I might add.  They also did not contribute anything to the discussion at hand, only insults and misinformation to boot.

That is it....5.

Surprised?  I thought you might be.  This is why you should check the facts first before making a serious accusation like that.  I am not a moderator in this topic area which hosts this topic of yours. 

If you were not referring to me, then I am sorry.  If you were not, then maybe you could name the other moderator you were thinking of when making this statement?

You and I can disagree on global warming all day long and it would never cause me to hate you, or anyone.  I do not hate any one.  It is probably pretty pointless to continue to argue and debate about it because you have your deep seeded beliefs which you apparently have no intention of changing, and so do I.

So, we can leave it at that.  I just wanted to set the record straight about my removing posts as a moderator, if indeed you were referring to me.  If you were not, then please accept my apology.

Bill