What happened to global warming?

And now for some CA and AK oil in the meantime.

 

I guess I have to put my 2 cents in on the subject. I too think it's a scam, or should I say, Know it's a scam. Here is why I think this.
#1. It's primarily the politicians that come out trying to pass this scam.
#2. Any one in science that doesn't believe it is imediatly discredited harshly and if well known enough, their reputation is smeared badly.
#3. Government funding going to Institutions that support Global warming only.
#4. Any discussions that any wishes to have to have open debate is mostly avoided. Global warming truly is a weak argument.
#5. Being is that people look at the term of global warming as a joke as cold weather is dominating the planet most of the time. Those people of science renamed it global climate change. Hence, the previouse term is mocked.
#6. Follow the Money, you will see it's real intent.

I cold go on and on with examples.
I personally believe that this will lead to a One world Government. I don't expect anyone here to beleive this, but just file that in the back of your mind. Once the Dollar is collapsed. I will be 100% sure it's the New World Order. It's not a matter of if, but when.
Comments?
eighter way I would like to hear both sides.

 

Global warming = Global Scamming. Come up with a bunch of BS. Get some laws passed to back it up. Rake in trillions being the exchangers of carbon emissions allowances. We are a carbon based life form, for crying out loud. More carbon = more life. We have plenty of room left on this ball for all the carbon we can dish out, til we blow the whole damn thing into carbon dust. Bring on the heat, it's too cold here in Pennsylvania. I'll start believing in this GWBS when it's hotter here than Yuma Arizona

 

i've said it a million times and i'll say it again. read State of Fear by micheal Chrichton (sp)

 

that is a great READ!!!!!! x2 nd

 

ice age ftmfw

 

he wasn't the greatest author in the world but he was known for researching the shit out of anything he wrote about. the research material he uses is amazing. if you had any doubts about global warming they are gone after reading that book. the only reason it didn't make a badass movie is cause its treats global warming like a myth and hollywood would never back it

 

couldn't say it any better!!!!!

LOVE IT ND

 

FGW too!

 

From The Times
January 23, 2010
UN climate change expert: there could be more errors in report
Jeremy Page, South Asia Correspondent

(Bob Strong/Reuters)
Rajenda Pachauri
The Indian head of the UN climate change panel defended his position yesterday even as further errors were identified in the panel's assessment of Himalayan glaciers.



Dr Rajendra Pachauri dismissed calls for him to resign over the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change’s retraction of a prediction that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035.

But he admitted that there may have been other errors in the same section of the report, and said that he was considering whether to take action against those responsible.

“I know a lot of climate sceptics are after my blood, but I’m in no mood to oblige them,” he told The Times in an interview. “It was a collective failure by a number of people,” he said. “I need to consider what action to take, but that will take several weeks. It’s best to think with a cool head, rather than shoot from the hip.”

The IPCC’s 2007 report, which won it the Nobel Peace Prize, said that the probability of Himalayan glaciers “disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high”.

But it emerged last week that the forecast was based not on a consensus among climate change experts, but on a media interview with a single Indian glaciologist in 1999.

The IPCC admitted on Thursday that the prediction was “poorly substantiated” in the latest of a series of blows to the panel’s credibility.

Dr Pachauri said that the IPCC’s report was the responsibility of the panel’s Co-Chairs at the time, both of whom have since moved on.

They were Dr Martin Parry, a British scientist now at Imperial College London, and Dr Osvaldo Canziani , an Argentine meteorologist. Neither was immediately available for comment.

“I don’t want to blame them, but typically the working group reports are managed by the Co-Chairs,” Dr Pachauri said. “Of course the Chair is there to facilitate things, but we have substantial amounts of delegation.”

He declined to blame the 25 authors and editors of the erroneous part of the report , who included a Filipino, a Mongolian, a Malaysian, an Indonesian, an Iranian, an Australian and two Vietnamese.

The “co-ordinating lead authors” were Rex Victor Cruz of the Philippines, Hideo Harasawa of Japan, Murari Lal of India and Wu Shaohong of China.

But Syed Hasnain, the Indian glaciologist erroneously quoted as making the 2035 prediction, said that responsibility had to lie with them. “It is the lead authors — blame goes to them,” he told The Times. “There are many mistakes in it. It is a very poorly made report.”

He and other leading glaciologists pointed out at least five glaring errors in the relevant section.

It says the total area of Himalyan glaciers “will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometers by the year 2035”. There are only 33,000 square kilometers of glaciers in the Himalayas.

A table below says that between 1845 and 1965, the Pindari Glacier shrank by 2,840m — a rate of 135.2m a year. The actual rate is only 23.5m a year.

The section says Himalayan glaciers are “receding faster than in any other part of the world” when many glaciologists say they are melting at about the same rate.

An entire paragraph is also attributed to the World Wildlife Fund, when only one sentence came from it, and the IPCC is not supposed to use such advocacy groups as sources.

Professor Hasnain, who was not involved in drafting the IPCC report, said that he noticed some of the mistakes when he first read the relevant section in 2008.

That was also the year he joined The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) in Delhi, which is headed by Dr Pachauri.

He said he realised that the 2035 prediction was based on an interview he gave to the New Scientist magazine in 1999, although he blamed the journalist for assigning the actual date.

He said that he did not tell Dr Pachauri because he was not working for the IPCC and was busy with his own programmes at the time.

“I was keeping quiet as I was working here,” he said. “My job is not to point out mistakes. And you know the might of the IPCC. What about all the other glaciologists around the world who did not speak out?”

Dr Pachauri also said he did not learn about the mistakes until they were reported in the media about 10 days ago, at which time he contacted other IPCC members. He denied keeping quiet about the errors to avoid disrupting the UN summit on climate change in Copenhagen, or discouraging funding for TERI’s own glacier programme.

But he too admitted that it was “really odd” that none of the world’s leading glaciologists had pointed out the mistakes to him earlier. “Frankly, it was a stupid error,” he said. “But no one brought it to my attention.”

 

The IPCC reports have always been full of shit. Read here:

http://ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20070201_monckton.pdf

Figures being revised by 33 to 400%? Since when was it acceptable in science to have up to 400% error in a predictive model? Statistically, it's the same as guessing in terms of correlation.

 

gotta love "scientists"

 

Global warming is like believing in god. People are followers and believe what they will, with no way of finding out the truth

 

I could have used some "Global Warming" two weeks ago when I was freezing my a$$ off with the temps around here.

 

and thats totally fine, except the governments around the world are trying to say global warming is a scientific fact and they try to make you look stupid or ignorant if you dont believe them

 

Thank you for using quotes.

 

Global warming makes as much sense as pet rocks

 

I don't want to sift through 7 pages of post, but found this article. also pretty good

WASHINGTON – A United Nations climate change conference

in Poland is about to get a surprise from 650 leading scientists who scoff at doomsday reports of man-made global warming – labeling them variously a lie, a hoax and part of a new religion.

Later today, their voices will be heard in a U.S. Senate minority report quoting the scientists, many of whom are current and former members of the U.N.'s own Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

About 250 of the scientists quoted in the report have joined the dissenting scientists in the last year alone.

In fact, the total number of scientists represented in the report is 12 times the number of U.N. scientists who authored the official IPCC 2007 report.


Here are some choice excerpts from the report:

• "I am a skeptic ... . Global warming has become a new religion." -- Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

• "Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]funding[/color][/color], I can speak quite frankly ... . As a scientist I remain skeptical." -- Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called "among the most pre-eminent scientists of the last 100 years."

• Warming fears are the "worst scientific scandal in the [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]history[/color][/color] ... . When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists." -- U.N. IPCC [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]Japanese[/color][/color] Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning Ph.D. environmental physical chemist.

• "The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn't listen to others. It doesn't have open minds ... . I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists." -- Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the U.N.-supported International Year of the Planet.

• "The models and forecasts of the U.N. IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity." -- Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico.

• "It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don't buy into anthropogenic global warming." -- U.S. Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

• "Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]water[/color][/color] vapor and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will." -- Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, New Zealand.

• "After reading [U.N. IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet." -- Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an associate editor of Monthly Weather Review.

• "For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" -- Geologist Dr. David Gee, the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer-reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.

• "Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp ... . Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact." -- Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch U.N. IPCC committee.

• "Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]careers[/color][/color] ruined." -- Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh, Pa.

• "Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense ... . The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning." -- Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.

• "CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another ... . Every scientist knows this, but it doesn't pay to say so ... . Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver's seat and developing nations walking barefoot." -- Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.

• "The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds." -- Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata.

The report also includes new peer-reviewed scientific studies and analyses refuting man-made warming fears and a climate developments that contradict the theory.

It is 4 degrees Celsius (39 Fahrenheit) today in Poznan, Poland, where the U.N. conference is being held.