This thread is a great example of why its best to avoid threads like this.
The Scientific consensus is that, the ultra long range forcast is for
increasing GW and climate change...and thats what we have to
prepare for...it would be grossly irresponsible to do anything else.
"being able to predict weather with modern equipment is helpful, however
the weather will be whatever it is, and that is what you will have to deal with."
The Scientific consensus is that, the ultra long range forcast is for
increasing GW and climate change...and thats what we have to
prepare for...it would be grossly irresponsible to do anything else.
They'll be asking questions alright and not just on this topic.I wonder what people will think of us in the year 2500.Bloody fossil fools.
UN Blowback: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims
Study: Half of warming due to Sun! –Sea Levels Fail to Rise? - Warming Fears in 'Dustbin of History'
POZNAN, Poland - The UN global warming conference currently underway in Poland is about to face a serious challenge from over 650 dissenting scientists from around the globe who are criticizing the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore. Set for release this week, a newly updated U.S. Senate Minority Report features the dissenting voices of over 650 international scientists, many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN. The report has added about 250 scientists (and growing) in 2008 to the over 400 scientists who spoke out in 2007. The over 650 dissenting scientists are more than 12 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.
LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index....ecord_id=2158072e-802a-23ad-45f0-274616db87e6
Agreed.
Not only have the Climate Change 'scientists' been 'cooking' the temperature books so to speak, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...-world-has-never-seen-such-freezing-heat.html
But the questioning voices of hundreds of scientists (which have always been there) are now getting louder.
This is not unusual to see in a bear market. People will start to question many 'beliefs' that were present in the bull market years, esp if it means higher costs (eg Carbon tax) that people are not willing to accept or believe is even warranted.
I'm sure more will unfold in this space as the bear market wears on.
From
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index....ecord_id=2158072e-802a-23ad-45f0-274616db87e6
“The models and forecasts of the UN 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
I was in a recent conversation with an IPCC member and we debated the impact of the sun on global warming. The IPCC stance was clearly "the SUN is a constant" and hence ignored temperature influence on the earth - which I believe is an incorrect assumption as well as bad science.
Modelling
A model is.... well, it's just a model.
However, what's real is real.
The IPCC's model is not real.
End of story.
LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!
I would hate to see your gloves.Factor in that activity and it fits like a glove.
"End of story".
Nobel Prize Winner for Physics said:“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.”
Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson said:“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.”
UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh said:"Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.”
Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet said:“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,”
Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera said:“The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.”
U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA said:“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.”
Geoffrey G. Duffy said:“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.”
Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs said:“After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.”
Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers said:“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?"
Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland said:“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.”
Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden said:“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.”
Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal said:“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.”
Dr. Takeda Kunihiko said:“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 politicalvehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.”
I would hate to see your gloves.
Please review these quotes from the current IPCC conference in Poznan Poland. Not oil or tobacco lobbyists, but real scientists... making a total idiot out of that @sshole, George Monbiot.
Agreed.The word skeptical indicates a certain amount of uncertainty. Some of the scientists have been so busy gaining letters and writing books (probably to make money) that I would be skeptical of their conclusions. Having been among academia I am aware that some have to rub the system the right way to get there.
For our granchindren we cannot offord to sit on the fence, we are gambling with thier future. There are cleaner alternatives to the fossil fuel regime and with the same subsidies would be cheaper.
..... and speaking of weather, here's some of God's handiwork,
Agreed.
But my consistent argument is that the AGWH religion draws attention from other "real" and urgent matters.
If you love your grandchildren, focus on the other myriad of environmental catastrophes and stop shadow boxing against the nonsense of co2 induced GW. If approached in this way, co2, if a factor in CC, will reduce as well.
Fretting about co2 emissions exclusively will do absolutely nothing for your , or anyone else's grandchildren.
And that's a fact Jack.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?