Global Warming - How Valid and Serious?

[--B--]

What agenda would that be?

A sustainable, peaceful, earth?

oh they pretend to push this agenda and deep down i dont doubt they desire it however inherent among green fanatics is a deep hatred for technology, wealth, and basically all us 'evil' human beings.

And not a drug riddled,

lol. im sure you are aware of the Greens stance on drugs?

wealth driven one?

oh, you are a greeny. money = bad huh? ironic to see you on a stock forum though.

Alas, I did vote green.

i believe you.

 

[numbercruncher]

B its never too late to join us, leave the dark side, the denier extremist fringe groups are being swept aside to be ruthlessly judged by history, maybe you could join us for a meditation circle and out of body experience where we hop on one foot and giggle like kookaburas while sharing a peace pipe? Maybe we could also partake in the ancient symbolic ritual of Burning 100 dollar bills and smashing iPods, at the end the grand master will reappear from the never world and cleanse you of your "evils"?


:

 

[--B--]

Hi guys, ive come across some interesting reading for you.

Brief highlights of the US Senate report featuring over 400 international scientists:

Israel: Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem has authored almost 70 peer-reviewed studies and won several awards. "First, temperature changes, as well as rates of temperature changes (both increase and decrease) of magnitudes similar to that reported by IPCC to have occurred since the Industrial revolution (about 0.8C in 150 years or even 0.4C in the last 35 years) have occurred in Earth's climatic history. There's nothing special about the recent rise!"

Russia: Russian scientist Dr. Oleg Sorochtin of the Institute of Oceanology at the Russian Academy of Sciences has authored more than 300 studies, nine books, and a 2006 paper titled "The Evolution and the Prediction of Global Climate Changes on Earth." "Even if the concentration of ‘greenhouse gases' double man would not perceive the temperature impact," Sorochtin wrote.
Netherlands: Atmospheric scientist Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, a scientific pioneer in the development of numerical weather prediction and former director of research at The Netherlands' Royal National Meteorological Institute, and an internationally recognized expert in atmospheric boundary layer processes, "I find the Doomsday picture Al Gore is painting - a six-meter sea level rise, fifteen times the IPCC number - entirely without merit," Tennekes wrote. "I protest vigorously the idea that the climate reacts like a home heating system to a changed setting of the thermostat: just turn the dial, and the desired temperature will soon be reached."
France: Climatologist Dr. Marcel Leroux, former professor at Université Jean Moulin and director of the Laboratory of Climatology, Risks, and Environment in Lyon, is a climate skeptic. Leroux wrote a 2005 book titled Global Warming - Myth or Reality? - The Erring Ways of Climatology. "Day after day, the same mantra - that ‘the Earth is warming up' - is churned out in all its forms. As ‘the ice melts' and ‘sea level rises,' the Apocalypse looms ever nearer! Without realizing it, or perhaps without wishing to, the average citizen in bamboozled, lobotomized, lulled into mindless ac*ceptance. ... Non-believers in the greenhouse scenario are in the position of those long ago who doubted the existence of God ... fortunately for them, the Inquisition is no longer with us!"

Norway: Geologist/Geochemist Dr. Tom V. Segalstad, a professor and head of the Geological Museum at the University of Oslo and formerly an expert reviewer with the UN IPCC: "It is a search for a mythical CO2 sink to explain an immeasurable CO2 lifetime to fit a hypothetical CO2 computer model that purports to show that an impossible amount of fossil fuel burning is heating the atmosphere. It is all a fiction."
Canada: IPCC 2007 Expert Reviewer Madhav Khandekar, a Ph.D meteorologist, a scientist with the Natural Resources Stewardship Project who has over 45 years experience in climatology, meteorology and oceanography, and who has published nearly 100 papers, reports, book reviews and a book on Ocean Wave Analysis and Modeling: "To my dismay, IPCC authors ignored all my comments and suggestions for major changes in the FOD (First Order Draft) and sent me the SOD (Second Order Draft) with essentially the same text as the FOD. None of the authors of the chapter bothered to directly communicate with me (or with other expert reviewers with whom I communicate on a regular basis) on many issues that were raised in my review. This is not an acceptable scientific review process."

India: One of India's leading geologists, B.P. Radhakrishna, President of the Geological Society of India, expressed climate skepticism in 2007. "We appear to be overplaying this global warming issue as global warming is nothing new. It has happened in the past, not once but several times, giving rise to glacial-interglacial cycles."

USA: Climatologist Robert Durrenberger, past president of the American Association of State Climatologists, and one of the climatologists who gathered at Woods Hole to review the National Climate Program Plan in July, 1979: "Al Gore brought me back to the battle and prompted me to do renewed research in the field of climatology. And because of all the misinformation that Gore and his army have been spreading about climate change I have decided that ‘real' climatologists should try to help the public understand the nature of the problem."

Italy: Internationally renowned scientist Dr. Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists and a retired Professor of Advanced Physics at the University of Bologna in Italy, who has published over 800 scientific papers: "Significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming."

New Zealand: IPCC reviewer and climate researcher Dr. Vincent Gray, an expert reviewer on every single draft of the IPCC reports going back to 1990 and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of "Climate Change 2001: "The [IPCC] ‘Summary for Policymakers' might get a few readers, but the main purpose of the report is to provide a spurious scientific backup for the absurd claims of the worldwide environmentalist lobby that it has been established scientifically that increases in carbon dioxide are harmful to the climate. It just does not matter that this ain't so."

South Africa: Dr. Kelvin Kemm, formerly a scientist at South Africa's Atomic Energy Corporation who holds degrees in nuclear physics and mathematics: "The global-warming mania continues with more and more hype and less and less thinking. With religious zeal, people look for issues or events to blame on global warming."

Poland: Physicist Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, Chairman of the Central Laboratory for the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Radiological Protection in Warsaw: ""We thus find ourselves in the situation that the entire theory of man-made global warming-with its repercussions in science, and its important consequences for politics and the global economy-is based on ice core studies that provided a false picture of the atmospheric CO2 levels."

Australia: Prize-wining Geologist Dr. Ian Plimer, a professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Adelaide in Australia: "There is new work emerging even in the last few weeks that shows we can have a very close correlation between the temperatures of the Earth and supernova and solar radiation."

Britain: Dr. Richard Courtney, a UN IPCC expert reviewer and a UK-based climate and atmospheric science consultant: "To date, no convincing evidence for AGW (anthropogenic global warming) has been discovered. And recent global climate behavior is not consistent with AGW model predictions."

China: Chinese Scientists Say C02 Impact on Warming May Be ‘Excessively Exaggerated' - Scientists Lin Zhen-Shan's and Sun Xian's 2007 study published in the peer-reviewed journal Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics: "Although the CO2 greenhouse effect on global climate change is unsuspicious, it could have been excessively exaggerated." Their study asserted that "it is high time to reconsider the trend of global climate change."

Belgium: Climate scientist Luc Debontridder of the Belgium Weather Institute's Royal Meteorological Institute (RMI) co-authored a study in August 2007 which dismissed a decisive role of CO2 in global warming: "CO2 is not the big bogeyman of climate change and global warming. "Not CO2, but water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas. It is responsible for at least 75 % of the greenhouse effect. This is a simple scientific fact, but Al Gore's movie has hyped CO2 so much that nobody seems to take note of it."

Sweden: Geologist Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, professor emeritus of the Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology at Stockholm University, critiqued the Associated Press for hyping promoting climate fears in 2007. "Another of these hysterical views of our climate. Newspapers should think about the damage they are doing to many persons, particularly young kids, by spreading the exaggerated views of a human impact on climate."

USA: Dr. David Wojick is a UN IPCC expert reviewer, who earned his PhD in Philosophy of Science and co-founded the Department of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie-Mellon University: "In point of fact, the hypothesis that solar variability and not human activity is warming the oceans goes a long way to explain the puzzling idea that the Earth's surface may be warming while the atmosphere is not. The GHG (greenhouse gas) hypothesis does not do this." Wojick added: "The public is not well served by this constant drumbeat of false alarms fed by computer models manipulated by advocates."

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport#report

comments and opinions are welcome and encouraged as usual!

 

[2020hindsight]

-B- As long as you continue to vote "act on it anyway", I don't have a problem

 

[--B--]

got nothing 2020?

thats not surprising,. i didnt expect many of the GW alarmists to want to respond. after all theyre the ones banging on about a scientific 'consensus'.

PS: sorry to disappoint you but i didnt vote as you suggested.

 

[numbercruncher]

A report from the US senate with their own clear cut agenda of pandering to their corporate masters just doesnt cut it sorry.

 

[wayneL]

-B- As long as you continue to vote "act on it anyway", I don't have a problem

But is anyone acting on it? Not from what I see.

What are you doing 20?

 

[--B--]

A report from the US senate with their own clear cut agenda of pandering to their corporate masters just doesnt cut it sorry.

i assumed you would ignore the 400 scientists opinions numbercruncher.

its difficult to consider something may not be quite as it seems when youre so blindly committed to it i suppose.

 

[numbercruncher]

i assumed you would ignore the 400 scientists opinions numbercruncher.

its difficult to consider something may not be quite as it seems when youre so blindly committed to it i suppose.

Ahh these teh same 400 you where telling us about that place there GW thermometers beside Airconditioners and Hot asphalt ?

 

[--B--]

Ahh these teh same 400 you where telling us about that place there GW thermometers beside Airconditioners and Hot asphalt ?

lol. i never said anything of the sort.

i note again with amusement you have nothing to say on the matter.

i dont doubt that many such as yourself blindly follow the GW myth because its easier and because the media forces such rubbish down our throats daily. dismissing all else without contemplation tends to render your opinions less valid.

 

[numbercruncher]

lol. i never said anything of the sort.

i note again with amusement you have nothing to say on the matter.

Ahh ok sorry must of been one of the other deniers

 

[--B--]

Ahh ok sorry must of been one of the other deniers

oh yes. your standard definition is:

anyone who considers all the issues, who studies the science and who evaluates all the opinions = deniers.

bleat away.

 

[2020hindsight]

But is anyone acting on it? Not from what I see.

What are you doing 20?

lol
ok - I'm no longer taking flash photos because the battery need charging

the other thing I've done is help to vote out the Howard Govt

The big thing Wayne is to get the world using power sytems other than fossil fuel .

You walking to your local pub is pissing in the windpower m8

 

[wayneL]

lol
ok - I'm no longer taking flash photos because the battery need charging

the other thing I've done is help to vote out the Howard Govt

The big thing Wayne is to get the world using power sytems other than fossil fuel .

You walking to your local pub is pissing in the windpower m8

It's OK to try and trivialize what I've decided to do (actually, taking into account your verbosity on the subject, it's a gross hypocrisy) but collectively, everybody walking to the local (plus everything else people can do as individuals, including campaigning for alternative fuels) can make a massive difference.

Join us doers 2020, and leave the likes of Al Bore to their talk and their monumental double standards.

From what I can gather, so far all your hot air is only adding to GW.

 

[2020hindsight]

It's OK to try and trivialize what I've decided to do (actually, taking into account your verbosity on the subject, it's a gross hypocrisy) but collectively, everybody walking to the local (plus everything else people can do as individuals, including campaigning for alternative fuels) can make a massive difference.

Join us doers 2020, and leave the likes of Al Bore to their talk and their monumental double standards.

From what I can gather, so far all your hot air is only adding to GW.

getting personal now

I could say ditto , but I won;t
You're a mod after all
you know best

 

[billhill]

Brief highlights of the US Senate report featuring over 400 international scientists:

Just thought i would clarify some points regarding your report. First it was released by the environmental and public works comittee minority office which is the republican division of the commitee. The majority office is run by the democrats and no such report was filed by them. Also i was unable to locate the names of the senators that put this report together so if you can provide that for srutiny it would be appreciated.

The minority office is run by a senator james inhofe. I checked his background and he is considered and extremely conservative republican with a long history of denying climate change.

Inhofe has a history of opposing environmental groups and global warming initiatives

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=James_M._Inhofe#Campaign_contributions

He also appears to be a big beneficiary of oil and gas interests.

Boxer replaced Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe, a Republican who has received $572,000 from the oil and gas industry since President Bush took office””more than all but three other members of Congress. .

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/347/oil-politics.html

Not saying the report is not valid but merely pointing out the interests behind it for the purposes of balance.

 

[2020hindsight]

getting personal now

I could say ditto , but I won;t
You're a mod after all
you know best

was a bit rushed when I sent that one
just that I was busy sending a container of manufactured goods to China.

but rest assured, I walked rather than drove whenever I could.

 

[billhill]

Join us doers 2020, and leave the likes of Al Bore to their talk and their monumental double standards.

Wayne i don't understand the criticisms you have towards al gore and other GW activists. You seem to take on a position that everyone who is concerned about GW needs to "walk to the pub". Sure things like this set a good example and hopefully over time culture and behaviour will change. But expecting all individuals to take the resposibilty is unrealistic. People are concerned but many have too much else on their plate to really concentrate on doing much themselves about it. Hence why people would rather allow legislators to do it for them. That way they are doing their bit and don't have to think about it along the way. Why don't people do anything about GW individually, the same reason people don't quit smoking. Its psychological and its ingrained in us through evolution.

As for al gore you obviously don't have a high oppinion of him but i hope you can agree that he has done more for GW awareness then any other person in the world. His movie probably single handedly made GW an issue in australia and probably led to more agressive environmental policy in this country then otherwise would have been. Thats surely more then just doing his bit regardless of his personal life.

 

[numbercruncher]

Many may not realise but Dubbya is a closet greeny, he knows what the energy starved future holds


Check out his diggs ....

The passive-solar house is positioned to absorb winter sunlight, warming the interior walkways and walls of the residence. Geothermal heat pumps circulate water through pipes buried 300 feet (100 m) deep in the ground. A 25,000 US gallon (151 m ³) underground cistern collects rainwater gathered from roof urns; wastewater from sinks, toilets, and showers cascades into underground purifying tanks and is also funneled into the cistern. The water from the cistern is then used to irrigate the landscaping around the home

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prairie_Chapel_Ranch

 

[--B--]

Just thought i would clarify some points regarding your report. First it was released by the environmental and public works comittee minority office which is the republican division of the commitee. The majority office is run by the democrats and no such report was filed by them. Also i was unable to locate the names of the senators that put this report together so if you can provide that for srutiny it would be appreciated.

The minority office is run by a senator james inhofe. I checked his background and he is considered and extremely conservative republican with a long history of denying climate change.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=James_M._Inhofe#Campaign_contributions

He also appears to be a big beneficiary of oil and gas interests.


http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/347/oil-politics.html

Not saying the report is not valid but merely pointing out the interests behind it for the purposes of balance.

oh ffs.

i suppose you hold the same reservations of any pro-GW reports you read? or is it only the ones who cast doubt on the GW debate that are possible open to bias?

you pick out one guy with a link to the EVIL oil and cite this as a reason to doubt the content of the report.

the fact is 400 credible scientists have put forward these views and have raised valid point which many (including yourself it seems) wil happily ignore because it doesnt fit in with the hype and catastrophe you all cheer about.