Global Warming

[xyzer]

Getting back to the subject of globalwarming, here is an interesting area that has been only lightly considered in the studies that the IPCC places so much credence in?..Weather station problems? Inaccurate temperature measurment?
Chris Horner Identifies More Weather Station Problems | NewsBusters.org

Here are some glaring examples of flawed temperature gathering techniques in a highly industrialized, wealthy, nation? Do we know how accurately the temps are measured in Bolivia, Tierra de Fuego, Tibet. etc? There is a term in the computer arena..GIGO.(garbage in, garbage out!) Obviously it still applies and impacts the data inserted into the computer models.

One can argue that approximations will do but the use of approximations(proxies) certainly diminishes the certainty of the ultimate product? And when we consider the term global it's not a stretch to suggest that the Gigo factor may be at work here. Another possible flaw

Bush is denounced for not ratifying the Kyoto accords, does anyone remember why he rejected them? Here's a hint:

rmnunez..for complete accuracy President Clintons Senates first rejected the Kyoto protocol. The Senate of the US is the body that votes on treaty matters not the the President..Though I will admit Bush wasn't pushing it!

[rmnunez]

True the ratification process is not an exclusive concern of Bush's, but for the typical critical lefty its easier and preferable to blame Bush, we don't get many of them dissecting the opposition in the legislature. Do you know the names of a few Democrats in either the upper or lower chambers of the US legislature who famously expressed opposition to Kyoto? I'm sure there must have been some, but we're quiet about this, it tends to suggest there may be differing views on the wisdom of Bush's opposition.

[Pooeypants]

Quote by: xyzer Getting back to the subject of globalwarming, here is an interesting area that has been only lightly considered in the studies that the IPCC places so much credence in?..Weather station problems? Inaccurate temperature measurment? Chris Horner Identifies More Weather Station Problems | NewsBusters.org

Erm, are you suggesting that all weather station equipments have the problems they claimed to have uncovered? They've just taken some photos and pointed out circumstantial evidence, for example, they remarked upon a sensor with a bbq nearby. Let's just ignore the fact that these sensors aren't the only way we check temperatures. Not to mention, this issue has ready be assessed.

Quote by: xyzer Here are some glaring examples of flawed temperature gathering techniques in a highly industrialized, wealthy, nation? Do we know how accurately the temps are measured in Bolivia, Tierra de Fuego, Tibet. etc? There is a term in the computer arena..GIGO.(garbage in, garbage out!) Obviously it still applies and impacts the data inserted into the computer models.

Why? Do you have evidence to support your assertions of the problems of data collection in other countries?

Quote by: xyzer One can argue that approximations will do but the use of approximations(proxies) certainly diminishes the certainty of the ultimate product? And when we consider the term global it's not a stretch to suggest that the Gigo factor may be at work here. Another possible flaw

Wait, you're trying to tell me that the entire scientific community has been fooled by bad placement of measurement equipment? Where do you come up with this stuff? It's comedy goldmine! Oh wait, you just parrot all the rehashed arguments from those Think tanks!

[rmnunez]

Its not likely the location of the BBQ and the thermometer at weather stations has had much impact, but if a weather station has recorded a substantial hike in recordings after they got the BBQ, does it take a scientist to look into this a bit more closely? These people ought to have the sense to appreciate something like that right away. Weather is recorded all over the place, high-schools, airports, lighthouses, radio stations, and all sorts of public buildings monitor and record weather data. If there were these pockets of oddly high readings at specific locations, I'm sure they'd notice in collating the data.

Error in scientific measurements is a shameful embarrassement, but not so bad it would be concealed, certainly not to scientists premising forecasts on this.

[xyzer]

Here is the latest from a thinking politician!
FT.com / Debates & polls / Ask the expert - Global warming: truth or propaganda?

Vaclav Klaus, president of the Czech Republic, argues in the Financial Times that ambitious environmentalism is the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity.

Admittedly Klaus is not a scientist but his analysis from a logical and practical point of view, is great!
I liked this statement!

Vaclav Klaus: I ask myself several questions. Let’s put them in the proper sequence: • Is global warming a reality? • If it is a reality, is it man-made? • If it is a reality, is it a problem? Will the people in the world, and now I have to say “globally”, better-off or worse-off due to small increases of global temperature? • If it is a reality, and if it is a problem, can men prevent it or stop it? Can any reasonable cost-benefit analysis justify anything – within the range of current proposals – to be done just now? Surprisingly, we can say yes – with some degree of probability – only to the first question. To the remaining three my answer is no. And I am not alone in saying that. We are, however, still more or less the silent or silenced majority. .................................................................................................... ...

[rmnunez]

That "silenced majority".

[Pooeypants]

Silenced majority of what? The National Academy of Sciences certainly don't agree with you, and who do you think they represent?

[Chris]

If it is a reality, is it a problem? Will the people in the world, and now I have to say “globally”, better-off or worse-off due to small increases of global temperature?

Nothing to worry about eh? Just a "small" increase in global temp.

It only melts inland ice and warms the oceans to cause stronger hurricanes, kills sea life at the bottom of the food chain, creating an unstoppable chain reaction. Its only these warmed oceans that cause catastrophic weather elsewhere in the world causing drought in some parts and floods in other parts. Where they need rain the most, they dont get it.

just a "small" problem eh?

[rmnunez]

Worms Composting?

Jim Frederickson, the research director at the Composting Association has called for data on worms and composting to be re-examined after a German study found that worms produce greenhouse gases 290 times more potent than carbon dioxide. Worms are being used commercially to compost organic material is in preference to putting it into landfill. The German government wants 45% of all waste to be composted by 2015. "Everybody... thinks they can do no harm but they contribute to global warming. People are looking into alternative waste treatments but we have to make sure that we are not jumping from the frying pan into the fire," said Frederickson. Scientist Implicates Worms in Global Warming

Are people concerned over CO2 in global warming barking up the wrong tree?

[xyzer]

Another scientist points out some flaws in the models that the IPCC has used to buttress its alarmist contentions..
Swedish Scientist Accuses UN's IPCC of Falsifying Data and Destroying Evidence | NewsBusters.org

According to Swedish paleogeophysicist Nils-Axel Mörner, who’s been studying and writing about sea levels for four decades, the scientists working for the IPCC have falsified data and destroyed evidence to incorrectly prove their point.

Now, back to satellite altimetry, which shows the water, not just the coasts, but in the whole of the ocean. And you measure it by satellite. From 1992 to 2002, [the graph of the sea level] was a straight line, variability along a straight line, but absolutely no trend whatsoever. We could see those spikes: a very rapid rise, but then in half a year, they fall back again. But absolutely no trend, and to have a sea-level rise, you need a trend

Chris, maybe you and Pooey wont have to worry about the oceans flooding your shores anytime soon?

Then, in 2003, the same data set, which in their [IPCC's] publications, in their website, was a straight line—suddenly it changed, and showed a very strong line of uplift, 2.3 mm per year, the same as from the tide gauge. And that didn't look so nice. It looked as though they had recorded something; but they hadn't recorded anything. It was the original one which they had suddenly twisted up, because they entered a “correction factor,” which they took from the tide gauge. So it was not a measured thing, but a figure introduced from outside. I accused them of this at the Academy of Sciences in Moscow —I said you have introduced factors from outside; it's not a measurement. It looks like it is measured from the satellite, but you don't say what really happened. And they answered, that we had to do it, because otherwise we would not have gotten any trend!

Is this scientist and expert in his field telling lies? Does the IPCC have an agenda? Is the house of cards tumbling down?

[rmnunez]

I liked the part where its noted how, if the sea level rose, the earth's diameter would have to increase, and hence the earth's rotation would slow down, but we still get 24 hour days.

[Pooeypants]

Quote by: xyzer Another scientist points out some flaws in the models that the IPCC has used to buttress its alarmist contentions.. Swedish Scientist Accuses UN's IPCC of Falsifying Data and Destroying Evidence | NewsBusters.org Chris, maybe you and Pooey wont have to worry about the oceans flooding your shores anytime soon? Is this scientist and expert in his field telling lies? Does the IPCC have an agenda? Is the house of cards tumbling down?

Yes, the interview of a retired Professor in an Economics magazine is really going to demolish a composite report from thousands of scientists. :rolleyes:

His accusations of that tree uprootment is just that...an accusation. Of course, I will research into this further but as I don't study this field it may take some time.

By the way, I think that Professor has overstepped the line [/url=http://secure.environmentaldefense.org/documents/3868_morner_exposed.pdf]with the organisation he was once President of Sea level change[/url].

[xyzer]

Pooey, I'm shocked but not suprised at your simplistic reasoning.

Yes, the interview of a retired Professor in an Economics magazine is really going to demolish a composite report from thousands of scientists

Define composite report by thousands of scientists for us? In fact the IPCC report is its own summation of the conclusions of studies by scientists, is it not? There is no real consensus among the scientists and the overall conclusions of the IPCC? You have tried to use that illogical ruse before?

This expert reveals that the IPCC has rigged the data in at least one area of climate influences. If the IPCC has rigged the data to buttress its conclusions is it reasonable to conclude it has an agenda and is not afraid to shape data and conclusions to favor that agenda? We've discussed the use of 'proxies' before. If that isn't shaping the process I don't know what is?

You can illogically defend the climate alarmists all you want but I'm afraid the alarmist house of cards is tumbling down...It all gets back to the trade off of resources and certainty? Is it prudent to expend resources to try to change something we are not certain we can change?

[Pooeypants]

Quote by: xyzer Define composite report by thousands of scientists for us? In fact the IPCC report is its own summation of the conclusions of studies by scientists, is it not?

My apologies, my wording was in correct, I should've said a composite report from the work of thousands of scientists. Which it is.

Quote by: xyzer There is no real consensus among the scientists and the overall conclusions of the IPCC? You have tried to use that illogical ruse before?

No, it is YOU who have used this illogical ruse. I have already cited what the consensus exists.
Yet time, and time again you conveniently ignore this evidence, you repeat the same lies over and over. And ever so often you'll post a new article from these "anti liberal media" sites that throw in the same rehashed arguments over and over.

Quote by: xyzer This expert reveals that the IPCC has rigged the data in at least one area of climate influences. If the IPCC has rigged the data to buttress its conclusions is it reasonable to conclude it has an agenda and is not afraid to shape data and conclusions to favor that agenda? We've discussed the use of 'proxies' before. If that isn't shaping the process I don't know what is?

You've cited an interview which has yielded accusations of data rigging. Until I see this published in a mainstream scientific source, I'll take it with a pinch of salt.

Quote by: xyzer You can illogically defend the climate alarmists all you want but I'm afraid the alarmist house of cards is tumbling down...It all gets back to the trade off of resources and certainty? Is it prudent to expend resources to try to change something we are not certain we can change?

The conclusions of the IPCC, NASs and many other scientific organisations are quite clear. It is your choice whether you choose to accept the collective voice of the majority or that of few individuals.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Of course global warming is happening, and most probably it is because of man. The costs of not acting may be world depression, social order break down, political instability, war, etc...

The argument to act on the possibility of those outcomes is the more prudent one to choose to respect and act on:

See here.

[xyzer]

Hey stronghearts...that dog wont hunt! You assume..
"Of course global warming is happening, and most probably it is because of man. The costs of not acting may be world depression, social order break down, political instability, war, etc...

The argument to act on the possibility of those outcomes is the more prudent one to choose to respect and act on:"

You reference a video clip

Cardio posted tha clip on this thread June 18th and I responded to it with a post at 9:59 AM. It's a specious bit of reasoning by a fairly convincing talker ....but it's illogical and alarmist, making assumptions before the fact. The starting point is that humans are causing global warming and can change the warming trend? Then we are treated to what might occur if the assumptions the asuthor spouts are correct..the usual alarmist hyperbole?
Get another dog

[xyzer]

The latest...Note this article attacks Gores assumptions in his docudrama "The Inconvenient Truth"? But it illustrates that the conclusions in many scientific studies as applied by the IPCC, have proven wrong or incomplete! Even been overtaken by more recent data.
Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Other Views

[xyzer]

Here is another article that considers the economic effects of Kyoto like cuts in energy use. Scary, is it not?
Townhall.com::Climate ethics on Capitol Hill ::By Paul Driessen

[Dr.Debate]

I believe Global Warming (and Cooling) exist naturally, but that humans are making it go faster.

[Bnet505]

Quote by: Dr.Debate I believe Global Warming (and Cooling) exist naturally, but that humans are making it go faster.

I agree. But we're not going to see a tidal wave tomorrow morning. It will eventually get to a point to worry but honestly we shouldn't have that much to worry about right now.