The last word on any scientific theory is, do future observation agree with predictions based on that theory.

Global warming predictions have never matched future observations.

Some times they are wrong by magnitudes, ie they predict ten times more change than actually occurred.

For the last 14 yrs global warming predictions have the direction wrong. While significant variability has occurred, the trend of change has been negative. The climate is cooling slightly.

The theory is wrong.

 

Has anybody managed to discredit the IPCC yet?

http://www.ipcc.ch

I know the Csiro here has a reputation for reputable and honest science.

http://www.csiro.au/en/Portals/Media/Insects-mating-secrets-key-to-protecting-Aussie-farms.aspx

 

Has anybody managed to discredit the IPCC yet?

the IPCC discredits themselves. They have admitted to making bold exaggerations, predicting things that they knew had almost no chance of actually occurring, in order to "get the message across."

 

And we will see how the defamation suit against mark steyn goes I suppose.

http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/31/climate-scientist-case-against-national-review-go-/

 

With the record setting cold and snow we have been having, why is the left pushing the failed global warming idea? Most people would like to see some warming. It has nothing to do with climate, it's just a distraction from the disaster that is obamacare.

 

It's not Global Warming anymore. They now call it "Climate Change" That way they can cover all bases. Brilliant!

 

ManBearPig is REAL!!! Don't let some foreigner mislead you!

 

ManBearPig is REAL!!! Don't let some foreigner mislead you!

This. Steyn is Canadian. He takes extreme fringe perspectives, appearing on the Limbaugh and Hannity shows.

Steyn's false accusations of Michael Mann have landed him and the National Review in legal trouble, which they are losing. They have tried to have the suit dismissed, which the court refuses saying there is real substance there.

Steyn's Wiki page makes no mention at all of the very prominent legal case over his libel. Imagine that. It is said that the court case may destroy the National Review.

http://www.salon.com/2014/01/30/a_defamation_lawsuit_may_kill_national_review/


Medieval Man, why would you refer to such a source for your information? Why would you try to make this all about politics? Why all the hate of your "leftists?"

Medieval Man, maybe let go of all the hate mongers and their extremist media. Perhaps try some science sometime.

Have you noticed a lot of weird weather and extreme events the past few years? It is only beginning. It is a survival issue right now. Get your families trained and situated for the future.

 

I'm no leftist and I believe in global warming, though it's part of a larger and more global phenomenon which is climate change. Temp can go up or down and this is normal, but if you look at the past ten years, changes have been wider. It seems every year, there are new records, with extreme cold (a few weeks ago in America) or heat (a few weeks ago in Australia).

Can't say if it's man made or not, but something's happening.

 

Yep something has been happening since the beginning.

 

So Mars is warming too! How about that. They also say Pluto is warming. How do you warm up from absolute Zero? It's got to be all those coal fired power stations the aliens are using. :space

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/research/2007/marswarming.html

 

No such thing as absolute zero. It is a concept.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_zero

 

whooosh .

 

Oh man, if you had your sarcasm meter on and I missed it, I apologize.

I'm thinking that's what you mean by the "whoosh" going right over my head?

But you really had me going there, you sounded just like one of those left wing zealots we deal with on a daily basis here in California.

 

This guy spent 16 or 17 years believing and trying to prove man made climate change. He seen it go from we will all freeze in the 70s to global warming and now to we don't know if it is going to get warmer or colder but we know man is the cause. Funny how someone who was a true believer and instigator is now being dismissed without any consideration at all.



A Greenpeace co-founder testified in Congress on Tuesday about global warming. What he said is hardly what anyone would expect.



Moore didn't hold back in his Senate appearance. He quickly zeroed in on the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and strongly scolded it for claiming there is a "95-100% probability" that man "has been the dominant cause of" global warming. Those numbers, he said, have been invented.



Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-edito...1587-greenpeace-co-founder-says-no-evidence-of-global-warming.htm#ixzz2wwOhiVNv

 

When someone speaks of the "last word" in a scientific theory, they demonstrate they don't understand what a scientific theory actually is.

 

Weather "scientists" can't reliably predict the weather tomorrow; how the hell do they expect us to believe that they can predict it 10, 20, or 100 years from now?

 

I got a kick out of a clip played on the news ( can't remember wich leftist it was ) today, seems it was their opinion that climate change would complicate the search for the airliner because all the currents had been changed and they no longer knew where the currents went.

 

It would appear the latest UN report admits what everyone who was not mentally defective should have known all along: There is no way we are going to mitigate the amount of greenhouse gases going into the atmosphere, or - whether or not that IS the cause of what's happening - global warming. What we need to do now is focus on adapting to changes that are going to alter the fabric of life for everyone for years to come.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/financ.../andrewlilico/100026933/climate-change-the-debate-is-about-to-change-radically/

 

why doesn't everyone realize that the SUN warms the globe. once that fundamental nugget is understood, then a large number of variables can influence the climate, but none of them will drive it. earth orbit, axis tilt, and orbit eccentricity are the next secondary influences that can modify the climate. beyond that are volcanoes, which can have a major impact on the interglacial warm period we are now enjoying. man made global warming is actually a good thing when you understand that a large volcanic eruption can cause a 5 or 10 degree average temperature drop, which would cause a catastrophic food shortage, and would kill millions or even billions due to starvation and disease. it has happened only a hundred years ago, after the eruption of krakatao, and hundreds of thousands lost their lives. while that eruption was small compared to other eruptions in the earth's past, hundreds of thousands perished due to famine and disease all around the globe. the extra CO2 in the atmosphere would be most welcome, because volcanic eruptions are a geological certainty. the effects are short term, considering the chronology of the history of this planet, but short term is relative, and our lifetimes are a blink of a eye, in the earth's life. as a matter of fact, volcanic activity is very probably the major factor which gives the recent historical temperature graph such an erratic profile. I say please add more CO2 to the atmosphere. thank you.

 

why doesn't everyone realize that the SUN warms the globe. once that fundamental nugget is understood, then a large number of variables can influence the climate, but none of them will drive it. earth orbit, axis tilt, and orbit eccentricity are the next secondary influences that can modify the climate. beyond that are volcanoes, which can have a major impact on the interglacial warm period we are now enjoying. man made global warming is actually a good thing when you understand that a large volcanic eruption can cause a 5 or 10 degree average temperature drop, which would cause a catastrophic food shortage, and would kill millions or even billions due to starvation and disease. it has happened only a hundred years ago, after the eruption of krakatao, and hundreds of thousands lost their lives. while that eruption was small compared to other eruptions in the earth's past, hundreds of thousands perished due to famine and disease all around the globe. the extra CO2 in the atmosphere would be most welcome, because volcanic eruptions are a geological certainty. the effects are short term, considering the chronology of the history of this planet, but short term is relative, and our lifetimes are a blink of a eye, in the earth's life. as a matter of fact, volcanic activity is very probably the major factor which gives the recent historical temperature graph such an erratic profile. I say please add more CO2 to the atmosphere. thank you.

That is good. The Sun is indeed the heat source for the planet. Next, what is between us and the Sun which regulates how much solar heat escapes back out to space?

 

Just too freaking funny to come back to this site after months...maybe a year of being away and see the same old tired BS playing out.

Gallon, Moccasin, dontbuypotteryfromme...you folks are just pounding sand around this forum. You're never going to sway even a smidges worth of mind set around here. It's a Rush Sean Faux News love fest run amok! There is no independent thought process. Just the same old rhetoric and talking points that have become the mantra of the "anti warming" crowd.

However...for the sake of stirring the pot a bit for those that still don't get it...

Don't Let the Snow Fool You. January Wasn't Cold at All.

The climate numbers are in from January and, on a global perspective, it actually wasn’t that cold at all.

In fact, for the 347th month in a row, planet Earth was downright toasty.

Yep, the last month in which Earth’s average temperature was below the 20th-century average was during the Reagan administration. February 1985, to be exact: “I Want to Know What Love Is” by Foreigner was the No. 1 song in the country. Sally Field had just been nominated for best actress for Places in the Heart. The author of this piece celebrated his fourth birthday party. That’s a long time for a planet to run a fever.

Since that moment 29 years ago, there’s been an unbroken stretch of planetary warmth. Almost as if the entire globe was warming. Hey, maybe we can call it “global warming” ...

Despite the East Coast cold, new data released last week shows January 2014 ranked among the warmest ever globally—the fourth warmest January since 1880, to be exact.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_t...ure_tense/2014/02/24/january_2014_was_the_fourth_warmest_january_on_record.html

Despite frigid temperatures in much of the US, January 2014 ranked as the fourth warmest since 1880, while many areas worldwide, including most of South America, Africa and Australia, had their warmest January in history. This NASA temperature rendering says it all. (Yes, Virginia, that's why it's called "global warming" and not "Eastern USA warming.")

Most areas of the world experienced warmer-than-average monthly temperatures, with the most notable warmth across Alaska, western Canada, southern Greenland, south-central Russia, Mongolia, and northern China. Parts of southeastern Brazil and central and southern Africa experienced record warmth, contributing to the warmest January Southern Hemisphere land temperature departure on record at 2.03°F (1.13°C) above the 20th century average. Temperature departures were below the long-term average across the eastern half of the contiguous U.S, Mexico, and much of Russia. However, no regions of the globe were record cold.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/news/ncdc-releases-january-2014-global-climate-report

Although the current temperatures in the eastern U.S. may seem unusually cold, in the context of our history they really aren’t.

http://ecowatch.com/2014/01/30/polar-vortex-global-warming/

But facts and in your face black and white data have never meant a thing to those that want to deny. They'll just keep spewing the fossil fuel industry drivel.

So yup...we keep on drilling and we keep on burning fuel cause it just ain't happening. Can't be. It's cold in the winter time!

 

Just too freaking funny to come back to this site after months...maybe a year of being away and see the same old tired BS playing out.

Gallon, Moccasin, dontbuypotteryfromme...you folks are just pounding sand around this forum. You're never going to sway even a smidges worth of mind set around here. It's a Rush Sean Faux News love fest run amok! There is no independent thought process. Just the same old rhetoric and talking points that have become the mantra of the "anti warming" crowd.

However...for the sake of stirring the pot a bit for those that still don't get it...

Don't Let the Snow Fool You. January Wasn't Cold at All.

The climate numbers are in from January and, on a global perspective, it actually wasn’t that cold at all.

In fact, for the 347th month in a row, planet Earth was downright toasty.

Yep, the last month in which Earth’s average temperature was below the 20th-century average was during the Reagan administration. February 1985, to be exact: “I Want to Know What Love Is” by Foreigner was the No. 1 song in the country. Sally Field had just been nominated for best actress for Places in the Heart. The author of this piece celebrated his fourth birthday party. That’s a long time for a planet to run a fever.

Since that moment 29 years ago, there’s been an unbroken stretch of planetary warmth. Almost as if the entire globe was warming. Hey, maybe we can call it “global warming” ...

Despite the East Coast cold, new data released last week shows January 2014 ranked among the warmest ever globally—the fourth warmest January since 1880, to be exact.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_t...]http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/news/ncdc-releases-january-2014-global-climate-report

Although the current temperatures in the eastern U.S. may seem unusually cold, in the context of our history they really aren’t.

But facts and in your face black and white data have never meant a thing to those that want to deny. They'll just keep spewing the fossil fuel industry drivel.

So yup...we keep on drilling and we keep on burning fuel cause it just ain't happening. Can't be. It's cold in the winter time!

Let's say your data is real which is a stretch given all the falsified data the living Earth deniers have published the last couple decades, you still are presenting 20-30 years of information out of thousands of years of natural climate change.

One thing your side does not understand very well is proper use of the scientific method and controlling/accounting for variables. Case in point are that temperature readings are predominately taken in urban areas where the weather station locations have remained static over many decades whereas the local area around these stations have become more urbanized (more concrete) creating localized pockets of slightly higher temperature.

I am on record stating that mankind can impact local weather to a limited extent but it is asinine to try to say that mankind can or does impact weather on a global or even regional weather.

So let's say the data you present is valid (sorry but previous false data reporting by your side continues to hurt your position), where is your detailed analysis identifying all the variables and how all these variables were accounted for?

I don't want bogus links (I've run down some of these bogus links before from some on your side who have posted on this thread). You act like you have all the answers and case closed. Well now is your chance to prove your understanding of the scientific method.

The way I see it, there is absolutely zero casual relationship between a higher average temperature for example in Phoenix over the last 50 or 100 (or whatever number you want to use) and ANY global or regional weather event.

In contrast living Earth deniers refuse the accept the existence of a living Earth, within a living solar system, within a living universe. They believe that life and the world around them is static and climate change only really started as a consequence of the industrial revolution.

How small. How naive. How ignorant of the history of climate change on our planet.

So lets see your full listing of all the variables your side identified and accounted for for all the data you presented. It really is very simple. Data is only valid if the data collections were valid (proper use of the scientific method) and proper understanding of the techniques for data collection and subsequent analysis of that data took into account all impact variables.

Should be real easy for ya since you present your global warming opinion as cut and dry.

We are patiently waiting.....

 

I have evidence the earth is warming. Thousands of years ago the land my house is now on was under a glacier. Today it's gone. It obviously got warmer.

 

Interesting.

The global warming myth supporters who have chimed in so far have:

- Attacked Mark Steyn

- Rehashed old editorial cartoons and leftist drivel from the likes of Slate and Salon

- Recycled information that has been appearing for years now from websites that continue to use data that has been discredited

Yet no one, not a single warmist who has posted here, has addressed Michael Mann's fake hockey stick graph, the leaked emails from the University of Anglia that proved collusion among Global Warming Myth supporting 'scientists' by cooking their data or the propaganda plan put in place decades ago by Stanford professor and GWM charter member Stephen Schneider.

I used to believe warmists purposely ignored information such as this that illustrated the nonsense their movement has created. What I've come to learn since then is they have not heard much dissension when it comes to global warming dogma.

Why?

Because of the GWM echo chamber they live in, where a 'scientific consensus' has 'proven' global warming. Where any dissenting voices are ridiculed, then ignored. With their whole, "The science is settled" approach, they are no different than the 'scientists' who ridiculed Galileo when he discovered the sun did not rotate around the earth.

It's not coincidence that most GWM supporters are leftists; they show that same lack of curiosity and closed minded support of their left-wing dogma...

 

Yeah...Nasa...those damn left wing commies! What do they know!

And yes...years worth of recycled data...all the way from February / March of 2014.

 

Such Irony.

 

Your fifth post in this thread. And you've said nothing.

Please, counter my assertions about Michael Mann's fake hockey stick graph. Show me where I'm wrong about the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia.

In five posts you've failed to even address these points. Why?

 

Weather is always "weird"... "Average" weather is just that... made up from extremes on either side. They are trying to get us to always expect "average" weather, and when it won't cooperate they hammer us with scary terms like "epic" and "historic" to raise your alarm... bunch of baloney.

Here's an interesting article that kinda debunks the CO2 thang... http://www.climatedepot.com/2013/05...-not-global-warming-end-times-but-only-a-big-yawn-climate-depot-special-report/

Renowned Climatologist: ‘You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide’

'Scientists note that geologically speaking, the Earth is currently in a 'CO2 famine' and that the geologic record reveals that ice ages have occurred when CO2 was at 2000 ppm to as high as 8000 ppm. In addition, peer-reviewed studies have documented that there have been temperatures similar to the present day on Earth when carbon dioxide was up to twenty times higher than today’s levels'

Studies like this make it clear to me that there some massive creepy-conspiracy stuff going on. This shows that CO2 levels have little correlation to climate.

 

Weather is always "weird"... "Average" weather is just that... made up from extremes on either side. They are trying to get us to always expect "average" weather, and when it won't cooperate they hammer us with scary terms like "epic" and "historic" to raise your alarm... bunch of baloney.

Here's an interesting article that kinda debunks the CO2 thang... http://www.climatedepot.com/2013/05...-not-global-warming-end-times-but-only-a-big-yawn-climate-depot-special-report/




Studies like this make it clear to me that there some massive creepy-conspiracy stuff going on. This shows that CO2 levels have little correlation to climate.

Yup...geologically speaking...Maybe...Maybe...no one really knows...8000 ppm 425 MILLION years ago!

But we know for sure that not in the last 800,000 years have we gone over 300 ppm. Until now.

You can research the bunk on your own.

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/ice_core_co2.html

 

So many brain washed corporate stoolies around here. 97% of people who study this for a living say its happening, but it must be false....I heard Rushbo and hannity say it.

Hey guyz....this just in, the Earth, its round.

Robertw and Gallon, keep fighting the good fight. Facts are teflon for these people....they just roll right off.

 

The 97% figure has been debunked. You're listening to the msnbc pinheads too much. Can't recall most of their names has they keep having to apologize for making stupid statements on air than going back into the woodwork replaced by another global warming robot. Is Al Sharpton still one of your heroes or is it that ski guy or the blond airhead on in the morning?

As far as the good fight, you could at least cheer for the A-team, or even the B- or C- teams instead of the wet behind the ear team. The debate does not seem fair the result being too one-sided.

Of course you could actually get in the debate yourself. Still patiently waiting for one from your team to prove he understands the scientific method and understanding of variable control.

Living Earth deniers are usually clueless about proper testing techniques and variable control and assessment. They accept any bogus data set made up by another climate change geek trying to get more hard-earned tax dollars to feed his prevented agenda. I see it on this board on a fairly regular basis by the LEDs.

 

Here you go...here's some more "recycled" data from...gasp...yesterday!

Global warming not stopped, will go on for centuries: WMO

http://news.yahoo.com/global-warmin...-warming-not-stopped-centuries-wmo-204257559.html;_ylt=AwrTWfxp2TFTHkUA8iPQtDMD

Here's the report itself:

http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/press_releases/pr_985_en.html

Thousands upon thousands of independent scientists from 100's of countries, universities, research centers all coming to the same conclusions.

But it's a hoax. One big massive conspiracy.

We can't get 2 countries in this world to agree on diddley. Yet on this one subject the overwhelming VAST majority of all involved agree.

Please share with us all where the deniers data comes from. Show me the reputable 1000's of scientist that are debunking this. They don''t exist. Only the few far right extremists oil industry funded lobbyists and bought individuals.

We don't live in Galileo's time any more.

 

AHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

MY EYESSS!!!!

The SCIENCE!!!!!

It BURNSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

really, that was an amazing post gallon.

I mean, is it really hard to imagine that the Kock brothers andtheir oil/coal minions would not spend 300 million dollars trying to keep people dependent on their products, just like the tobacco companies did in the 90's?

duh, it is simply common sense.

 

No the government is forcing unpopular legislation and conflicting with rich backers because there is a political advantage there somewhere.

Different ideologies and conservative governments like China are acting because they know that fuzzy left wing ideals are just more fun to employ.

There is no real global problem here.

 

hey medieval man,
e
since you are so sure about the emails having "proven" that climate change is false, here, I copied and pasted this for you. It is the full quote of the email.

now tell me, have you ever heard or seen this? the full, uncensored quote? why is that? what could possibly make people take thousands of emails out of context and assert that scientists talking amongst themselves are part of some grand conspiracy???

What if all of those people who have been giving you this information are paid agents of disinformation, trying to keep you under their control? Would you believe me if you found out that they intentionally kept the truth from you???

well, here ya go!

"I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline."

 

Hi new guy with two posts!

Where did you come from? Haha.

Tough to read all the what ifs and such, and I'm a bit lost with your point about paid agents of disinformation (he says to the new guy with two posts), but I think you're referring to the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia that became known as Climate Gate?

And you're saying it all came down to one sentence?

Maybe in Mother Jones, Salon or some other leftist drivel.

But it was well reported elsewhere:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/en...rming/6636563/University-of-East-Anglia-emails-the-most-contentious-quotes.html

Most egregious was Michael Mann and Phil Jones coordinating efforts to avoid FOI requests for information, where they discuss deleting emails.

But the hacker got 'em anyway!

Awesome, isn't it? Thank goodness for whistle blowers.

 

Consensus

Out of 10885 peer reviewed papers in 2013, only two reject global warming.
http://www.jamespowell.org/index.html

From the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.
"we use an extensive dataset of 1,372 climate researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers."
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.abstract



From Science magazine, one of the very best science journals.
The scientific consensus on climate change:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.short



From the American Geophysical Union.
Examining the scientific consensus on climate change:
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009EO030002.shtml



From NASA
"Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities"
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus


Other surveys:
Lavelle 2008:
http://www.usnews.com/news/national...s/national/articles/2008/04/23/survey-tracks-scientists-growing-climate-concern

Bray and Storch 2008
http://coast.gkss.de/staff/storch/pdf/CliSci2008.pdf

Doran and Zimmerman 2009
http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf

Farnsworth and Lichter 2011
http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/10/27/ijpor.edr033.short


Guys, you continue to claim that AGW is refuted. But all you have to show are the same tired old canards.

The Climategate scandal was entirely contrived and trumped up by the likes of Fox News. Very interesting that Fox was caught red handed hacking into private emails at the very same time that the climate emails were hacked. Very telling. Yet the denier crowd continues to blow the same tired old dog whistle.

The 97% figure has changed. Now it is up to 98% or 99% of actual working climate scientists who agree with the science that shows that global warming is man made. Virtually all of the major scientific institutions across the planet are also in agreement. Yet the denier crowd dismisses this with a handwave.

The Hockey Stick scandal is another trumped up affair. As listed above, there has been significant scientific agreement since Mann first published in 1998. Yet, the deniers continue to blow the same dog whistle untill they are blue in the face.

Really, all you guys have are bumper sticker canards. Very short, very catchy, and most importantly very easy for you to remember.

The simple facts remain
1. There a mountain of scientific evidence in favor of anthropogenic global warming and no convincing evidence against it.

2. Those who deny anthropogenic global warming have no alternative theory to explain the observed rise in atmospheric CO2 and global temperature.

3. The global climate system continues to accumulate excess energy at the rate of 250 trillion watts.

4. Deniers continue to focus on claimed hoaxes and scandals, and somehow manage to always avoid the science. Look here at the non responses to the list of scientific references provided. Deniers don't do science. They do innuendo and disinformation. And in response the deniers will furiously repeat the same tired old false canards.

 

Deniers continue to focus on claimed hoaxes and scandals, and somehow manage to always avoid the science. Look here at the non responses to the list of scientific references provided. Deniers don't do science.
.

Ok. Since your favorite word is "science". Care to elaborate on the science ?

What is the proof of AGW ? is it computer models ?

 

Tick-tock, tick-tock, tick-tock,.......