Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Normander, that is a good one too... As is the CERN experiment with deep space partical impact on cloud formation. REALLY looking forward to that one.
Yeah, the CERN one had me really interested as the data has to be a huge indicator to have agency heads pleading for scientists to refrain from conclusions made from it. Especially considering the hasty jump to such conclusions in the past when it supported AGW.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,335 posts, read 54,455,929 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
From what I see ... they aren't making "predictions" ... just providing data that contradicts the predictions already made.
The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted
That sounds remarkably like a prediction to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
And many of these AGW "Climate Modeling" programs have been found to produce basically the same results regardless of the data fed them. That tends to eliminate the need for "cherry picking", now, doesn't it?
Notice it says less, not no future global warming. Not only are they predicting, they are not totally debunking the possibility of GW.
The great experiment of the last few, and likely the next century, continues unabated. We are still collecting data and, obviously, have not come to any conclusion.
The politically interesting part of this is:
The increase in atmospheric CO2 does produce a "Greenhouse Effect" and the globe becomes substantially warmer as well as the ocean dissolved CO2 concentration much higher. What are the likely effects of this change on the world ecosystem as well as the world economy? Who would gain and who would lose because of the changes?
Most of the cause of the "greenhouse effect" is from water vapor which was factored out in many of the early computer models. This is why they ran with the co2 BS. Co2 makes up .04 of the greenhouse effect. I guess we should drain the oceans to cool the planet.
Yeah, the CERN one had me really interested as the data has to be a huge indicator to have agency heads pleading for scientists to refrain from conclusions made from it. Especially considering the hasty jump to such conclusions in the past when it supported AGW.
You know the really funny thing is, that with the sun going quiet, if the CERN experiment validates Svensmark's hypothesis, we are looking at a nasty cooling for the next 30 to 50 years. and that cooling will be very very bad for the world.
Warming I dont fear. Warming is good. Warming has always been good for civilization. Cooling however is devistating. it brings famine, crazy storms and food shortages.
NASA is going off of data that has been collected. The warmers go off of models adding in data they "think" will be. It's all BS. One volcano goes off their little models are shot to hell. What's funny is this is "peer reviewed" which the warmers are always yelping about.
It also appears there are more polar bears now than in the last thirty years. Seems the polar bears like to swim.
You know the really funny thing is, that with the sun going quiet, if the CERN experiment validates Svensmark's hypothesis, we are looking at a nasty cooling for the next 30 to 50 years. and that cooling will be very very bad for the world.
Warming I dont fear. Warming is good. Warming has always been good for civilization. Cooling however is devistating. it brings famine, crazy storms and food shortages.
Since this is the ranking AGW thread, it should be pointed out that the chief scientist that has suggested Polar Bears are dying off because of AGW has been suspended due to an ethics probe related to his research.
It seems even the Obama adminstration cannot hide the fact that the guy lied in his research and there has been no die off of the great white beasts.
It isn't the Silverado's alone, its all the droop snout Kenilworths, vintage VW Microbusses, 50cc mopeds, portable generators, weed whackers, model airplane engines, etc. etc. etc. Petabilllions of man-made BTU's radiating into the atmosphere. Yah... the volcano's are natural, the weed whackers are not. If the biggest issue for many is whether the GW is AGW or not then, there is no issue. It is AGW. Now what? Apparently nothing. So be it, but can we cut the charts and graphs BS? Ranking AGW thread... you mean because C-D hasn't killed it yet? They will now. Sayonara.
H
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
