U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-18-2007, 12:36 PM
 
Location: Your mind
2,923 posts, read 4,575,120 times
Reputation: 590

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poptech View Post
No my proof is the reality. Check the degree of every major Alarmist Scientist and you will consistently find a degree other than Climatology.

The 0.6c [IPCC] increase in temperature over the last 100 years is a natural cycle:

1500-Year Climate Cycle:

Earth Cools In Persistent, 1,500-Year Rhythm, Say Columbia Scientists, Working From Sea Cores (Science Daily)
The Physical Evidence of Earth's Unstoppable 1,500-Year Climate Cycle (http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st279/ - broken link) (National Center for Policy Analysis)

1,500-Year Climate Cycle:

A 150,000-year climatic record from Antarctic ice
(Nature 316, 591 - 596, 15 August 1985)
- C. Lorius, C. Ritz, J. Jouzel, L. Merlivat, N. I. Barkov

A Pervasive Millennial-Scale Cycle in North Atlantic Holocene and Glacial Climates
(Science, Vol. 278. no. 5341, pp. 1257 - 1266, 14 November 1997)
- Gerard Bond, William Showers, Maziet Cheseby, Rusty Lotti, Peter Almasi, Peter deMenocal, Paul Priore, Heidi Cullen, Irka Hajdas, Georges Bonani

A Variable Sun Paces Millennial Climate
(Science, Vol. 294. no. 5546, pp. 1431 - 1433, 16 November 2001)
- Richard A. Kerr

Cyclic Variation and Solar Forcing of Holocene Climate in the Alaskan Subarctic
(Science, Vol. 301. no. 5641, pp. 1890 - 1893, 26 September 2003)
- Feng Sheng Hu, Darrell Kaufman, Sumiko Yoneji, David Nelson, Aldo Shemesh, Yongsong Huang, Jian Tian, Gerard Bond, Benjamin Clegg, Thomas Brown

Decadal to millennial cyclicity in varves and turbidites from the Arabian Sea: hypothesis of tidal origin
(Global and Planetary Change, Volume 34, Issues 3-4, Pages 313-325, November 2002)
- W. H. Bergera, U. von Rad

Late Holocene approximately 1500 yr climatic periodicities and their implications
(Geology, v. 26; no. 5; p. 471-473, May 1998)
- Ian D. Campbell, Celina Campbell, Michael J. Apps, Nathaniel W. Rutter, Andrew B. G. Bush

Possible solar origin of the 1,470-year glacial climate cycle demonstrated in a coupled model
(Nature 438, 208-211, 10 November 2005)
- Holger Braun, Marcus Christl, Stefan Rahmstorf, Andrey Ganopolski, Augusto Mangini, Claudia Kubatzki, Kurt Roth, Bernd Kromet

The 1,800-year oceanic tidal cycle: A possible cause of rapid climate change
(PNAS, vol. 97, no. 8, 3814-3819, April 11, 2000)
- Charles D. Keeling, Timothy P. Whorf

The origin of the 1500-year climate cycles in Holocene North-Atlantic records
(Climate of the Past Discussions, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp.679-692, 2007)
- M. Debret, V. Bout-Roumazeilles, F. Grousset, M. Desmet, J. F. McManus, N. Massei, D. Sebag, J.-R. Petit, Y. Copard, A. Trentesaux

Timing of abrupt climate change: A precise clock
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 30, NO. 10, 1510, 2003)
- Stefan Rahmstorf

Timing of Millennial-Scale Climate Change in Antarctica and Greenland During the Last Glacial Period
(Science, Volume 291, Issue 5501, pp. 109-112, 2001)
- Thomas Blunier, Edward J. Brook

Widespread evidence of 1500 yr climate variability in North America during the past 14 000 yr
(Geology, v. 30, no. 5, p. 455-458, May 2002)
- André E. Viau, Konrad Gajewski, Philippe Fines, David E. Atkinson, Michael C. Sawada
Your links are to a 10-year-old article that would have already shifted scientific thought if it legitimately debunked man-made global warming and an article from a right-wing anti-environmentalist think tank?

On the other hand, your other contention is correct, it turns out that most climatologists don't have "climatology" degrees

Climatology as a Profession

But it doesn't mean that all, or even most of the scientists mentioned in your list consider themselves to be "climate scientists," or that they even spend a large amount of time studying the climate, and there's no indictation as to the degree of their "skepticism." What are they all skeptical about? Why couldn't they find a single non-retired person who considers himself to be a "climatologist," even if the ones who do consider themselves to be such make up a minority of "climate scientists" (I don't know whether they do or don't).

Last edited by fishmonger; 11-18-2007 at 12:47 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-18-2007, 12:38 PM
 
4,740 posts, read 8,806,182 times
Reputation: 4073
fishmonger - Hansen at NASA made errors that contributed to reports like the one you cite.

Quote:
Due to an error in calculations of mean U.S. temperatures, 1934, not 1998 as previously reported, is the hottest year on record in the United States.
Error in NASA climate data sparks debate

If you don't like CO2, stop breathing...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2007, 12:39 PM
 
Location: Your mind
2,923 posts, read 4,575,120 times
Reputation: 590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poptech View Post
BTW you link also states this:

Sorry but the debate is NOT over.
You left out the "A small," in front of the "...number of," which is sort of funny... what is it that convinces you to latch on to the small number rather than the large majority? Your legitimate scientific studies of the issue, or possibly some pro-business, anti-regulatory political beliefs?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2007, 12:41 PM
 
Location: Your mind
2,923 posts, read 4,575,120 times
Reputation: 590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reactionary View Post
fishmonger - Hansen at NASA made errors that contributed to reports like the one you cite.



Error in NASA climate data sparks debate

If you don't like CO2, stop breathing...
Overblown... it was a very small error (the guy who made the correction admitted it was a "micro-change," I think...) and while 1934 is now believed to be in the competition for hottest year on record IN AMERICA, globally 1999-2005 I think are still considered to be the hottest years. Global is what matters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2007, 12:50 PM
 
Location: southern california
55,668 posts, read 74,655,684 times
Reputation: 48187
scientists in denial.
they were probably talkin like this just b4 pompeii
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2007, 12:50 PM
 
114 posts, read 124,321 times
Reputation: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishmonger View Post
Your links are to a 10-year-old article that would have already shifted scientific thought if it legitimately debunked man-made global warming and an article from a right-wing anti-environmentalist think tank?

On the other hand, your other contention is correct, it turns out

Climatology as a Profession

But it doesn't mean that all, or even most of the scientists mentioned in your list consider themselves to be "climate scientists," and there's no indictation as to the degree of their "skepticism." What are they all skeptical about?
Man-made global warming has never been proven. The age of a scientific paper is irrelevant, what matters is the science. If science is proven it does not get old. The other link is fully sourced (http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st279/st279m.html - broken link) to peer-reviewed papers.

They are ALL skeptical of any catastrophy, man-made CO2 being the primary driver of climate and any draconian legislation needed to "stop global warming" or whatever that means. It varies from there from fully believing it is a natural cycle to believing man is contributing in "some" way. None of them endorse Gore's ridiculous position which has been proven to be lies in a UK court:

UK Court finds 9 Inaccuracies in Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth

I suggest watching these:


20/20: The Debate is Not Over (Video) (8min)
The Great Global Warming Swindle (broken link) (Video) (1hr 14min)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2007, 12:54 PM
 
114 posts, read 124,321 times
Reputation: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishmonger View Post
You left out the "A small," in front of the "...number of," which is sort of funny... what is it that convinces you to latch on to the small number rather than the large majority? Your legitimate scientific studies of the issue, or possibly some pro-business, anti-regulatory political beliefs?
That is because it is not a small number, that is propaganda and not verifiable. There is no majority and no poll has ever been taken to prove one. On the contrary every poll available shows the exact opposite that there is no consensus. I suggest reading:

NO 'Consensus' on "Man-Made" Global Warming

It is very comprehensive and includes:

19,000 Scientists declare that "man-made" global warming is a lie with no scientific basis whatsoever (OISM)
500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares (Heartland Institute)

ect...

Apparently you have missed all the Peer-Reviewed papers I provided.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2007, 12:56 PM
 
4,740 posts, read 8,806,182 times
Reputation: 4073
fishmonger - your own State of Alabama Climatologist, Dr. Christy (who shares the Nobel Prize with Sen. Gore), says:

Quote:
I see neither the developing catastrophe nor the smoking gun proving that human activity is to blame for most of the warming we see. Rather, I see a reliance on climate models (useful but never “proof”) and the coincidence that changes in carbon dioxide and global temperatures have loose similarity over time.
Free Preview - WSJ.com

The founder of the Weather Channel, John Coleman, says:

Quote:
It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM.
ICECAP
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2007, 01:14 PM
 
114 posts, read 124,321 times
Reputation: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishmonger View Post
Overblown... it was a very small error (the guy who made the correction admitted it was a "micro-change," I think...) and while 1934 is now believed to be in the competition for hottest year on record IN AMERICA, globally 1999-2005 I think are still considered to be the hottest years. Global is what matters.
1934 is definitely the hottest year in the US. The hottest years are now:

1934
1998
1921
2006
1931
1999
1953
1990
1938
1939

I hardly see a recent trend that is not balanced out by an equal trend in the 30s.

There are MAJOR problems being found with the US Weather Stations and considering the US is supposed to have the best stations in the world I cannot imagine what sort of nightmare you will find in other countries.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2007, 02:16 PM
 
Location: OKC, OK
640 posts, read 359,127 times
Reputation: 133
I'm still trying to figure out what the Nobel PEACE Prize has to do with global warming....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top