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.
I've covered this many times. Look up Hansen NASA incorrect there is plenty to read. Being wrong as a scientist is one thing. Working for someone like NASA and intentionally providing bogus information to try to prove your theories is quite another.
I've covered this many times. Look up Hansen NASA incorrect there is plenty to read. Being wrong as a scientist is one thing. Working for someone like NASA and intentionally providing bogus information to try to prove your theories is quite another.
Being wrong for a scientist is just as exciting as being correct. When the data demonstrates that what was thought to be true was wrong, then we learn something. We learn just as much as if the data demonstrated that what was thought to be true was correct. Either way it is something more that we did not know before, and that is exciting news.
It is not science if the data is manufactured, for any purpose.
Being wrong for a scientist is just as exciting as being correct. When the data demonstrates that what was thought to be true was wrong, then we learn something. We learn just as much as if the data demonstrated that what was thought to be true was correct. Either way it is something more that we did not know before, and that is exciting news.
It is not science if the data is manufactured, for any purpose.
Correct, however, when data IS mannfactured and provided as scientific data....that is the problem...
Big Al? It's 2014, how cares about Al Gore besides republicans? Is that all you got, demonize Al Gore?
I agree, Al "the climate wh*re" Gore is just a slimy opportunist. (James Hansen invented the AGW hoax)
However, whether you like it or not, Gore's elevation and anointment as Grand Imperial Poobah of the Church of Anthropogenic Global Warming was facilitated by his being awarded the Nobel Prize - he shall forever and always be the poster child of the (self)righteous.
Being wrong for a scientist is just as exciting as being correct. When the data demonstrates that what was thought to be true was wrong, then we learn something. We learn just as much as if the data demonstrated that what was thought to be true was correct. Either way it is something more that we did not know before, and that is exciting news.
It is not science if the data is manufactured, for any purpose.
I agree but it was claimed to be and it was used in the past just like Al Gore was used in the past to make the same arguments the warmists are using today.
Supposedly Hansen's studies were peer reviewed studies that were supported by the majority of scientists. As we now know, it wasn't. That has done a lot of harm to legit science.
SLOW global warming could be a very positive thing for the world. The problem with global warming is the fast rate. Species don't have enough time to adapt. Agriculture doesn't have enough time to adapt. Cities don't have enough time to move so they aren't buried in water.
But people don't realize how much of the world is uninhabitable because its too cold. And even places like CO springs would benefit if temps and moisture increase.
Look up Agenda 21. Once the UN takes over and polices the globe, the first objective underneath Section I is population control. If that isn't scary enough, look at section II, which is atmosphere control.
It's no accident people are thinking humans are responsible for the change in the weather, this is what they want us to think.
SLOW global warming could be a very positive thing for the world. The problem with global warming is the fast rate. Species don't have enough time to adapt. Agriculture doesn't have enough time to adapt. Cities don't have enough time to move so they aren't buried in water.
But people don't realize how much of the world is uninhabitable because its too cold. And even places like CO springs would benefit if temps and moisture increase.
According to NASA's data, global surface temperatures have had a net increase of 0.51°C (0.918°F) and sea levels have risen 195 mm (7.7 inches) in the last 130 years. That is a pretty damn slow rate of change.
There is plenty of time for the flora and fauna to adapt. Although, we do have a segment of the human population that are simply too stupid to adapt. Instead of adapting they want to pretend that we do not exist by "reducing our carbon footprint" and imposing "carbon taxes." These morons are the ones that deserve extinction, it would raise the IQ of the entire species.
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.
