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.
Thirty five years ago I made drinks with ice from a glacier (I have forgotten the name) near Anchorage Alaska. The end of the glacier was floating in the small lake that was filled with icebergs from that glacier. Now the foot of that glacier is several miles upstream from the little lake. The thing is melting faster than it can be replenished. The only reasonable explanation is that area is getting warmer. I think the change in atmospheric chemistry attritubital to human activites provides a reasonable answer as to the cause of the warming.
Complete anecdotal evidence and a seriously irresponsible jump to a conclusion. You fit right into the climate science field. I would ask for proper evidential support for each claim and attempt to find cause between them, but we all know that this is not what climate science is about. After all, those pesky details are just a "smoke screen" right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW
I also see the criticisms of the global warming data by NOMANDER and others based on statistical minutia as nothing more than a smokescreen designed to provide a sense of scientific virtue to a deliberate attempt to mislead. The global climate is and will continue, even if we sharply curtail CO2 emissions, to get warmer over the next millennia. I do not believe there is anything humans can do about the situation we have created. The only thing we can do is attempt to predict the consequences and use that information to cope with the problem with minimal disruption.
You see it as a smoke screen? Ahh yes, pay no attention of the errors in our data and methodology, we are still right, the science is settled!
Seriously, keep it up, this is exactly what is destroying climate science credibility. Each time people keep dismissing the problems with the details of their claims and jumping to a conclusion, we see it for what it is.... a three ring circus with the clowns being at the front of the show.
Now hold on here all you Global Warming fanatics! Didnt you tell us that temperature really has nothing to do with it? Not so long ago, there were days of big snow storms and such, and when people pointed that out to you, you said "nope, it has nothing to do with temperature and the weather per say. But now that its been hot you run back to using "temperature" as proof....
Which is it? Make up your damn minds.
You aren't supposed to hold them to anything or check their data and methods, that is simply a smoke screen you know! You are supposed to simply take their word for it and do as they say.
I find this whole movement rather amusing. Usually social manipulation is based on an ignorant public where they have no access to the facts and must consider only the claims made by the "experts". These guys are being caught with their pants down and still are trying to tell people that there is nothing to see, their research is correct, never-mind the glaring assumptive errors before you, just "believe". What is funny is that people are starting to treat them like wackos as they deny more and more the problems with their own claims. It really is insane hearing their spin on the flaws in their claims.
I wonder how the Arctic and Antarctic are doing this year?
It really puts things into perspective when you lay it all on the table doesn't it? Can't spin when you see the whole picture. Sorry AGW folks, I know you want to focus on just specific things and jump around ignoring the overall because it detracts from your point.
Lets take a look:
(bet ya a nickle on which one you think they are going to put heavy focus on. Hint: GregW has made mention of the type of focus, watch him and other shoot to it like flies on ...)
It appears that the arctic isn't likely to hit 2007 and it may even be possible that it tracks along 2006 or even hits 2005 levels.
Area is tracking low, but then extent is tracking much better than before. That is, if things go well, we may see a 3rd year in a row of growth in the ice.
That is interesting and all, but we will have to wait till September to see the full extent of the melt. Though it doesn't bode well for warmer enthusiasts. If it hits a 3 year growth, its going to make some previous positions on an ice less arctic look pretty stupid (not that they aren't looking that way now with some of their conclusive statements and botched analysis)
The real news here campers is the Antarctic. Remember, the AGW crowd likes to focus on one area at a time that supports their position and avoids looking at the overall picture because it detracts from their position.
Take a peak at the Antarctic there. Notice that its extent is well above the average. Also pay close attention to the global sea ice graph and notice the trends there.
Sorry AGW crowd, I know you were hoping that people would stay uninformed witless twits to which you could manipulate, but you can't keep people ignorant forever. They will eventually find interest and inform themselves.
The climate science field and movement isn't losing credibility because of propaganda or "evil skeptical denier manipulation", its losing credibility because those who were left in charge have been abusing the power of their station. It is losing credibility because they stopped applying science and promoted political interest instead.
It is not "science tells us we should...", it is "Science shows...". A simple fact that you have all forgotten.
It appears that the arctic isn't likely to hit 2007 and it may even be possible that it tracks along 2006 or even hits 2005 levels.
Area is tracking low, but then extent is tracking much better than before. That is, if things go well, we may see a 3rd year in a row of growth in the ice.
That is interesting and all, but we will have to wait till September to see the full extent of the melt. Though it doesn't bode well for warmer enthusiasts. If it hits a 3 year growth, its going to make some previous positions on an ice less arctic look pretty stupid (not that they aren't looking that way now with some of their conclusive statements and botched analysis)
The real news here campers is the Antarctic. Remember, the AGW crowd likes to focus on one area at a time that supports their position and avoids looking at the overall picture because it detracts from their position.
Take a peak at the Antarctic there. Notice that its extent is well above the average. Also pay close attention to the global sea ice graph and notice the trends there.
Sorry AGW crowd, I know you were hoping that people would stay uninformed witless twits to which you could manipulate, but you can't keep people ignorant forever. They will eventually find interest and inform themselves.
The climate science field and movement isn't losing credibility because of propaganda or "evil skeptical denier manipulation", its losing credibility because those who were left in charge have been abusing the power of their station. It is losing credibility because they stopped applying science and promoted political interest instead.
It is not "science tells us we should...", it is "Science shows...". A simple fact that you have all forgotten.
done misunderestimate the power of the Warmists to reject science! LOL!
I linked to most of these sites earlier either in this thread or another on the same topic only to be told that the data could not be trusted... OR in one case, the data came from an AGW believer so I couldnt use that information to argue against AGW.
done misunderestimate the power of the Warmists to reject science! LOL!
I linked to most of these sites earlier either in this thread or another on the same topic only to be told that the data could not be trusted... OR in one case, the data came from an AGW believer so I couldnt use that information to argue against AGW.
it was weird but...
Don't you love circular arguments? It is mind boggling their process, though I think we both know that all of the claims of the "science" is simply a vehicle for their main motive.
As we have seen numerous times here in these discussion, you push them into a corner and they begin to admit what it is they are doing, which is simply pushing their personal ideology.
As for the data not being trusted, that one is interesting though. Did you read about the story Harold Ambler did on DMI? It really was interesting to see the process to which they use to obtain their results. Even though they actually do go out and do measurements, their process still relies heavily on assuming all of the holes with estimates. Everything really is simply a guess. They do have one thing going for them though, they aren't "adjusting" the data as NASA/GISS does.
Oh com'on Environmentalists, You care about the planet don't you? Surely you won't let a few facts get in your way? You can go on about how important it is to conserve and how the science isn't important, how we are all stupid deniers and should be shot dead (as per your daily KoS informant) and anything we point out is lies funded by the oil companies! Heck, I bet even the Earth was paid off by the oil companies, that is why it isn't responding to your predictions! Maybe the earth needs to be "euthanized" as well because it doesn't listen to you!
huh?
you are posting evidence of global warming while poking fun at the global warming camp?
BTW - we are on pace to also have the warmest July on record as well. But, global warming is just a hoax. just a hoax..
the other planets are warmer too...i guess it's all that air conditioning i use in my 5,000 sq. foot home
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.
