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.
Your OP was a tabloid journalist's (Christopher Booker) and his hysterically inaccurate article in a trash tabloid. That's who I was referring to as a 'turkey'
Your Gish Gallop of names with no provision of a source is something else. Got any links?
Deny, deflect, and discredit. Your tactics are nothing if not predictable. Literally anything that does not conform to the leftist talking points on this subject receives this treatment from you, with no mental flexibility or open-mindedness on the part of you or the other warmists at all whatsoever.
The London Telegraph is a major British newspaper, by the way. It is not a tabloid and you do yourself and your presentation a real disservice by characterizing it as such.
Christopher Booker is just another of a long list of journalists and scientists who dares to defy this politically contrived movement and who gives voice to stories that do not support the rigid AGW alarmism talking points, an act of heresy that some people such as yourself apparently cannot bear to see presented or discussed.
If you and your comrades are to be believed, then for the first time in the history of science there is no legitimate conflicting data worthy of consideration and debate in a major area of study, such as climate science. On this, the government funded "experts" are beyond question and the debate is over, at least in the minds of the AGW alarmism faithful.
Nothing in the field of science is this settled and doctrinaire. Seriously, you and the rest of the alarmists need to get over yourselves. You have jumped the shark and few outside the choir of the AGW alarmism worship team take your politically contrived alarmist scare tactics seriously anymore. They have just been wrong too many times.
Nothing in the field of science is this settled and doctrinaire. Seriously, you and the rest of the alarmists need to get over yourselves. You have jumped the shark and few outside the choir of the AGW alarmism worship team take your politically contrived alarmist scare tactics seriously anymore. They have just been wrong too many times.
AGW may be the only field of science where people refuse to listen to contrarian data and opinions. They are offended when somebody says "let's check the data". And they blackmail scientists who don't tow the party line.
Meanwhile, the rich get richer off the backs of hard working people using the AGW scam.
Okay I read your link.... it's the GWPF - a political advocacy group originally founded by outspoken layperson and climate science 'skeptic' Nigel Lawson who worked for fossil fuel companies. GWPF hide who their funders are. Why aren't they being transparent about this?
This 'temperature data review project' seems to be headed by a retired clinical biochemist who hasn't any qualifications or expertise in any of the geosciences and hasn't published any research in climate science? Hmmm. This is what you call an expert?
There isn't really anything to look at yet on their project website. However, I'll give them benefit of the doubt - if they do an honest critical analysis and submit it for peer review and publishing in a reputable academic Journal-well and good. Honest scepticism is always encouraged in science.
Unfortunately, their proven history of misrepresentation and lies for political/commercial purposes doesn't inspire me with confidence. And on their home page they state a deliberate and unsubstantiated lie about the NOAA data- which doesn't bode well as a beginning.
Here are the credentials of the people on the panel that are conducting the inquiry:
The panel is chaired by Terence Kealey, until recently vice-chancellor of the University of Buckingham. His team, all respected experts in their field with many peer-reviewed papers to their name, includes
Dr Peter Chylek, a physicist from the National Los Alamos Laboratory;
Richard McNider, an emeritus professor who founded the Atmospheric Sciences Programme at the University of Alabama;
Professor Roman Mureika from Canada, an expert in identifying errors in statistical methodology;
Professor Roger Pielke Sr, a noted climatologist from the University of Colorado, and
Professor William van Wijngaarden, a physicist whose many papers on climatology have included studies in the use of “homogenisation” in data records.
They are scientists all, with impressive backgrounds. And yet you immediately fly directly into discreditation mode in predictably knee-jerk fashion.
In fact, the next time that you regard anyone who dares to critically evaluate data or results that support the AGW alarmist hypothesis as credible or qualified, will be the first time. Apparently the act of approaching this movement, its data or the results of its predictive models skeptically is all you need to know to regard someone as "discredited".
In fact, the only people that you and your AGW alarmism comrades discredit with this kind of outrageous bias is yourselves.
I love how global warming deniers rely solely on the opinions of idiots over factual information. Because we all know blogs and opinions are more factual than research and facts.
"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand" - Bertrand Russell.
Liberals constantly harp on Global Warming or Climate Change..... now Extreme Weather..... and contort themselves to make their case in the face of very weak scientific evidence. Their gyrations would be hilarious if the regulations they have imposed on businesses weren't so terribly damaging to the economy.
Meanwhile ISIS is killing thousands and we act like it's no big deal???
Go start a different thread about it. This thread is about the irony of fake climate science 'skeptics' gullibly swallowing whatever some non-scientist journalist in the trashy tabloid press writes and believing it's debunked 100 years of science and overwhelming evidence. And that 10000s of scientists all over the world are all complicit in some bizarre worldwide conspiracy.
------------------
Last month, we are told, the world enjoyed “its hottest March since records began in 1880”. This year, according to “US government scientists”, already bids to outrank 2014 as “the hottest ever”. The figures from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) were based, like all the other three official surface temperature records on which the world’s scientists and politicians rely, on data compiled from a network of weather stations by NOAA’s Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN).
According to ''Wiki'', Science says the Earth is 4.5 BILLION years old (4,500,000,000).
According to ''Wiki'', the Bible says the Earth is 75 thousand years old (75,000).
Now, I am not a Scientist, but I can count. Even with my limited understanding of Science, I can see that ''since records began in 1880'' (135 years), is not a long time even by the Bible. If you use the Scientific number, that amount of time is even more insignificant.
In my 63 years on this Earth, I have seen a few ''Scientific facts'' proven to not be facts. Pardon me, If don't take ''Global Warming'' as a 'fact'.
According to ''Wiki'', Science says the Earth is 4.5 BILLION years old (4,500,000,000).
According to ''Wiki'', the Bible says the Earth is 75 thousand years old (75,000).
Now, I am not a Scientist, but I can count. Even with my limited understanding of Science, I can see that ''since records began in 1880'' (135 years), is not a long time even by the Bible. If you use the Scientific number, that amount of time is even more insignificant.
In my 63 years on this Earth, I have seen a few ''Scientific facts'' proven to not be facts. Pardon me, If don't take ''Global Warming'' as a 'fact'.
The Bible does not put an age on the Earth, and it certainly does not say it is "75,000 years old".
But why do you feel the need to keep pointing it out...it's like you are trying to convince yourself lol If you don't care about this planet then fine but please don't judge the rest of us for caring. And who has brainwashed you into believing this is political. Oh, I guess it's your political masters
Left wingers....The person already answered your question! As for the rest of your comment, it is just hyperbole. We don't have political masters for climate change, we are smart enough to speak out to our politicians that climate change ( yes climate changes, no we can't stop it ) is just a cover to bring in more taxes . Can you afford to pay higher energy prices? Because I sure can't.
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.
''hottest March since records began in 1880''
