73 replies to this topic

[salsabob]

The e-mail attack is against Michael Mann, best known for his "hockey stick" which is representative of global warming; some would say unprecedented rapid global warming (an issue put to bed by former skeptic Richard Muller's BEST study - one of those very rare skeptics that actually has a PhD and does research in a field of inquiry relevant to the issue; not some non-credential former TV weatherman).

BTW -- Michael Mann -- as of January 2014 -- SLAMS Muller as a "Koch Brother's Hack". He REALLY does not feel vindicated by him.

Might want to read Mann's article -- after the part where he rags on the New York Times for printing Muller -- in the Huffington Post --> LINK

The BEST study was partially funded by the Krotch Bros -much to their dismay I'm sure.

[*JB*]

You're still conflating the issue of global warming as a now widely-recognized occurrence (except for truly hopeless deadenders - my primary point about Stock's continuing foolishness) with the cause for such warming - the latter was your point, not mine and not the original.

My secondary point is that since (a) the science is not there yet to either attribute or NOT attribute the unprecedented rise in historical temperature records nor can it yet establish impacts on regional/local weather, and ( the skeptics have been proven so very embarrassingly wrong about the unprecedented rise (as validated by Muller), that one might expect that they would be a little bit more humble about their ideological-driven certitude on these current scientific questions - at least those with 1/2 a brain that don't worship at the feet of the Krotch Brothers. Even after decades of life, I find it truly amazing how ideological blindness can make obviously intelligent people completely stupid when it comes to certain issues.

Fair enough. I did get in the middle of an issue that I was not aware was the point.

Given your later statement, I will NOT quibble. I do believe warming has occurred...the cause and effect -- and degrees of each -- issues I'll let lie.

I would point out the outlandish claims we see every day from "scientists" -- based on nothing but irresponsible supposition. Two very recent examples, "3 scientists" say that flight 370 debris can't be found because of climate change...OR, mud slide in Washington State due to Global Warming.

With media/academics/self appointed non-scientist activists/politicians/et al calling for the personal destruction of skeptics -- you might understand the heft of the resentment felt by those trying to seek the truth and question such greatly exaggerated claims. the honest AGW group would do well to disown the "Al Gores" and his like. If they AGWs are right -- it would be even be more important to silent the vicious in their camp.

[salsabob]

You're still conflating the issue of global warming as a now widely-recognized occurrence (except for truly hopeless deadenders - my primary point about Stock's continuing foolishness) with the cause for such warming - the latter was your point, not mine and not the original.

My secondary point is that since (a) the science is not there yet to either attribute or NOT attribute the unprecedented rise in historical temperature records nor can it yet establish impacts on regional/local weather, and ( the skeptics have been proven so very embarrassingly wrong about the unprecedented rise (as validated by Muller), that one might expect that they would be a little bit more humble about their ideological-driven certitude on these current scientific questions - at least those with 1/2 a brain that don't worship at the feet of the Krotch Brothers. Even after decades of life, I find it truly amazing how ideological blindness can make obviously intelligent people completely stupid when it comes to certain issues.

Fair enough. I did get in the middle of an issue that I was not aware was the point.

Given your later statement, I will NOT quibble. I do believe warming has occurred...the cause and effect -- and degrees of each -- issues I'll let lie.

I would point out the outlandish claims we see every day from "scientists" -- based on nothing but irresponsible supposition. Two very recent examples, "3 scientists" say that flight 370 debris can't be found because of climate change...OR, mud slide in Washington State due to Global Warming.

With media/academics/self appointed non-scientist activists/politicians/et al calling for the personal destruction of skeptics -- you might understand the heft of the resentment felt by those trying to seek the truth and question such greatly exaggerated claims. the honest AGW group would do well to disown the "Al Gores" and his like. If they AGWs are right -- it would be even be more important to silent the vicious in their camp.

Nothing to disagree with there.

I could say that a lot of skeptics replace any thinking on the matter with knee-jerked evil big govt dingos coming to take their babies (you need a fake Australian accent to really pull this off), but then the counter is a lot of the true believers replace their thinking with evil big oil dingos coming to take their babies! So, a draw for now. I guess pull up a chair, get the popcorn and watch the show unfold some more!
Peace.

[*JB*]

pre-release report -- IPCC, Climate Change Reconsidered II --

""The new report summarizes scholarly research published as recently as January 2014 on the impacts, costs, and benefits of climate change. Hefty chapters summarize thousands of peer-reviewed studies of the impact of rising levels of carbon dioxide – a greenhouse gas produced during the burning of fossil fuels – on plants and soils, agriculture, forests, wildlife, ocean life, and humankind.

The authors find higher levels of carbon dioxide and warmer temperatures benefit nearly all plants, leading to more leaves, more fruit, more vigorous growth, and greater resistance to pests, drought, and other forms of “stress.” Wildlife benefits as their habitats grow and expand. Even polar bears, the poster child of anti-global warming activist groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), are benefiting from warmer temperatures.

“Despite thousands of scientific articles affirming numerous benefits of rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2, IPCC makes almost no mention of any positive externalities resulting from such,” said one of the report’s lead authors, Dr. Craig D. Idso. “Climate Change Reconsidered II corrects this failure, presenting an analysis of thousands of neglected research studies IPCC has downplayed or ignored in its reports so that scientists, politicians, educators, and the general public can be better informed and make decisions about the potential impacts of CO2-induced climate change.”

The authors look closely at claims climate change will injure coral and other forms of marine life, possibly leading to some species extinctions. They conclude such claims lack scientific foundation and often are grossly exaggerated. Corals have survived warming periods in the past that caused ocean temperatures and sea levels to be much higher than today’s levels or those likely to occur in the next century.""


LINK to WHOLE "pre report"

[*JB*]

NOT to Mislead, this is the NONgovernmental IPCC report, from the heartland Institute.

pre-release report -- IPCC, Climate Change Reconsidered II --

""The new report summarizes scholarly research published as recently as January 2014 on the impacts, costs, and benefits of climate change. Hefty chapters summarize thousands of peer-reviewed studies of the impact of rising levels of carbon dioxide – a greenhouse gas produced during the burning of fossil fuels – on plants and soils, agriculture, forests, wildlife, ocean life, and humankind.

The authors find higher levels of carbon dioxide and warmer temperatures benefit nearly all plants, leading to more leaves, more fruit, more vigorous growth, and greater resistance to pests, drought, and other forms of “stress.” Wildlife benefits as their habitats grow and expand. Even polar bears, the poster child of anti-global warming activist groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), are benefiting from warmer temperatures.

“Despite thousands of scientific articles affirming numerous benefits of rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2, IPCC makes almost no mention of any positive externalities resulting from such,” said one of the report’s lead authors, Dr. Craig D. Idso. “Climate Change Reconsidered II corrects this failure, presenting an analysis of thousands of neglected research studies IPCC has downplayed or ignored in its reports so that scientists, politicians, educators, and the general public can be better informed and make decisions about the potential impacts of CO2-induced climate change.”

The authors look closely at claims climate change will injure coral and other forms of marine life, possibly leading to some species extinctions. They conclude such claims lack scientific foundation and often are grossly exaggerated. Corals have survived warming periods in the past that caused ocean temperatures and sea levels to be much higher than today’s levels or those likely to occur in the next century.""


LINK to WHOLE "pre report"

[*JB*]

iNTERESTING ARTICLE --

Biofuels do more harm than good, UN warns

Growing crops to make “green” biofuel harms the environment and drives up food prices, admits the United Nations

FULL ARTICLE

[Rogerdodger]

I do believe warming has occurred.

That often happens...especially coming out of the little ice age ending around 1850, about the time that many early temperature records were beginning to be kept.

[Rogerdodger]

'INCONVENIENT TRUTH' Producers Talking Sequel...

Crackdown ordered on UK climate skeptics...

Green Guru Reverses Belief: 'I don't think anybody really knows what's happening. They just guess'... I’m not funded by some government department or commercial body or anything like that.

Lovelock dismissed the entire basis for global warming concerns in his BBC television interview. “Take this climate matter everybody is thinking about. They all talk, they pass laws, they do things, as if they knew what was happening. I don’t think anybody really knows what’s happening. They just guess. And a whole group of them meet together and encourage each other’s guesses,” Lovelock explained.

BBC interviewer Jeremy Paxman noted to Lovelock during the April 3 program: ”Sure. But you then, after publishing these apocalyptic predictions, you then retracted them.”

The newly skeptical Lovelock responded: ”Well, that’s my privilege. You see, I’m an independent scientist. I’m not funded by some government department or commercial body or anything like that. If I make a mistake, then I can go public with it. And you have to, because it is only by making mistakes that you can move ahead.”

Edited by Rogerdodger, 03 April 2014 - 03:52 PM.

[Rogerdodger]

Climate Change has been occurring since day one, long before your Crotch brothers invented carbon.
Sometimes cooling, sometimes warming.
Volcanoes, meteorites, solar cycles, tectonic plate shifts.
Floods, droughts, deserts and forests.

Open your mind.
Read a book.
Learn to think.
Lay off the Kool-aid.
Use reason and logic rather than emotion and group-think dogma.

STUDY: Amazon rainforest grew after 'climate change' 2,000 years ago...

"The scientists said that a shift toward wetter conditions, perhaps caused by natural shifts in the Earth’s orbit around the sun, led to growth of more trees starting about 2,000 years ago.
Carson said that the growth of Amazonian forests could, for instance, have contributed to the Little Ice Age, from about 1350 to 1850 by absorbing heat-trapping gases from the air."

Note: We have no record of Solar Cycles until the mid 1700's, thus it impossible to correlate estimated climate temps with Solar Cycles that long ago. .
"Cycle 1 began in March 1755 with a smoothed sunspot number of 8.4 and ended in June 1766."
http://www.solen.info/solar/cycl1.html

Edited by Rogerdodger, 08 July 2014 - 04:31 PM.

[Rogerdodger]

Greenpeace Co-Founder: 'I fear cooling'...

Moore told the conference he left Greenpeace when it “went anti-human.”
The Greenpeace elites would deny billions of poor people access to energy, Moore notes, while at the same time living lavishly, by comparison. Greenpeace hypocritically boasts of the “super-efficient electric motors” on its new $22 million yacht, says More, but doesn’t mention that the boat is also powered by diesel engines that, of course, use the dreaded “fossil fuels” Greenpeace wants to deny to others.

Ecologist Dr. Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, warned “I fear a global cooling,” during his keynote address to the Ninth International Conference on Climate Change in Las Vegas on Tuesday. Moore, who left Greenpeace in 1986 because he felt it had become too radical, is the author of “Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout: The Making of a Sensible Environmentalist.” (Watch climate conference live here)

Moore noted that a cooling would adversely impact agriculture, and said: “Let’s hope for a little warming as opposed to a little cooling. I would rather it got a little warmer.” (Watch Moore video here at the Heartland Institute event)

Moore noted that “the U.S. is currently been cooling” and noted that there has been “no global warming for nearly 18 years.” He also mocked the notion that “everything is due to global warming.”

“If it warms two degrees, hopefully more in Canada in the North…maybe it would be a good thing if it did,” Moore explained.

Moore noted that carbon dioxide is a trace essential gas in the atmosphere and is not the control knob of the Earth’s climate.
“CO2 is the most important nutrient for all life on earth,” he noted.

“There are so many [climate] variables that we can’t control and when you do an experiment you have to control all the variables except the one you are studying if you want to get a clean result. There are even variables we do not even understand that we cannot control,” he said.
“So it is virtually impossible to think of doing an experiment where we would be able to tweeze out the impact of CO2 versus the hundreds of other variables at work. Which is why you could never make a model that would predict the climate,” he added.

“Change the way our kids are being taught about this subject because if we don’t there will be a whole generation of people who are just blindly following this climate hysteria,” Moore said.
“Our children are not taught logic, they are not taught what the scientific method is, and they are taught that carbon dioxide is pollution. They are told it is carbon now as if it were soot,” he added.

Edited by Rogerdodger, 09 July 2014 - 09:02 PM.