The next ClimaGate has happened! The results from the BEST Project showed three things:
First; the data clearly shows no warming for the last 13 years
Second; The data may well have been contaminated? by heat islands as many have predicted (to you mindless believers, that means temps have gone down, not up)
Third: The report by Prof. Richard Muller, of Berkeley was a clear cut act of fraud! According to Prof Judith Curry (another AGW scientist) we SHOULD be skeptical about AGW!
htsone
Juvenile. It’s been shown that this “Global warming/climate change” farce is simply a scam perpetrated by scientists in the pay of government. They simply depend? on the taxpayers to keep the siphon flowing. They are whores for the Statist agenda. No more. No less.
robhoneycutt
@TheRealArchAngel Yes, I know you aren’t reading the actual research because? none of it says what you are saying! I HAVE read the published research.
TheRealArchAngel
“I can clearly see that you have not read? even one paper on temperature proxy records”
Because I’m saying that Prox data vs real world instruments is TOO LOW?
Tree rings, Soil composition and ICe Composition is subject to various factors that can easily fuck up the data…and,more importantly, Proxy data is a reaction to thoe factors changing (as in a lag) so sampling ICe Cores, Soil or Tree rings for now 300 years from now wouldn’t show the 390ppm co2 in the air…it would be166ppm
robhoneycutt
@TheRealArchAngel I can clearly see that you have not read even one paper on temperature? proxy records.
robhoneycutt
@TheRealArchAngel What do you think happens to that carbon MONoxide when it gets into the atmosphere and interacts? with free oxygen? Hmmm…
You also might look at your exhalation figures in comparison to the total contribution of anthropogenic CO2. Humans put 30 GIGATONS of CO2 into the air. Not only that but consider where the carbon from breathing coming from originally (answer: the air).
robhoneycutt
@TheRealArchAngel Now you’re pulling numbers out of your ass with? that $23/gal figure.
robhoneycutt
@TheRealArchAngel Go read about Hubbert Peak Oil theory. You don’t seem to know what? you’re talking about.
robhoneycutt
@TheRealArchAngel Sorry, but two different studies show that 97% of researchers? who study and publish in the field of climate science believe that climate change is real.
TheRealArchAngel
“3) No one is “funding” global warming”
10 billion was given to further study the possibility that humans have soething to do with it and what the impacts might be
Of course what the UN been coveting since it’s inception was taxing and regulation powers and? the AGW nonsense was it’s angle up to Copenhagen when Obama told them to fuck off with a cherry on top by givening “green policy” powers to the world bank and not them
Now they’ve switched to the ol’ “Overpopulation Armegedon” bullshit
TheRealArchAngel
“The “hockey stick” has actually been vindicated repeatedly. Nothing is wrong with the global proxy graphs.”
Well, proxy isn’t 100 accurate or foolproof….it’s a estimate based on relative information
This is why when scientists startied to have instruments to monitor co2 and tempature directly they was noting that the proxy was actually low compared to real world data which is why they started to swap out real world data for? proxy to..er..”hide the decline” which deniers took out of context
TheRealArchAngel
“humans make less then 0.1% of a whole? of less then 5% in the atmosphere ”
Almost 7 billion Humans exhaling (vs 200 million 150 years ago) exhale 2 billion tons of co2 a year
Likewise farm animals to support? that many humans have also boomed adding their farts and exhales to the atmosphere
What we don’t have is the fallacy that a post 1994 car with no catalyst converter turning CARBON MONOXIDE out of the engine to CARBON DIOXIDE(the grain of truth in hokey “co2 from combustion” claims)
TheRealArchAngel
“You should be concerned about the motives of fossil fuel energy companies. They are the ones with the means and? motivation to try to confuse people.”
COme on, without government subsidies it costs up to $23 a gallon to drill and move oil and the only reason governments subsidize that for a 10 cents a gallon profit is they make up to $980 a gallon in various taxes,fines,leases
Geothermal and Solar is cheap for Chevron and BP to run by comparison but voltage and range vs? cost currently sucks
TheRealArchAngel
“You should? be concerned about the motives of fossil fuel energy companies. They? are the ones with the means and motivation to try to confuse people.”
Motives?
There attempts to convince government there is “peak oi;” in the 70′s in order to get the world governments to losen the restrictions on their alternative energy research was largely ignored by government
“Big Oil” actually joined the AGW outcry thus their PR campaign saying they were more then Oil after the US Nov 2007 cap&trade
TheRealArchAngel
“I would say 100% of all climate scientists say? that Global Warming is true”
Well, considering only 14 of the 250 experts on IPCC (not “2500″) were scientists and? only 4 of them had a degree in anything related to Climate…100% of 4 = 4 (Hansen,Webber,CHristy,and Spenser)..lol
Of the 4 only Andrew is so sure that Humans are the cause and Hansen is the one convinced taxing the fuck out of oil and gas can unmelt the ice,save baby polar bears,and lower the sea levels
TheRealArchAngel
“I would say 100% of all climate scientists say? that Global Warming is true”
Well, considering only 14 of the 250 experts? on IPCC (not “2500″) were scientists and only 4 of them had a degree in anything related to Climate…100% of 4 = 4 (Hansen,Webber,CHristy,and Spenser)..lol
Of the 4 only Andrew is so sure that Humans are the cause and Hansen is the one convinced taxing the fuck out of oil and gas can unmelt the ice,save baby polar bears,and lower the sea levels (rollseyes)
robhoneycutt
@JumboGaming Boy, you are full of all sorts of mumbo jumbo that “people” are saying. Problem is, none? of it is true.
JumboGaming
you know what people are saying ??? because people produce co2 they must be killed . for now its a carbon tax what is at the heart of it a tax on life . and one more thing so why are people saying co2 is bad, humans make less then 0.1% of? a whole of less then 5% in the atmosphere that is just enough to keep our earth warm enough to not be frozen, and explain why the moons of Jupiter and saturn are melted and are now liquid water last time i check co2 isnt causing that , is it now.
robhoneycutt
@unite4peaceonearth Wow. How many things can you get wrong in one paragraph.
1) 97% of scientist who are? actively publishing in the field of climate say that CO2 is a problem.
2) The “hockey stick” has actually been vindicated repeatedly. Nothing is wrong with the global proxy graphs.
3) No one is “funding” global warming.
4) You should be concerned about the motives of fossil fuel energy companies. They are the ones with the means and motivation to try to confuse people.
CafecitoConLeche
@TrollForTuna
Not all of us are experts on every topic. I tend to put my trust on the scientific consensus, and the reason should be obvious.? The thing is, you dont have to stop there; no one is telling you to do so. You can go and check the facts and studies yourself if the subject is so important for you, thats the beauty of science.
unite4peaceonearth
I would say 100% of all climate scientists say that Global Warming is true. But I would argue that 99% of all non-government funded scientists agree that Co2 is good for earth and there is nothing we can do that would significantly change? the outcome of global warming. The hockey stick graph has already been proven to be a hoax, where the numbers and calculations were fudged. The people and companies that fund and promote these Global Warming ideas are in favor of a one World Government. Beware!
LeadBeIIy
@geiragustsson The original hockey-stick chart was built on info that contained inaccurate data. The scientists released all the errors and corrected them. The errors were inconsequential and the graph still looks EXACTLY? the same.
The original Soon & Baliunas report criticising the graph was proved by a scientific body to be flawed. It also didn’t criticise global warming in the present, it only stated that they believed the Medieval temps to be higher. You never read any of that I’m sure.
LeadBeIIy
@Thatmakessense356 Greenhouse gases emit thermal radiation back regardless of the time of day. Thermal radiation is what is put out by the earth after it is hit by solar radiation. We haven’t observed increases in the? amount of solar radiation (the original radiation put out by the sun), which makes the sunspot theory slightly weak in comparison to the man-made C02 theory.
LeadBeIIy
@geiragustsson Capitalism didn’t work for the U.S. A vast supply of natural resources did. Granted, a stable and sane government helped us develop and profit? off of these resources. Taking advantage of the cheap transportation (cause of cheap oil) and cheap labor in other countries also helped us a lot.
I doubt the world will ever again experience economic growth like it did in the U.S. this last century. And the idea that people can continue economic growth until we are all rich is idiotic.
TrollForTuna
ok, i’m seriously not trying to be bias.
but the start of this video begins with a tactic of conformity, where by they try and get the ‘middle ground’ by saying, effectively: “everyone else thinks so”
people should not be urged either for or against a position they don’t fully? understand.
i have studied far more than most people, and i’m still open-minded
and no, i’m not saying what my position is, it’s irrelevant to the point i’m trying to say;
The next ClimaGate has happened! The results from the BEST Project showed three things:
First; the data clearly shows no warming for the last 13 years
Second; The data may well have been contaminated? by heat islands as many have predicted (to you mindless believers, that means temps have gone down, not up)
Third: The report by Prof. Richard Muller, of Berkeley was a clear cut act of fraud! According to Prof Judith Curry (another AGW scientist) we SHOULD be skeptical about AGW!
Juvenile. It’s been shown that this “Global warming/climate change” farce is simply a scam perpetrated by scientists in the pay of government. They simply depend? on the taxpayers to keep the siphon flowing. They are whores for the Statist agenda. No more. No less.
@TheRealArchAngel Yes, I know you aren’t reading the actual research because? none of it says what you are saying! I HAVE read the published research.
“I can clearly see that you have not read? even one paper on temperature proxy records”
Because I’m saying that Prox data vs real world instruments is TOO LOW?
Tree rings, Soil composition and ICe Composition is subject to various factors that can easily fuck up the data…and,more importantly, Proxy data is a reaction to thoe factors changing (as in a lag) so sampling ICe Cores, Soil or Tree rings for now 300 years from now wouldn’t show the 390ppm co2 in the air…it would be166ppm
@TheRealArchAngel I can clearly see that you have not read even one paper on temperature? proxy records.
@TheRealArchAngel What do you think happens to that carbon MONoxide when it gets into the atmosphere and interacts? with free oxygen? Hmmm…
You also might look at your exhalation figures in comparison to the total contribution of anthropogenic CO2. Humans put 30 GIGATONS of CO2 into the air. Not only that but consider where the carbon from breathing coming from originally (answer: the air).
@TheRealArchAngel Now you’re pulling numbers out of your ass with? that $23/gal figure.
@TheRealArchAngel Go read about Hubbert Peak Oil theory. You don’t seem to know what? you’re talking about.
@TheRealArchAngel Sorry, but two different studies show that 97% of researchers? who study and publish in the field of climate science believe that climate change is real.
“3) No one is “funding” global warming”
10 billion was given to further study the possibility that humans have soething to do with it and what the impacts might be
Of course what the UN been coveting since it’s inception was taxing and regulation powers and? the AGW nonsense was it’s angle up to Copenhagen when Obama told them to fuck off with a cherry on top by givening “green policy” powers to the world bank and not them
Now they’ve switched to the ol’ “Overpopulation Armegedon” bullshit
“The “hockey stick” has actually been vindicated repeatedly. Nothing is wrong with the global proxy graphs.”
Well, proxy isn’t 100 accurate or foolproof….it’s a estimate based on relative information
This is why when scientists startied to have instruments to monitor co2 and tempature directly they was noting that the proxy was actually low compared to real world data which is why they started to swap out real world data for? proxy to..er..”hide the decline” which deniers took out of context
“humans make less then 0.1% of a whole? of less then 5% in the atmosphere ”
Almost 7 billion Humans exhaling (vs 200 million 150 years ago) exhale 2 billion tons of co2 a year
Likewise farm animals to support? that many humans have also boomed adding their farts and exhales to the atmosphere
What we don’t have is the fallacy that a post 1994 car with no catalyst converter turning CARBON MONOXIDE out of the engine to CARBON DIOXIDE(the grain of truth in hokey “co2 from combustion” claims)
“You should be concerned about the motives of fossil fuel energy companies. They are the ones with the means and? motivation to try to confuse people.”
COme on, without government subsidies it costs up to $23 a gallon to drill and move oil and the only reason governments subsidize that for a 10 cents a gallon profit is they make up to $980 a gallon in various taxes,fines,leases
Geothermal and Solar is cheap for Chevron and BP to run by comparison but voltage and range vs? cost currently sucks
“You should? be concerned about the motives of fossil fuel energy companies. They? are the ones with the means and motivation to try to confuse people.”
Motives?
There attempts to convince government there is “peak oi;” in the 70′s in order to get the world governments to losen the restrictions on their alternative energy research was largely ignored by government
“Big Oil” actually joined the AGW outcry thus their PR campaign saying they were more then Oil after the US Nov 2007 cap&trade
“I would say 100% of all climate scientists say? that Global Warming is true”
Well, considering only 14 of the 250 experts on IPCC (not “2500″) were scientists and? only 4 of them had a degree in anything related to Climate…100% of 4 = 4 (Hansen,Webber,CHristy,and Spenser)..lol
Of the 4 only Andrew is so sure that Humans are the cause and Hansen is the one convinced taxing the fuck out of oil and gas can unmelt the ice,save baby polar bears,and lower the sea levels
“I would say 100% of all climate scientists say? that Global Warming is true”
Well, considering only 14 of the 250 experts? on IPCC (not “2500″) were scientists and only 4 of them had a degree in anything related to Climate…100% of 4 = 4 (Hansen,Webber,CHristy,and Spenser)..lol
Of the 4 only Andrew is so sure that Humans are the cause and Hansen is the one convinced taxing the fuck out of oil and gas can unmelt the ice,save baby polar bears,and lower the sea levels (rollseyes)
@JumboGaming Boy, you are full of all sorts of mumbo jumbo that “people” are saying. Problem is, none? of it is true.
you know what people are saying ??? because people produce co2 they must be killed . for now its a carbon tax what is at the heart of it a tax on life . and one more thing so why are people saying co2 is bad, humans make less then 0.1% of? a whole of less then 5% in the atmosphere that is just enough to keep our earth warm enough to not be frozen, and explain why the moons of Jupiter and saturn are melted and are now liquid water last time i check co2 isnt causing that , is it now.
@unite4peaceonearth Wow. How many things can you get wrong in one paragraph.
1) 97% of scientist who are? actively publishing in the field of climate say that CO2 is a problem.
2) The “hockey stick” has actually been vindicated repeatedly. Nothing is wrong with the global proxy graphs.
3) No one is “funding” global warming.
4) You should be concerned about the motives of fossil fuel energy companies. They are the ones with the means and motivation to try to confuse people.
@TrollForTuna
Not all of us are experts on every topic. I tend to put my trust on the scientific consensus, and the reason should be obvious.? The thing is, you dont have to stop there; no one is telling you to do so. You can go and check the facts and studies yourself if the subject is so important for you, thats the beauty of science.
I would say 100% of all climate scientists say that Global Warming is true. But I would argue that 99% of all non-government funded scientists agree that Co2 is good for earth and there is nothing we can do that would significantly change? the outcome of global warming. The hockey stick graph has already been proven to be a hoax, where the numbers and calculations were fudged. The people and companies that fund and promote these Global Warming ideas are in favor of a one World Government. Beware!
@geiragustsson The original hockey-stick chart was built on info that contained inaccurate data. The scientists released all the errors and corrected them. The errors were inconsequential and the graph still looks EXACTLY? the same.
The original Soon & Baliunas report criticising the graph was proved by a scientific body to be flawed. It also didn’t criticise global warming in the present, it only stated that they believed the Medieval temps to be higher. You never read any of that I’m sure.
@Thatmakessense356 Greenhouse gases emit thermal radiation back regardless of the time of day. Thermal radiation is what is put out by the earth after it is hit by solar radiation. We haven’t observed increases in the? amount of solar radiation (the original radiation put out by the sun), which makes the sunspot theory slightly weak in comparison to the man-made C02 theory.
@geiragustsson Capitalism didn’t work for the U.S. A vast supply of natural resources did. Granted, a stable and sane government helped us develop and profit? off of these resources. Taking advantage of the cheap transportation (cause of cheap oil) and cheap labor in other countries also helped us a lot.
I doubt the world will ever again experience economic growth like it did in the U.S. this last century. And the idea that people can continue economic growth until we are all rich is idiotic.
ok, i’m seriously not trying to be bias.
but the start of this video begins with a tactic of conformity, where by they try and get the ‘middle ground’ by saying, effectively: “everyone else thinks so”
people should not be urged either for or against a position they don’t fully? understand.
i have studied far more than most people, and i’m still open-minded
and no, i’m not saying what my position is, it’s irrelevant to the point i’m trying to say;
think for your self.