Scientists scoff at AP global-warming story
posted at 11:55 am on December 17, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
Remember that global-warming wet kiss from the AP to climate-change activists and Barack Obama earlier this week? Even scientists who believe in global warming couldn’t quite believe their eyes. They called the report by the Seth Borenstein a “polemic” and wondered when research stopped being a requirement for science reporters (via Q&O):
James O’Brien, an emeritus professor at Florida State University who studies climate variability and the oceans, said that global climate change is very important for the country and that Americans need to make sure they have the right answers for policy decisions. But he said he worries that scientists and policymakers are rushing to make changes based on bad science.
“Global climate change is occurring in many places in the world,” O’Brien said. “But everything that’s attributed to global warming, almost none of it is global warming.”
He took issue with the AP article’s assertion that melting Arctic ice will cause global sea levels to rise.
“When the Arctic Ocean ice melts, it never raises sea level because floating ice is floating ice, because it’s displacing water,” O’Brien said. “When the ice melts, sea level actually goes down. I call it a fourth grade science experiment. Take a glass, put some ice in it. Put water in it. Mark level where water is. Let it [melt]. After the ice melts, the sea level didn’t go up in your glass of water. It’s called the Archimedes Principle.”
And that comes from Borenstein’s ally on global warming. O’Brien calls hysteria on sea levels “major scare tactic,” the kind one would expect a science reporter to debunk rather than to perpetuate. He wants public policy on climate change to be informed rather than hysterical. The fact that water is less dense as a solid than as a liquid — which is why ice cubes float in your drink — never seems to occur to the AP’s “science” writer, who probably never heard of the Archimedes Principle before now. The only way melting ice would raise sea levels would be if water was more dense as a solid than a liquid, which if true would mean ice would get submerged below water than float on top of it.
Other scientists blasted the entire basis of Borenstein’s reporting as well as his ignorance of research:
“If the issues weren’t so serious and the ramifications so profound, I would have to laugh at it,” said David Deming, a geology professor at the University of Oklahoma who has been critical of media reporting on the climate change issue. …
“The mean global temperature, at least as measured by satellite, is now the same as it was in the year 1980. In the last couple of years sea level has stopped rising. Hurricane and cyclone activity in the northern hemisphere is at a 24-year low and sea ice globally is also the same as it was in 1980.” …
Michael R. Fox, a retired nuclear scientist and chemistry professor from the University of Idaho, is another academic who found serious flaws with the AP story’s approach to the issue.
“There’s very little that’s right about it,” Fox said. “And it’s really harmful to the United States because people like this Borenstein working for AP have an enormous impact on everyone, because AP sells their news service to a thousand news outlets.
Fox understands the problem, but undersells the scale. When the AP produces propaganda rather than reporting, it gets distributed to thousands of publications around the world. Unfortunately, the rebuttals don’t get that kind of distribution, and the lies and propaganda get accepted as truth.
Unfortunately, that’s been the history of the global-warming cult over the last decade. They accept no challenges, demonize those who question their science, scoff at contradictory data (such as the fact that temperatures have stopped rising), and insist on politicizing their science rather than work from facts. The AP has become the cult’s propaganda arm.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 Next »
Poptech on December 17, 2008 at 10:46 PM
Wow… I can’t imagine having so little self-respect that I would be willing to post some of the crap you post.
Earthquake detection algorithms
The other things you said there could be responded to with similar results.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 10:50 PM
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 10:50 PM
An algorithm = software now?
And a google search result is evidence?
I am not the least tech-savvy and I’m not fooled by that sheer idiocy.
Give it up Dave. You don’t know jack. Thanks for the laughs Dave, but I’m really embarrassed for you, now.
JannyMae on December 17, 2008 at 10:53 PM
Interesting you bring up Hanrahan who has a degree in BioPhysics and founded the movie animation studio – Pixar.
Poptech on December 17, 2008 at 10:53 PM
If I ran that code on my computer it would detect earthquakes! Awesome, I love magic code.
Poptech on December 17, 2008 at 10:54 PM
” The debate is over “.
Johan Klaus on December 17, 2008 at 10:55 PM
I hope DaveS read up on his algorithm? I don’t want to make him a fool. He is doing a great job as it is.
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 10:56 PM
Gee within 3 minutes of hearing his name so do I.
Pat Hanrahan lectures
F15Mech on December 17, 2008 at 10:58 PM
Pleeease people, just leave DaveS alone and he will shut up. He can’t possibly just talk to himself.
jimmy the notable on December 17, 2008 at 10:59 PM
I am thinking that DaveS works in the education field and not in the real world.
F15Mech on December 17, 2008 at 11:00 PM
Now this is where I am stepping in and just calling you a fool.
Dave, they do have many different types of Siesmic programs… but they are on the fritz so much that they are unreliable due to issues with 1. the recorders are off balance 2. the township and range is off due to Satilite issues and 3. viruses on the computer.
How do I know this… I use to work for the USGS as well as the University up here in Alaska which has the highest density of Earthquakes in the world. If the recorders didn’t catch the time, correct velosity of the S and P waves as well as the dates and rates of either waves. You have to figure it out via the drum. And the Drum isn’t consistant either. But lets say all fails and we need to determine range and varient of the earthquake you still have to go back to the basics. Algebra and Calc!
Guess you have that wrong too. Since I know you have NO experience with that… what so ever.
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:01 PM
15Mech on December 17, 2008 at 10:47 PM
Why do you think I mentioned those examples? They are very well known.
LOL, no a telescope is a telescope. I’m talking about modeling lens optics and systems of lenses–telescopes, cameras, eyeballs, etc. When you watch a Pixar movie, do you think they actually point a camera at things and film them? No… they render them, producing some of the coolest products of that field of computer science.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:01 PM
How do I know this… I use to work for the USGS as well as the University up here in Alaska which has the highest density of Earthquakes in the world. If the recorders didn’t catch the time, correct velosity of the S and P waves as well as the dates and rates of either waves. You have to figure it out via the drum. And the Drum isn’t consistant either. But lets say all fails and we need to determine range and varient of the earthquake you still have to go back to the basics. Algebra and Calc!
Guess you have that wrong too. Since I know you have NO experience with that… what so ever.
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:01 PM
I was going to tell him that. But, glad you did. I am playing the dumb blond tonight. You Rock!
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:04 PM
Wow, that people are actually arguing that computer science isn’t science speaks volumes about how far Hotair’s readership has fallen, intellectually. I mean, I am reading some of the most profoundly stupid things I have read in ages, and, unfortunately, its right here in Hotair’s comment.
F15Mech on December 17, 2008 at 10:58 PM
Cool, make sure to bookmark the stuff about radiosity, global illumination, bidirectional reflection distribution functions, Monte Carlo sampling techniques, and other things I mentioned earlier to. If you read them, you may actually learn some things that I know!
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:05 PM
Didn’t it snow in Dallas AND Las Vegas in the last week? And wasn’t there a big ice storm recently,too? Hmmmmm.
Green is the new Red.
Global Warming: It’s the Sun, stupid.
darwin-t on December 17, 2008 at 11:05 PM
1) Oh my. I did say the blog blames all the C12 on man after I thought we established we were talking about increases. I will make sure to always use the word INCREASES. Once again from your blog:
“Over the last 150 years, carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations have risen from 280 to nearly 380 parts per million (ppm). The fact that this is due virtually entirely to human activities is so well established that one rarely sees it questioned. Yet it is quite reasonable to ask how we know this.”
There is still zero proof from you or your blog that most of the CO2 INCREASE is due entirely to human activity, despite both of you making that claim.
2) Warming has always had a poor correlation with CO2 levels, as CO2 is such a small component of the atmosphere and its effect on warming is logarithmic. Temperature charts simply do not align with continuing CO2 increase. They never have.
Chuck Schick on December 17, 2008 at 11:07 PM
I use to build the little recorders as well as set them up. I also helped build the computer program for the data that came in and transfered it to my laptop. It was a great learning tool in what I do today.
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:07 PM
Do you remember the problem that Intel had with the floating decimal on the early Pentium chips?
Johan Klaus on December 17, 2008 at 11:07 PM
And you are actually trying to tell people here that there is no scientific research into detection, location, and measurement of earthquakes? You just named 3 items that has nothing to do with the correctness of the algorithm itself (garbage in, garbage out), none of which discredit the topic as an interesting, legitimate research topic.
What were you trying to say there? Are you trying to say that those research papers I linked don’t exist? You guys are making less and less sense every time you comment.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:08 PM
All of which has absolutely nothing to do with global warming.
Poptech on December 17, 2008 at 11:08 PM
Johan Klaus on December 17, 2008 at 11:07 PM
Yes, and I actually understand what the problem was.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:10 PM
Too or also?
Johan Klaus on December 17, 2008 at 11:11 PM
Chuck Schick on December 17, 2008 at 11:07 PM
I’ll bet that’s why I never said that they did.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:12 PM
In this case too and also are the same.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:13 PM
Is my memory failing me or did you say predict earthquakes?
Johan Klaus on December 17, 2008 at 11:15 PM
LMFAO admit it you just got PWNED! You are a complete retard trying to use something you have NO CLUE ABOUT!
What an idiot. You do not use algorithms for detection of earthquakes.. you use math viarients via the waves of the earthquake (S and P). And you use math to find out the magnitude, which is the depth and velocity and size.
Here Dave, a link for you in common words and phrases for earthquake, epicenter and measurement: http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/beyond/articles/earthquakes/earthquakes.html
Or you can click my name and learn it via 5th grade graphs LMFAO!
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:15 PM
To is a preposition.
Johan Klaus on December 17, 2008 at 11:17 PM
I use to build the little recorders as well as set them up. I also helped build the computer program for the data that came in and transfered it to my laptop. It was a great learning tool in what I do today.
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:07 PM
You are a very intelligent Woman. I enjoy reading your posts. Computer Programs are not easy to build. I would get head aches when I was doing that. I love building systems though. Computers are a part, but not fool proof in what you know who is suggesting. Even when my hubby uses turbo cad, he still needs to use his calculator and his drafting table also. Guess some think Computers can do everything and are fault proof.
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:19 PM
Johan Klaus on December 17, 2008 at 11:15 PM
No, I don’t detect earthquakes. There is tons of research, though, into matters that might help do that some day.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:20 PM
That cost us a ton of money. Bad data. Sort of like some that is put out by the agw crowd.
Johan Klaus on December 17, 2008 at 11:20 PM
Johan Klaus on December 17, 2008 at 11:17 PM
Right, which is why a smart person would have realized that it was a typo and avoided the confusion you are suffering.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:20 PM
Oh so you are not modeling a telescopes lens and the optics of said telescope to find where light would be refracted or bent so we could see further into space or something important like that.
Instead you are focusing your talents on making something fake look real thru the lens of a camera for the entertainment of my bro’s/sisters children.
I get it now. Personally I will continue to buy telescopes, toy guns and Lego’s for my nephews.
F15Mech on December 17, 2008 at 11:20 PM
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:19 PM
Computers don’t do anything other than what they are told.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:22 PM
It is just like building a small computer. The memory was always low and the way I would record the data was wether go to the recorder or it would use a dial up motem to call me with the data in which I still had to go to and deete the data after a couple weeks.
It wasn’t easy and I was helping someone with a grant on what Seismic waves do to a Sky Scraper that has more of a jello mold sand like consistancy under it for further review on how tall to build the sky scrapers. I was the main source of the research… more the back bone. It was a hard job but fun.
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:23 PM
Excellent. A good place for us to stop then. Let me know if you ever find that CO2 increase breakdown by source.
Chuck Schick on December 17, 2008 at 11:23 PM
Like I said, one little error. Just trying to make a point. The only thing that I am suffering from is old age.
Johan Klaus on December 17, 2008 at 11:24 PM
Computers don’t do anything other than what they are told.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:22 PM
Ok….That is the point! Not what you have been saying…Garbage in garbage out! You need to read what you write. Unless you talk out of your……..um back side and pay no attention.
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:26 PM
Hmmmmm didn’t you say this earlier?
Keep trying.. one day you will believe your own dribble.
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:28 PM
It is just like building a small computer. The memory was always low and the way I would record the data was wether go to the recorder or it would use a dial up motem to call me with the data in which I still had to go to and deete the data after a couple weeks.
It wasn’t easy and I was helping someone with a grant on what Seismic waves do to a Sky Scraper that has more of a jello mold sand like consistancy under it for further review on how tall to build the sky scrapers. I was the main source of the research… more the back bone. It was a hard job but fun.
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:23 PM
I am very impressed upinak. That sounds very rewarding. I bet it was a fun job. Sounds hard though.
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:29 PM
F15Mech on December 17, 2008 at 11:20 PM
Basically, yeah. Computer graphics applies known physics to synthesizing images, among other things. The science of computer graphics and other related CS topics (image processing) is what allows us to:
- make entertainment for your children
- create realistic, virtual worlds for training pilots like yourself and soldiers before they enter combat (this is getting better all the time)
- turn abstract data from telescopes etc into images that we can see
- detect faces and other things in moving images (for security, etc)
- synthesize images of weather so that you can see something understandable on your nightly news
- have soldiers point a laser around a corner and construct a 3D model of what they will see before going around the corner (ok, that may not be here yet, but it is absolutely plausible and probably is here)
- turn satellite imagery into 3D models of towns so that pilots can practice bombing runs
etc. etc…
Come on people… surely you guys don’t really mean to sound this ignorant. This is just very, very sad, to me, that you all would be so eager to throw self-respect out the window and bash science in general, just for the sake of scoring a few cheap, fallacious points in what you perceive to be a debate about climate change.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:29 PM
Time consuming. I would do it at night and on weekends so I wouldn’t be disturbed. I enjoyed my job.. I was my own boss. That is what I enjoy and learning new things.
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:30 PM
Yeah, I also explained very clearly, as if to a small child, that computer science is not about computers.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:30 PM
You really should stop reading your own comments if its causing you that much distress.
jimmy the notable on December 17, 2008 at 11:31 PM
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:26 PM
Where did you get the idea that I ever contradicted that?
Good god people.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:31 PM
DaveS, The software that the Scientists used to calculate Global Warming was FLAWED!!!! They only put in what they wanted, for the results that they wanted!!!! End of story! It is impossible to do that on a Computer! And not use any thing else. Impossible!
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:31 PM
Do you EVER know when to SHUT UP!?
You have been told you are a moron by just about everyone in here and You were SHOWN that you were a moron in more ways then one.
If anything you flip a freaking switch… computer science boy. Because no company in their right mind would allow you to do anything else.
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:31 PM
jimmy, I think you’ll find that people here are pretty confused about science-y stuff that I mention. I was talking about them.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:33 PM
You sure have no clue about earthquakes, siesmology or volcanology yet you brought THAT up.
Shut UP already!
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:34 PM
*Throws in the towel* I will try to be a good girl now…… *crosses her fingers behind her back* :)
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:34 PM
Wait repetitively talking about computer graphics when this is about climate change and computer models is not ignorant? My apologies please continue explaining how we are bashing “science”.
Does the debate go, you create fabricated lie and we respond?
Poptech on December 17, 2008 at 11:35 PM
“the debate is over ” is not very scientific, especially when many scientist disagree.
Johan Klaus on December 17, 2008 at 11:36 PM
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:34 PM
I brought it up because a lot of the idiots here said that it wasn’t science. There are a LOT of idiots here tonight. Actually, I think you were the one who butted in and said that it wasn’t science.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:36 PM
Of course they chose to call it COMPUTER science to fool everyone and computer scientists really work as philosophy majors.
Poptech on December 17, 2008 at 11:37 PM
Johan Klaus on December 17, 2008 at 11:36 PM
Then why don’t you go have a debate with people who say the debate is over, instead of talking nonsense in here?
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:37 PM
Climate chaos? Don’t believe it (Christopher Monckton, Mathematician
Poptech on December 17, 2008 at 11:39 PM
I butted IN?
Dude can you lie anymore? I told you exactly the problems with Siesmographs and the reliability issues. And what they revert too… MATH ON A PIECE OF PAPER!
Do you have a freaking clue? Do you know WTF you are talking about.. NO! Jesus man you are a complete IDIOT! You don’t know shit about science and you keep spewing!
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:39 PM
Poptech on December 17, 2008 at 11:37 PM
Actually, there has been a debate for over a hundred years what to call it, precisely because it can be confusing to people who don’t know what it is.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:40 PM
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:39 PM
If you don’t understand why that is irrelevant, you will never be able to discuss this.
And yes, I was pointing it out as an example of science which involves computer science, and you butted in to make the astonishing claim that it isn’t science… or at least, that is the implication of your taking issue with what I said. The fact that some software you used doesn’t work is irrelevant.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:42 PM
Here we go again Wikipedia. Yawn, no wonder so many people are stupid.
Poptech on December 17, 2008 at 11:44 PM
I never said my software.. moron. I didn’t even bring up software now did I? Look again… you might be caught in a lie again.
just shut up Dave, you have proven how absolutely retarded you are. Period.
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:44 PM
Wikipedia… the liberal Bible of the world. Filled with crap, lies and wasted information.
I feel ya man.
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:45 PM
Come on people… surely you guys don’t really mean to sound this ignorant. This is just very, very sad, to me, that you all would be so eager to throw self-respect out the window and bash science in general, just for the sake of scoring a few cheap, fallacious points in what you perceive to be a debate about climate change.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:29 PM
You are the one that is ignorant! Global Warming doesn’t exist! Bashing science? You don’t even know what science is! When they did their calculations on Global Warming, the software was flawed. On purpose! That way they could put in what they wanted to put in. Then along comes Al Gore with his bull crap movie. A freak show. Did you star in it btw? Reading your posts you don’t stay consistent with shit! You talk in circles. There are incredible Science. Not Global Warming. That is a inconvenient lie!
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:48 PM
At the Las Vegas Airport no departures are allowed until further notice. Small snow problem. Worst snow storm in 30 years hit the area. No de-icing equipment or plows to clear the runways. Looks like they are expecting 3 to 6 inches. We just have to hope that Al Gore is there sleeping on the floor.
MB4 on December 17, 2008 at 11:50 PM
Wikipedia is the worse place to research. Anyone can go on there and change anything they want to. Wikipedia is a joke. Only a dummy would go there. Like DaveS. The Scientist! LOL!!!
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:51 PM
All I can say to those last couple is “wow”.
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:44 PM
Jesus Christ, are you kidding? Then WTF were you talking about? If you weren’t talking about software, why would you respond to my mention of computer science research into earthquake detection algorithms with this?
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:51 PM
At the Las Vegas Airport no departures are allowed until further notice. Small snow problem. Worst snow storm in 30 years hit the area. No de-icing equipment or plows to clear the runways. Looks like they are expecting 3 to 6 inches. We just have to hope that Al Gore is there sleeping on the floor.
MB4 on December 17, 2008 at 11:50 PM
That is so cool! I mean, not cool that planes can’t get in or out. But cool it is snowing there. Would love to see that.
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:52 PM
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:48 PM
Only if you are a shallow thinker. I would be interested in what you think I have said that is inconsistent.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:53 PM
damn… I was explaining why they go to math. I am sorry your 6th grade education doesn’t let you think and get your mind around that reason.
upinak on December 17, 2008 at 11:54 PM
Dave, they do have many different types of Siesmic programs… but they are on the fritz so much that they are unreliable due to issues with 1. the recorders are off balance 2. the township and range is off due to Satilite issues and 3. viruses on the computer.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:51 PM
Dude, There is something mental with you. How the hell do you see software in the above? What a pure retard! You need some serious help and fast!
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:54 PM
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:54 PM
Yeah, “viruses on a computer” would never cause software to be unusable, nor would communications problems or bad data.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:57 PM
Only if you are a shallow thinker. I would be interested in what you think I have said that is inconsistent.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:53 PM
Go back and read your worthless posts. Wait, your brain can’t work that way. You only see and read what you want. Love a Liberal’s way. If I say water, you probably would say shit. I am done with you. You are Shallow! How the hell did you get on HA?
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:57 PM
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:57 PM
I know what I have said… I’m curious what you perceive to be inconsistent.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:59 PM
Just don’t blame me. I didn’t drag him in. I do have some class.
FeralCat on December 18, 2008 at 12:01 AM
sheebe on December 17, 2008 at 11:54 PM
Dude, There is something mental with you. How the hell do you see software in the above? What a pure retard! You need some serious help and fast!
Yeah, “viruses on a computer” would never cause software to be unusable, nor would communications problems or bad data.
DaveS on December 17, 2008 at 11:57 PM
OMG! WTF? How the hell did you get your answer with what I wrote? You were attacking upinak, which pissed me off. She knows what she is talking about. I do fix computers and servers. And wow you are a true idiot. So, you think that viruses don’t cause software to become unusable? Or with communications or bad data? Go back to the planet you came from. I am laughing so hard I can’t stand it. You are mental. Check in to a room with no windows. Stay there!
sheebe on December 18, 2008 at 12:01 AM
Forgot to say, I have had programs on computers that had viruses written in them. Syquest had a real bad virus in the install disk. That is why they went out of business!!
sheebe on December 18, 2008 at 12:03 AM
Talking nonsense? Example?
Johan Klaus on December 18, 2008 at 12:03 AM
Just don’t blame me. I didn’t drag him in. I do have some class.
FeralCat on December 18, 2008 at 12:01 AM
:) I won’t blame you.
sheebe on December 18, 2008 at 12:04 AM
Johan Klaus on December 18, 2008 at 12:03 AM
Well, there was that one post where you said ““the debate is over ” is not very scientific, especially when many scientist disagree” out of the blue, when nobody said otherwise.
DaveS on December 18, 2008 at 12:06 AM
Computer models are only as good as the data sets that they are based on. Much of the temperature data used in the models that global warming alarmists base their predictions on are based historical tree ring data used as a proxy for temperature. Many recent scientific investigations of this tree ring data have shown that it was not rigorously verified and validated by the scientific community before being blindly accepted as fact. Furthermore, close re-examination of much of this data has shown that it is, in fact, not a reliable predictor of historical temperatures and that the suspect data is directly responsible for producing the much-touted hockey stick temperature curves. When the data sets are corrected by removing the unreliable data, the historical temperature curves look nothing like the alarmist hockey stick curves. In fact, they validate the existence of a significant medieval warming period a few degrees higher than modern warming trends that agree with much of the historical and archeological evidence that supports the existence a more significant warming period on the Earth. The climate of this planet is certainly changing, but there is no real empirical evidence that this change is either extraordinary or that is is caused by man-made CO2. What we need in science right now is careful examination of the data without politics driving the answers. Science is pretty good at separating fact from fiction when the scientific method is rigorously followed and conclusions are based on properly verified/validated data and assumptions, Unfortunately, too much of what we are getting from the global warming community is bad data feeding bad science resulting in bogus conclusions. Good science is not settled by a consensus process. It is a natural result of rigor and due diligence by scientists with no allegiance to political adgendas.
NuclearPhysicist on December 18, 2008 at 12:10 AM
Johan Klaus on December 18, 2008 at 12:10 AM
Google it.
Johan Klaus on December 18, 2008 at 12:11 AM
NuclearPhysicist, thanks god you came in to post something reasonable that didn’t display a phobic fear of science.
DaveS on December 18, 2008 at 12:12 AM
NuclearPhysicist on December 18, 2008 at 12:10 AM
well when you go off tempurature readings via a water source that wasn’t checked daily due to bad weather and people fibbing (what a concept huh) …should have been thrown out to begin with.
But then what do you do with people who didn’t know better.
upinak on December 18, 2008 at 12:13 AM
Remember al gore?
Johan Klaus on December 18, 2008 at 12:13 AM
Nobody HERE said it. If you want to have arguments with yourself and imaginary google friends, go somewhere else.
DaveS on December 18, 2008 at 12:13 AM
John Klaus,
Killing babies is no way to solve the worlds problems, I don’t care what you or anyone else say.
DaveS on December 18, 2008 at 12:15 AM
NuclearPhysicist on December 18, 2008 at 12:10 AM
Beautifully written!! And very respectfully. Thank you for making sense! I am going to go for a while. But your post was perfect! :)
sheebe on December 18, 2008 at 12:15 AM
AUSGEZEICHNET! Well said.
Johan Klaus on December 18, 2008 at 12:18 AM
upinak on December 18, 2008 at 12:13 AM
I will be back in a while. Have to roll some cigarettes. It is probably late where you are. But I do enjoy when you are here. Last week, when I was going to make the Salmon Chowder. I checked my bank account. Not as much as I thought. :) But, Friday is Payday!!! So, Saturday will be Salmon Chowder! Hope to see you later or tomorrow.
sheebe on December 18, 2008 at 12:19 AM
GIGO.
Cheshire Cat on December 18, 2008 at 12:20 AM
Name calling? Killing babies?
Johan Klaus on December 18, 2008 at 12:20 AM
LOL, NuclearPhysicist said basically everything I have said, only he did it without using your crazy-trigger buzzwords. You’re like little automatons.
DaveS on December 18, 2008 at 12:21 AM
Johan Klaus on December 18, 2008 at 12:20 AM
I read some people on Google saying that before.
DaveS on December 18, 2008 at 12:21 AM
I believe that it was you that was refering to information on different web sites. I did the same. A little testy there?
Johan Klaus on December 18, 2008 at 12:23 AM
naaaa not late yet.
upinak on December 18, 2008 at 12:24 AM
This thread was about AGW, rignt?
Johan Klaus on December 18, 2008 at 12:24 AM
Perception is a funny thing. I thought he said what we have been saying.
Johan Klaus on December 18, 2008 at 12:26 AM
The main reason that we are seeing a steady increase in the number of scientists who are questioning the validity of the predictions of the alarmist global warming community is that more real scientists are finally getting around to critically evaluating the data and assumptions that drive the computer models. Sadly, these assessments are finding out just how much many scientists are willing to abandon scientific first principles in order to further their own personal/political agendas. I’ve been a scientist for over 50 years and its sickens me to see this happening on such a large scale. In the end, I feel that truth will win the day, but not before hundreds of billions of dollars are wasted in trying to prove something that is the equivalent of the flat-earth theory.
NuclearPhysicist on December 18, 2008 at 12:38 AM
Can I touch you?
theregoestheneighborhood on December 18, 2008 at 12:42 AM
Back to the propaganda and lies – you never learn. No one posted anything that was a phobic fear of science. You sir are the most dishonest person posting here.
Poptech on December 18, 2008 at 12:44 AM
Holy sh@t, are you guys STILL going over this crap?
BallisticBob on December 18, 2008 at 1:00 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 Next »