Global Warming - running out of time to prevent ECONOMIC disaster

[BandwidthAddict]

Hello BlueCollar. Once again spouting GW religious crap. All hail the Goracle!!!

For people that still have some reasoning capability left, here is a little item that the NASA dude Hansen might find "inconvenient"

http://ker-plunk.blogspot.com/2008/07/hansen-1988-v-hansen-2008.html

PS. Did you know that there are three independant global temperature monitoring systems, two concur and show pretty much a stable temperature band for the last couple decades, one shows a steep rise in temperature. The one that shows a steep rise was "corrected" using a special algorithm. Guess which one was "corrected"? If you guessed the one from James Hansen of NASA, you would have guessed correctly.

Did you know that James Hansen has an interest in carbon trading? Ohh .. I bet you didn't. Wow, the "expert" who preaches doom and gloom also has an interest in the solution that will net some ppl a huge amount of moolahs.

Have you seen how wide the Goracle has become, how much jetting he does and how much electricity his mansion uses? If he was so concerned about the health of the planet, you think he would actually, I don't know, ACT accordingly. Instead, he burns carbon like it is going out of fashion, much more than average joes like you and I could EVER concieve of matching.

Tell me, if a boulder was on it's was down the hill to crush you, would you blithely walk in it's shadow or would you get out of the way? How many international climate conferences have been convened since the "threat" was "discovered"? How much carbon was burnt getting to these conferences? How much was actually done?

And now for Kyoto .. If there is such a big problem, how come China, India, Africa, South America and all the BIG polluters are excempt? Only the western world seems to be a "problem". Why the "focus" on the western world? Did you know that China is either currently, or very soon to be, the biggest polluter in the world?

When the chicken littles actually start acting like there is a problem, that's when I will take them seriously.

 

[BCO]

Hi BWA.

Couple of things - Al Gore was not mentioned once in the article I posted, so I'm not sure why you feel the need to bring him into this discussion. Believe it or not, but Gore and global warming are not interchangeable terms. Also, ad hominem attacks on Al Gore do not constitute valid arguments against the science of climate change.

Regarding your comment about Kyoto, let's look at a couple of things you said:

And now for Kyoto .. If there is such a big problem, how come China, India, Africa, South America and all the BIG polluters are excempt? Only the western world seems to be a "problem". Why the "focus" on the western world? Did you know that China is either currently, or very soon to be, the biggest polluter in the world?

Again, the article I posted specifically mentions China and India:

While international recognition of global warming was swift, actions have faltered. The U.S. refused to place limits on its emissions, and developing countries such as China and India rapidly increased their emissions.

Africa and South America, for the record, are NOT major atmospheric polluters compared to the USA, China, India, Russia or Europe.

Once again, despite what you claim to be true about climate change, the vast majority of climate scientists (read, people who actually know what they're talking about) would strongly disagree with you and frankly, I'd believe what they're saying over the opinion of some bandwidth addict any day.

 

[BandwidthAddict]

BlueCollar, I noticed that you did not comment on the temperature graphs. Inconvenient?

 

[BandwidthAddict]

Once again, despite what you claim to be true about climate change, the vast majority of climate scientists (read, people who actually know what they're talking about) would strongly disagree with you and frankly, I'd believe what they're saying over the opinion of some bandwidth addict any day.

Another inconvenient truth:

http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2008/...ientists-rejecting-global-warming-hypothesis/

The list:

http://www.petitionproject.org/

Why don't you list your scientists and how much they earn as a result of "research" into global warming.

edit: missed this:

http://hummersandcigarettes.blogspot.com/2008/07/30000-scientists-say-global-warming-is.html

Humdinger

 

[BCO]

BlueCollar, I noticed that you did not comment on the temperature graphs. Inconvenient?

Read the comments in that article you linked to see how your blogger (WTF is Jack Lacton anyway?) gets pwned.

Gee, who am I to believe - the head of NASA's climate program and thousands of other climate scientists or a blogger from Australia?

 

[BCO]

From your own link:

It is evident that 31,072 Americans with university degrees in science - including 9,021 PhDs, are not “a few.” Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,072 American scientists are not “skeptics.”

Wow so 31 000 Americans with Bsc's disagree with the notion of anthropogenic climate change. It said NOTHING about whether these "degrees in science" had anything to do with climate systems.

You also mention that good old Heartland Institute claim about 500 "prominent scientists" disagreeing with GW. Read this:

http://www.desmogblog.com/500-scientists-with-documented-doubts-about-the-heartland-institute

Dozens of scientists are demanding that their names be removed from a widely distributed Heartland Institute article entitled 500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares.

Quoting bloggers isn't that convincing BTW...

 

[BandwidthAddict]

BlueCollar.

Tsk Tsk. Note the 9021 PhDs .. Did you see their qualifications? Did you open the link?

Have a look at some of those names and then come back to me with your religious ravings.

Who do I believe? Let us see, "scientists" who "benefit" from the political and social results of global warming scaremongering, OR, scientists who actually read the research papers these "climatologists" spew and say, wait a minute, 1 + 1 does not equal 3, this is bunk. Gee wiz, very difficult decision.

I still see that you have not given me your list and their source of funding.

Also, you mention my little graphs were "owned" but provide no reasoning for this. Pray tell, I am so stupid, I do need you to point out where these are wrong.

Help a poor idiot?

 

[BandwidthAddict]

I wonder what the alarmists think of this article?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/03/goddard_polar_ice/

Yeah .. the polar ice caps are melting .. they are melting and the earth will drown .. or not.

Even if the north polar ice caps melt, I doubt there will be flooding .. that ice is not on land, it FLOATS on the sea. Do some research about volume changes when ice cubes floating in water melt into the water.

But check here; our regular alarmist has this to say: http://mybroadband.co.za/vb//showpost.php?p=1871557&postcount=19

MUHAHAHAHAHA!!!

 

[BandwidthAddict]

Look people, global warming is a scam .. it's all about the carbon trading. Thing is, the other side of AGW has a very sinister outcome, there are people out there using AGW to KILL the western economies. THINK .. what will happen if the western economies collapse? Do you have any idea of the millions, possibly billions that will die of starvation?

Also, before going on about the bio-fuels, do some reading on how these are made and where the crops are grown. Think rising food prices.

In SA, people are starting to starve because they cannot afford food. This is due to at least four issues - biofuels reducing global food production, land redistribution, farm murders and fuel price.

We used to be mostly self-sufficient for our basic food needs but now we are net importers. Think ZIM. There are strikes happening now because of the food price issue and this is before the US and European economies have collapsed.

Make no bones about it .. there are insane people out there that actually believe that the west is evil and must be destroyed and they don't care how many have to die, or suffer as a consequence. We have a fair number of these evil morons on this site.

All sane people must ridicule and isolate these pests at every opportunity, they must not be taken seriously or this world will know suffering that you cannot imagine, far worse than any global disaster flick.

Be aware, be prepared and never show your back to them dangerous critters.

 

[pos(t)er]

i don't know much about it, but i've had this impression from the moment Al gore jumped on the wagon-that was a major scam alert for me.

 

[icyrus]

Look people, global warming is a scam .. it's all about the carbon trading. Thing is, the other side of AGW has a very sinister outcome, there are people out there using AGW to KILL the western economies. THINK .. what will happen if the western economies collapse? Do you have any idea of the millions, possibly billions that will die of starvation?

Also, before going on about the bio-fuels, do some reading on how these are made and where the crops are grown. Think rising food prices.

In SA, people are starting to starve because they cannot afford food. This is due to at least four issues - biofuels reducing global food production, land redistribution, farm murders and fuel price.

We used to be mostly self-sufficient for our basic food needs but now we are net importers. Think ZIM. There are strikes happening now because of the food price issue and this is before the US and European economies have collapsed.

Make no bones about it .. there are insane people out there that actually believe that the west is evil and must be destroyed and they don't care how many have to die, or suffer as a consequence. We have a fair number of these evil morons on this site.

All sane people must ridicule and isolate these pests at every opportunity, they must not be taken seriously or this world will know suffering that you cannot imagine, far worse than any global disaster flick.

Be aware, be prepared and never show your back to them dangerous critters.

You might convince more people of your position if you stuck to facts rather than hyperbole, grandstanding and paranoia.

 

[Alan]

Hello BlueCollar. Once again spouting GW religious crap.

Bluecollar a dubya fan

All hail the Goracle!!!

*Praise to the Goracle lest we all burn*

i don't know much about it, but i've had this impression from the moment Al gore jumped on the wagon-that was a major scam alert for me.

Especially when the bandwagon went right past him when he was VP and he conveniently managed not to spot it go by.

 

[BCO]

Another inconvenient truth:

http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2008/...ientists-rejecting-global-warming-hypothesis/

The list:

http://www.petitionproject.org/

Why don't you list your scientists and how much they earn as a result of "research" into global warming.

edit: missed this:

http://hummersandcigarettes.blogspot.com/2008/07/30000-scientists-say-global-warming-is.html

Humdinger

Ok, looking at your list of 31000 scientists:

Let's pick the first 5 people on the list -

1. Earl Aagaard. Field: Biology, interested explicitly in Intelligent Design. Relevant publications on climate change? None. (Just look at the University where he has tenure: Southern Adventist University with its mission to provide a quality Seventh-day Adventist Christian undergraduate education, emphasizing the balanced development of the spiritual, intellectual, physical, and social dimensions of men and women. Within the framework of a Christian understanding of the origin and workings of biological systems, the department seeks to provide opportunities for its academic and local communities to understand the value, process and limitations of scientific inquiry as well as to develop an awareness and understanding of the biological world and our responsibility to it. Its curricula are designed to provide students with high quality preparation for careers in the biological and biomedical professions. Quality
2. Charles W. Aami. Field: Unknown. I couldn’t find any person by that name in connection to any scientific field, let alone climate science. Relevant publications on climate change? None.
3. Roger L. Aamodt. Field: Oncology. Relevant publications on climate change? None.
4. Wilbur A. Aanes. Field: Veterinary surgery (specifically “large animal surgery”). Relevant publications on climate change? None (although he seems to be well-published on equine surgery, which I’m sure has some bearing on climate change).
5. M. Robert Aaron, DECEASED. Field: Telecommunications. Relevant publications on climate change? None.

Yeah these guys sure are authorities when it comes to global climate.

Who are "my scientists"?

Here's a list of some of the national science academies that endorse the IPCC findings in support of anthropogenic climate change:

* Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Brazil)
* Royal Society of Canada
* Chinese Academy of Sciences
* Academié des Sciences (France)
* Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
* Indian National Science Academy
* Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
* Science Council of Japan
* Russian Academy of Sciences
* Royal Society (United Kingdom)
* National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)
* Australian Academy of Sciences
* Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
* Caribbean Academy of Sciences
* Indonesian Academy of Sciences
* Royal Irish Academy
* Academy of Sciences Malaysia
* Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
* Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

As well as these private institutions:

* NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS)
* National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
* National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
* State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC)
* Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
* Royal Society of the United Kingdom (RS)
* American Geophysical Union (AGU)
* American Institute of Physics (AIP)
* National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)
* American Meteorological Society (AMS)
* Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS)

So again, who am I going to believe here? A bunch of "scientists" of the same calibre as some biologist from a Seventh Day Adventist university (?!) or the American Meteorological Society, The Royal Society etc?

The list of IPCC endorsers also puts paid to your notion that AGW proponents want to see the West fail - they're mostly western organisations who support the IPCC findings. Strange that.

BWA - why don't you show me some convincing evidence against AGW from a peer reviewed scientific journal written by people who are actual climate scientists? Please no blog posts by veterinarians claiming they know more about climate than the IPCC.

 

[HavocXphere]

How many international climate conferences have been convened since the "threat" was "discovered"? How much carbon was burnt getting to these conferences? How much was actually done?

I'm sure everyone would be interested in an feasible alternative approach you might have. Any solution would not only have to be technically sound, but also be reasonable enough so that politicians can support it without losing the next election.

And now for Kyoto .. If there is such a big problem, how come China, India, Africa, South America and all the BIG polluters are excempt? Only the western world seems to be a "problem". Why the "focus" on the western world? Did you know that China is either currently, or very soon to be, the biggest polluter in the world?

Those countries you mentioned are not entirely exempt, they are just afforded more leniency because they all happen to be developing countries.

I'm sure you know that Kyoto is voluntary, and consequently the politicians will only agree if the don't lose face, don't harm their next election or affect the economy negatively.

If you tell china to switch all their energy over to solar/whatever, then they will argue that the western nations were not disadvantage when the industrialized.

Consequently the only way to get the developing nations to agree to anything, it has to be fairly lenient. You cannot force a country which can't feed it's people to blow its (small) budget on solar panels.

When the chicken littles actually start acting like there is a problem, that's when I will take them seriously.

That's a curious way of evaluating whether something is a problem.

As for this James Hansen business, I'd just say that I don't give a @#$% what some Nasa dude does/doesn't do...it does not change the fact that there is a huge problem.

 

[BandwidthAddict]

BC

Where is your list of PEOPLE. You have quoted organisations, that are very political. Then you quote them endorsing the IPCC. Wow, political organisations that support a political document, who woulda thunk it! And yes, the IPCC is pure politics .. have you read how it was created? On top of that, two major components of the IPCC report have been debunked; the ice core data and the "hockey stick" graph.

Now, once again, where is your list of PEOPLE and where do they get their funding from?

You STILL have not debunked the original temp graphs.
You have NOT explained why the so called supporters of the theory find it ok to travel around in style.
You agreed that the polar ice caps are melting away BUT this year they are actually growing????? Oh yeah, except in those areas over the very active VOLCANOS!!! Oh yeah, volcanos are HOT, and heat melts ICE!! Wow!!
You also cannot explain carbon trading .. how come something that is so important to the world is a profit centre???? They should be doing this for FREE!!!!!!! I mean, WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE ANYWAY!!!
How come these big name stars that support the theory don't mind living on land that, by their reckoning, will end up in the sea? Cognitive dissonance?
How about 3000 deep sea probes that show that the sea has decreased in temperature over the last 5 years. I thought AGW was supposed to make the sea WARMER!!!

Also, if you won't listen to a biologist, how about the 40 climatologists on the list that reckon there is no consensus Typical leftie .. how about like vs like, but then you don't like those odds SCARE & SCAM .. you just want in on it .. admit it.

BTW .. I have noticed that the temperatures this year are well on track for being pretty much the same, if not a little colder, than the last couple of years. WHERE IS THE WARMENING?? Isn't GLOBAL warming supposed to be, well, GLOBAL!!!!!

 

[BCO]

Where is your list of PEOPLE. You have quoted organisations, that are very political. Then you quote them endorsing the IPCC. Wow, political organisations that support a political document, who woulda thunk it! And yes, the IPCC is pure politics .. have you read how it was created?

Now, once again, where is your list of PEOPLE and where do they get their funding from?

Also, if you won't listen to a biologist, how about the 40 climatologists on the list that reckon there is no consensus Typical leftie .. how about like vs like, but then you don't like those odds SCARE & SCAM .. you just want in on it .. admit it.

You want lists of climate scientists who endorse AGW? This is a fairly difficult task for me to do… why you might ask? Because unlike the material that denialists like to claim as solid evidence (like your lovely email petition, for example) most of the “consensus” scientific material is published in peer reviewed journals which I don’t have access to (not being at a university and all that).

It is a well-established fact that AGW is happening, and it would appear that most climate scientists are busy getting on with their jobs, trying to understand better the mode and tempo of climate change (How will it happen? How fast will it happen? not Is it happening? Or, did we cause it? – that’s already been established) rather than filling out email petitions. So I’m afraid that I can’t give you a list of every scientist who endorses climate change. What I can do is list some published climate scientists that I know of and you can feel free to do as much digging as you like into their credentials. I can also point out two peer reviewed meta-studies that indicate that the consensus view holds. See Bray & von Storch, 2003 and Orestes, 2004 (summary).
Here’s some consensus view climate scientists (all writers on the excellent Web site, realclimate.org):
Gavin A. Schmidt – climate modeller at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
Michael E. Mann – member of the Penn State University faculty, holding joint positions in the Departments of Meteorology and Geosciences, and the Earth and Environmental Systems Institute (ESSI). He is also director of the Penn State Earth System Science Center (ESSC).
Caspar Ammann – climate scientist working at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR).
Rasmus E. Benestad – Phil in physics from Atmospheric, Oceanic & Planetary Physics at Oxford University.
Ray Bradley – Director of the Climate System Research Center (www.paleoclimate.org) at the University of Massachusetts.
Etc etc (more here if you’re at all interested.

Now let’s look at the organizations I listed in my previous post. First let’s clarify something – institutions such as the Royal Society are not “political organizations” they are learned societies. Fundamental difference there. These are very prestigious organizations that have strict entry criterion – much more stringent than, say, an internet petition that simply requires that you have a degree in “science” from any “university” *cough* Seventh Day Adventist University, lol *cough*
Perhaps you should read up on how the membership, electoral process etc. of such societies work before claiming some grand conspiracy theory that the “left” (whoever that is) is collaborating with thousands of scientists on their payroll in order to make up a global warming scam which will enable them to overthrow the evil capitalist world order. Or maybe it’s the massive renewable energy sector that’s funding all these corrupt scientists? After all wind power makes a lot more money each year than the oil companies, right?

On top of that, two major components of the IPCC report have been debunked; the ice core data and the "hockey stick" graph.

Please provide at least some links to these claims before I bother replying.

You STILL have not debunked the original temp graphs.

I’m assuming you mean those graphs posted by the Aussie blogger?

You have NOT explained why the so called supporters of the theory find it ok to travel around in style.

Oh, so because Al Gore travels around “in style” that means every AGW supporter jet sets around the world in first class seats? As I said before, Al Gore and AGW are not interchangeable terms. Therefore, attacking Gore’s lifestyle has no bearing whatsoever on the science of climate change.

You agreed that the polar ice caps are melting away BUT this year they are actually growing????? Oh yeah, except in those areas over the very active VOLCANOS!!! Oh yeah, volcanos are HOT, and heat melts ICE!! Wow!!

Sources please.

You also cannot explain carbon trading .. how come something that is so important to the world is a profit centre???? They should be doing this for FREE!!!!!!! I mean, WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE ANYWAY!!!

I’m not entirely convinced on the benefits of carbon trading myself. Funny that you should be anti-carbon trading though, as it’s mostly “lefties” and treehuggers that see it as a means for governments and corporations to get off the hook in terms of their pollution outputs. Nevertheless, in principal it seems like a fairly plausible way to incentivize emissions reductions and penalize those who can’t meets emissions targets. Still, what exactly does this have to do with the science of climate change?

How come these big name stars that support the theory don't mind living on land that, by their reckoning, will end up in the sea? Cognitive dissonance?

I’m not sure how you expect me to answer for the lifestyle choices of these “big names stars”, nor how you expect me to immediately know exactly which “big name stars” you’re referring to.

How about 3000 deep sea probes that show that the sea has decreased in temperature over the last 5 years. I thought AGW was supposed to make the sea WARMER!!!

Again, please provide a source for your claim.

BTW .. I have noticed that the temperatures this year are well on track for being pretty much the same, if not a little colder, than the last couple of years. WHERE IS THE WARMENING?? Isn't GLOBAL warming supposed to be, well, GLOBAL!!!!!

Source. Dude, you can’t just make sweeping claims without providing some kind of evidence to back them up.

 

[BandwidthAddict]

Ooohh .. I must provide sources? When you do not? Your sources basically amount to "them be experts, me believe experts". Hey I know of a few expert car mechanics; they know how to fix cars but they mostly CHOOSE not to because they got a good scam going with the "regular" services.

Point 1. You have no answer to the temperature graphs which are considered accurate satellite thermal data. Instead you grasp at ad-hominem attacks on the messenger - "He is a blogger - not experty - ignore - la la la la". Fact is that the data shows NO warming at all, in fact shows a small cooling. This has been acknowledged by your "experts" who now say that it is a cooling time before the great warmening of 2020. Based on what?? COMPUTER MODELS!!! These same COMPUTER MODELS that cannot accurately forecast events of the past because thry cannot take into consideration things like cloud cover and other water vapour effects, ocean temperature shunts etc. By modelling standards, they are bunk. But hey, you can pray 5 times a day to the "perfect" models and their "perfect" prophets.

Point 2. The models predicted antartic ice thinning but when that did not happen, the models had to be revised for that fact. The antarctic is thickening. The models cannot cope with the cold air effect and ozone hole over the antarctic. Boo hoo. But they are perfect. We were supposed to see huge ice bergs off the Cape by now. Never happened.

Point 3. The seas were supposed to be getting higher. This has not happened. Now they say it will only start happening in 100 - 1000 years. Last century they were saying that we were supposed to see doom and gloom today.

Point 4. We were supposed to get horrendous storms like Katrina but on a bigger scale. Except, as it warmed, the storms abated and we had a very quiet season. Then it cooled and the storms returned.

Linky? Why bother when you can google. But then, any reality that differs from your own is just a conspiracy by the OIL companies to destroy this world. Problem is, the only people doing major damage right now are you enviro morons.

I am sitting right now in 3 degree temperature. This is totally normal for JHB at this time. WHERE IS THE WARMENING?

 

[Turtle]

... snip string of lies ... I am sitting right now in 3 degree temperature. This is totally normal for JHB at this time. WHERE IS THE WARMENING?

Funny, we're having what I think must be the warmest winter I can ever recall in over 30 years in Pretoria, we're past the shortest day and most the locals here joke that winter is 'about to start'. On probably most days I can literally sun myself outside wearing just shorts. The usual frosts that so far always killed so many of the grass and plants every year without fail, just haven't arrived this year, my crop plants e.g. tomatoes and chillis are still producing like it's summer (this has never happened before), most flowers are still flowering, most the plants are confused about what time of year it is, and we've had major rain and thunderstorms in the middle of winter like I've never seen before in over 30 years.

I would be very surprised if Joburg is as normal as you claim, given it's usually only about two degrees colder than Pretoria.

 

[Praeses]

Funny, we're having what I think must be the warmest winter I can ever recall in over 30 years in Pretoria, we're past the shortest day and most the locals here joke that winter is 'about to start'. On probably most days I can literally sun myself outside wearing just shorts. The usual frosts that so far always killed so many of the grass and plants every year without fail, just haven't arrived this year, my crop plants e.g. tomatoes and chillis are still producing like it's summer (this has never happened before), most flowers are still flowering, most the plants are confused about what time of year it is, and we've had major rain and thunderstorms in the middle of winter like I've never seen before in over 30 years.

I would be very surprised if Joburg is as normal as you claim, given it's usually only about two degrees colder than Pretoria.

Here in bloem we only had frost like...twice this winter, which is really odd! Back in primary school I remember how I felt the crackling underneath my (worn ) shoes almost every day for weeks!
Bloem is in a summer-rainfall region and we've had lots of rain and a rather hectic "hail-storm" this winter, and I recall how weird it was the past 3 years when we had winter rain which really poured all day/night.
/me looks at the green grass outside the window
Coincidence? Who knows...

 

[w1z4rd]

I really hope this happens soon. Humanity needs a wake up call slap. The death of billions should get that sorted out. Natural selection needs to run its course.