AGW-Anthrogenic Global Warming

[EddieWalker]

I don't know that climate scientists are destroying and fudging data. And I certainly don't think they're all engaged in that kind of thing.

I'm not the brightest bulb in the chandelier IH but I do work with allot of very smart people and when it comes to getting them to agree on something I think I'd rather try to herd cats.

I'm sure that there are many climate scientists who have doubts and concerns about the methodology being used to model earth's climate. But I also think there are enormous financial interests in maintaining the status quo with regard to how we source the world's energy needs.

It's coming out that they have in fact fudged the data to get the results that they want. While I agree that not all of them are doing this, those who are in charge sure are.

Hot Air Blog Archive NOAA/GHCN “homogenization” falsified climate declines into increases

This also includes NASA, who's in allot of hot water over their changes in what year was the hottest on record.

NASA BACKTRACKS ON 1998 WARMEST YEAR CLAIM

On Co2

Global Warming Hoax: News / Comments / Debunking the CO2 Feedback Myth - by Leonard Weinstein, ScD

And one of the best articles on how they fudged the date, read

Climategate reveals 'the most influential tree in the world' - Telegraph

It's all coming out. Every day, more and more information about how they peer reviewed each other, hid and changed the original data and cherry picked what data they needed to get the results they wanted.

Just ask why they destroyed the orignal data at the University of East Anglia. For years, they refused to provide this date to the scientist who were requesting it under Britains version of the Freedom of Information Act. They wanted to do independent studies to see if they were right. Science is only sound when it can be duplicated, and one of the biggest red flags to Global Warming science is that it cannot be duplicated. Junk in, junk out.

Climate change data dumped - Times Online

Remember, just because allot of people believe something, that doesn't mean it's correct. Science is not about a concensus, it's only about the facts. If you have to lie and fabricate your "facts," then it's not true. AGW is not true.

The planet warms and cools on it's own. It's been hotter in the past then it is now. NASA has admitted that it was warmer in the 1930's then it is today. Why was it warmer then, when there was fewer people, fewer sources of so called Carbon Polution? Then there is the Midevil Warming Period 1,000 years ago where Greenland was farmed and not covered in ice. Why was the planet so much warmer back then? It had to be warmer back then because Greenland wasn't covered in ice.

The so called Hockey Stick graph relied on ingoring the Midevil Warm Period. This was left out on purpose to mislead everyone that we are now in an extreme warming period that has never happened before. More proof that the scientist in charge have and will lie to support their beliefs, and ignore the facts available to them.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/monckton/monckton_what_hockey_stick.pdf


Eddie

 

[Redneck in training]

Plants just love CO2. If we are worried about cutting down the rain forest, the CO2 will cause it to grow all over again. The earth has a way of returning to the state it likes. In 1900 less than 10% of New York state was forested. In 2000 over 60% of the state is forest land, and I'm sure that is true in many eastern states.

The farmers quit farming and nature returns to what it likes.

That is true about USA. I found aerial pictures of my land from 1935. Only the big oak trees were present. When I bought it there was about 30 acres of forest. This is not necessarily true in the rest of the world though. As population increases the jungle is disappearing very fast. I was driving between Bintulu and Miri on Borneo few years back. The jungle is mostly gone replaced by oil palm plantations. My estimation is the area is about 5000 sq miles. All in name of development. Now the jungle is gone and the people living there are not better of than before. But that is another topic altogether.
The biggest problem humans face is population growth. The nature will find new balance for sure. The question is if we would like the new balance.

If you get away from the politics of the green movement there is still good reason to switch to different source of energy. China makes 10 or 20 million cars per year, India as well. Standard of living in Asian countries is rising quite fast. It will put a pressure on oil demand. We will not run out of oil anytime soon. We will just run out of cheap oil.

 

[EddieWalker]

There is a lot of 'cherry picking' of data going on here. No doubt by people on both sides of the issue.

It's hard to ignore melting ice sheets though, and that is an observable fact, it's rather easy to distinguish between ice and water It isn't subject to interpretation.

I try to use common sense. There are many indicators the earth's climate is warming from insects to ice. Whether people influence it seems to be the issue. It would be nice to know the total CO2 and other gases injected into the atomosphere annually expressed as 40,000 lb tractor-trailer loads. That would be a good perspective. I'll try to find a ballpark number.

Some scientist's think increased CO2 would be 'good' for us apparently. I want no part of that academic ivory-tower inspired science experiment. Thanks but no thanks. That sort of thinking always leads to big problems.
Dave.

While I agree with you that if these things were actully happening, it might be a reason to be concerned, what we now know for a fact, is that the scientist providing us with this information have been lying about it all along. They have ignored warmer periods and have exagerated how much ice has melted.

Global Warming Hoax: News / Comments / The Truth About Arctic and Greenland Ice - by Leonard Weinstein, ScD

What we know for sure is that we don't know anything for sure. They have been caught fudging the numbers and outright lying about what is happening with the planet.

Eddie

 

[IH3444]

Dave, the sun heats both the earth, and Mars. Research solar cycles, and the amount of data available from solar scientist.

A russian solar scientist predicted in 2005, that we would enter a solar minimum cycle much deeper than the previous cycles. He also predected we would go into a 20 year cooling cycle begining in 2007.

Give it a few more years, until the repeat of the next great ice age predictions will start...hehehehehe

 

[eepete]

Let me go where angels fear to tread...

There are things you can observe that show there is climate change going on. Glaciers are receding, ocean temperatures are up, and CO2 levels are up. This means we'll have more intense hurricanes and larger weather swings. No models, no guesses, no projections this is stuff you can see and measure and compare with simple recorded historical data.

Here's where I upset people. I don't care why. It's hard enough to agree on what to do and then some people also want to have everyone agree on why. The only reason to have people agree on why is to garner power. So what do you do about all this? Well, we can all build buildings that are stronger and better insulated. Better insulated means more money up front, but less energy used down the road.

Speaking of energy, there is another problem headed our way. The BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India and China) are waking up the Western worlds way of doing things, and that takes energy. So the cost of energy is going up a lot in the next generation due to simple supply and demand economics. Oil and gas won't last forever, even coal has a 500 year limit. And coal is rough on the environment both mining and burning.
IMHO, conserving your way out of an energy crisis is like telling someone who is starving that if they eat less it will all be OK. Energy is critical to quality of life. It makes clean water, runs hospitals, keeps the children and the elderly comfortable, etc.
I think we should stop burning fossil fuels for fixed use site. It'g got the best weight to BTU of anything going, and should only be used for mobile applications (like tractors!). We should electrify all our major rail lines. Right now in the US, our entire distribution network is influenced by the cost of diesel. In the next 30 years we could help cushion ourselves while providing infrastructure jobs as we electrify the rail system. Cars getting better milage and plug in hybrids cuts fuel use. In 30 years when gas is $20 per gallon, that will be a big win. Let's react before we get wacked. And lets get nuclear going with the centralized processing of fuel, disposal of waste, and single plant design so the cost goes down and lessons learned can be applied. There are some inherently safe designs that look good.

I'm adding solar cells to the house (there will be a post on this when it's done). It has a payback time of less than 10 years. Government tax credits make it possible (thanks to y'all for your contribution to my project!), but every energy business gets lots of tax credits. The cells are made in Japan, shipped to the US where the panels (extruded aluminum) are made. The mounting rails are made in the USA. The mounting hardware (stainless) is made in the USA. That's about as good as it gets for now in the global economy we are in. In our free enterprise system, I'm doing this because it makes economic sense. Governments should make level fields that encourage these sorts of things, not create a penalty system of taxes. More flies with honey than vinegar.
Note also that solar cells help out the aging power distribution network in the US, a hidden cost of higher electric prices to come. Instead of more power lines, more panels. As for higher cost of panels and if they can be afforded, I ask the following: Why can we spend 200B$ to bail out banks but not spend that same amount of money to put 2KW of solar cells on 40 million homes? Suddenly the peak load during the summer afternoons goes away. It would be nice if there was a 40 year mortgage that would be used to make houses better insulated and have solar panels, but the industry that could have helped the country get there would rather help itself to quick profits. I know solar panels don't work everywhere, can't solve this problem in one post, the panels are one example of solutions we can work towards now.

So we don't have to agree about if there is global warming or not. There are clear signs of where the weather and prices are going. Deal with everything that makes good economic sense and creates jobs. Stop using a great chemical resource (oil and gas) for fixed location use. Increase efficiency (MPG) of cars realizing that fuel cost are going up due to global demand. Make more energy with non carbon based options because having lots of energy rocks! Long term sustainability means energy independence and more of our energy dollars and jobs staying at home.

It's a lot of work, but how else can the price of diesel be kept low enough that we can all get more seat time. We are all so busy arguing about the problem that we aren't working on any solutions.

Pete

 

[texbaylea]

I haven't posted in awhile but have been reading all that has been said. Here is an article by a man who knows what he is talking about.

Hurricane Expert Rips Climate Fears: 'There has been an unrelenting quarter century of one-sided indoctrination' | Climate Depot

Also I have been wondering where all the "killer" hurricanes forecasted by the global warming group?

Vernon

 

[texbaylea]

A comment: Have you noticed how, about a year ago, that the buzz word became climate change rather than global warming. I had the reaction that the AGW gurus were preparing to swing the other way if AGW blew up in there faces. Some have already made the switch from coming ice age to AGW when they could not get traction for coming ice age.

Governments love AGW since it gives them a beautiful excuse for more taxes. And controls on people. Do I dare mention "Public Option Health Care"

Vernon

 

[keegs]

The bakery down the street from our place in Maine uses electric ovens. The owner installed a wind turbine last spring. I was told from someone in town that startup costs for the turbine was about 75k. In August the owner of the bakery told me that the turbine was generating almost all her electricity needs and that her bill had been approx. 1.1k per month prior to installation of the turbine. She anticipated it would generate a surplus during fall and winter months when average wind speeds increase.

 

[dave1949]

While I agree with you that if these things were actully happening, it might be a reason to be concerned, what we now know for a fact, is that the scientist providing us with this information have been lying about it all along. They have ignored warmer periods and have exagerated how much ice has melted.

Global Warming Hoax: News / Comments / The Truth About Arctic and Greenland Ice - by Leonard Weinstein, ScD

What we know for sure is that we don't know anything for sure. They have been caught fudging the numbers and outright lying about what is happening with the planet.

Eddie

Do you really think a site named globalwarminghoax will provide an unbiased view? The graphs on the page show one thing for sure, global temps rising. Does it really matter if they rise consistently in a straight line? I don't think so.

The results of seemingly minor temperature changes are subtle. Think of insects that keep moving north where they couldn't before, think about bird migrations that occur earlier than before. Think about cargo ships crossing the Arctic Sea in summer where they couldn't earlier. I see these as 'canaries in the coal mine', they are real, undisputable facts that don't come from emails, scientists, Al Gore or pro/con websites. A glacier that is receding is real and you can see it with your own two eyes. There is an old Irish saying - 'Who are you going to believe, me or your own lieing eyes?' We are each of us, more prone to indoctrination than we think possible.

Sure there are a lot of people getting rich or their 15 mins. of fame on both sides of this issue. You think the controversy hurts their bottom line? Heck no, the longer they can feed the issue the wealthier they become. That doesn't change any facts on the ground however.

In the end, whether the earth is warming, cooling or neither, we are running this orb at about full capacity. We really need to understand how to deal with the ecological systems we depend upon or there will be many fewer of us in the future living very degraded lives. We will have our own period of extinction someday, it is not an 'if', but a 'when'. Until then, we should make the best of what we have.
Dave.

 

[charlz]

The results of seemingly minor temperature changes are subtle. Think of insects that keep moving north where they couldn't before, think about bird migrations that occur earlier than before. Think about cargo ships crossing the Arctic Sea in summer where they couldn't earlier. I see these as 'canaries in the coal mine', they are real, undisputable facts that don't come from emails, scientists, Al Gore or pro/con websites. A glacier that is receding is real and you can see it with your own two eyes.

Why is change automatically bad????