United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: If the evidence of global warming is so strong why does the left manufacture so much bogus data in an attempt to prove their fairytale?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Feb 2, 2011
Author: GATEWAY PUNDIT
Post Date: 2011-02-02 11:33:58 by no gnu taxes
Keywords: None
Views: 21090
Comments: 40
If the evidence of global warming is so strong why does the left manufacture so much bogus data in an attempt to prove their fairytale? This is what climate disruption global change (aka -weather) is really about… Ottmar Edenhofer, a German economist and co-chair of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change admits the group’s primary goal is the redistribution of wealth and not environmental protection or saving the Earth. http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/554439/201011191859/The-Climate-Cash-Cow.aspx Lets take a look at all the manufactured data by fraudulent people. Bogus Data by a bogus leftist… California (Hein Tran) grossly miscalculated pollution levels by 340% in a scientific analysis used to toughen the state’s clean-air standards http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/10/08/MNOF1FDMRV.DTL Bogus Data… UN climate change panel based claims on student dissertation and magazine article http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7111525/UN-climate-change-panel-based-claims-on-student-dissertation-and-magazine-article.html Bogus Data… UN pledges tighter controls after melting glaciers blunder http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/24/climate-change-un-row Bogus Data… A prime piece of evidence linking human activity to climate change turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics. http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/13830/ Bogus Data… The hockey stick hoax http://theblogprof.blogspot.com/2009/01/hockey-stick-hoax_5545.html Bogus Documents… Experts Say White House ‘Misrepresented’ Views to Justify Oil Drilling Moratorium http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/10/experts-say-obama-misrepresented-views-justify-offshore-drilling-ban/ Obama’s top science adviser, John P. Holdren, advocated the “de-development” of the United States http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/51702# What they want is to ‘save’ the planet from capitalism. In other words…fundamentally transform the world into communist governance.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: no gnu taxes (#0)
My opinion is the liberal/socialist types are a frightened group. Mostly they are scared stupid of having to take care of themselves. They want a nanny to take care of them; in this case it is socialist government. They are intentionally oblivious to the fact that socialism has been an abject failure throughout our history. Socialist "leaders" are very cognizant of this apparent mental malady of the dupes they use to satiate their greed for wealth and power. These ruthless people will employ any fraud that enhances their opportunities to bleed the dupes.
Well put.
Well, [war's] got to do something for attention, his multiple personalities aren't speaking to him any more, and his imaginary friends keep finding excuses not to come over.
So its a world wide conspiracy theory? Are the Freemasons behind this? Illuminati? Reptilian alien shape shifters?
"Keep Your Goddamn Government Hands Off My Medicare!" - Various Tea Party signs.
"Two eyes, two ears, a chin, a mouth, 10 fingers, two nipples, a butt, two kneecaps, a penis. I have just described to you the Loch-Ness Monster, and the reward for its capture...all the riches in Scotland. So I have one question, why are you here"
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
The perpetrators of the climate doom hoaxes is the sniveling, neo-hippy, yuppie, liberal/socialist dupes who are so frightened of every boogeyman their political gods create to control them that they cower happily in their ignorance not realizing they will be the first fatalities when the SHTF.
Nope. Its between the leftists of the world. The same leftist who said in 2007 that snowing is becoming an endangered phenomena are now saying the blizzards we are experiencing is the result of global warming. Get your damn stories straight. Doesn't the evidence of your own eyes tell yo anything?
Well, [war's] got to do something for attention, his multiple personalities aren't speaking to him any more, and his imaginary friends keep finding excuses not to come over.
He said no such thing. What he said was that climate policy will redistribute the world's wealth away from oil and coal producers. It's kind of ironic that you, as one of the biggest pushers of false information, are complaining about what you perceive as false information.
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
The Pentagon is infested with "sniveling, neo-hippy, yuppie, liberal/socialist dupes who cower"..... "Keep Your Goddamn Government Hands Off My Medicare!" - Various Tea Party signs.
What have you got to say about the false information in the video #6?
Well, [war's] got to do something for attention, his multiple personalities aren't speaking to him any more, and his imaginary friends keep finding excuses not to come over.
LOL!! Does that surprise you?
Bullshit. I call you climate phonies on your pack of prevarications.
Sorry, unlike yourself I don't get my climate predictions from politicians or tv/radio personalities. I prefer folks who make these sorts of predictions: Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
I call you climate phonies on your pack of prevarications. And there are no weather sensors in the artic [sic] right?
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
"The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War." "climate policy is redistributing the world's wealth" ...it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization." He admits this "has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole."
Neither do I. As usual, you skirt the question and throw dust into the air to cloud the fact you know nothing about meteorology or science in general. Its all agenda-based hype that doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
Well, [war's] got to do something for attention, his multiple personalities aren't speaking to him any more, and his imaginary friends keep finding excuses not to come over.
That's not what I said, but you are too dumb to get it. Weather sensors in the Arctic are few and far between, and NONE (or so few as to be inconsequential) are located in remote, inland high areas which would give true measures of the temperature outside the populated coastal UHI where the sensors are located. If you think the sensors in the populated UHI areas correlate with those (which supposedly exist) in the high remote areas, simply provide the exact location of the sensors in both areas and demonstrate how the same readings are obtained in both areas.
so we just ignore the satellite data then?
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
When your argument boils down to "damn the data, it's all a massive conspiracy involving tens of thousands of people, thousands of institutions, and multiple data sets" you have put yourself in the same group of people who think the government carried out the 9/11 attacks.
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
satellites? Oh, you mean commie sputnik devices......
"Keep Your Goddamn Government Hands Off My Medicare!" - Various Tea Party signs.
Yesterday he argued that a sensor in a 2700 sq mile island with a population of 300 was urban.
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
CONCLUSIONS Analysis of the satellite data shows a statistically significant cooling trend for the past 12 to 13 years, with it not being possible to reject a flat trend (0 slope) for between 16 and 23 years. This is a length of time at which disagreement with climate models can no longer be attributed to simple LTP. On the other hand, studies cited herein have documented a 50–70 year cycle of climate oscillations overlaid on a simple linear warming trend since the mid-1800s and have used this model to forecast cooling beginning between 2001 and 2010, a prediction that seems to be upheld by the satellite and ocean heat content data. Other studies made this same prediction of transition to cooling based on solar activity indices or from ocean circulation regime changes. In contrast, the climate models predict the recent flat to cooling trend only as a rare stochastic event. The linear warming trend in these models that is obtained by subtracting the 60–70 yr cycle, while unexplained at present, is clearly inconsistent with climate model predictions because it begins too soon (before greenhouse gases were elevated) and does not accelerate as greenhouse gases continue to accumulate. This model and the empirical evidence for recent cooling thus provide a challenge to climate model accuracy.
You never provide a source for these sorts of claims, why is that? Give me the source if you want me to respond. Otherwise, I'll simply assume that you made up the data/charts much in the same way the chart you posted yesterday showing one chart overlayed on another was simply made up.
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
Never mind, a quick google found the source - Anthony Watts. Chuckle. The author of the study is Craig Loehle, a forestry scientist considered an expert by the Heartland institute. He works directly for the paper industry to spin their view of climate change, and who's past efforts are chock full of mistakes. (Watts even published a correction of the above data you cited). http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/12/past-reconstructions/ Every time you post this B.S. data it is either blatantly false, not peer reviewed, or authored by a shill for industries trying to undercut climate change theory for economic gain. Keep at it. You keep embarrassing yourself.
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
Watts doesn't doctor the data he uses and fudge his models like Hanson et al. What Hanson does was proven and you still deny it. And the correction you cite was evidence of his honesty, even though it was inconsequential to his point.
Spin? Talk about ignoring the data. These maps and graphs make it clear just how brazen the fraud of the Hockey Stick is. It’s clear that the world was warmer during medieval times. Marked on the map are study after study (all peer-reviewed) from all around the world with results of temperatures from the medieval time compared to today. These use ice cores, stalagmites, sediments, and isotopes. They agree with 6,144 boreholes around the world which found that temperatures were about 0.5°C warmer world wide. What follows is a sordid tale of a graph that overthrew decades of work, conveniently fitted the climate models, and was lauded triumphantly in glossy publication after publication. But then it was crushed when an unpaid analyst stripped it bare. It had been published in the highest most prestigious journal, Nature, but no one had checked it before or after it was spread far and wide. Not Nature, not the IPCC, not any other climate researcher. In 1995 everyone agreed the world was warmer in medieval times, but CO2 was low then and that didn’t fit with climate models. In 1998, suddenly Michael Mann ignored the other studies and produced a graph that scared the world — tree rings show the “1990’s was the hottest decade for a thousand years”. Now temperatures exactly “fit” the rise in carbon! The IPCC used the graph all over their 2001 report. Government departments copied it. The media told everyone. But Steven McIntyre was suspicious. He wanted to verify it, yet Mann repeatedly refused to provide his data or methods — normally a basic requirement of any scientific paper. It took legal action to get the information that should have been freely available. Within days McIntyre showed that the statistics were so flawed that you could feed in random data, and still make the same hockey stick shape nine times out of ten. Mann had left out some tree rings he said he’d included. If someone did a graph like this in a stock prospectus, they would be jailed. In 2009 McIntyre did it again with Briffa’s Hockey Stick. After asking and waiting three years for the data, it took just three days to expose it too as baseless. For nine years Briffa had concealed that he only had 12 trees in the sample from 1990 onwards, and that one freakish tree virtually transformed the graph. When McIntyre graphed another 34 trees from the same region of Russia, there was no Hockey Stick. The sharp upward swing of the graph was due to one single tree in Yamal. Skeptical scientists have literally hundreds of samples. Unskeptical scientists have one tree in Yamal, and a few flawed bristlecones… It was an audacious fraud. Climate models don’t know why it was warmer 800 years ago. The models are wrong. The so-called “expert review” is meaningless. The IPCC say 2,500 experts review their reports, but those same “experts” made the baseless Hockey Stick graph their logo in 2001.
Again, non-sourced charts/data, and Loehle recreation had numerous flaws. Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
The skeptic argument: Hockey stick is broken http://www.skepticalscience.com/broken-hockey-stick.htm What the science says... Links to numerous recreations and source data at URL above.
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
Wattergate: Tamino debunks “just plain wrong” Anthony Watts Anthony Watts: Disastrously Wrong Again
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
Unfortunately, for Watts, this bias turned out to be exact opposite of the one that he predicted. The poor quality sites included in the USCHN, and identified by Watts, have actually imparted a cooling bias on the raw US surface temperature record since the 1980’s for reasons relating to changes in the instrumentation used to create the records. http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ushcn/v2/monthly/menne-etal2010.pdf
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
You can use all you moonbat bullshit sites with their fabricated crap to support their worthless theory all you want, but these are the facts and they are not in dispute: -- In 2009 McIntyre did it again with Briffa’s Hockey Stick. After asking and waiting three years for the data, it took just three days to expose it too as baseless. For nine years Briffa had concealed that he only had 12 trees in the sample from 1990 onwards, and that one freakish tree virtually transformed the graph. When McIntyre graphed another 34 trees from the same region of Russia, there was no Hockey Stick. The sharp upward swing of the graph was due to one single tree in Yamal. Skeptical scientists have literally hundreds of samples. Unskeptical scientists have one tree in Yamal, and a few flawed bristlecones… It was an audacious fraud. Climate models don’t know why it was warmer 800 years ago. The models are wrong. The so-called “expert review” is meaningless. The IPCC say 2,500 experts review their reports, but those same “experts” made the baseless Hockey Stick graph their logo in 2001.
wrong
that describes McIntyre aptly.
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
Are you not aware that the PIPS computer model only extends down to 50 degrees latitude and doesn't include ice trends between 50-80 degrees where places like Hudson Bay reside? I didn't think so.....
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
The map shows the Hudson Bay and shows increases in ice there.
take another look, the PIPS computer model shows increasing ice at the cap, shrinking ice in numerous other places. And hudson bay has had less ice than usual this winter: http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/12/arctic-ice-growth-stalls-as-europe-shivers.ars Note that the ars technica article is based on actual observation while PIPS is a computer model. And there's a reason why the author picked 2009 as a start point, melting was much greater in 2007 and 2008.
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
Reread the legend. It's increasing everywhere, except perhaps in a very small area of Siberia.
re-watch the animation, more areas of green at the caps, rapidly receding ice in Asia and between Canada and Greenland. And again, note that they didn't include 2007-08. Here's why: Here's the PIPS long-term data: Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
rapidly receding ice in Asia and between Canada and Greenland. There is no doubt that in most areas, even away from the poles, it is increasing, not decreasing. And again, note that they didn't include 2007-08. They didn't include 1922, either.
If the evidence of global warming is so strong why does the left manufacture so much bogus data in an attempt to prove their fairytale?
#2. To: eskimo (#1)
#3. To: eskimo, no gnu taxes, Rudgear, go65 (#1)
#4. To: Godwinson (#3)
So its a world wide conspiracy theory? Are the Freemasons behind this? Illuminati? Reptilian alien shape shifters?
#5. To: Godwinson (#3)
#6. To: Godwinson (#3)
So its a world wide conspiracy theory? Are the Freemasons behind this? Illuminati? Reptilian alien shape shifters?
#7. To: no gnu taxes, rudgear, godwinson (#0)
Ottmar Edenhofer, a German economist and co-chair of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change admits the group’s primary goal is the redistribution of wealth and not environmental protection or saving the Earth.
#8. To: eskimo, go65, Rudgear (#5)
e perpetrators of the climate doom hoaxes is the sniveling, neo-hippy, yuppie, liberal/socialist dupes who are so frightened of every boogeyman their political gods create to control them that they cower happily in their ignorance not realizing they will be the first fatalities when the SHTF.
#9. To: go65 (#7)
(Edited)
It's kind of ironic that you, as one of the biggest pushers of false information, are complaining about what you perceive as false information.
#10. To: Godwinson (#8)
The Pentagon is infested with "sniveling, neo-hippy, yuppie, liberal/socialist dupes who cower".....
#11. To: go65 (#7)
one of the biggest pushers of false information
#12. To: Rudgear (#9)
What have you got to say about the false information in the video #6?
In the meantime, we can venture two "predictions" on "whither U.S. climate". First, regarding U.S. temperature, we have argued (Hansen et al., 1999a) that the next decade will be warmer than the 1990s, rivaling if not exceeding the 1930s. The basis for that prediction is the expectation of continued greenhouse warming and probable slackening of regional ocean cooling. Second, regarding precipitation and drought, even without analysis of regional patterns of change, we can offer the probabilistic statement that the frequencies of both extremes, heavy precipitation and floods on the one hand and droughts and forest fires on the other, will increase with increasing global temperature. The rationale for this (Hansen et al., 1991) is that increased surface heating increases evaporation, and this increases the intensity of both precipitation and drought conditions where and when they occur.
James Hansen, Reto Ruedy, Jay Glascoe and Makiko Sato — August 1999
#13. To: no gnu taxes (#11)
Bullshit.
#14. To: go65 (#7)
#15. To: go65 (#12)
#16. To: go65 (#13)
And there are no weather sensors in the artic
#17. To: no gnu taxes (#16)
Weather sensors in the Arctic are few and far between, and NONE (or so few as to be inconsequential) are located in remote, inland high areas which would give true measures of the temperature outside the populated coastal UHI where the sensors are located.
#18. To: Rudgear (#15)
(Edited)
Neither do I. As usual, you skirt the question and throw dust into the air to cloud the fact you know nothing about meteorology or science in general. Its all agenda-based hype that doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
#19. To: go65, no gnu taxes (#17)
so we just ignore the satellite data then?
#20. To: Godwinson, no gnu taxes (#19)
satellites? Oh, you mean commie sputnik devices......
#21. To: go65 (#17)
#22. To: no gnu taxes (#21)
CONCLUSIONS
#23. To: no gnu taxes (#21)
CONCLUSIONS
#24. To: go65 (#23)
(Edited)
Every time you post this B.S. data
#25. To: no gnu taxes (#0)
(Edited)
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. -- Winston Churchill
#26. To: go65 (#23)
The author of the study is Craig Loehle, a forestry scientist considered an expert by the Heartland institute. He works directly for the paper industry to spin their view of climate change, and who's past efforts are chock full of mistakes.
#27. To: no gnu taxes (#26)
Figure 1: Northern Hemisphere Temperature Reconstruction by Moberg et al. (2005) shown in blue, Instrumental Temperatures from NASA shown in Red.
#28. To: no gnu taxes (#26)
"In 2003 Professor McKitrick teamed with a Canadian engineer, Steve McIntyre, in attempting to replicate the hockey stick and debunked it as statistical nonsense. They revealed how the chart was derived from 'collation errors, unjustified truncation or extrapolation of source data, obsolete data, incorrect principal component calculations, geographical mislocations and other serious defects', substantially affecting the temperature index." (John McLaughlin)
Since the hockey stick paper in 1998, there have been a number of proxy studies analysing a variety of different sources including corals, stalagmites, tree rings, boreholes and ice cores. They all confirm the original hockey stick conclusion: the 20th century is the warmest in the last 1000 years and that warming was most dramatic after 1920.
#29. To: no gnu taxes (#24)
Watts doesn't doctor the data he uses and fudge his models like Hanson et al.
Pseudo-scientist Anthony Watts of the “Watts Up With That” climate change denial blog posted a bold prediction earlier this year — he said this summer would decisively show that the polar ice cap had stopped declining. He guaranteed this, in fact.
Now the scientific measurements have been taken, and the results are in, and Watts’s prediction is revealed as the denialist propaganda it is; in fact, polar ice has declined to historically low levels, and this summer, both the Northwest Passage and the Northeast Passage were completely clear of ice for the first time in recorded history. Watts is a hack and a fraud, posing as a scientist to feed his right wing audience the soothing false claims they want to hear.
#30. To: no gnu taxes, godwinson (#29)
By examining what has rapidly become the climate change deniers’ holy grail, the raw, uncorrected, temperature data for all the stations that Watts’ had assessed up to the point at which they started work (43% of the total number of sites included in the USHCN), Menne and his co-authors did, indeed, find clear evidence of a bias in the raw data associated with those sites that Watts had assessed as being of poor quality.
#31. To: go65 (#27)
#32. To: go65 (#29)
olar ice has declined to historically low levels
#33. To: no gnu taxes (#31)
It was an audacious fraud.
#34. To: no gnu taxes (#32)
#35. To: no gnu taxes (#32)
#36. To: go65 (#35)
Are you not aware that the PIPS computer model only extends down to 50 degrees latitude and doesn't include ice trends between 50-80 degrees where places like Hudson Bay reside?
#37. To: no gnu taxes (#36)
(Edited)
The map shows the Hudson Bay and shows increases in ice there.
#38. To: go65 (#37)
(Edited)
he PIPS computer model shows increasing ice at the cap,
#39. To: no gnu taxes (#38)
(Edited)
Reread the legend.
#40. To: go65 (#39)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]