More Global Warming

[MuyLocoNC]

if MMGW is such a hoax and so phony, why do only 1-2% of papers come to that conclusion?

if the science is so unsettled, who do less than 1% say they're uncertain?



i see you've finally realized that taking no position whatsoever is quite different from saying they're uncertain.

let's play a game: for every paper you can show me that says global warming is not caused by human activities, i'll show you 30 more that state the exact opposite!

wanna play? or are you too busy trying to figure out what happened to that 14 point romney lead?

I like this game better. For every paper supporting MMGW, I'll show you 2.33 that couldn't or wouldn't reach that conclusion. Odd for a conclusion that is so obvious and enjoys such a consensus.

I guess the ~70 papers that couldn't/wouldn't reach such an obvious conclusion were all working for oil companies. Or maybe they took the time to research the subject, looked at the evidence, took the time write the papers, but decided not to implicate humans because those scientists just aren't "joiners". It's either the big oil theory, the not joiners theory or the evidence simply didn't support the MMGW conclusion.

Game over. Don't worry, you'll still get your participation trophy.

 

[Wavels]

Well,some retired NASA employees are sick and tired of the absurd un-scientific gibberish being used to support the canard of ACC or AGW.
They do not want NASA to be associated with the politically driven agenda masquerading as "consensus" and "settled" science.


The Climate Change Nazis are not going to like this.
They will attempt to delegitimize these guys in the same puerile manner which has become their means of thoughtful rebuttal.







The planet is not in danger of catastrophic man made global warming. Even if we burn all the world's recoverable fossil fuels it will still only result in a temperature rise of less than 1.2 degrees C.

So say The Right Climate Stuff Research Team, a group of retired NASA Apollo scientists and engineers - the men who put Neil Armstrong on the moon - in a new report.
"It's an embarrassment to those of us who put NASA's name on the map to have people like James Hansen popping off about global warming," says the project's leader Hal Doiron.
Doiron was one of 40 ex NASA employees - including seven astronauts - who wrote in April 2012 to NASA administrator Charles Bolden protesting about the organization's promotion of climate change alarmism, notably via its resident environmental activist James Hansen.

Using calculations by George Stegemeier of the National Academy of Engineering, they estimated the total quantity of recoverable oil, gas and coal on the planet. They then used 163 years of real world temperature data to calculate Transient Climate Sensitivity (ie how much the world will warm as a result of the burning of all the carbon dioxide in the fossil fuel). The figure they came up with 1.2 degrees C which is considerably lower than the wilder claims of the IPCC, whose reports have suggested it could be as high as 4 degrees C or more.
This is because, as scientists such as the Cato Institute's Pat Michaels have long argued, "climate sensitivity" (ie how the planet's temperature responds to CO2 emissions) is considerably lower than the IPCC's computer models project. So much so that it should be called "climate insensitivity", he believes.
Doiron is similarly sceptical of the computer models used by climate alarmists. He and his team argue that the 105 models currently used by the IPCC are seriously flawed because they don't agree with each other and don't agree with empirical data.
There is no empirical data indicating Anthropogenic Global Warming will produce catastrophic climate changes. AGW can only produce modest global warming, likely to be beneficial when CO2 benefits to crop production are considered.
Doiron says: "I believe in computer models. My whole career was about using computer models to make life or death decisions. In 1963 I had to use them to calculate whether, when the lunar module landed on a 12 degree slope it would fall over or not - and design the landing gear accordingly. But if you can't validate the models - and the IPCC can't - then don't use them to make critical decisions about the economy and the planet's future."

 

[MuyLocoNC]

You think bad weather means climate change isn't happening when every single scientific model predicts more extreme weather patterns because of climate change.

And by "every" you mean every model that supports MMGW. How awesome for you that the perpetrators of the scam can use the same faulty, agenda-driven models to support their agenda's position that everything that happens can be blamed on MMGW. Proof that if you feed in the right data or set the right parameters, you can get any result you want. Models, lol.

Temps fall:MMGW, temps flatten:MMGW, Temps increase:MMGW, heat wave:MMGW, cold snap:MMGW, tornadoes:MMGW, hurricanes:MMGW, drought:MMGW, floods:MMGW, ice age:MMGW

So convenient. A non-zealot might look at that and find it a bit suspect.

 

[Doer]

And by "every" you mean every model that supports MMGW. How awesome for you that the perpetrators of the scam can use the same faulty, agenda-driven models to support their agenda's position that everything that happens can be blamed on MMGW. Proof that if you feed in the right data or set the right parameters, you can get any result you want. Models, lol.

Temps fall:MMGW, temps flatten:MMGW, Temps increase:MMGW, heat wave:MMGW, cold snap:MMGW, tornadoes:MMGW, hurricanes:MMGW, drought:MMGW, floods:MMGW, ice age:MMGW

So convenient. A non-zealot might look at that and find it a bit suspect.

Don't worry we have laws against all this. Just now the harm is being established in Courts. I am really surprised there is no backlash about anit-GMO yet. But, compared to this, GMO is mouse nuts, and to kncck down the the Climate Sagaist and take their money, is a killer blow to the mouse nuts Saganists as well. It can snowball against the Gun-nut Saganists.

And I hope I do my part in that.

 

[Doer]

The slight differnce between me and you, Muy, is that I don't expect logic or shame or sorry from any Saganists.

What will happen however, is they will be pushed back by Law.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

But if you can't validate the models - and the IPCC can't - then don't use them to make critical decisions about the economy and the planet's future."

Somebody hasn't been drinking his liberal-mandated koolaid. Didn't you get the memo? We're putting new cover sheets on all the TPC reports before they go out. So if you could go ahead and try to remember to do that from now on, that'd be great. MmmKay?

 

[heckler73]

Well,some retired NASA employees are sick and tired of the absurd un-scientific gibberish being used to support the canard of ACC or AGW.
They do not want NASA to be associated with the politically driven agenda masquerading as "consensus" and "settled" science.

I thought NASA was up to something.
As I remarked in an earlier thread, the stuff coming out of NASA these days is not "toeing the line" in regards to ACC.
I thought it was just my imagination, and I'm glad to see it was not.

 

[Doer]

I thought NASA was up to something.
As I remarked in an earlier thread, the stuff coming out of NASA these days is not "toeing the line" in regards to ACC.
I thought it was just my imagination, and I'm glad to see it was not.

5 years ago, NASA concluded a 3 year drift study of all the oceans and many depths. Robots ballasting themselves to remain at the correct depth for years.

That study showed NO WARMING of the oceans. So it is all a surface heat exchange of evaporation, and that causes spreading surface sea ice, to moderate the global albedo.

Was sweep under by Politics. These are scientists, but they are at the public trough. So, I imagine we may see a crumbling of this fiasco turned Fraud, very soon.

And I listed what want would be evidence in science.... none of that is happening.

So all those Saganists that want a central govt, this is why.

They control the information, a la 1984.

 

[Doer]

Somebody hasn't been drinking his liberal-mandated koolaid. Didn't you get the memo? We're putting new cover sheets on all the TPC reports before they go out. So if you could go ahead and try to remember to do that from now on, that'd be great. MmmKay?

And the red stapler??? I have to keep...that...important. My red stapler?

 

[Wavels]

I thought NASA was up to something.
As I remarked in an earlier thread, the stuff coming out of NASA these days is not "toeing the line" in regards to ACC.
I thought it was just my imagination, and I'm glad to see it was not.

You are an exceptionally perspicacious pot-head; I salute your objectivity Good Sir!

 

[NoDrama]

I haven't noticed any extreme weather patterns.

I remember 50 years ago there were tornadoes, hurricanes, snow, rain, sleet, hail, flooding, excessive snowfall, extra cold temperatures then too. We haven't had any more extreme weather than in the past, just that the stuff we do have gets a lot more coverage since anyone with a cell phone can make a video for anyone in the world to see.

Remember the Vietnam war? It was on the news every day, fresh in our minds every day.

When was the last time you saw something on the longest war the USA has ever been engaged in?

Half of you probably don't even know what that is.

 

[NoDrama]

So all those Saganists that want a central govt, this is why.

They control the information, a la 1984.

Most of these people are young and are a product of the education they received, an education of toeing the line, where communal lives are good lives, while individuals are not to be trusted and are the ones doing all the evil. The collective is the important thing, individuals are not. The Borg hive mind is preferrable to individual liberties.

Common Core is now what is coming to schools, another UN agenda 21 takeover espousing the importance of sustainable living ( Smaller homes, less use of energy), and the importance of the collective on a global scale.

Not that those are bad things, but having it forced upon you is.

 

[Wavels]

I haven't noticed any extreme weather patterns.

I remember 50 years ago there were tornadoes, hurricanes, snow, rain, sleet, hail, flooding, excessive snowfall, extra cold temperatures then too. We haven't had any more extreme weather than in the past, just that the stuff we do have gets a lot more coverage since anyone with a cell phone can make a video for anyone in the world to see.

Remember the Vietnam war? It was on the news every day, fresh in our minds every day.

When was the last time you saw something on the longest war the USA has ever been engaged in?

Half of you probably don't even know what that is.

Yup, back then every day evening news broadcast reported body counts and updates of the Vietnam war.

Walter Cronkite and Huntley and Brinkley would usually start their shows with these gruesome updates.
And there were only three national networks in those long ago days.

I think it snowed much more then also...until this catastrophic and extreme winter!!!

 

[MuyLocoNC]

I haven't noticed any extreme weather patterns.

I remember 50 years ago there were tornadoes, hurricanes, snow, rain, sleet, hail, flooding, excessive snowfall, extra cold temperatures then too. We haven't had any more extreme weather than in the past, just that the stuff we do have gets a lot more coverage since anyone with a cell phone can make a video for anyone in the world to see.

Remember the Vietnam war? It was on the news every day, fresh in our minds every day.

When was the last time you saw something on the longest war the USA has ever been engaged in?

Half of you probably don't even know what that is.

Well, anyone with even a modicum of common sense knows it MUST be the Republican's war on women.

 

[NoDrama]

Well, anyone with even a modicum of common sense knows it MUST be the Republican's war on women.

I heard that the problem with the economy of late was that it snowed this winter.

 

[Doer]

Most of these people are young and are a product of the education they received, an education of toeing the line, where communal lives are good lives, while individuals are not to be trusted and are the ones doing all the evil. The collective is the important thing, individuals are not. The Borg hive mind is preferrable to individual liberties.

Common Core is now what is coming to schools, another UN agenda 21 takeover espousing the importance of sustainable living ( Smaller homes, less use of energy), and the importance of the collective on a global scale.

Not that those are bad things, but having it forced upon you is.

since collectivism is mind fuck along with smaller dwellings

Just check the dwelling size of those making these mind fucks

 

[UncleBuck]

Well,some retired NASA employees are sick and tired of the absurd un-scientific gibberish being used to support the canard of ACC or AGW.
They do not want NASA to be associated with the politically driven agenda masquerading as "consensus" and "settled" science.


The Climate Change Nazis are not going to like this.
They will attempt to delegitimize these guys in the same puerile manner which has become their means of thoughtful rebuttal.







The planet is not in danger of catastrophic man made global warming. Even if we burn all the world's recoverable fossil fuels it will still only result in a temperature rise of less than 1.2 degrees C.

So say The Right Climate Stuff Research Team, a group of retired NASA Apollo scientists and engineers - the men who put Neil Armstrong on the moon - in a new report.
"It's an embarrassment to those of us who put NASA's name on the map to have people like James Hansen popping off about global warming," says the project's leader Hal Doiron.
Doiron was one of 40 ex NASA employees - including seven astronauts - who wrote in April 2012 to NASA administrator Charles Bolden protesting about the organization's promotion of climate change alarmism, notably via its resident environmental activist James Hansen.

Using calculations by George Stegemeier of the National Academy of Engineering, they estimated the total quantity of recoverable oil, gas and coal on the planet. They then used 163 years of real world temperature data to calculate Transient Climate Sensitivity (ie how much the world will warm as a result of the burning of all the carbon dioxide in the fossil fuel). The figure they came up with 1.2 degrees C which is considerably lower than the wilder claims of the IPCC, whose reports have suggested it could be as high as 4 degrees C or more.
This is because, as scientists such as the Cato Institute's Pat Michaels have long argued, "climate sensitivity" (ie how the planet's temperature responds to CO2 emissions) is considerably lower than the IPCC's computer models project. So much so that it should be called "climate insensitivity", he believes.
Doiron is similarly sceptical of the computer models used by climate alarmists. He and his team argue that the 105 models currently used by the IPCC are seriously flawed because they don't agree with each other and don't agree with empirical data.
There is no empirical data indicating Anthropogenic Global Warming will produce catastrophic climate changes. AGW can only produce modest global warming, likely to be beneficial when CO2 benefits to crop production are considered.
Doiron says: "I believe in computer models. My whole career was about using computer models to make life or death decisions. In 1963 I had to use them to calculate whether, when the lunar module landed on a 12 degree slope it would fall over or not - and design the landing gear accordingly. But if you can't validate the models - and the IPCC can't - then don't use them to make critical decisions about the economy and the planet's future."

too embarrassed to attribute your little article, eh?

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/03/08/Earth-is-safe-from-global-warming-say-the-men-who-put-man-on-the-moon

yep, breitbart. they of the shirley sherrod debacle. some credible mother fuckers.

replete with links to wattsupwiththtat (dumbass) and the CATO institute (but i bet you guys hate politicization of this, eh?).



all this followed by a vigorous circle jerk amongst the flat earth society, the same folks who bought into the skewed polls nonsense (seriously, do you guys ever embarrassed? have you no shame?).

monumentally stupid stuff here guys.

 

[UncleBuck]

The slight differnce between me and you, Muy, is that I don't expect logic or shame or sorry from any Saganists.

i'm still waiting for you guys to show the least bit of shame over the skewed polls debacle that you guys were so sure of.

none of the models were right, it was a liberal scam, the science couldn't be trusted....and then election day. and no shame from you anti-science flat-earthers.

 

[UncleBuck]

1984.

Common Core...another UN agenda 21 takeover.

the Republican's war on women.

collectivism

don't forget commie fluoride and plastic bottles that make our babies gay, you geniuses.

 

[Doer]

don't forget commie fluoride and plastic bottles that make our babies gay, you geniuses.

Don't mis-quote me, I answered about collectivism I didn't claim it and I am not a Saganist about fluoride or plastic.

Are ye havin a stroke?