Global Warming Update

Woodstock.Hippie

New Member
and ITs so damned cheap ain't IT LARDASS?

[youtube]4ozk7fnKilU[/youtube][youtube]8JryQXilMj4[/youtube][youtube]OVSd5rrUOys[/youtube]

Back when thephatrabbit turds were Heavvvvvvvvvvvvvy shit, man.

:hump:
:peace:
 

mismos00

Well-Known Member
solar what? ... http://www.informationweek.com/news/storage/virtualization/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=222900062


so the sun can jam my cell phone, but i have more effect on the EARTH then it does.


get the fuck out.

I guess it makes more sense that you're right than 90% of scientists. You finally convinced me by just stating the opposite of what the experts say. Uneducated Americans are right and the rest of the world is wrong. Yeah!

Congratulations!

BTW... you need to send this important information about this entity the SUN you speak of. I don't think any scientist are aware of this phenomenon you call 'Sun'. (I don't even know if I'm pronouncing that correctly).
 

Woodstock.Hippie

New Member
[youtube]D6o17u_VJaY[/youtube][youtube]Fk0Q6BCKQx4[/youtube][youtube]urNyg1ftMIU[/youtube]

Otherwise, shit gets bad real phast.

[youtube]3S6gMw0X4gg[/youtube][youtube]nUdPVCIRe1U[/youtube]

What could be the phreakiest call to get at :10?

Awesome Avatars could evolve into awesome avatar solutions when filters are good for bridging gaps between IT and the real world.
:hump:
:peace:
 

mismos00

Well-Known Member
I think those who say it is now impossible to reverse climate change are correct. It was never in our control to begin with and it still isn't. The same climate change that is going on now has gone on before. Someday we'll get hit by a comet too.

Y'all libs should just move on to something else. Global warming is totally discredited for at least another generation.

Isn't the problem that the current climate change is happening much, much faster than it did in the past. Also isn't this current climate change out of sync with the natural cycle?

I might agree with you that it might not be stoppable or reversible and that current policies are probably inadequate, but that doesn't mean I'm going to become a Luddite and reject basic science. Sheesh!
 
P

PadawanBater

Guest
You're right, there isn't any. There is no possible way human activity is a measurable verifiable cause of anything as significant as climate change. Smog? fine. Climate change, no way. :finger:
...right, those 32 international science academies got it wrong...

Since 2001, 32 national science academies have come together to issue joint declarations confirming anthropogenic global warming, and urging the nations of the world to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. The signatories of these statements have been the national science academies:

-Australia
-Belgium
-Brazil
-Cameroon
-Canada
-Caribbean
-China
-France
-Ghana
-Germany
-Indonesia
-Ireland
-Italy
-India
-Japan
-Kenya
-Madagascar
-Malaysia
-Mexico
-Nigeria
-New Zeleand
-Russia
-Senegal
-South Africa
-Sudan
-Sweden
-Tanzania
-Uganda
-United Kingdom
-United States
-Zambia
-Zimbabwe


 

coach

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by PadawanBater
...right, those 32 international science academies got it wrong...
Dude that is complete utter bullshit.
 

Woodstock.Hippie

New Member
We only got one world.

[youtube]WpYeekQkAdc[/youtube][youtube]pV_T551jw88[/youtube][youtube]X0T3jMRNwV8[/youtube]

No Shit.

Why the phuck do they keep turning off the audio?

If they want you they will get you.

Holy Shit!

Have no doubt.

[youtube]oUBkDJOoLLs[/youtube][youtube]2iT25FUG3z4[/youtube][youtube]6TLbviUMouI[/youtube]

Very true.
Every crypt has a key.

edit: Remember how to dilute the Hippie quotient.
Its all about the math.
:hump:
:peace:
 
P

PadawanBater

Guest
Dude, they can't all be wrong. This is like arguing evolution. It's independent data, collected by thousands of scientists, all over the world, corroborating on one thing, and coming to the same conclusion.

You can't be serious. I really don't understand the rationale behind dismissing the WHOLE OF CLIMATE CHANGE data based on a single instance of manipulation by no more than a handful of scientists. Like I said, the similarities to creationism and the denial of evolution are astounding. It's just like a creationist denying the mountains of evidence in favor of evolution because of Nebraska man...


Originally Posted by PadawanBater
...right, those 32 international science academies got it wrong...
Dude that is complete utter bullshit.
Brilliant answer. Explain WHY, genius.
 

jeff f

New Member
Well put, definitely agree with you here too!

dude, no offense but your "science" has been well debunked, over and over in the last six months. many many scientists are totally against man made global warming theory and their science seems to be way more on track.

if you are gona come on and act like a dick, at least get up to date on where the argument currently is. half the shit youre talking about it several years old.

remember, the cats out of the bag and you aint gonna be able to put it back in. so go research a REAL crisis and get bact to us.

oh yes, and go look in the mirror and say, "forgive me dad, i got duped" 15 times. it helps with the deprogramming that the church of global warming priests have implanted in your brain.
 
I

Illegal Smile

Guest
[FONT=times new roman,times]Brief highlights of the report featuring over 400 international scientists: [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times] [/FONT] [FONT=times new roman,times]Israel: Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem has authored almost 70 peer-reviewed studies and won several awards. “First, temperature changes, as well as rates of temperature changes (both increase and decrease) of magnitudes similar to that reported by IPCC to have occurred since the Industrial revolution (about 0.8C in 150 years or even 0.4C in the last 35 years) have occurred in Earth's climatic history. There's nothing special about the recent rise!” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Russia: Russian scientist Dr. Oleg Sorochtin of the Institute of Oceanology at the Russian Academy of Sciences has authored more than 300 studies, nine books, and a 2006 paper titled “The Evolution and the Prediction of Global Climate Changes on Earth.” “Even if the concentration of ‘greenhouse gases’ double man would not perceive the [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]temperature impact,” Sorochtin wrote. (Note: Name also sometimes translated to spell Sorokhtin)[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Spain: Anton Uriarte, a professor of Physical Geography at the University of the Basque Country in Spain and author of a book on the paleoclimate, rejected man-made climate fears in 2007. “There's no need to be worried. It's very interesting to study [climate change], but there's no need to be worried,” Uriate wrote. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Netherlands: Atmospheric scientist Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, a scientific pioneer in the development of numerical weather prediction and former director of research at The Netherlands' Royal National Meteorological Institute, and an internationally recognized expert in atmospheric boundary layer processes, “I find the Doomsday picture Al Gore is painting – a six-meter sea level rise, fifteen times the IPCC number – entirely without merit,” Tennekes wrote. “I protest vigorously the idea that the climate reacts like a home heating system to a changed setting of the thermostat: just turn the dial, and the desired temperature will soon be reached." [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Brazil: Chief Meteorologist Eugenio Hackbart of the MetSul Meteorologia Weather Center in Sao Leopoldo – Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil declared himself a skeptic. “The media is promoting an unprecedented hyping related to global warming. The media and many scientists are ignoring very important facts that point to a natural variation in the climate system as the cause of the recent global warming,” Hackbart wrote on May 30, 2007. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]France: Climatologist Dr. Marcel Leroux, former professor at Université Jean Moulin and director of the Laboratory of Climatology, Risks, and Environment in Lyon, is a climate skeptic. Leroux wrote a 2005 book titled Global Warming – Myth or Reality? - The Erring Ways of Climatology. “Day after day, the same mantra - that ‘the Earth is warming up’ - is churned out in all its forms. As ‘the ice melts’ and ‘sea level rises,’ the Apocalypse looms ever nearer! Without realizing it, or perhaps without wishing to, the average citizen in bamboozled, lobotomized, lulled into mindless ac*ceptance. ... Non-believers in the greenhouse scenario are in the position of those long ago who doubted the existence of God ... fortunately for them, the Inquisition is no longer with us!” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Norway: Geologist/Geochemist Dr. Tom V. Segalstad, a professor and head of the Geological Museum at the University of Oslo and formerly an expert reviewer with the UN IPCC: “It is a search for a mythical CO2 sink to explain an immeasurable CO2 lifetime to fit a hypothetical CO2 computer model that purports to show that an impossible amount of fossil fuel burning is heating the atmosphere. It is all a fiction.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Finland: Dr. Boris Winterhalter, retired Senior Marine Researcher of the Geological Survey of Finland and former professor of marine geology at University of Helsinki, criticized the media for what he considered its alarming climate coverage. “The effect of solar winds on cosmic radiation has just recently been established and, furthermore, there seems to be a good correlation between cloudiness and variations in the intensity of cosmic radiation. Here we have a mechanism which is a far better explanation to variations in global climate than the attempts by IPCC to blame it all on anthropogenic input of greenhouse gases."[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Germany: Paleoclimate expert Augusto Mangini of the University of Heidelberg in Germany, criticized the UN IPCC summary. “I consider the part of the IPCC report, which I can really judge as an expert, i.e. the reconstruction of the paleoclimate, wrong,” Mangini noted in an April 5, 2007 article. He added: “The earth will not die.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Canada: IPCC 2007 Expert Reviewer Madhav Khandekar, a Ph.D meteorologist, a scientist with the Natural Resources Stewardship Project who has over 45 years experience in climatology, meteorology and oceanography, and who has published nearly 100 papers, reports, book reviews and a book on Ocean Wave Analysis and Modeling: “To my dismay, IPCC authors ignored all my comments and suggestions for major changes in the FOD (First Order Draft) and sent me the SOD (Second Order Draft) with essentially the same text as the FOD. None of the authors of the chapter bothered to directly communicate with me (or with other expert reviewers with whom I communicate on a regular basis) on many issues that were raised in my review. This is not an acceptable scientific review process.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Czech Republic: Czech-born U.S. climatologist Dr. George Kukla, a research scientist with the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University, expressed climate skepticism in 2007. “The only thing to worry about is the damage that can be done by worrying. Why are some scientists worried? Perhaps because they feel that to stop worrying may mean to stop being paid,” Kukla told Gelf Magazine on April 24, 2007. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]India: One of India's leading geologists, B.P. Radhakrishna, President of the Geological Society of India, expressed climate skepticism in 2007. “We appear to be overplaying this global warming issue as global warming is nothing new. It has happened in the past, not once but several times, giving rise to glacial-interglacial cycles.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]USA: Climatologist Robert Durrenberger, past president of the American Association of State Climatologists, and one of the climatologists who gathered at Woods Hole to review the National Climate Program Plan in July, 1979: “Al Gore brought me back to the battle and prompted me to do renewed research in the field of climatology. And because of all the misinformation that Gore and his army have been spreading about climate change I have decided that ‘real’ climatologists should try to help the public understand the nature of the problem.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Italy: Internationally renowned scientist Dr. Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists and a retired Professor of Advanced Physics at the University of Bologna in Italy, who has published over 800 scientific papers: “Significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming." [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]New Zealand: IPCC reviewer and climate researcher and scientist Dr. Vincent Gray, an expert reviewer on every single draft of the IPCC reports going back to 1990 and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of "Climate Change 2001: “The [IPCC] ‘Summary for Policymakers’ might get a few readers, but the main purpose of the report is to provide a spurious scientific backup for the absurd claims of the worldwide environmentalist lobby that it has been established scientifically that increases in carbon dioxide are harmful to the climate. It just does not matter that this ain't so.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]South Africa: Dr. Kelvin Kemm, formerly a scientist at South Africa’s Atomic Energy Corporation who holds degrees in nuclear physics and mathematics: “The global-warming mania continues with more and more hype and less and less thinking. With religious zeal, people look for issues or events to blame on global warming.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Poland: Physicist Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, Chairman of the Central Laboratory for the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Radiological Protection in Warsaw: “We thus find ourselves in the situation that the entire theory of man-made global warming—with its repercussions in science, and its important consequences for politics and the global economy—is based on ice core studies that provided a false picture of the atmospheric CO2 levels.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Australia: Prize-wining Geologist Dr. Ian Plimer, a professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Adelaide in Australia: "There is new work emerging even in the last few weeks that shows we can have a very close correlation between the temperatures of the Earth and supernova and solar radiation.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Britain: Dr. Richard Courtney, a UN IPCC expert reviewer and a UK-based climate and atmospheric science consultant: “To date, no convincing evidence for AGW (anthropogenic global warming) has been discovered. And recent global climate behavior is not consistent with AGW model predictions.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]China: Chinese Scientists Say C02 Impact on Warming May Be ‘Excessively Exaggerated’ – Scientists Lin Zhen-Shan’s and Sun Xian’s 2007 study published in the peer-reviewed journal Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics: "Although the CO2 greenhouse effect on global climate change is unsuspicious, it could have been excessively exaggerated." Their study asserted that "it is high time to reconsider the trend of global climate change.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Denmark: Space physicist Dr. Eigil Friis-Christensen is the director of the Danish National Space Centre, a member of the space research advisory committee of the Swedish [FONT=times new roman,times]National Space Board, a member of a NASA working group, and a member of the European Space Agency who has authored or co-authored around 100 peer-reviewed papers and chairs the Institute of Space Physics: “[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]The sun is the source of the energy that causes the motion of the atmosphere and thereby controls weather and climate. Any change in the energy from the sun received at the Earth’s surface will therefore affect climate.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times][FONT=times new roman,times]Belgium: Climate scientist Luc Debontridder of the Belgium Weather Institute’s Royal Meteorological Institute (RMI) co-authored a study in August 2007 which dismissed a decisive role of CO2 in global warming: "CO2 is not the big bogeyman of climate change and global warming. “Not CO2, but water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas. It is responsible[/FONT] for at least 75 % of the greenhouse effect. This is a simple scientific fact, but Al Gore's movie has hyped CO2 so much that nobody seems to take note of it.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Sweden: Geologist Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, professor emeritus of the Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology at Stockholm University, critiqued the Associated Press for hyping promoting climate fears in 2007. “Another of these hysterical views of our climate. Newspapers should think about the damage they are doing to many persons, particularly young kids, by spreading the exaggerated views of a human impact on climate.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]USA: Dr. David Wojick is a UN IPCC expert reviewer, who earned his PhD in Philosophy of Science and co-founded the Department of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie-Mellon University: “In point of fact, the hypothesis that solar variability and not human activity is warming the oceans goes a long way to explain the puzzling idea that the Earth's surface may be warming while the atmosphere is not. The GHG (greenhouse gas) hypothesis does not do this.” Wojick added: “The public is not well served by this constant drumbeat of false alarms fed by computer models manipulated by advocates.” [/FONT]
 

jeff f

New Member
Dude, they can't all be wrong. This is like arguing evolution. It's independent data, collected by thousands of scientists, all over the world, corroborating on one thing, and coming to the same conclusion.

You can't be serious. I really don't understand the rationale behind dismissing the WHOLE OF CLIMATE CHANGE data based on a single instance of manipulation by no more than a handful of scientists. Like I said, the similarities to creationism and the denial of evolution are astounding. It's just like a creationist denying the mountains of evidence in favor of evolution because of Nebraska man...



Brilliant answer. Explain WHY, genius.

i will take a shot at it, CUZ ITS FUCKING FREEZING IN THE QHOLE ENTIRE NORTHERN HEMISHERE.

dude, you cant do years of "scientific" study and come to the conclusion that we have "global warning", then when its starts freezing say, "climate change" and still assume your reasoning was correct.

your whole fucking theory got blown out of the water when the earth went in the OPPOSITE FUCKING DIRECTION than the scientists "theory" stated it would. the THEORY isnt holding up to the actual factual data....its fucking freezing and getting colder.

you dont need the hoax stuff to prove youre theory is wrong. throw all the proof that people in very high places lied through their teeth. just forget that for a moment. ignore it completely. ITS FUCKING FREEZING. that should tell you, wait, there is somethig seriously wrong with our models. they said it should be getting hotter but its actually going the opposite direction.

then as a scientific comunity just change the name of your whole body of work and say, "i am still right, but now we are gona call it climate change". no, you arent "still" right. you were never right. you thought it would get warmer and its not. and we always knew the climate changes, so what. adapt or die.

get it? global warming was wrong, start over with a fresh hypothosis and start figuring out what is going on. then when you PROVE your "theory" we will believe you. till then shut the fuck up already and start figuring out what is going on.
 

jeff f

New Member
[FONT=times new roman,times]Brief highlights of the report featuring over 400 international scientists: [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Israel: Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem has authored almost 70 peer-reviewed studies and won several awards. “First, temperature changes, as well as rates of temperature changes (both increase and decrease) of magnitudes similar to that reported by IPCC to have occurred since the Industrial revolution (about 0.8C in 150 years or even 0.4C in the last 35 years) have occurred in Earth's climatic history. There's nothing special about the recent rise!” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Russia: Russian scientist Dr. Oleg Sorochtin of the Institute of Oceanology at the Russian Academy of Sciences has authored more than 300 studies, nine books, and a 2006 paper titled “The Evolution and the Prediction of Global Climate Changes on Earth.” “Even if the concentration of ‘greenhouse gases’ double man would not perceive the [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]temperature impact,” Sorochtin wrote. (Note: Name also sometimes translated to spell Sorokhtin)[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Spain: Anton Uriarte, a professor of Physical Geography at the University of the Basque Country in Spain and author of a book on the paleoclimate, rejected man-made climate fears in 2007. “There's no need to be worried. It's very interesting to study [climate change], but there's no need to be worried,” Uriate wrote. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Netherlands: Atmospheric scientist Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, a scientific pioneer in the development of numerical weather prediction and former director of research at The Netherlands' Royal National Meteorological Institute, and an internationally recognized expert in atmospheric boundary layer processes, “I find the Doomsday picture Al Gore is painting – a six-meter sea level rise, fifteen times the IPCC number – entirely without merit,” Tennekes wrote. “I protest vigorously the idea that the climate reacts like a home heating system to a changed setting of the thermostat: just turn the dial, and the desired temperature will soon be reached." [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Brazil: Chief Meteorologist Eugenio Hackbart of the MetSul Meteorologia Weather Center in Sao Leopoldo – Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil declared himself a skeptic. “The media is promoting an unprecedented hyping related to global warming. The media and many scientists are ignoring very important facts that point to a natural variation in the climate system as the cause of the recent global warming,” Hackbart wrote on May 30, 2007. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]France: Climatologist Dr. Marcel Leroux, former professor at Université Jean Moulin and director of the Laboratory of Climatology, Risks, and Environment in Lyon, is a climate skeptic. Leroux wrote a 2005 book titled Global Warming – Myth or Reality? - The Erring Ways of Climatology. “Day after day, the same mantra - that ‘the Earth is warming up’ - is churned out in all its forms. As ‘the ice melts’ and ‘sea level rises,’ the Apocalypse looms ever nearer! Without realizing it, or perhaps without wishing to, the average citizen in bamboozled, lobotomized, lulled into mindless ac*ceptance. ... Non-believers in the greenhouse scenario are in the position of those long ago who doubted the existence of God ... fortunately for them, the Inquisition is no longer with us!” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Norway: Geologist/Geochemist Dr. Tom V. Segalstad, a professor and head of the Geological Museum at the University of Oslo and formerly an expert reviewer with the UN IPCC: “It is a search for a mythical CO2 sink to explain an immeasurable CO2 lifetime to fit a hypothetical CO2 computer model that purports to show that an impossible amount of fossil fuel burning is heating the atmosphere. It is all a fiction.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Finland: Dr. Boris Winterhalter, retired Senior Marine Researcher of the Geological Survey of Finland and former professor of marine geology at University of Helsinki, criticized the media for what he considered its alarming climate coverage. “The effect of solar winds on cosmic radiation has just recently been established and, furthermore, there seems to be a good correlation between cloudiness and variations in the intensity of cosmic radiation. Here we have a mechanism which is a far better explanation to variations in global climate than the attempts by IPCC to blame it all on anthropogenic input of greenhouse gases."[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Germany: Paleoclimate expert Augusto Mangini of the University of Heidelberg in Germany, criticized the UN IPCC summary. “I consider the part of the IPCC report, which I can really judge as an expert, i.e. the reconstruction of the paleoclimate, wrong,” Mangini noted in an April 5, 2007 article. He added: “The earth will not die.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Canada: IPCC 2007 Expert Reviewer Madhav Khandekar, a Ph.D meteorologist, a scientist with the Natural Resources Stewardship Project who has over 45 years experience in climatology, meteorology and oceanography, and who has published nearly 100 papers, reports, book reviews and a book on Ocean Wave Analysis and Modeling: “To my dismay, IPCC authors ignored all my comments and suggestions for major changes in the FOD (First Order Draft) and sent me the SOD (Second Order Draft) with essentially the same text as the FOD. None of the authors of the chapter bothered to directly communicate with me (or with other expert reviewers with whom I communicate on a regular basis) on many issues that were raised in my review. This is not an acceptable scientific review process.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Czech Republic: Czech-born U.S. climatologist Dr. George Kukla, a research scientist with the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University, expressed climate skepticism in 2007. “The only thing to worry about is the damage that can be done by worrying. Why are some scientists worried? Perhaps because they feel that to stop worrying may mean to stop being paid,” Kukla told Gelf Magazine on April 24, 2007. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]India: One of India's leading geologists, B.P. Radhakrishna, President of the Geological Society of India, expressed climate skepticism in 2007. “We appear to be overplaying this global warming issue as global warming is nothing new. It has happened in the past, not once but several times, giving rise to glacial-interglacial cycles.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]USA: Climatologist Robert Durrenberger, past president of the American Association of State Climatologists, and one of the climatologists who gathered at Woods Hole to review the National Climate Program Plan in July, 1979: “Al Gore brought me back to the battle and prompted me to do renewed research in the field of climatology. And because of all the misinformation that Gore and his army have been spreading about climate change I have decided that ‘real’ climatologists should try to help the public understand the nature of the problem.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Italy: Internationally renowned scientist Dr. Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists and a retired Professor of Advanced Physics at the University of Bologna in Italy, who has published over 800 scientific papers: “Significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming." [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]New Zealand: IPCC reviewer and climate researcher and scientist Dr. Vincent Gray, an expert reviewer on every single draft of the IPCC reports going back to 1990 and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of "Climate Change 2001: “The [IPCC] ‘Summary for Policymakers’ might get a few readers, but the main purpose of the report is to provide a spurious scientific backup for the absurd claims of the worldwide environmentalist lobby that it has been established scientifically that increases in carbon dioxide are harmful to the climate. It just does not matter that this ain't so.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]South Africa: Dr. Kelvin Kemm, formerly a scientist at South Africa’s Atomic Energy Corporation who holds degrees in nuclear physics and mathematics: “The global-warming mania continues with more and more hype and less and less thinking. With religious zeal, people look for issues or events to blame on global warming.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Poland: Physicist Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, Chairman of the Central Laboratory for the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Radiological Protection in Warsaw: “We thus find ourselves in the situation that the entire theory of man-made global warming—with its repercussions in science, and its important consequences for politics and the global economy—is based on ice core studies that provided a false picture of the atmospheric CO2 levels.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Australia: Prize-wining Geologist Dr. Ian Plimer, a professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Adelaide in Australia: "There is new work emerging even in the last few weeks that shows we can have a very close correlation between the temperatures of the Earth and supernova and solar radiation.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Britain: Dr. Richard Courtney, a UN IPCC expert reviewer and a UK-based climate and atmospheric science consultant: “To date, no convincing evidence for AGW (anthropogenic global warming) has been discovered. And recent global climate behavior is not consistent with AGW model predictions.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]China: Chinese Scientists Say C02 Impact on Warming May Be ‘Excessively Exaggerated’ – Scientists Lin Zhen-Shan’s and Sun Xian’s 2007 study published in the peer-reviewed journal Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics: "Although the CO2 greenhouse effect on global climate change is unsuspicious, it could have been excessively exaggerated." Their study asserted that "it is high time to reconsider the trend of global climate change.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Denmark: Space physicist Dr. Eigil Friis-Christensen is the director of the Danish National Space Centre, a member of the space research advisory committee of the Swedish [FONT=times new roman,times]National Space Board, a member of a NASA working group, and a member of the European Space Agency who has authored or co-authored around 100 peer-reviewed papers and chairs the Institute of Space Physics: “[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]The sun is the source of the energy that causes the motion of the atmosphere and thereby controls weather and climate. Any change in the energy from the sun received at the Earth’s surface will therefore affect climate.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times][FONT=times new roman,times]Belgium: Climate scientist Luc Debontridder of the Belgium Weather Institute’s Royal Meteorological Institute (RMI) co-authored a study in August 2007 which dismissed a decisive role of CO2 in global warming: "CO2 is not the big bogeyman of climate change and global warming. “Not CO2, but water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas. It is responsible[/FONT] for at least 75 % of the greenhouse effect. This is a simple scientific fact, but Al Gore's movie has hyped CO2 so much that nobody seems to take note of it.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Sweden: Geologist Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, professor emeritus of the Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology at Stockholm University, critiqued the Associated Press for hyping promoting climate fears in 2007. “Another of these hysterical views of our climate. Newspapers should think about the damage they are doing to many persons, particularly young kids, by spreading the exaggerated views of a human impact on climate.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]USA: Dr. David Wojick is a UN IPCC expert reviewer, who earned his PhD in Philosophy of Science and co-founded the Department of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie-Mellon University: “In point of fact, the hypothesis that solar variability and not human activity is warming the oceans goes a long way to explain the puzzling idea that the Earth's surface may be warming while the atmosphere is not. The GHG (greenhouse gas) hypothesis does not do this.” Wojick added: “The public is not well served by this constant drumbeat of false alarms fed by computer models manipulated by advocates.” [/FONT]
oh those guys are all douchbags.

boy i would make a good little leftist sheep. its really not that hard :lol:
 
P

PadawanBater

Guest
[FONT=times new roman,times]Brief highlights of the report featuring over 400 international scientists: [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Israel: Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem has authored almost 70 peer-reviewed studies and won several awards. “First, temperature changes, as well as rates of temperature changes (both increase and decrease) of magnitudes similar to that reported by IPCC to have occurred since the Industrial revolution (about 0.8C in 150 years or even 0.4C in the last 35 years) have occurred in Earth's climatic history. There's nothing special about the recent rise!” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Russia: Russian scientist Dr. Oleg Sorochtin of the Institute of Oceanology at the Russian Academy of Sciences has authored more than 300 studies, nine books, and a 2006 paper titled “The Evolution and the Prediction of Global Climate Changes on Earth.” “Even if the concentration of ‘greenhouse gases’ double man would not perceive the [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]temperature impact,” Sorochtin wrote. (Note: Name also sometimes translated to spell Sorokhtin)[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Spain: Anton Uriarte, a professor of Physical Geography at the University of the Basque Country in Spain and author of a book on the paleoclimate, rejected man-made climate fears in 2007. “There's no need to be worried. It's very interesting to study [climate change], but there's no need to be worried,” Uriate wrote. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Netherlands: Atmospheric scientist Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, a scientific pioneer in the development of numerical weather prediction and former director of research at The Netherlands' Royal National Meteorological Institute, and an internationally recognized expert in atmospheric boundary layer processes, “I find the Doomsday picture Al Gore is painting – a six-meter sea level rise, fifteen times the IPCC number – entirely without merit,” Tennekes wrote. “I protest vigorously the idea that the climate reacts like a home heating system to a changed setting of the thermostat: just turn the dial, and the desired temperature will soon be reached." [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Brazil: Chief Meteorologist Eugenio Hackbart of the MetSul Meteorologia Weather Center in Sao Leopoldo – Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil declared himself a skeptic. “The media is promoting an unprecedented hyping related to global warming. The media and many scientists are ignoring very important facts that point to a natural variation in the climate system as the cause of the recent global warming,” Hackbart wrote on May 30, 2007. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]France: Climatologist Dr. Marcel Leroux, former professor at Université Jean Moulin and director of the Laboratory of Climatology, Risks, and Environment in Lyon, is a climate skeptic. Leroux wrote a 2005 book titled Global Warming – Myth or Reality? - The Erring Ways of Climatology. “Day after day, the same mantra - that ‘the Earth is warming up’ - is churned out in all its forms. As ‘the ice melts’ and ‘sea level rises,’ the Apocalypse looms ever nearer! Without realizing it, or perhaps without wishing to, the average citizen in bamboozled, lobotomized, lulled into mindless ac*ceptance. ... Non-believers in the greenhouse scenario are in the position of those long ago who doubted the existence of God ... fortunately for them, the Inquisition is no longer with us!” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Norway: Geologist/Geochemist Dr. Tom V. Segalstad, a professor and head of the Geological Museum at the University of Oslo and formerly an expert reviewer with the UN IPCC: “It is a search for a mythical CO2 sink to explain an immeasurable CO2 lifetime to fit a hypothetical CO2 computer model that purports to show that an impossible amount of fossil fuel burning is heating the atmosphere. It is all a fiction.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Finland: Dr. Boris Winterhalter, retired Senior Marine Researcher of the Geological Survey of Finland and former professor of marine geology at University of Helsinki, criticized the media for what he considered its alarming climate coverage. “The effect of solar winds on cosmic radiation has just recently been established and, furthermore, there seems to be a good correlation between cloudiness and variations in the intensity of cosmic radiation. Here we have a mechanism which is a far better explanation to variations in global climate than the attempts by IPCC to blame it all on anthropogenic input of greenhouse gases."[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Germany: Paleoclimate expert Augusto Mangini of the University of Heidelberg in Germany, criticized the UN IPCC summary. “I consider the part of the IPCC report, which I can really judge as an expert, i.e. the reconstruction of the paleoclimate, wrong,” Mangini noted in an April 5, 2007 article. He added: “The earth will not die.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Canada: IPCC 2007 Expert Reviewer Madhav Khandekar, a Ph.D meteorologist, a scientist with the Natural Resources Stewardship Project who has over 45 years experience in climatology, meteorology and oceanography, and who has published nearly 100 papers, reports, book reviews and a book on Ocean Wave Analysis and Modeling: “To my dismay, IPCC authors ignored all my comments and suggestions for major changes in the FOD (First Order Draft) and sent me the SOD (Second Order Draft) with essentially the same text as the FOD. None of the authors of the chapter bothered to directly communicate with me (or with other expert reviewers with whom I communicate on a regular basis) on many issues that were raised in my review. This is not an acceptable scientific review process.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Czech Republic: Czech-born U.S. climatologist Dr. George Kukla, a research scientist with the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University, expressed climate skepticism in 2007. “The only thing to worry about is the damage that can be done by worrying. Why are some scientists worried? Perhaps because they feel that to stop worrying may mean to stop being paid,” Kukla told Gelf Magazine on April 24, 2007. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]India: One of India's leading geologists, B.P. Radhakrishna, President of the Geological Society of India, expressed climate skepticism in 2007. “We appear to be overplaying this global warming issue as global warming is nothing new. It has happened in the past, not once but several times, giving rise to glacial-interglacial cycles.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]USA: Climatologist Robert Durrenberger, past president of the American Association of State Climatologists, and one of the climatologists who gathered at Woods Hole to review the National Climate Program Plan in July, 1979: “Al Gore brought me back to the battle and prompted me to do renewed research in the field of climatology. And because of all the misinformation that Gore and his army have been spreading about climate change I have decided that ‘real’ climatologists should try to help the public understand the nature of the problem.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Italy: Internationally renowned scientist Dr. Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists and a retired Professor of Advanced Physics at the University of Bologna in Italy, who has published over 800 scientific papers: “Significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming." [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]New Zealand: IPCC reviewer and climate researcher and scientist Dr. Vincent Gray, an expert reviewer on every single draft of the IPCC reports going back to 1990 and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of "Climate Change 2001: “The [IPCC] ‘Summary for Policymakers’ might get a few readers, but the main purpose of the report is to provide a spurious scientific backup for the absurd claims of the worldwide environmentalist lobby that it has been established scientifically that increases in carbon dioxide are harmful to the climate. It just does not matter that this ain't so.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]South Africa: Dr. Kelvin Kemm, formerly a scientist at South Africa’s Atomic Energy Corporation who holds degrees in nuclear physics and mathematics: “The global-warming mania continues with more and more hype and less and less thinking. With religious zeal, people look for issues or events to blame on global warming.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Poland: Physicist Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, Chairman of the Central Laboratory for the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Radiological Protection in Warsaw: “We thus find ourselves in the situation that the entire theory of man-made global warming—with its repercussions in science, and its important consequences for politics and the global economy—is based on ice core studies that provided a false picture of the atmospheric CO2 levels.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Australia: Prize-wining Geologist Dr. Ian Plimer, a professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Adelaide in Australia: "There is new work emerging even in the last few weeks that shows we can have a very close correlation between the temperatures of the Earth and supernova and solar radiation.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Britain: Dr. Richard Courtney, a UN IPCC expert reviewer and a UK-based climate and atmospheric science consultant: “To date, no convincing evidence for AGW (anthropogenic global warming) has been discovered. And recent global climate behavior is not consistent with AGW model predictions.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]China: Chinese Scientists Say C02 Impact on Warming May Be ‘Excessively Exaggerated’ – Scientists Lin Zhen-Shan’s and Sun Xian’s 2007 study published in the peer-reviewed journal Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics: "Although the CO2 greenhouse effect on global climate change is unsuspicious, it could have been excessively exaggerated." Their study asserted that "it is high time to reconsider the trend of global climate change.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Denmark: Space physicist Dr. Eigil Friis-Christensen is the director of the Danish National Space Centre, a member of the space research advisory committee of the Swedish [FONT=times new roman,times]National Space Board, a member of a NASA working group, and a member of the European Space Agency who has authored or co-authored around 100 peer-reviewed papers and chairs the Institute of Space Physics: “[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]The sun is the source of the energy that causes the motion of the atmosphere and thereby controls weather and climate. Any change in the energy from the sun received at the Earth’s surface will therefore affect climate.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times][FONT=times new roman,times]Belgium: Climate scientist Luc Debontridder of the Belgium Weather Institute’s Royal Meteorological Institute (RMI) co-authored a study in August 2007 which dismissed a decisive role of CO2 in global warming: "CO2 is not the big bogeyman of climate change and global warming. “Not CO2, but water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas. It is responsible[/FONT] for at least 75 % of the greenhouse effect. This is a simple scientific fact, but Al Gore's movie has hyped CO2 so much that nobody seems to take note of it.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Sweden: Geologist Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, professor emeritus of the Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology at Stockholm University, critiqued the Associated Press for hyping promoting climate fears in 2007. “Another of these hysterical views of our climate. Newspapers should think about the damage they are doing to many persons, particularly young kids, by spreading the exaggerated views of a human impact on climate.” [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]USA: Dr. David Wojick is a UN IPCC expert reviewer, who earned his PhD in Philosophy of Science and co-founded the Department of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie-Mellon University: “In point of fact, the hypothesis that solar variability and not human activity is warming the oceans goes a long way to explain the puzzling idea that the Earth's surface may be warming while the atmosphere is not. The GHG (greenhouse gas) hypothesis does not do this.” Wojick added: “The public is not well served by this constant drumbeat of false alarms fed by computer models manipulated by advocates.” [/FONT]


Did you miss my previous post? Those 32 international science academies...? Each one holding hundreds of scientists, each one agreeing to human activity increasing climate change...?

Have you ever heard of the list of Steve's? It's this list the National Center for Science Education made up in response to the creationists list of those "scientists" who denied the theory of evolution. The creationists were able to get somewhere under 100 names to sign their list right... Then as of today, the NCSE got 1,134 different people, ONLY NAMED Steve (or some other variant) to sign. PWNED.

http://ncse.com/taking-action/list-steves

This is the exact same thing you're attempting to do by denying climate change happens. You and your list of a few dozen names is nothing in comparison to the actual scientists (with credible backgrounds in their respective fields) who agree this is happening.

What do you have to say about that?

i will take a shot at it, CUZ ITS FUCKING FREEZING IN THE QHOLE ENTIRE NORTHERN HEMISHERE.

dude, you cant do years of "scientific" study and come to the conclusion that we have "global warning", then when its starts freezing say, "climate change" and still assume your reasoning was correct.

your whole fucking theory got blown out of the water when the earth went in the OPPOSITE FUCKING DIRECTION than the scientists "theory" stated it would. the THEORY isnt holding up to the actual factual data....its fucking freezing and getting colder.

you dont need the hoax stuff to prove youre theory is wrong. throw all the proof that people in very high places lied through their teeth. just forget that for a moment. ignore it completely. ITS FUCKING FREEZING. that should tell you, wait, there is somethig seriously wrong with our models. they said it should be getting hotter but its actually going the opposite direction.

then as a scientific comunity just change the name of your whole body of work and say, "i am still right, but now we are gona call it climate change". no, you arent "still" right. you were never right. you thought it would get warmer and its not. and we always knew the climate changes, so what. adapt or die.

get it? global warming was wrong, start over with a fresh hypothosis and start figuring out what is going on. then when you PROVE your "theory" we will believe you. till then shut the fuck up already and start figuring out what is going on.
Like I explained before jeff, the term was misleading, clearly, as evident by your insistent case of "they said it was warming, they said it was WARMING!! :cuss:" .

Climate CHANGE is exactly what it is. It gets warmer in some parts, cooler in others.

Show me some of this data you believe exists that totally defeats the theory proposed. Lets see it, because for now, I'm afraid I'm taking thousands of scientists word above yours.
 

jeff f

New Member
Did you miss my previous post? Those 32 international science academies...? Each one holding hundreds of scientists, each one agreeing to human activity increasing climate change...?

Have you ever heard of the list of Steve's? It's this list the National Center for Science Education made up in response to the creationists list of those "scientists" who denied the theory of evolution. The creationists were able to get somewhere under 100 names to sign their list right... Then as of today, the NCSE got 1,134 different people, ONLY NAMED Steve (or some other variant) to sign. PWNED.

http://ncse.com/taking-action/list-steves

This is the exact same thing you're attempting to do by denying climate change happens. You and your list of a few dozen names is nothing in comparison to the actual scientists (with credible backgrounds in their respective fields) who agree this is happening.

What do you have to say about that?



Like I explained before jeff, the term was misleading, clearly, as evident by your insistent case of "they said it was warming, they said it was WARMING!! :cuss:" .

Climate CHANGE is exactly what it is. It gets warmer in some parts, cooler in others.

Show me some of this data you believe exists that totally defeats the theory proposed. Lets see it, because for now, I'm afraid I'm taking thousands of scientists word above yours.
they said "warming" on purpose. because they were trying to prove it was getting warmer. we already know that its hot in some places and cold in others. we have known that for centuries.

pad, you were duped. face it. you were lied to, you believed it, and now you are having trouble coming to grips with the fact that it was wrong.

other than that, i cant help ya bro. :cry:
 
P

PadawanBater

Guest
they said "warming" on purpose. because they were trying to prove it was getting warmer. we already know that its hot in some places and cold in others. we have known that for centuries.

pad, you were duped. face it. you were lied to, you believed it, and now you are having trouble coming to grips with the fact that it was wrong.

other than that, i cant help ya bro. :cry:

Again, your word over thousands of scientists collective data... who to trust...
:roll:
 

Mindmelted

Well-Known Member
Yep its getting hotter.

The first 10 days of january where the coldest ever in florida Ever!!!!!!!

Wiped out crops and animals,But its getting warmer?
 
Top