leading global warming sceptic admits....

[somedude]

leading global warming skeptic admits....

http://tvshack.net/documentaries/Earth__the_Climate_Wars_Fightback__Episode_2/

At the 2008 international conference on climate change leading global warming skeptic Dr Patrick Michaels admits that the world is warming and humans play some part in it.

 

[Good to Go]

Hey, you spelled 'skeptic' wrong in your title...


LOL, you can't fix it, but nice try. You CAN delete it and enter it again if it really bugs you.

 

[somedude]

Yea i feel like an idiot oh well guess it sucks to be me

 

[Wade]

Yes, that's a popular show. Just like the Great Swindle show did, the author had an agenda. You can tell by the way he demeans the skeptics. See, the problem is, he kinda left a lot of data out himself. There's two sides to every story. Anyway, this isn't as exciting as TV, but this article tries to show that their were many other indicators which proved the medieval warming period existed.

Don't you find it interesting how, plants grew further north, than today, but the show made it seem like it's warmer today. Another interesting point, all data indicates that the earth has been cooling for the past decade, why did a show, filmed in 2008, not show the latest data. Maybe, because it wouldn't support the intended outcome. Anyway, read it for yourself.

What hockey stick?

You also noticed that Dr Patrick Michaels said the data showed the earth was warming, and man had implications. They kinda cut off the part where he describes the implication??????

 

[Ollie]

YOu still trying.
How many FACTS do we have to smack ya with.
FACT, arctic ice is EXPANDING. It has surpassed the 1980 levels.
FACT, the earth has cooled to pre 1980 levels.
FACT, 650 of the WORLDS leading climatoligist call global warming BS.
FACT, Co2 levels have NOTHING to do with global warming. It is a mienute amount of the autmoshpere. Water vapour is the leading cause of the Green House Effect.
FACT, ocean temps haven't changed.

I will give you props for being persistant, if ignorant.
Go check out Dr Patrick Michaels and see who writes his checks. Where does he get his grants. That will tell you why he is spouting off.

Every industrial nation in the world is going to be dropping the global warming scam but the US. Why? Ignorant people that REFUSE to admit they are not as all important as they think and the earth isn't going to explode.

 

[mcgyver]

I just released some methane into the atmosphere!

 

[somedude]

well i guess we'll find out in the years to come
if your right no big deal
if your wrong it would be prudent to take measures now.

 

[Uller]

Somedude,

Please got to the link in my sig line and do some reading. There are many interesting links in this site especially, the ones about sun spots.

Another is the senate minority report where the 650 skeptics have signed on disagreeing with the UN Global Warming Report (including some that originally signed that report)

 

[Superjag]

YOu still trying.
How many FACTS do we have to smack ya with.
FACT, arctic ice is EXPANDING. It has surpassed the 1980 levels.

Yes it is. But Antarctic Ice is declining rapidly. More importantly, global ice mass and overall glacier mass (including glaciers flowing from the West Antarctic ice sheet) are declining significantly .

FACT, the earth has cooled to pre 1980 levels.

Not sure where you are getting that from, but it's wrong. According to a number of reputable sources, including the National Climatic Data Center, last year was the 8th warmest globally on record. The other 7 have all come in the past 12 years.

FACT, 650 of the WORLDS leading climatoligist call global warming BS.

Check your "facts" again. The 650 people you are referring to were made up of some climatologists, but also a large number of television weathermen, economists, scientists in unrelated fields with no experience in climate science. Even if you put their "credentials" aside, there were about 10,300 other people at that conference who did not share their view.


FACT, Co2 levels have NOTHING to do with global warming. It is a mienute amount of the atmoshpere. Water vapour is the leading cause of the Green House Effect.

First of all, the "Greenhouse Effect" is not the same as global warming. The Greenhouse Effect refers to the capture of the sun's light and heat by molecules in our atmosphere. Without the "Greenhouse Effect" we would all die, as the surface of our planet would be way too cold to be inhabited by any of our life forms.

With regard to the CO2 levels, you're partly correct. While CO2 makes up only approximately .004% of the earth's atmosphere, CO2 is an important component of the Earth's atmosphere because it absorbs and emits infrared radiation, thereby playing a very significant role in the greenhouse effect and overall planet temperatures. CO2 levels in the atmosphere now in 2008 were at approximately 387 parts per million (ppm), highest for at least the last 650,000 years.


FACT, ocean temps haven't changed.

Where the h*ll did you get that?! The scientific consensus is that in the last 40 years or so, global ocean temperature has risen by approximately 0.10°C. The debate is over what is causing it.

Wheteher you want to admit it or not, the empirical evidence is pretty clear that the mean surface temperature of the land and the water on this planet is increasing. What isn't clear is whether it is man or nature that is causing this to happen, and to be honest, I don't claim to be smart enough to know.

Either way, your "facts" are way off.

 

[Ollie]

http://www.globalwarmingbs.com/2008/12/19/scientists-stand-up-against-global-warming-lie/

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tp-climate-change-water.htm
Read on.

http://globalwarmingisbs.com/

http://roadsassy.com/category/global-warming-bs/

NO ANTARCTIC ICE ISN'T DECLINING.
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2005/05/27/antarctic-ice-a-global-warming-snow-job/

As for the 650 experts you dismiss.
How about you show me the the credintials of the scientist pushing global warming, who they work for and how they get paid? Follow the money.

 

[Superjag]

The first site: Check out the list of credentials in the first site. In the first 15 names are a geologist, a paleontologist, and a chemical and materials engineer. And these are the names that they thought would add credibility to their claim. Imagine the ones they left off the list. Custodial engineer, sanitation engineer, Polaris engineer...

I'm not sure why you are listing the second site (the IPCC). What is the purpose for that link?

The third and fourth sites are sites geared towards people who are already committed to the position that global warming is a hoax. What does that prove? That would be like me posting the link to Al Gore's site. Aren't we supposed to be drawing our own conclusions from the evidence that is available, rather than swallowing a bunch of dribble from people who have already made up their mind one way or the other?

 

[ruffryder]

The first site: Check out the list of credentials in the first site. In the first 15 names are a geologist, a paleontologist, and a chemical and materials engineer. And these are the names that they thought would add credibility to their claim. Imagine the ones they left off the list. Custodial engineer, sanitation engineer, Polaris engineer...

I'm not sure why you are listing the second site (the IPCC). What is the purpose for that link?

The third and fourth sites are sites geared towards people who are already committed to the position that global warming is a hoax. What does that prove? That would be like me posting the link to Al Gore's site. Aren't we supposed to be drawing our own conclusions from the evidence that is available, rather than swallowing a bunch of dribble from people who have already made up their mind one way or the other?

ha ha ha.... Don't worry about Ollie... just a misguided sheeple...

Ollie check out this site... all you need to know...

www.ollieiswrong.com

 

[Ollie]

Ruffy, when have I ever been wrong.
Oh and heres a novel idea.
Try reading it this time instead of just looking at the head lines and bylines.

Ok, lets try this again.
You can hide your head and ignore real science all you want.
Here, let me try this.
Since you are glued to the media and what ever they tell you, I will let the media show you.


The REAL reason liberals are pushing global warming.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-s...-obama-use-global-warming-redistribute-wealth

News. It's from the media, so you know it's true.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/dec/19/year-of-global-cooling/
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2009/01/19/are-we-entering-era-global-cooling-alarmism
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/scarewatch/warming_really_cooling.html
http://hypsithermal.wordpress.com/2008/05/24/global-cooling-real/
http://www.newsmax.com/hostetter/global_warming/2007/12/19/58187.html
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/07/12/four-scientists-global-warming-out-global-cooling-in/

 

[ruffryder]

Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias

Doesn't that mean in and of itself that they are biased too???

One thing that bothers me to no end is the people trying to discount the global warming idea try and actually use spot data showing temperatures decreasing as a means of showing that there is global cooling going on... That is like the retard calling out the guy next to him as a retard too...

For one, the idea is that the AVERAGE temperatures will trend and tend to increase over a set period of time. Looking at data for one year or showing new low records is not on the same page as what global warming is talking about. Different scales and scopes are being used here...

Two, the idea of global warming is dumb, and the idea of global cooling is also dumb by association. To think that we understand enough of the weather to predict / show very long time trends is blasphemy.. We don't have accurate enough models nor basic understanding of weather, nor do we have enough of an understanding of how the sun and its radiation (sun spots and the like) have on the earths weather..

Three, people trying to argue either side normally don't know anything anyways.. (That is a FACT.. lol)

Four, just because the link is a .org doesn't make it a good site.. especially when it is trying to sound smart.. like science and public policy .org and newsbusters.org.... they are scam sites, trying to show reputation for factualness from their address... to many straws being drawn..

Anyways... I think the human mind is not to the point of understanding the weather to make any sort of statement one way or the other.. The global warming crap is going to be a big hurdle in the green movement.. It was a good vehicle, but pollution and its' effects on the health of people and the planet (lakes, soil, drinking water, food stocks) should have been the main focus, not the scare tactics of the world is going to end.

Five, a blog is not "The Media"... it is an editorial, I would really hope you know the difference in standards as such..

That is my point on the subject.. you are all wrong and I am the only right one! ha ha

 

[Ollie]

Doesn't that mean in and of itself that they are biased too???

One thing that bothers me to no end is the people trying to discount the global warming idea try and actually use spot data showing temperatures decreasing as a means of showing that there is global cooling going on... That is like the retard calling out the guy next to him as a retard too...

Go back and actually READ the information that I put in the original rebutal. It lists GLOBAL TEMPS AS A WHOLE, no spot data. Oh and the individuals putting forward global warming are have been using spot info to push their bs for the last 10 years.

For one, the idea is that the AVERAGE temperatures will trend and tend to increase over a set period of time. Looking at data for one year or showing new low records is not on the same page as what global warming is talking about. Different scales and scopes are being used here...

The data I put up, ya know, the stuff you didn't read. Shows the average temps of a 10 YEAR period. Which is a longer period than the global warming clowns used to start their bs.

Two, the idea of global warming is dumb, and the idea of global cooling is also dumb by association. To think that we understand enough of the weather to predict / show very long time trends is blasphemy.. We don't have accurate enough models nor basic understanding of weather, nor do we have enough of an understanding of how the sun and its radiation (sun spots and the like) have on the earths weather..

At this I tend to agree with you except the idea of global warming has cost the US BILLIONS of wasted dollars.

Three, people trying to argue either side normally don't know anything anyways.. (That is a FACT.. lol)

I don't claim to be an expert. That is why I try to look things up. If you can come up with a convincing arguement that makes logical sence. Then I will change my opinion.

Four, just because the link is a .org doesn't make it a good site.. especially when it is trying to sound smart.. like science and public policy .org and newsbusters.org.... they are scam sites, trying to show reputation for factualness from their address... to many straws being drawn..

Anyways... I think the human mind is not to the point of understanding the weather to make any sort of statement one way or the other.. The global warming crap is going to be a big hurdle in the green movement.. It was a good vehicle, but pollution and its' effects on the health of people and the planet (lakes, soil, drinking water, food stocks) should have been the main focus, not the scare tactics of the world is going to end.

However, the green movement will take a crippling hit when the truth is FORCED on the public. If the governments don't take a SERIOUS look at both sides and make a REAL effort to discover the truth, we may find ourselves in real trouble. I would rather have global warming than a mini-ice age. Ever try to grow wheat in 3' of snow?

As for the "good vehicle", I don't think so. People don't like to be scammed. They don't like to be lied to and they sure as heck don't like to find out they have spend billions on that lie. I am all for cleaning things up, but don't tell me the world will end if we don't do it RIGHT NOW.

Five, a blog is not "The Media"... it is an editorial, I would really hope you know the difference in standards as such..

Um, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and the like are nothing more than editorials with more hype.

That is my point on the subject.. you are all wrong and I am the only right one! ha ha

Right of left maybe.

 

[ericbigbore]

The first site: Check out the list of credentials in the first site. In the first 15 names are a geologist, a paleontologist, and a chemical and materials engineer. And these are the names that they thought would add credibility to their claim. Imagine the ones they left off the list. Custodial engineer, sanitation engineer, Polaris engineer...

I'm not sure why you are listing the second site (the IPCC). What is the purpose for that link?

The third and fourth sites are sites geared towards people who are already committed to the position that global warming is a hoax. What does that prove? That would be like me posting the link to Al Gore's site. Aren't we supposed to be drawing our own conclusions from the evidence that is available, rather than swallowing a bunch of dribble from people who have already made up their mind one way or the other?

Hey superjag,

Lets see your data and references. Put it up like ollie did. I also want to hear your spin on sun spots and solar effects on weather. Also I would like to hear your spin on historical proof of warmer times in mans history with less co2 backed up by reputable resources like NOAA, NASA, science, ect...

 

[Ollie]

I'm not sure why you are listing the second site (the IPCC). What is the purpose for that link?

The IPCC was established to provide the decision-makers and others interested in climate change with an objective source of information about climate change.

If you actually had read or even looked the site over you would have found a CHINGO of info and data on climate and weather.

 

[Dogmeat]

I dunno but all you global warming naysayers are going to rot in hell for all eternity for not saving the world ... the psuedo-relegio-environtardists say so.

 

[Wade]

Wheteher you want to admit it or not, the empirical evidence is pretty clear that the mean surface temperature of the land and the water on this planet is increasing. What isn't clear is whether it is man or nature that is causing this to happen, and to be honest, I don't claim to be smart enough to know.

Either way, your "facts" are way off.

So, this appears to be clearly increasing??????? NASA GISS data.

 

[somedude]

so your saying geoligist Ian Stewart is lying, he disproves what you guys are saying in that documentary???