• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Falsified Data, Lies, & Anthropogenic Global Warming

vetusvates said:
Failing to prove one thing, does not support the existence of the opposite.
In this case I see it as (it might appear) global warming may just have failed to be proved. But it is not proved that it does not exist at all.
Click to expand...

I meant just that the study you're referring to in the most recent link was not a study to back up the idea of global warming at all, but seems to have been one that predicts the rate at which the globe will warm. This isn't the study that gives us the idea of global warming at all and (presumably) that study or those studies don't seem to have the same kind of problems. Whether global warming is real or not is not what they were studying- nor was it whether it's man made or not.
I guess I just wanted to point that out lest anyone not read the article and get the idea that "global warming" as an idea was now in any serious jeopardy as a result of this study.
As is often the case in these threads we're talking about many different things. 1. global warming is real or it's not 2. global warming is caused by humans & 3. the link you posted (study with missing data) which states something like 'This is the rate at which we believe that globe will warm.' 2. or 3. could be totally bogus ideas and it has no effect on 1.
Also the answer from the study in question would likely be that the data they didn't keep is readily obtainable from the places they obtained it in the first place- weather stations around the world. I'm not defending that they dumped them, but it's likely that they can repeat this as those records wouldn't be gone..

"The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building."
 
To recapitulate the OP, the links there imply that we do not necessarily absolutely positively know that there is actually any such thing as global warming.
The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.
Click to expand...
~ a quote from the awkward, uncovered, formerly hidden, emails and documents of the proponents. That was followed by discussing the deleting of many emails.
EDITORIAL: Hiding evidence of global cooling
Click to expand...
~ the title of an editorial that the second link leads to. It's an editorial, of course. But the uniting of the two words "global" and "cooling" does not a factual concept of the union make.
 
I can't comment on some fragments of emails that we can never know the context of, so I didn't.
I don't think you'll find many actual scientists who don't think the planet is warming overall.. Maybe there are quite a few who haven't been satisfied that it's man made, maybe even some who will say that they believe it's a natural cycle.
 
Simple google search for "fallacy of global warming" :
Results 1 - 10 of about 455,000 for fallacy of global warming. (0.17 seconds)
Click to expand...
Simply one search underlines the old adage that there are two sides to every coin.
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=fallacy+of+global+warming&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
___________________________________________________________________

But in all fairness, simple google search for "global warming" yielded :
Results 1 - 10 of about 12,400,000 for global warming. (0.12 seconds)
Click to expand...
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=global+warming&aq=f&oq=&aqi=
 
Roy Munson said:
I haven't seen the reports. :roflmao: Maybe Rich hasn't read every posted word either. :roflmao: I guess neither the admin, not the mods are all-seeing or omniscient. :roflmao:
Click to expand...

I'm a big boy. I almost never bother to report people that have to resort to insults to prove a point that they can't support with real evidence (unless they cross the line into really obnoxious statements that are definitely not family-friendly). Frequently, I feel that they look worse when the insults-instead-of-discussion are LEFT instead of removed.

I wasn't fussing at the moderators at ALL in that post. Promise. You know I'm less subtle than that. ;)
 
ruraldean said:
Bear in mind that these will also include all of the above, plus all the other anti-warming sites.
Click to expand...
Excellent observation. As I was going to sleep last night that dawned on me, but I was too lazy to log back on to make a note of that detail.
Thanks ruraldean, for doing that for me.
So : total "global warming" results (minus results containing "fallacy") = 12,400,000 - 455,000.

Doesn't look much different, relatively. But my little bit of data is more precise. Having been homogenised/QC'd/massaged. ;)
 
vetusvates said:
Simple google search for "fallacy of global warming" :
Click to expand...

And . . .
Results 1 - 10 of about 6,820,000 for global warming lies. (0.22 seconds)

Fallacy is a big word for a lot of people. ;)

So, of the 12 million total hits for global warming, half and half (give or take) . . . for something that is dictating economic and global policy. :shrugs:

D80

PS. Of course this conflicts greatly with . . .
Results 1 - 10 of about 18,600,000 for global warming truths. (0.26 seconds) :sidestep:

and of course, there's approximately 2 million hits for another huge problem:
Results 1 - 10 of about 2,400,000 for global warming goats. (0.25 seconds)
 
Drizzt80 said:
And . . .
Results 1 - 10 of about 6,820,000 for global warming lies. (0.22 seconds)

Fallacy is a big word for a lot of people. ;)

So, of the 12 million total hits for global warming, half and half (give or take) . . . for something that is dictating economic and global policy. :shrugs:

D80

PS. Of course this conflicts greatly with . . .
Results 1 - 10 of about 18,600,000 for global warming truths. (0.26 seconds) :sidestep:

and of course, there's approximately 2 million hits for another huge problem:
Results 1 - 10 of about 2,400,000 for global warming goats. (0.25 seconds)
Click to expand...
Excellent point.
Hmmmm.....goats
KJUN said:
Hmmmmmmm

Results 1 - 10 of about 557,000 for Society of Canadians for Global Warming.
Click to expand...
Canadians have a lot more to gain than most by global warming. Much new real estate. And women in bikinis on Hudson Bay.

But the big question here is : Why do goats outnumber Canadians in stance on global warming?
 
Tom, just today, now, following your link...and seeing the date written, that we've been hearing about for years, did I realize that that is the day after my 50th birthday, 20 Dec 2012. Weird stuff. I actually dread (not really) turning 50, more than I dread the day after.
But I know I dislike watching others grow old more so than myself. Like in those capital punishment/death penalty threads...I don't see death so much as a punishment or a bad ending. I am very curious as to what comes "after"...even if it is a floating drifting rest in limbo.
 
What if it is like that moment when the alarm clock goes off, but you aren't awake enough to turn it off...and you can't quite stay asleep, either. You know, that HORRIBLE point where you are stuck in limbo with the loud, bothersome noise going one and on........except that it would go on now forever.

Obviously, that is a minor fear of mine. It's been expanded from a line in a play, of course.
 
Well, when Saul had the witch of Endor summon up the ghost of Samuel,...old Samuel was pretty doggone cranky. So I'm thinking a deep restful sleep.
And once I get good and settled and finished haunting a few enemies for payback, and loved ones for fun,...nobody better be coming along and waking me up.
 
Woke up this morning to this:http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/143573.

Worth a read for those who haven't yet decided our governments are anything but honest.

Also, here in England, the leader of the Conservative Party, David Cameron, faces a backlash from his own people on the issue of Global Warming.

Thankfully, people are slowly waking up to the fact that this is a great way of governments controlling the populace and raising spurious taxes. I wonder how many companies are now relying on the sale of their new "green" products? W S Atkins, huge consulting engineer in the UK has said that they'd be struggling without Global Warming. Hmmmm...
 
I have no doubts at all that once the "evidence" for man made global warming evaporates, the next challenge will be the call to end global cooling.

Heck with all the rain we've had around here in north Florida this year, perhaps global flooding will be the next major threat......

I mean didn't anyone pay attention to the Y2K panic and how it was used by people on many levels for PROFIT?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top