Reverend_Hellh0und

So it seems Al Gore was wrong when he stated that the issue of GW was "settled"... Sun spots, all the planets cooling, and other factors that many of us have been talking about for years, seems to be a bigger factor, than our breathing and burning of things. :shug:

__________________
كافر
Caith siar é agus ná lig anair á

Goobieman

There's a reason why the Watermellons* changed their mantra from "global warming" to "climate change" -- in doing so, they can blame the wealth of the world, primarily that here in the US, for any and all unusual weather, including extreme and/or out of place cold.

* Watermellons:
Green on the outside, red in the middle.

__________________
Artificially supporting the weak, slow, sick and stupid strains already limited resources and weakens the species as a whole.
-Goobieman

American

My thread got moved to the Enviromental forum.

__________________
"Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure." -- Thomas Jefferson יהוה

Joe1991

The scientists from NASA take on the deniers dissimulation:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/Enviro...l-warming.html

Erod

Prediction: In about 10 years, you won't be able to find a soul in town willing to admit that they once bought into this garbage.

Throw it in the bin with SARS, Bird Flu, Y2K, and pretty soon, Swine Flu.

__________________
Give a man a fish, and you've created a liberal. Teach him to fish, and you've created a life-long conservative.

hazlnut

Because it's not BREAKING NEWS. The title of the piece makes it obvious it's a partisan opinion piece.

You want to get educated and better informed about Climate Change and Global Warming:

Climate Change: NASA's Eyes on the Earth

NASA - Climate Change Resource Reel

Climate Change | U.S. EPA

If you want to continue being a partisan hack (basically working for free for oil and energy interests) don't go to these links. The info there will make it hard for you to live with yourself.

__________________
President Merkin Muffley: Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room.

Goobieman

* Watermellons:
Green on the outside, red in the middle.

__________________
Artificially supporting the weak, slow, sick and stupid strains already limited resources and weakens the species as a whole.
-Goobieman

Middleground

Amen. Jeepers the pickins' must by pretty slim for the deniers, since this article has been posted 3 times already.

__________________
Guess what I don't care and don't believe dogs gas causes global warming. After all it is 40 degrees here in Florida today. --ptif219

Kandahar

There's already a thread on this:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/Enviro...l-warming.html

__________________
Are you coming to bed?
I can't. This is important.
What?
Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

Middleground

The guy who wrote the article is an idiot. Why? Cuz he cannot even look up easy facts.

For instance, this is a crock of poop:

But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

This is simply untrue. It's been warming. Don't fall for the lies, you are being mislead. I urge y'all to read the following:

Objection:

Global temperatures have been trending down since 1998. Global Warming is over.


Answer:

At the time, 1998 was a record high year in both the CRU and the NASA GISS analysis. In fact, it was not just a record year, it blew away the previous record by .2oC. (That previous record went all the way back to 1997, by the way!) According to NASA, it was elevated far above the trend line because 1998 was the year of the strongest El Nino of the century. Choosing that year as a starting point is a classic cherry pick and demonstrates why it is necessary to remove the very chaotic year to year variability that exists (aka: weather) by smoothing out the data. Looking at the CRU's graph below, you can see the result of that smoothing in black.




Clearly 1998 is an anomaly and the trend has not reversed. (Even the apparent levelling at the end is not the real smoothing. The smoothed trend in 2005 depends on all of its surrounding years, including a few years still in the future.) By the way, choosing the CRU analysis is also a cherry pick because NASA has 2005 breaking the 1998 record, though by very little.

Now this is an excusable mistake for average folks who do not need the rigors of statistical analysis in their day jobs, but any scientist in pretty much any field knows that you can not extract any meaningful information about trends in noisy data from single-year end points. This is why it is hard to hear a scientist make this argument and still believe that they are a voice of integrity in this debate, rather it appears more to be an abuse of the trust people would like to place in them as scientists. Bob Carter is such a voice and was the first to trot out this argument in an article in the Daily Telegraph. Since then it has echoed far and wide and has been used by Richard Lindzen as well as a host of sceptic websites.

Warming Stopped in 1998 : A Few Things Ill Considered

__________________
Guess what I don't care and don't believe dogs gas causes global warming. After all it is 40 degrees here in Florida today. --ptif219