• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

"BOMBSHELL" BUSTED! So-called "whistleblower" admits: NO DATA FRAUD

Jack Hays said:
I really don't care. No one at the Washington Post (for example) gets a bonus for calling AGW orthodoxy into question. The data are the data; that's good enough for me.
Click to expand...

I guess that's a version of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying 'lalalala I can't hear you!'
 
Cvir said:
Do you really believe scientists can accurately determine temperature anomalies 4000 years, 8000 years or 20,000 years ago, let alone a million years ago? These are guesses based on scant evidence. You people are off the charts on the gullible scale. And get real. Even if you believe this garbage, it does not prove man has anything to do with any changes in climate, nor is there anything any one can do about it. And where do you really think this will all lead to? More government interference in our lives, that's where. If you really think the earth is warming, fine. Move to another country, maybe Greenland, since it should be warming up there real soon. Start a farming commune, use your plow horses, eat alfalfa and bean sprouts and leave the rest of us alone.
Click to expand...

Hear hear!
 
Threegoofs said:
I guess that's a version of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying 'lalalala I can't hear you!'
Click to expand...

That's pretty good policy where alarmist rhetoric is concerned.
 
Cvir said:
the earth has warmed and cooled through 5 ice ages.
Click to expand...
Cvir said:
Do you really believe scientists can accurately determine temperature anomalies 4000 years, 8000 years or 20,000 years ago, let alone a million years ago?
Click to expand...

Hmmm. I'm thinking one of these two guys is lying.
 
Cvir said:
Do you really believe scientists can accurately determine temperature anomalies 4000 years, 8000 years or 20,000 years ago, let alone a million years ago? These are guesses based on scant evidence. You people are off the charts on the gullible scale. And get real. Even if you believe this garbage, it does not prove man has anything to do with any changes in climate, nor is there anything any one can do about it. And where do you really think this will all lead to? More government interference in our lives, that's where. If you really think the earth is warming, fine. Move to another country, maybe Greenland, since it should be warming up there real soon. Start a farming commune, use your plow horses, eat alfalfa and bean sprouts and leave the rest of us alone.
Click to expand...
People tend to read and hear what they want, Marcott, et al, which is cited often, states in the paper, that the proxies have an average resolution of 120 years.
This means a spike in temperature over a 20 year period may not even show up!
 
longview said:
People tend to read and hear what they want, Marcott, et al, which is cited often, states in the paper, that the proxies have an average resolution of 120 years.
This means a spike in temperature over a 20 year period may not even show up!
Click to expand...

I've tried to explain that fact before about proxy resolutions. The indoctrinated simply don't care about scientific facts.
 
Lord of Planar said:
I've tried to explain that fact before about proxy resolutions. The indoctrinated simply don't care about scientific facts.
Click to expand...

Funny - some of the indoctrinated pretend groups like the National Academy of Sciences 'dont care about scientific facts' too.

And others (mostly people who pretend they understand science and 'read all the papers', yet have never done a whit of paleoclimate research on their own) pretend that one can get massive global temperature spikes that somehow go up a half degree and then back down a half degree in the Marcott study and it would never be picked up.
 
Jack Hays said:
With Michael Mann no less. Yet another false claim of debunking, while steering clear of what Bates actually said.
Click to expand...
What is even funnier is that if one accepts the Numbers from Karl, et al 2015 showing no pause,
Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus | Science
the rate of warming is not alarming.
Moreover, for 1998–2014 our new global trend is 0.106°± 0.058°C decade−1, and for 2000–2014, it is 0.116°± 0.067°C decade−1 (table S1).
Click to expand...
The 0.116°C /decade, is closer to Judith Curry's prediction, than Michael Mann's.
 
Jack Hays said:
With Michael Mann no less. Yet another false claim of debunking, while steering clear of what Bates actually said.
Click to expand...

I forget- you don't trust experts unless they appear on internet 'radio' shows that also discuss that Queen Elizabeth is also a lizard shapeshifter.
 
Threegoofs said:
I forget- you don't trust experts unless they appear on internet 'radio' shows that also discuss that Queen Elizabeth is also a lizard shapeshifter.
Click to expand...

The facts of this matter are readily available (and notably dodged by you, btw) and, sadly, MM's claim is inconsistent with those facts.
 
[h=1]Top Climate Porn: All-Women Photo[/h]Posted on 10 Feb 17 by GEOFF CHAMBERS • 9 Comments
The Bates/Karl affair is having all kinds of ramifications, with the usual suspects falling over themselves to defend Karl, sometimes with the interesting argument that his correction is so trivial as to be hardly worth talking about. Stefan Rahmstorf at RealClimate asks: “Could the difference of a few hundredths of a degree have duped world …
 
Looks like the Met Office has lined up against Michael Mann.

Quotes of the Week: Met Office vs NOAA

The Battle For Truth And Credibility Over Global Warming Pause A story in the Sunday Times confirms that the UK Met Office does not accept Karl et al.’s denial of the global warming hiatus and acknowledges that, ‘the slowdown hasn’t gone away.’ Writing in this week’s New Scientist, Michael Mann claimed that the pause is…

Continue reading →

The Battle For Truth And Credibility Over Global Warming Pause
A story in the Sunday Times confirms that the UK Met Office does not accept Karl et al.’s denial of the global warming hiatus and acknowledges that, ‘the slowdown hasn’t gone away.’ Writing in this week’s New Scientist, Michael Mann claimed that the pause is an ‘utterly debunked idea’ and ‘in the final analysis was much ado about nothing,’ and a ‘favourite climate contrarian talking point.’ The pause is real and it contains lots of interesting science, there are over 50 explanations proffered for it. But is also has another effect in that is shows the diversity of opinion in climate science, which on this important topic is certainly not settled. Who can deny that climate science is divided over this crucial issue? –- David Whitehouse, GWPF Observatory, 12 February 2017
“What you see is that the slowdown just goes away.” –Thomas Karl (NOAA), Science Magazine, 4 June 2015.
“The slowdown hasn’t gone away.” –Peter Stott (Met Office), The Sunday Times, 12 February 2017
​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom