The Global Warming Scam: A Bigger SCAM than first Suspected

Nazaroo

Nazaroo

New member
Here's a great outline of the basic controversy:

(1) The argument for Global Warming is based on temperature fluctuations and trends over many centuries.

(2) The Graphs for temperature fluctuations can be manipulated by choice of 'averaging'.
e.g., do we average the annual (yearly) temperature, or record summer highs and winter lows? Do we instead take 10 year or 50 year or 100 year 'averages' and compare those?

(3) Is the data consistent or even of the same type when comparing temperature data
of the past 10 centuries with that of the last century?



Global Warming Scam: Scientific Data in “Hockey Stick” Graph Bogus, Uh, ‘Fudged’ (video)

Posted By Vicki McClure Davidson on November 28, 2009
Scientific data used to create the 'hockey stick' graph (top) were 'fudged' to create the false illusion of global warming increasing - the bottom graph shows actual European climate change over the past 1,000 years

Last month, I went to the world premier of the outstanding documentary Not Evil Just Wrong. Irish filmmakers Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney exposed and explained the junk science used in Al Gore’s global-warming-fraud film An Inconvenient Truth. The bogus data used in the so-called “hockey stick” graph was a major focal point in the documentary.
Looks like McAleer’s and McElhinney’s research on the manipulated hockey stick data was way ahead of the global warming scandal now unfolding.
From Gateway Pundit: Death Knell to Global Warming– Renowned Statistician & Software Engineer Says Hockey Stick Data Was “Fudged”:
This May Be the Nail in the Coffin to Global Warming Junk Science—
Renowned statistician and software engineer Eric S. Raymond (ESR) says the global warming “hockey stick” graph data was “hard-coded” or purposefully “fudged.”
Dr. Michael Mann, who co-authored the famous graph of temperature trends dubbed the “hockey stick graph,” was implicated in Climategate this week. Mann’s controversial work has been challenged in the past.
​
I know that for some people, discussion of scientific data and hockey stick graphs is pure agony, total Snoozeville. But this scientist in the next video makes it fairly easy for even the most bubble-headed liberal arts majors to understand what the global warming zealots did to support their lies about global warming.


Explanation of the hockey stick graph – Result of Bad, Possibly Dishonest Science, Statistical Errors, and Flawed Data | Aired July 2008


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1k4mFZr-gE



 
TracerBullet

TracerBullet

New member
Nazaroo said:
Here's a great outline of the basic controversy:

(1) The argument for Global Warming is based on temperature fluctuations and trends over many centuries.
Click to expand...
false. The evidence for climate change comes from numerous sources Not just temperature changes but also atmospheric levels of green house gases. The reduction in polar ice sheets (year round change not single reading taken in winter). Ocean acidification. Changes in sea level and a dozen other sources.

(2) The Graphs for temperature fluctuations can be manipulated by choice of 'averaging'.
e.g., do we average the annual (yearly) temperature, or record summer highs and winter lows? Do we instead take 10 year or 50 year or 100 year 'averages' and compare those?
Click to expand...
speaking of graph manipulation the graphs presented in your OP or of two different things.

My favorite example of data manipulation is the use of outlying temperatures in 1998 to 'prove' there really ins't much change in temperature today.
 
badp

badp

New member
This is why the public doesn't take "science" seriously. Scientists can't even predict when it's going to snow, yet they are going to tell us what's causing the earth to warm up and what the consequences are going to be?

Computer models are really cool for the movies, but real science is a bit more... boring sometimes.

"However, the record to date is not clear enough to make any definitive conclusions about long-term climate trends based on the sea-ice observations alone."

That's from NASA, which is in the tank for global climate warming change.

Curious, what would be the consequences of the polar ice caps melting? Polar bears die off?
 
genuineoriginal

genuineoriginal

New member
TracerBullet said:
false. The evidence for climate change comes from numerous sources Not just temperature changes but also atmospheric levels of green house gases. The reduction in polar ice sheets (year round change not single reading taken in winter). Ocean acidification. Changes in sea level and a dozen other sources.

speaking of graph manipulation the graphs presented in your OP or of two different things.

My favorite example of data manipulation is the use of outlying temperatures in 1998 to 'prove' there really ins't much change in temperature today.
Click to expand...
dr_evil_weather_modification_carbon_tax_meme.png
 
R

rexlunae

New member
badp said:
This is why the public doesn't take "science" seriously. Scientists can't even predict when it's going to snow, yet they are going to tell us what's causing the earth to warm up and what the consequences are going to be?
Click to expand...

It's actually a lot harder to predict whether or not it's going to snow tomorrow than it is to predict how much snow will fall this year. And it's easier to predict how much will fall this decade than it is to predict how much will fall this year.

Do you know why?

badp said:
Computer models are really cool for the movies, but real science is a bit more... boring sometimes.
Click to expand...

Oh, I assure you, computer models can be plenty boring. I'm guessing, though, based on your comment that you're thinking of something out of CSI: Cyber more than something realistic.

badp said:
"However, the record to date is not clear enough to make any definitive conclusions about long-term climate trends based on the sea-ice observations alone."
Click to expand...

Right. You can't use the sea-ice observations alone to reach definitive conclusions about the total climate. Unsurprisingly.

You might want to read that a couple of times.

badp said:
Curious, what would be the consequences of the polar ice caps melting? Polar bears die off?
Click to expand...

Fill in the blank:
I would rather live ___________ the surface of the ocean.

a) above
b) below
 
TracerBullet

TracerBullet

New member
badp said:
This is why the public doesn't take "science" seriously. Scientists can't even predict when it's going to snow, yet they are going to tell us what's causing the earth to warm up and what the consequences are going to be?

Computer models are really cool for the movies, but real science is a bit more... boring sometimes.

"However, the record to date is not clear enough to make any definitive conclusions about long-term climate trends based on the sea-ice observations alone."
Click to expand...

and that is why long term climate changes are based multiple sources and not on see ice observations alone
 
intojoy

intojoy

BANNED
Banned
Nazaroo said:
Here's a great outline of the basic controversy:

(1) The argument for Global Warming is based on temperature fluctuations and trends over many centuries.

(2) The Graphs for temperature fluctuations can be manipulated by choice of 'averaging'.
e.g., do we average the annual (yearly) temperature, or record summer highs and winter lows? Do we instead take 10 year or 50 year or 100 year 'averages' and compare those?

(3) Is the data consistent or even of the same type when comparing temperature data
of the past 10 centuries with that of the last century?



Global Warming Scam: Scientific Data in “Hockey Stick” Graph Bogus, Uh, ‘Fudged’ (video)

Posted By Vicki McClure Davidson on November 28, 2009
Scientific data used to create the 'hockey stick' graph (top) were 'fudged' to create the false illusion of global warming increasing - the bottom graph shows actual European climate change over the past 1,000 years

Last month, I went to the world premier of the outstanding documentary Not Evil Just Wrong. Irish filmmakers Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney exposed and explained the junk science used in Al Gore’s global-warming-fraud film An Inconvenient Truth. The bogus data used in the so-called “hockey stick” graph was a major focal point in the documentary.
Looks like McAleer’s and McElhinney’s research on the manipulated hockey stick data was way ahead of the global warming scandal now unfolding.
From Gateway Pundit: Death Knell to Global Warming– Renowned Statistician & Software Engineer Says Hockey Stick Data Was “Fudged”:
This May Be the Nail in the Coffin to Global Warming Junk Science—
Renowned statistician and software engineer Eric S. Raymond (ESR) says the global warming “hockey stick” graph data was “hard-coded” or purposefully “fudged.”
Dr. Michael Mann, who co-authored the famous graph of temperature trends dubbed the “hockey stick graph,” was implicated in Climategate this week. Mann’s controversial work has been challenged in the past.
​
I know that for some people, discussion of scientific data and hockey stick graphs is pure agony, total Snoozeville. But this scientist in the next video makes it fairly easy for even the most bubble-headed liberal arts majors to understand what the global warming zealots did to support their lies about global warming.


Explanation of the hockey stick graph – Result of Bad, Possibly Dishonest Science, Statistical Errors, and Flawed Data | Aired July 2008


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1k4mFZr-gE



Click to expand...


Well during the tribulation the earthers are in for a hell of a suprise
 
R

rexlunae

New member
This Just In

This Just In

So, it is winter in the Northern Hemisphere. And it's normally colder. And there's news from the North Pole:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...le-to-freezing-point-50-degrees-above-normal/

Apparently the temperature has risen 50 degrees above normal to the point that the pole is melting. In the winter. At the North Pole. It's likely warmer to the North than it is further south.

Strange times. And sure, it's an El Niño. And sure, weird weather can happen anyway. But I don't think we've seen this in other El Niños. I wonder what could cause it...
 
Nazaroo

Nazaroo

New member
rexlunae said:
So, it is winter in the Northern Hemisphere. And it's normally colder. And there's news from the North Pole:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...le-to-freezing-point-50-degrees-above-normal/

Apparently the temperature has risen 50 degrees above normal to the point that the pole is melting. In the winter. At the North Pole. It's likely warmer to the North than it is further south.

Strange times. And sure, it's an El Niño. And sure, weird weather can happen anyway. But I don't think we've seen this in other El Niños. I wonder what could cause it...
Click to expand...

An inevitable change in the atlantic ocean convection current.
completely independent from either greenhouse gasses, human pollution,
or the most important current events, changes in the behaviour of the Sun.

Can't even blame the pole-flipping (every 48,000 yrs) for this.

Nothing lasts forever, as apparently geology illustrates. Ask a dinosaur.

I don't believe dinosaurs generated enough methane to impact climate.

By the way, the earth is currently emitting huge clouds and puffs of methane,
far more than is produced by cows in the beef market.

Something under the crust is happening, as should be expected with a changing planet.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Nazaroo said:
An inevitable change in the atlantic ocean convection current.
completely independent from either greenhouse gasses, human pollution,
or the most important current events, changes in the behaviour of the Sun.

Can't even blame the pole-flipping (every 48,000 yrs) for this.

Nothing lasts forever, as apparently geology illustrates. Ask a dinosaur.

I don't believe dinosaurs generated enough methane to impact climate.

By the way, the earth is currently emitting huge clouds and puffs of methane,
far more than is produced by cows in the beef market.

Something under the crust is happening, as should be expected with a changing planet.
Click to expand...



Yes, on under the crust. As I recall, about a month ago, there were several thermal images of the Pacific that would result in our winter season and they were being compared to recent years. The amount of activity was unusual and the increase was alarming. And I don't recall any industry in the area!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top