It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

MSM reports: The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever

page: 7
44
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 01:49 PM
link   
This is the whole problem with this debate. One guy, or one group or one association or one graph or one thing gets all our attention and we debate it or debunk it and argue over it. When we do that we miss the big picture.

Overwhelmingly...scientists and scientific organizations overall, keep telling us that man made global warming is real and is a warming trend, outside of any of the natural warming trends and cycles. Big picture please.




posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
This is the whole problem with this debate. One guy, or one group or one association or one graph or one thing gets all our attention and we debate it or debunk it and argue over it. When we do that we miss the big picture.

Overwhelmingly...scientists and scientific organizations overall, keep telling us that man made global warming is real and is a warming trend, outside of any of the natural warming trends and cycles. Big picture please.


Lol.
OK big picture.

Name a single time in earths history where co2 was higher and led to " out if control warming"....

Seeing how it was way higher many times all resulting in life's explosion of species not catastrophe....

Why is it you believe despite actual known data this time it is somehow a massive problem?

There has never once despite much higher co2 concentrations many times, been this magical " out of control warming"

This is not science....it is faith based, thus falls into the realm of religion.

There is nor a single piece of evidence that corilates with co2 causing out of control warming.

This has not even once happened, even when co2 was thousands of times higher than it is now.

The only side effect was bigger faster growing plants..and an exosion of life.

More co2 is a good thing.

Ask the Dino's who ruled for hundreds of millions of years.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 03:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: infinityorder

originally posted by: amazing
This is the whole problem with this debate. One guy, or one group or one association or one graph or one thing gets all our attention and we debate it or debunk it and argue over it. When we do that we miss the big picture.

Overwhelmingly...scientists and scientific organizations overall, keep telling us that man made global warming is real and is a warming trend, outside of any of the natural warming trends and cycles. Big picture please.


Lol.
OK big picture.

Name a single time in earths history where co2 was higher and led to " out if control warming"....

Seeing how it was way higher many times all resulting in life's explosion of species not catastrophe....

Why is it you believe despite actual known data this time it is somehow a massive problem?

There has never once despite much higher co2 concentrations many times, been this magical " out of control warming"

This is not science....it is faith based, thus falls into the realm of religion.

There is nor a single piece of evidence that corilates with co2 causing out of control warming.

This has not even once happened, even when co2 was thousands of times higher than it is now.

The only side effect was bigger faster growing plants..and an exosion of life.

More co2 is a good thing.

Ask the Dino's who ruled for hundreds of millions of years.


But...am I to believe that thousands of scientists, scientific papers, scientific organizations and associations are wrong and you are right. Did they all forget that, but you did not. Serious question. Help me get past that logically. Are they all lying to me. Every single one of them?

Editing to add that CO2 might overall be good for the planet and the dinos...but..it won't be for us. Try living in Vegas for a summer and you'll see....rising oceans, unpredictable climate changes, drought, more energy consumption to keep us cooler, water disputes and wars...mas migration and immigration...and although polution is good for plants, it's not good for us. Just look at the smog in China.
edit on 9-2-2015 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: infinityorder

originally posted by: amazing
This is the whole problem with this debate. One guy, or one group or one association or one graph or one thing gets all our attention and we debate it or debunk it and argue over it. When we do that we miss the big picture.

Overwhelmingly...scientists and scientific organizations overall, keep telling us that man made global warming is real and is a warming trend, outside of any of the natural warming trends and cycles. Big picture please.


Lol.
OK big picture.

Name a single time in earths history where co2 was higher and led to " out if control warming"....

Seeing how it was way higher many times all resulting in life's explosion of species not catastrophe....

Why is it you believe despite actual known data this time it is somehow a massive problem?

There has never once despite much higher co2 concentrations many times, been this magical " out of control warming"

This is not science....it is faith based, thus falls into the realm of religion.

There is nor a single piece of evidence that corilates with co2 causing out of control warming.

This has not even once happened, even when co2 was thousands of times higher than it is now.

The only side effect was bigger faster growing plants..and an exosion of life.

More co2 is a good thing.

Ask the Dino's who ruled for hundreds of millions of years.


But...am I to believe that thousands of scientists, scientific papers, scientific organizations and associations are wrong and you are right. Did they all forget that, but you did not. Serious question. Help me get past that logically. Are they all lying to me. Every single one of them?

Editing to add that CO2 might overall be good for the planet and the dinos...but..it won't be for us. Try living in Vegas for a summer and you'll see....rising oceans, unpredictable climate changes, drought, more energy consumption to keep us cooler, water disputes and wars...mas migration and immigration...and although polution is good for plants, it's not good for us. Just look at the smog in China.



...And you have read the publications of each and everyone of those scientists ,right?Big picture,man,big picture!



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 03:37 PM
link   
A lot of people here seem to forget that the Sun is the biggest contributor to Earth's weather/climate. Earth's temperatures follow the pattern of the Sun's activity. The latest warming trend saw one of the most active sun cycles ever, and now the sun has become less active causing cooler temperatures then what we have seen in in the last full years. The same occurred in the 60s and 70s, the sun became less active, helping to cause the epic winters of the late 70s.

Unless we are tampering with the Sun, then climate change is mostly natural. It's almost arrogant to think we can have such a huge affect in Earth's climate, with out nature balancing it's self out.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 03:38 PM
link   
More information on the altered data.

Telegra ph


To fill in the huge gaps, those compiling the records have resorted to computerised “infilling”, whereby the higher temperatures recorded by the remaining stations are projected out to vast surrounding areas (Giss allows single stations to give a reading covering 1.6 million square miles). This alone contributed to the sharp temperature rise shown in the years after 1990.

But still more worrying has been the evidence that even this data has then been subjected to continual “adjustments”, invariably in only one direction. Earlier temperatures are adjusted downwards, more recent temperatures upwards, thus giving the impression that they have risen much more sharply than was shown by the original data.




An early glaring instance of this was spotted by Steve McIntyre, the statistician who exposed the computer trickery behind that famous “hockey stick” graph, beloved by the IPCC, which purported to show that, contrary to previous evidence, 1998 had been the hottest year for 1,000 years. It was McIntyre who, in 2007, uncovered the wholesale retrospective adjustments made to US surface records between 1920 and 1999 compiled by Giss (then run by the outspoken climate activist James Hansen). These reversed an overall cooling trend into an 80-year upward trend. Even
Hansen had previously accepted that the “dust bowl” 1930s was the hottest US decade of the entire 20th century.

Assiduous researchers have since unearthed countless similar examples across the world, from the US and Russia to Australia and New Zealand.

In Australia, an 80-year cooling of 1 degree per century was turned into a warming trend of 2.3 degrees.

In New Zealand, there was a major academic row when “unadjusted” data showing no trend between 1850 and 1998 was shown to have been “adjusted” to give a warming trend of 0.9 degrees per century. This falsified new version was naturally cited in an IPCC report (see “New Zealand NIWA temperature train wreck” on the Watts Up With That science blog, WUWT, which has played a leading role in exposing such fiddling of the figures).




One of the more provocative points arising from the debate over those claims that 2014 was “the hottest year evah” came from the Canadian academic Dr Timothy Ball when, in a recent post on WUWT, he used the evidence of ice-core data to argue that the Earth’s recent temperatures rank in the lowest 3 per cent of all those recorded since the end of the last ice age, 10,000 years ago.


Here is an example of altered data.




edit on 9-2-2015 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 03:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
But...am I to believe that thousands of scientists, scientific papers, scientific organizations and associations are wrong and you are right. Did they all forget that, but you did not. Serious question. Help me get past that logically. Are they all lying to me. Every single one of them?


This is a fair point, I think this situation is akin to the now debunked anti-fat movement which was really propagated by industry professionals (which includes or perhaps consists of government regulators at one time or another).

It isn't that they are lying (as you say, they can't all be lying), they just don't know or care what the truth is. Once convinced, popular opinion demands consistency and they have a job to do and a professional career to prepare for which pretty much excludes any dissent from the prevailing 'wisdom'. (btw, it doesn't mean that eating only fat and lots of it is the logical conclusion either)

Remember those people whose contemptuous glares made your doughnut taste just a little better than it should have?
edit on 9-2-2015 by greencmp because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 03:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
We caused the ice ages, we caused all the subsequent thaws, and every other climate catastrophe that ever happened was the fault of modern man too ... because government funded scientists said so!


Why make such an obvious straw man?



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 04:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: IngyBall
A lot of people here seem to forget that the Sun is the biggest contributor to Earth's weather/climate. Earth's temperatures follow the pattern of the Sun's activity. The latest warming trend saw one of the most active sun cycles ever, and now the sun has become less active causing cooler temperatures then what we have seen in in the last full years. The same occurred in the 60s and 70s, the sun became less active, helping to cause the epic winters of the late 70s.

Unless we are tampering with the Sun, then climate change is mostly natural. It's almost arrogant to think we can have such a huge affect in Earth's climate, with out nature balancing it's self out.


Scientists haven't forgotten that. They know that the Sun is responsible for certain climate cycles. However, the debate is whether humans are creating a separate cycle. It's not arrogant to think that we can have a huge impact on climate, and really any aspect of the earth. small examples being smog in cities around the world, the extinction of species, etc.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Could some one answer this problem for me. How come with advent of the industrial revolution and the years between 1800s to the 1960s, when more crap than ever before was threw into the earth's atmosphere, how come there was not a massive spike in the earth's global temperature?

According to the present reasoning, supposedly through man made pollution, there HAD to be a massive spike showing higher temperatures with all that pollution and it was vastly higher than today's global pollution. But there was not.

If you want to talk about man made pollution in the atmosphere just talk to anyone over 60 and they'll tell you when they were younger the stuff that was released into the air was horrific compared to today's supposedly man made pollution.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: crayzeed
Could some one answer this problem for me. How come with advent of the industrial revolution and the years between 1800s to the 1960s, when more crap than ever before was threw into the earth's atmosphere, how come there was not a massive spike in the earth's global temperature?

According to the present reasoning, supposedly through man made pollution, there HAD to be a massive spike showing higher temperatures with all that pollution and it was vastly higher than today's global pollution. But there was not.

If you want to talk about man made pollution in the atmosphere just talk to anyone over 60 and they'll tell you when they were younger the stuff that was released into the air was horrific compared to today's supposedly man made pollution.


I think there's still more pollution going in the air today than decades ago or centuries ago. Plus more cars and China and some of these other countries hadn't ramped up yet. I could be wrong of course.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: grandmakdw

Ignorance huh, how come my NASA meteorologist friend nearly died because they wanted him to shut up about the data manipulation? They didn't dare risk firing him, so they tried to kill him instead, when that failed, he got the message, shut up.


That is BS.

Absolutely disgusting you would make something like that to suit your argument. Great claims like that require great evidence or any evidence.

This thread is full of ignorant claims and jingles that the masses like to sing along, kind of like Fox New's talking points.

I am ashamed of ATS right now.

Do so many of you truly believe that:

1) Human activity has not caused the observed 40+% rise of CO2 in the past half century?

2) The overwhelming majority of climate/weather/atmosphere scientist are just making this up as a scam to raise taxes?



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: crayzeed

Pollution can cause a cooling/dimming effect, like soot for an example.

The problem with the Planet's atmosphere and the concern for global warming is there is a relation between CO2 and O2 in our atmosphere. For millions of years there has been a balance(and fluctuation) of CO2 and O2 that has enabled complex life to rise. There is legitimate evidence for concern over a runaway shift in CO2 and O2 levels because of the current trend in CO2 concentrations, as well as the CO2/O2 ratio and the N2/O2 ratio.

Currently the human race is pumping CO2 into the atmosphere while destroying the planet's natural sinks of CO2, i.e. The rain forest, phytoplankton, ect...

The planet can adjust, but will complex life, ourselves included do so?
edit on 9-2-2015 by jrod because: ahhh



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 05:08 PM
link   
@anyone who says earth was not high in CO2. Remember theperiod when all the volcanic activity was going on before life was alive?(as in humans)



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 05:14 PM
link   
This only proves one thing: The government will lie and cherry pick data when it suits them for their agenda. This should neither surprise or shock anyone.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod
Whoops, a bit of we're damned if we do or we're damned if we don't scenario. A bit like the climate scientists in the early 1990s" we're going to enter a mini ice age". Whoops the data doesn't show that. The early 2000s "we made a mistake ,we'll be entering a global warming phase". Whoops we've only got supposed future models for that but not definite data.
So let's edge our bets and call it climate change then no one can pull us up on it because it can mean both scenarios.
So we f*** the planet up for humans and we go extinct. So what if the dung beetles or a thousand other species go extinct with us no humans will be around to notice and the world will go on turning as if nothing happened.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: crayzeed

I do know a few people who are adamant that climate change is a hoax, scam, or liberal hippy BS so inherently evil . I've watched them in action, they are the same ones who don't think twice in throwing their fast food garbage out their car window when they are done.

Future generations(not just humans) should not be burdened because of some of us are self-centered jerks that could care less what becomes of this world after they perish.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

No one says that.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 06:16 PM
link   
I believe we're getting lots of earth changes, weather anomalies, pole shift initiated, north pole melting, possibly due to being targetted and possibly due to the magnetic pole moving, and Einstein and alternative scientists being right about what pole shift means, not current scientists covering that it is also a geophysical one. Because its all magnets, and what the heck does a ball do when its magnets change????

I believe its technology and being used as a geopolitical weapon by the dominating psycho's.

I believe they first used alot of atmospheric nukes, and also depleted uranium combusting to ionize the stratosphere, and also this would cause warming in spots. And this facilitates their use of Scalar Technology, Tesla Technology, to heat the ionosphere, direct the jetsreams and conduct horror and genocide on earth and reshape the world as they wish, which by the way is 9/11 destruction chaos mode.

So in a sense global warming is correct at times, when they want it to be, beyond cycles. They're forcing a cycle.
edit on 9-2-2015 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 06:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod

originally posted by: grandmakdw

Ignorance huh, how come my NASA meteorologist friend nearly died because they wanted him to shut up about the data manipulation? They didn't dare risk firing him, so they tried to kill him instead, when that failed, he got the message, shut up.


That is BS.

Absolutely disgusting you would make something like that to suit your argument. Great claims like that require great evidence or any evidence.

This thread is full of ignorant claims and jingles that the masses like to sing along, kind of like Fox New's talking points.

I am ashamed of ATS right now.

Do so many of you truly believe that:

1) Human activity has not caused the observed 40+% rise of CO2 in the past half century?

2) The overwhelming majority of climate/weather/atmosphere scientist are just making this up as a scam to raise taxes?


Can guarantee you 100% I did not make up the story about my meteorologist friend. You can and have chosen not to believe me and that is your right. Doesn't make it not true.



new topics

top topics



 
44
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join