UN Blowback: More Than 650 Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims , page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 53 times


reply posted on 10-12-2008 @ 08:21 PM by mbkennel
The scientific objections in this thread from the supposed "dissenters" are stupendously ignorant and just plain blatantly.

I too am a professional scientist (not in climate) but I started to read about what scientists in the field who were doing this for real have accomplished and know.

All of them (and many more misunderstandings) have been debunked for a long time.

1) "The effect of the Sun has not been included." Of course changes in solar output are not included in the IPCC projections of "what happens if you emit more GHG's" because that's not the goal. Everybody knows that more solar output means hotter, less solar output means cooler. But since we do not have any reason to predict any trend in solar output, there is no point to including change in the models.

The insinuation is that the climatologists have somehow "forgotten" about the role of the Sun and not seriously considered it. This is a total lie. Issues of solar output have been studied for decades, both in historical climate records (important for estimating climate sensitivity), and there have been ongoing physical measurements of solar output in recent years.

2) "water vapor is most of greenhouse effect". Of course it is significant, and all climatologists have known this since the beginning, but it is not an important *driver* of climate since it is in physical dynamical equilibrium because the oceans are enormous. It is a responder to climate since extra water goes in and out at timescales of 2 weeks, but greenhouse gases last decades to millenia. The amount of water vapor depends on the temperature and the climate as determined by long term drivers, not the other way around.

Again, the underlying insinuation is that professional scentists---the whole bulk of them---have forgotten about water vapor is yet another stupid and insidious lie. It is like imagining cardiothoracic surgeons all forgot about the liver.

If the dissenters have actual scientific arguments and some evidence they are encouraged to discuss them with scientists & submit them for publication. And throughout the years, man such papers which may have lowered climate sensitivity or cast doubt on standard predictions have in fact been published.

It turns out a number of them ended up having some significant methodological and data errors, discovered later.

But the type of objections as described in the first post come into the "would flunk out of oceanography 101".

See www.realclimate.org for factual information on climate science.

And then there's the final idiotic assertion that the number of authors of the IPCC report somehow is a legitimate count of the number of professionals in the field who agree with the conclusions. Three eminent scientists might write a review article about some area of chemistry, but 3,000 actual chemists really agree with it.

In truth, many of the actual disagreements from scientists in the field in some areas surround areas where they feel the IPCC is too slow and conservative, not taking into account newly discovered nonlinear phenomena which have the potential to make things markedly worse more quickly, and they'd want the upper bound on the confidence intervals raised.


reply posted on 10-12-2008 @ 08:30 PM by mbkennel
Originally posted by Mikey84
There is global warming, but it is a completely natural cycle of the planet and man has nothing to do with it at all, there is plenty of evidence out there to support and show that it is all just a natural cycle of the planet,


Such as? What kind of "cycle"? What kind of "natural"?

What specifically is the physical mechanism, what are the observations, experiments and theory, which support this mechanism, and what other mechanism is there to negate the observed physical effect of more infrared emissivity from increasing greenhouse gases? (this last effect is an observed fact, not conjecture).

Just saying "it's a natural cycle" only seems to turn off the brains of some. Actual climate scientists don't.

look at Mars which is also warming, Greenland has more Ice now than ever before, Glaciers are melting, but there are many growing!


1) We're not talking about Mars.
2) Remember, that you can get more ice when it warms up because you get more snow. In many Arctic/Antarctic regions it's so cold, but also very dry. Not much weather. Warmer weather, moist warmer air interacting with cold air makes

This is why there is more *snowfall* in Buffalo NY and Chicago, than many deep Arctic regions.

But the melt rate is also increasing because temperatures are warming.


Global warming is real, it’s just completely natural.

They fact that people swallowed the crap from Al Gore is just scary.

Mikey


Leave Gore out of it. Listen to actual scientists, who have been working on this for decades.


reply posted on 10-12-2008 @ 08:55 PM by jdub297
Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by jdub297


Oh GEE, and Russia is supposed to become the one of the largest exporters of oil and natural gas. They dont' tend to benefit from an anti-global warming effort.


You'll note it's a Lack of Russian information that created an appearance of GW. Think before you speak and you'd make more sense. Wouldn't Russia benefit if there was NO evidence of GW? That isn't the case. There are no Russian scientists or data involved in refuting GW.

Geez. Did you just see Russia, oil and GW and f*** it all up into something it's not, or is this the way you really are?


reply posted on 10-12-2008 @ 09:30 PM by jdub297
Originally posted by Blaine91555
If the $1,500.00 per animal tax goes through in the US, this Global Warming lie will hurt lots of innocent people. Do the math.

Al Gore is heavily invested in the Carbon Credit scam and Obama has stated his support. Pelosi is behind the tax on livestock among others.

God I'm glad I have access to plenty of Moose. I can't imagine what it will be like for the poor when protein sources go through the roof in price.


Excellent points Sarah. Get some rest.
In Sum: Man can't change weather. GW is all about money and control.

th3dudabides wrote
An examination in this case of who these scientists are, and who they have worked for would change the whole flavor of this story. If it turned out upon examination that 70% of these dissenters worked for DOW chemicals, Exxon, Monsanto or PNAC, certain think tanks, their motives and their masters would come to light and nobody could/would fall for it yet again


the bottom half of the piece contains references to all the most recent data sources refuting GW. These are objective observations and measurements, not interpretations or opinions, and thus independently verifiable. Just facts. No influence on thermometers and such.

mbkennel wrote

The scientific objections in this thread from the supposed "dissenters" are stupendously ignorant and just plain blatantly.

I too am a professional scientist (not in climate) but I started to read about what scientists in the field who were doing this for real have accomplished and know.


blatantly what? you're not a linguist either are you?

The point of this thread is not anti-change! You obviously have not read the discussions and papers.

The issue is man-made change. If you are a scientist then you know that with 380ppm CO2, that alone, as contributed by man, cannot possibly affect global weather.

Man can't control weather up, down, hot, dry or indifferent.

You'd do ATS a favor to read up on the issue before you attack the wrong target.


reply posted on 10-12-2008 @ 09:41 PM by Stranded
Although I do not have a science degree. I have trouble believing in a man-made Global Warming after the other hoax about Acid Rain.

Sure I can see human destructive nature and polluting habits influence nature, but the war on carbon is not for restoring or preventing. The only reason is to get more money by regulation and taxation.

Farmers have to pay tax for their stock, but this doesn't mean they have less animals and produce smaller co² because people want to eat. So pricing for products just goes up to settle difference for taxation. Nothing changed.

Oil and derived products are taxed higher, but alternatives are kept at high prices so everyone able to afford a car still drives. Transportation costs are paid by consumers in the end. People are not driving less than before. There are more cars on the road and numbers are climbing.

So I do not see how more tax will help. I only see a way to make more money via tax and using climate as excuse. That is very sad.

Not sure if it was HAARP or similar trying to blast holes in the atmosphere. Someone correct me if wrong. Those experiments are more dangerous than me as a living being breathing air I guess. Though not stopped.

People making jokes asking if I want to buy some carbon vouchers. I think if these climate fearmongers had their way it might be reality in the future.

In any case I am glad scientists are speaking out. Although its a bit strange that they did after funding stopped. That almost state they would keep lying if their fundings where not ended and can be used to discredit their claims.


reply posted on 10-12-2008 @ 11:27 PM by infolurker
I love it when I can re-use posts. FYI -

Global warming has benefited from one of the greatest public relations and marketing efforts in recent history. You'll hear plenty from environmentalists about carbon emissions, clean energy, and the disappearing arctic, but here's what you will NEVER hear them admit:

Scientists have reaped MILLIONS from their global warming "research." They've turned supporting global warming - into a cash cow!

These same scientists were trying to convince us the world was cooling just a few decades ago, when that's where the grant money was.

Read up on the carbon credit scam & so called "cap and trade". This "creates" a whole new paper trading / subsides industry. If this is allowed to happen there will be to much money in it for it to ever go away.

What Governments and Special Interest groups believe in is all the money that will come with the "carbon credit" scam and all the power it gives a government to do as it wishes against the will of the people in the "interest" of mankind

Companies are figuring out how to work the ridiculous "Carbon Credits" debacle to make big bucks. (and as they get paid, traders trade paper and real industries have to buy the paper and pass on the cost to .... wait for it... US!)

Rhodia, is a French Company, makes adipic acid which is a chemical used in the production of nylon. They have moved their operation to South Korea and Brazil. Why?

A by-product of their manufacturing process is the creation of nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas that is over 300 times more potent as an atmospheric warming agent than carbon dioxide. Rhodia destroys the nitrous oxide after it has been created and then claims carbon credit reimbursement for the green house gasses it has eradicated.

Rhodia, makes more money from this scam than they do from their primary business, They are raking in around a three hundred million dollars a year - more money than the whole of Africa is from Carbon credit reimbursements!

Also, Al Gore has a very big personal investment into bringing this carbon credit (cap & trade) to America.

www.capitalresearch.org...

Here is the deal, this whole Kyoto protocol is nothing but a money grab. Even many die hard global warming groups are starting to see that this scheme will do little to nothing in reducing carbon emissions.

daily.stanford.edu...


Global Warming - NASA Scientist Dr. Hansen caught again

Article Quotes - NASA Scientist caught lying again

vocalminority.typepad.com...


I for one did not know that this had happened. This is Gore's pet global warming gloom and doom prophet again being caught passing off bad data and when caught, they try to cover it up.

www.telegraph.co.uk.../opinion/2008/11/16/do1610.xml

If there is one scientist more responsible than any other for the alarm over global warming it is Dr Hansen, who set the whole scare in train back in 1988 with his testimony to a US Senate committee chaired by Al Gore. Again and again, Dr Hansen has been to the fore in making extreme claims over the dangers of climate change. (He was recently in the news here for supporting the Greenpeace activists acquitted of criminally damaging a coal-fired power station in Kent, on the grounds that the harm done to the planet by a new power station would far outweigh any damage they had done themselves.)

Yet last week's latest episode is far from the first time Dr Hansen's methodology has been called in question. In 2007 he was forced by Mr Watts and Mr McIntyre to revise his published figures for US surface temperatures, to show that the hottest decade of the 20th century was not the 1990s, as he had claimed, but the 1930s.

Another of his close allies is Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the IPCC, who recently startled a university audience in Australia by claiming that global temperatures have recently been rising "very much faster" than ever, in front of a graph showing them rising sharply in the past decade. In fact, as many of his audience were aware, they have not been rising in recent years and since 2007 have dropped.

Dr Pachauri, a former railway engineer with no qualifications in climate science, may believe what Dr Hansen tells him. But whether, on the basis of such evidence, it is wise for the world's governments to embark on some of the most costly economic measures ever proposed, to remedy a problem which may actually not exist, is a question which should give us all pause for thought.


[edit on 10-12-2008 by infolurker]


reply posted on 10-12-2008 @ 11:30 PM by infolurker
If there is one scientist more responsible than any other for the alarm over global warming it is Dr Hansen, who set the whole scare in train back in 1988 with his testimony to a US Senate committee chaired by Al Gore. Again and again, Dr Hansen has been to the fore in making extreme claims over the dangers of climate change.

In addition, as the Telegraph article goes on to say, this is not the first time Hansen has been caught fixing the climate data! As Christopher Horner reported last September that the very same Anthony Watts caught NASA fixing the data by placing thermometers “… in Arizona parking lots, overhanging black asphalt pads, near cell towers and hot-air blowing air conditioner exhausts or next to trash burn barrels, … setting one just away from a chimney directly above a Weber barbecue grill …”

Horner goes on to explain:

This embarrassment came amid NASA also having to correct its data since the year 2000, which has been used to support many of the global warming alarmists’ “money claims”, such as Al Gore’s line that 9 of the 10 hottest years on record occurred in the past decade.

Well, no. We now know that this is false and that NASA has corrected the record to reflect that the warmest year in the U.S. was 1934, 4 of the 10 warmest here occurred in the 1930s, 3 during the 1990s, and one each in the 1920s, 1950s and this decade. That this claim has now been debunked, like most every other statement of substance in Mr. Gore’s movie.

vocalminority.typepad.com...


[edit on 10-12-2008 by infolurker]
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



Russian scientists reach buried Antarctic Lake Vostok
  Posted 4 days ago with 83 member flags
Monsanto quits as GM results announced (EUROPE)
  Posted 6 days ago with 72 member flags
Strange noises reported around North Battleford
  Posted 17 days ago with 67 member flags
Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel
  Posted 5 days ago with 49 member flags