It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Global Warming Data in Question

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 12:49 AM
Ross McKitrick: Defects in key climate...

I came upon this article and read the information provided.

The IPCC also made this argument in its 2007 report. But the second expert panel, led by statistician Edward Wegman, pointed out that the other studies are not independent. They are written by the same small circle of authors, only the names are in different orders, and they reuse the same few data climate proxy series over and over. Read more:

I found it interesting that the same circle of authors/scientist keep coming up with supporting data leading back to the 'Mann Hockey Stick' graph that has lead to practically all support of the Global Warming debate.

The IPCC relied on these studies to defend the Hockey Stick view, and since it had appointed Briffa himself to be the IPCC Lead Author for this topic, there was no chance it would question the Yamal data. Read more:

Its a closed loop system of insiders promoting their views on data and not opening it up to those that see the data for what it really is...flawed.

The sharp uptrend in the late 20th century came from cores of 10 living trees alive as of 1990, and five living trees alive as of 1995. Based on scientific standards, this is too small a sample on which to produce a publication-grade proxy composite. Read more:

10!!!!! All this hysteria is based on a sample of TEN TREES? You have to be kidding me and these people call themselves scientist.

I am open to looking into the way we do business and how we go about our everyday lives, but a forced march to what ever this global warming debacle is, I do not like.

Discuss, debate, I would like to hear a wide range of views on the article.

Note to mods: if this is not in the right forum can you please move it? Thank you!

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:16 AM
Take a look at the 1990 IPCC report, then look at the 2001 IPCC report. They're completely different. The 1990 report shows historical temperatures completely in a way that shows current temperatures normal, and the 2001 completely eliminates the medieval warm preriod. They essentially tried to change history.

The 2001 reports methodology was proven wrong.


A collection of scientific data? Yeah, that changes every year to suit the agenda...

[edit on 3/10/2009 by C0bzz]

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:29 AM
I just find it fascinating that people will follow whatever if a scientist shows up and says it so. No independent collaboration, locked data that is 'for their eyes only' type of stuff.

They also seem to be operating in a backwards trend, ie "We have the answer, now lets apply a method that fits that answer" rather than "We have a question, lets find an answer".

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:32 AM
reply to post by ownbestenemy

Couldn't agree more.

People seem to take the word of scientists as law - scientists are just as flawed as everyone else and their knowledge is not invincible.

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:37 AM
reply to post by spellbound

Science in some sort of fashion I believe should be a cornerstone in everyone's education. If the data is there and its logical, air-tight, and actually answers the hypothesis, then kudos to the men/women that come to that conclusion!

For now we have a closed debate about global warming or climate change or whatever its called nowadays and an open hand saying we need money to fix it all or we will soon perish!

But I am guessing we all know why governments are accepting such rubbish as real science while the populace is really starting to smell the er....roses
Just hopefully we debunk and quiet this fraud before it goes anywhere in the United States along with anyone else that didn't sign that wretched Kyoto treaty

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:42 AM
Well this would explain a lot.
Last winter and this summer, we had one of the coldest years on record for where I live! (deep south, sub tropical... we didn't hit the 100s once! (and were only in the 90s for two weeks!)
It's just now October and I already need a jacket some nights!

I should also mention that the Rockys got record snowfall last winter that made the glaciers almost completely recover.

IF there is global warming... I don't think it's near as bad as the egg heads make it out to be!

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:46 AM
reply to post by ownbestenemy

S & F

But I would rather scientists stopped doing their (often) useless research and started feeding the starving people.

Just a thought.

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:52 AM
reply to post by spellbound

Well one day that might come true, but for now we have to make sure crack-pots that are just looking for government money to stay out of our lives and actually provide useful scientific studies and data. From what I see, the cultural in the science community is all about grants and not really about the data they produce....kinda like a basket-weaving class at Harvard

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:58 AM
reply to post by ownbestenemy

I know - a lot of people have huge grants to research into what is inevitably happening, which is pointless, so they are happy. But surely we should be forewarned by these people?

But this is a sorry waste of the world's resources. I wish everyone had a conscience.

I wonder how this benefits the world - it did not help with the recent horrors in Samoa and Indonesia, and it probably won't help with more to come.

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:59 AM
Are you referring to the debunking of global warming or to the global warming side?

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 02:03 AM
reply to post by ownbestenemy

I am referring to scientists, on grants, being dumb. Science means knowledge, literally, and they don't seem to have any.

I don't see how anyone can say global warming is not happening with the huge melting of the icecaps.

People like to joke that they are not warmer - it should not be a joke, but that is just dumb humanity in the face of cataclysm.

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 02:24 AM
reply to post by spellbound

I agree any idiot can see that global warming is happening what is incorrect is the popular theories about why it is happening. I remember when Global Warming first hit the headlines back in like 2004, I actually did a research project on it, most scientists (back then), basically said it was not happening and if it was it was just a natural the popular belief is that it is happening and its all our fault. However, if you research global warming on other planets in our solar system you will see that most of them are warming as we have humans releasing CO2 and other greenhouse gasses on those planets? Or is it really just a natural cycle...hmmmm. I am more inclined to believe the latter.

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 02:32 AM
reply to post by acmpnsfal

Unfortunately, I agree with you.

I think that most of what happens anywhere bypasses us - we just do not understand it.

That is why I think we should stop giving scientists huge grants, stop warfare, and just try and feed and love those in our vicinity - on our own planet.

Alas, this will not happen, and that is why we are doomed.

It is not in human nature to love our own kind. We are freaks.

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 03:23 AM
Thats the reason I like the article so much though, it is basically ripping to shreds the 'evidence' that we are the main cause of global warming or whatever, but in reality, people took a very very small sample, one that fit their view on what they wanted to promote and spewed it as truth.

That there I believe is the biggest key in that whole article.

I actually believe, and from data I have read through articles, do not see this warming trend or drastic upticks of the temperature, but I am always open for more information

posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 04:47 AM

[edit on 3/10/2009 by C0bzz]

new topics

top topics


log in