Debunking the Deniers of Global Warming

After I hear allover from the global warming swindle, I wanted to know where this information all comes from. It's very interesting to know how a Info becomes a disinfo - becomes a disdisinfo. Please read a bit here, its a very good summary of what happened.

It was a TV Show on Channel 4 by Martin Durkin. He was the man that spread out his faked statistics and the "documentary: The Great Global Warming Swindle". SAD!

www.durangobill.com...

reply to post by cushycrux


Here the longest stat available from 5 locations from "the old world":



[edit on 30-1-2010 by cushycrux]

OMG!!!

We are almost as warm as we were in 1780!!!!!!!!!

The graph is good proof that global warming is bologna!

"It is getting warmer!!!" - further proof of global warming
"It is getting colder!!!" - further proof of global warming
"There hasn't been a change!!!" - further proof of global warming
"My beer has gotten warm!!!" - further proof of global warming

reply to post by YourPopRock


Or you could RTFA. I know, it's a lot of work, moving one's eyes from left to right.

By the way? That Europe graph shows a rise of 1.5 degrees average. Just thought you might like to know.

The europe graph?

And here I thought that Vienna was in europe... What was I thinking?!?

reply to post by cushycrux


I see you are trying to make a good attempt here, and I am all for it.
Too bad there is some sort of general attitute here at ATS to bash this kind of information. Hopefully you will be able to take it with ease and counter with some well based facts.

It seems to me that the "pro" facts come from renown sources and the "con" seem to pick their easy points from murky waters.

What this kind of "denial" hails from is pretty much a mystery, at least to me.
Is it fear of change?
Fear of tax increase?
Or is it just plain refusal to take the blame like a man and accept that mankind has severely damaged the planet due to our greed and disrespect for nature?
Maybe all of the above.

Let me just say this; some of the largest companies in the modern world are those who deal with energy and fossile fuel. These companies can't take any blame since they are more than reluctant to change their ways. Stubborn stupidity, with other words.
They use their money to flood the world with their "bought" science.
They don't want you to save up on electricity. They don't want you to limit your driving or general consumption.
They want you to keep doing like we already have done for the past 50 years or so, only more.

Developing countries like China doesn't want this kind of debate either. At least not yet. They want to become just as senseless in their consumption like we idiots in the west first before they do anything to improve the situation (that isn't really a problem in the first place...eh?).

It's kind of upsetting really.
The "Global Warming Scam" idea is pretty demented as it is, and if it is anything; it's a popularity contest. Often presented to the ignorant masses as entertaining and amusing. That's how you capture the crowds; with fun, not facts. School is boring, playtime is fun.

Well, I won't jump into this any further since I had it with the madness that eventually floods every such tread as this one.
But if you are ready to shoulder the burden of this inevitable rant-battle, know that I, and many others, support you fully.

I hope this thread can stay on-topic for at least three pages.

Star and flag. Keep up the spirit.

(Sorry for any typos, it's late and I've been at work all day)
/Raud

reply to post by YourPopRock


The whole graph is from Europe. And please do not troll, the topic is "climategate gate"

The graph shows a clear tendency from 1980 - 2000, right? There are some peaks in the past, but this was not on all locations and the values where more fluctuating (and faster).

Originally posted by YourPopRock
What was I thinking?!?

Were you thinking? See the graph? See it's named "Central Europe"? See the names of several Central European cities (Not just Vienna)?

You do know how to read the data you see, don't... pffffft... who am I kidding.

reply to post by cushycrux


Very noble thread indeed. I just warn you that you are falling for the game plan that has been laid out for you. Keep in mind that this will culminate in a one world government with everyone brainwashed into eating and living like cave men. While those at the very top have a good laugh at your expense.

So, did we caus the global cooling before the global warming that happened from the 1860's on?

And yes, I did read the graph (though your personal attack made you sound like more of a buffoon than your post did!)

Originally posted by jackflap
reply to post by cushycrux

 

Very noble thread indeed. I just warn you that you are falling for the game plan that has been laid out for you. Keep in mind that this will culminate in a one world government with everyone brainwashed into eating and living like cave men. While those at the very top have a good laugh at your expense.

Yeah, that sounds much worse than living in an already corporate-controlled existance like mindless vegetables in front of our over-sized, energy consuming TV's, eating chemically mutated "food" that has been shipped across the globe for our pleasure...
That's just swell.

(I know I said I shouldn't go any further into this thread, but a man is entiteled to a second chance, isn't he?)

reply to post by Raud


Thanks for you wise and calm words. I will not debate, just give away what i know. I also know about the methane problem, but this is for me is no problem, - I eat no meat since 20 years.

I am not religious but I remember always:
"Forgive them for they know not what they do!"

reply to post by YourPopRock


What cooling?

We really need all of the raw data for each of the plot points on the graph to be able to average out a 1.5 degree steady increase.

Based on the European Model graph provided us, there is no increase in the mean on the graph, simply a steady and gradual flux.

(Just because I am critical, it doesn't mean I don't know what the heck I am talking about)

OK, what was 1940? Thats significant. Europe was a bit cold then.

Originally posted by cushycrux
reply to post by YourPopRock

 

What cooling?

Every single point represented was cooler in 1860 than in the beginning of your graph.

Unfortunatly, without the actual raw data used to plot the graph points, no mathmatical deductions can actually be made. They are all simply observational and open to individual interpretation.

reply to post by cushycrux


It takes some time for the impact to hit - 1940's weather would be the result of the changes in the years before it, rather than anything that happened in 1940.

If you'll recall, in the years prior to 1940, most of the developed world was having a pretty severe economic downturn. Lots of factories shut down, people stopped driving, electricity use went way down. Plus on top of human-based effects... it could have just been a cold year. It does happen.

Originally posted by cushycrux
OK, what was 1940? Thats significant. Europe was a bit cold then.

According to the global warming philosophy, 1940 would have had to be a massive under-use of fossil fuels, carbon emissions and quite frankly... cow farts!

We really should have done better in 1940 at burning stuff. We almost cause a horrible man-made global cooling situation. We should have driven more, polluted more and farted more!

(See how it sounds when you apply the same thought process in the other direction?)

This is from Swiss GOV Site:




Source:
www.meteoschweiz.admin.ch...

This is 1864-2009: 1.8 Grad Celsius! Ouch.

Originally posted by cushycrux
This is from Swiss GOV Site:

Source:
www.meteoschweiz.admin.ch...

This is 1864-2009: 1.8 Grad Celsius! Ouch.

And we know that this isn't a natural cycle how?