Originally posted by lampsalot
^Look, I hate Al Gore as much as the next person, but the quality of the messenger is not always proportional to the truth of the message.
In this case both are bad. Al Gore doesn't really know anything about Global Warming. He's just a politician with a political message. the fact (and
it is a fact) that he got his graph backwards ought to tell you something. What actually happened is that the refinements in the samples from which
his graph is derived changed over the years and became more specific, which revealed the mistake. In other words, I don't think he made the mistake
on purpose. But the fact is he won't admit that it is wrong and refuses any debates on the subject.
The entire Global Warming issue is based on a pack of lies. If you'll read the book I cited above you will begin to see how and why this stuff
happened. The data on which historical global warming is based is extremely thin, in some cases amounting to a few suspect trees.
I'll give you another example. Remember all the hype on "Hide the decline"? Here's what happened:
The "decline" refers to a line on a graph that shows several different lines, all showing increased temperatures--except one. This single line
referenced tree ring data. The idea is that you can "tell" past climate by looking at the thickness of tree ring data. To "aithenticate" this
method scientists measured tree ring data during years when they also had collected temperature readings using technical means, with gauges. If the
tree ring data correlated with the "real world" temperature gauge data, that method could be said to be "authenticated" and valid to use.
First of all, this is quite simplistic. Thick tree rings can be caused by a number of factors, including moisture--not just temperature. Also,
"heating degree days" can be spread out over time rather than concentrated during a single period, so there are some inherent problems with using
tree ring data in the first place. So what these guys have done is extrapolate backwards over time and claim that 1,000 years ago, tree rings behaved
the same way, therefore global warming.
But wait! Remember that "hidden decline." The "decline" was in tree ring data that showed the temperature DECREASING when everything else,
including instrumentation, said the temperature was INCREASING. The tree ring data was not correlating with reality. If the tree ring data is wrong
now, you can't really use it for 1,000 years ago. And that's exactly what happened. If they showed the tree ring data declining when other
measurements were increasing, how could this be explained?
Well, it couldn't, so they hid it in the graph because it would be too embarrassing to explain. That's just one of many different manipulations that
has gone on to keep up this fiction that global warming is real. Read the Climategate emails and you can see this happen again and again and again.
The data is very poor to begin with and has also been manipulated.
Here we are on a conspiracy site where we are called disinfomration agents if we dare to question chemtrails, 9/11, alien babies, and all manner of
NWO TPTB Illuminati nonsense, and here's a real conspiracy right in front of you with ample evidence to prove it, and what does ATS say?
Nah! Global warming is real!
Jesus F. Christ.