1880 IS getting colder!

page: 2
89
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by wlf15y
 


Thank you. I did know that adjustments had been made but I have not seen a graph such as I produced.

Anyway, no harm in airing the fraud again!




posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by rickymouse
 


Funny that you mention textbooks. I have been told (on multiple occasions) that my memories of being taught about the "coming ice age" that might cause the extinction of humanity are imaginary, caused by a false meme spread by climate change deniers. I've even had links sent to me debunking my memories.

Seriously, I remember science class at Harper Elementary School in the late 70s/early 80s where we were given a greatly simplified explanation for the end of large reptiles (ice age) and in the text books it was explained that humanity (through the use of dangerous chemicals like CFCs) was contributing to a potentially disastrous tipping point of heat loss that would result in a global ice age.

I'm shocked by how easily people forget the stories they are told when the stories are changed completely.

Related more recent story: I remember after 9/11 how the taliban were said to have angered the eastern block mafias because they had destroyed the poppy crops as they hated heroin trade. Within a few years, the story was shifted to say that they were in fact the biggest drug dealers ever (like, totally, oh my gerd!)...
--

I rarely comment or reply, but I really appreciate seeing that other people exist who recognize that much of what we're told is at best incomplete and at worst complete bull#.

THANKS!



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by elvisofdallas
 


Or could the Taliban have realised the effect the opium derivatives are having in the Western World, and, of course, the revenue would buy an awfull lot of guns?

There are many things on ATS that I take with a pinch of salt, but if Puterman is behind it then I take notice. This is seriously disturbing. Why should TPTB do this - because of the money earning potential behind climate change industries/taxes? What on earth do they want all this money for? Or is it just to keep us in a constant state of fear?

I also find it very scary indeed that so much of what I see, hear and read about what is going on in the world, now, in the past and even the future, is manipulated, distorted, like an endless game of 'Chinese whispers' (apologies for a politically incorrect expression there). I kinda feel if I can't believe my eyes and ears - I'm screwed!



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


I really would like people to be clear on what fraud they are talking about...

That climate change is a reality only a fool would disagree, that it is man made is probably debatable but highly likely to be. In any case it depends on humans to attempt to keep it from worsening, whatever the cause is.

The only fraud that I subscribe is on the carbon trading schemes and other plans that trades money for green investments (without assured efficacy or control) and removes the burden to polluters (including historical contributions). The pressure and restrictions on the first world should be different from those that are now modernizing, this do not include exceptions that permits newcomers to repeat the same errors, but it should be the first world to fund and offer up-to-date technology for reducing general human footprint...

So what fraud are you talking about here ?



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Simplify the approach, make a video and make this go viral.

This could be one of the biggest truths that could dismiss global warming and the carbon taxes scam.



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   
I understand what you see but there is no reason to change data but who knows. The only thing I see these days is more fluctuation in temp and more in winter why I don't know this year in winter it hit 80 just unreal. It could be a sign of our weather destabilizing faster then what we thought. This is all theory of coarse. They said if it warms to much the weather could spin out of control just maybe it is starting. We need to change the way we do things I know we have the technology to produce clean energy. It just needs to move faster. We also need to save what we have left of our oil supply in case we ever need it you just never no.



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Panic2k11
 



So what fraud are you talking about here ?


Changing the numbers. Of course there is climate change, we live on a dynamic planet.

What is fraudulent is to amend the figure to suit a particular agenda.



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by joecool9887
 



We need to change the way we do things I know we have the technology to produce clean energy.


But we are not allowed to use it because it is not in the agenda and it would not be profitable, nor can you make weapons from it.

That is the problem really. The people in charge actually do not give a damn about climate change as long as they can profit from it, therefore it must go on.



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 04:00 PM
link   
my 80 year old step pop debunked global warming, he called it something along the lines of BS.

He said the weather we are getting is normal.

Global warming is a scam.



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by xDeadcowx
reply to post by PuterMan
 


If you are saying what i think you are saying and the recorded mean temperature of past years is changing, then you may be on to something pretty significant.

It would not suprise me to find out these numbers are being changed to support global warming. There is just too much money it in for those making the money to let it a little thing like the truth get in the way.

I hope you have been saving screen shots, documents, and any other form of proof for these changes.

Awesome catch!
DC


I agree.



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Psychoparrot
reply to post by elvisofdallas
 



There are many things on ATS that I take with a pinch of salt, but if Puterman is behind it then I take notice. This is seriously disturbing. Why should TPTB do this - because of the money earning potential behind climate change industries/taxes? What on earth do they want all this money for? Or is it just to keep us in a constant state of fear?

I also find it very scary indeed that so much of what I see, hear and read about what is going on in the world, now, in the past and even the future, is manipulated, distorted, like an endless game of 'Chinese whispers' (apologies for a politically incorrect expression there). I kinda feel if I can't believe my eyes and ears - I'm screwed!


I agree, and yes, I like the fact that somebody like Puterman has picked up on this. The more that do, the better.

Eventually this AGW fraud will be fully exposed. To be clear, I am not pro fossil fuel or anything, but am definitely pro ECONOMICALLY VIABLE. I am also pro Thorium, as that is the answer for the near term, and maybe within a few decades to a century we actually manage to get something non nuclear. I believe Co2 will cause some warming, but MUCH less than the alarmists predict AND, that natural drivers (solar activity, ie.. the lack thereof) will easily overpower Co2. Their manipulation of data sends a clear message to me, and that's one of fraud.
edit on 18-11-2012 by wlf15y because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by wlf15y
 



I am also pro Thorium, as that is the answer for the near term, and maybe within a few decades to a century we actually manage to get something non nuclear.


So am I. It takes one half ounce of Thorium to run the Average American's life for one month or something. 80% of the Thorium is in seawater and there is enough on the planet for ALL of electrical needs for literally billions of years.

It eats other radioactive materials and is fail-safe.

But.... but.... but it does not make plutonium
No bombs
/sarc

ETA: It is said they will be able to run vehicles on a small reactor as well, and I don't believe it has a carbon footprint other than the construction.

edit on 18/11/2012 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


Related to your excellent thread, I had recently found some material newer related to Climategate and those involved directly. I started a thread around the time of the American elections and so it didn't reach the light of day, so my bad.

Anyway, this is an example of attempted cover-up by one, Gavin Schmidt of NASA collaborating with the University of East Anglia, (he's the one who actually discovered the hacking) It is an e-mail he sent to a blogger TWO days later, although he already knew that the hacked e-mails were genuine two days before,

' Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:48:21 -0500
From: Gavin Schmidt
To: lucia liljegren
Subject: a word to the wise

Lucia, As I am certain you are aware, hacking into private emails is very illegal. if legitimate, your scoop was therefore almost certainly obtained illegally (since how would you get 1000 emails otherwise). I don’t see any link on Jeff-id’s site, and so I’m not sure where mosher got this from, but you and he might end up being questioned as part of any investigation that might end up happening. I don’t think that bloggers are shielded under any press shield laws and so, if I were you, I would not post any content, nor allow anyone else to do so. Just my twopenny’s worth

Gavin '

The 'if legitimate' bolds are mine.

It is important from the point of view that he participated in a programme called 'Climategate revisited' on BBC4 radio, and on it he actually says, once I saw the material I knew right away we had been hacked, which does not gel with his e-mail above, which is an attempt to both dissuade, and threaten the blogger, Lucia.

The radio programme is here, and you will here him speak early on in the programme,

www.bbc.co.uk... and I urge you to listen to it.


My thread is here, but the mindset of just one person involved deeply with all this manipulating climate research, speaks volumes as to the rest, so you'll get the gist anyway.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 18-11-2012 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by joecool9887
I understand what you see but there is no reason to change data but who knows. The only thing I see these days is more fluctuation in temp and more in winter why I don't know this year in winter it hit 80 just unreal. It could be a sign of our weather destabilizing faster then what we thought. This is all theory of coarse. They said if it warms to much the weather could spin out of control just maybe it is starting. We need to change the way we do things I know we have the technology to produce clean energy. It just needs to move faster. We also need to save what we have left of our oil supply in case we ever need it you just never no.


You have to understand that there are things that effect our climate/weather on many different timescales. For one, there are ocean oscillations that have approximately 60 year cycles, so weather, or weather patterns we're seeing now may not have occurred in the last 60 years at least. I don't know about you, but I'm only 41 y.o. and know I haven't seen it all.
Here's the key though. When they make claims of unprecedented, never before seen, all time record, etc...when you actually do the research, you will find it ALWAYS has precedence, especially if you look at all the different proxies we have available to us now, in addition to written history. A good example is Arctic sea ice. The "records" we're seeing are the SATELLITE record, all 35 years or so of it. But there are papers out there that prove it has completely disappeared for periods during the Holocene Optimum. There is also evidence that as recent as the MWP, it was gone in summer. So apparently we still aren't as warm as they claim we are, seeing how Mann and Hansen claim we're now warmer than during the MWP.



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Maybe it has something to do with the space-time continuum thing...

Perhaps our algorithms are incorrect and we're actually living in the past because the present hasn't happened yet ? This would explain the future changes to the goal posts temperatures from our past present.

It might also explain our wishful need to maintain neanderthal traditional scientific foundations scrambled together with faith-based dogma understandings...?




posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Well isn't that just perfect. Al's dream come true...in the process make the sheep pay more for utilities and just wait and see all the speculators that jump on that band wagon for a ride. Nice, i love paying more for heat to survive and petrol to work so that i can give it all back to the ultimate manipulators. They already have their smart metres fixing the rates to whatever they want it to be. What about the 1700' s, did they conveniently, inconveniently lose that truth? The mini ice age, doesn't figure into their model, how is that? I hope when the weather does show them that it doesn't follow their fixed curve (guess the hockey stick was a little far fetched) that they all sit in their hearthless homes shivering and pray for just a little bit of global warming. But big money and big profits are more important than letting people survive in comfort and cheaply. Gotta cull the herd i guess.



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by wlf15y
 





But.... but.... but it does not make plutonium
No bombs
/sarc


Exactly, many people don't realize that weapons potential is the ONLY reason we're using Uranium. We were actually developing Thorium back in the 50's, early 60's, but abandoned it because of it's LACK of weapons potential. And yes, it will not melt down on it's own, unless primed (designed) to do so.

There is good (maybe) news though, I recently read that the US Dept. of Energy is now collaborating with China on development, as China has fast tracked Thorium Reactors. Maybe, if Obama has anything to do with this, he will get something right for a change. Will post link if I can find it.

Ah here it is.

oilprice.com...
edit on 18-11-2012 by wlf15y because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by CranialSponge
 


Too much for my brain after a long day! I shall have to make my present my future instantly by sleeping and then my past will be my present in the future.

Science should be, above all else, honest. Nothing more is required of them than that. Dogma has NO place in science.



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by wlf15y

Originally posted by joecool9887
I understand what you see but there is no reason to change data but who knows. The only thing I see these days is more fluctuation in temp and more in winter why I don't know this year in winter it hit 80 just unreal. It could be a sign of our weather destabilizing faster then what we thought. This is all theory of coarse. They said if it warms to much the weather could spin out of control just maybe it is starting. We need to change the way we do things I know we have the technology to produce clean energy. It just needs to move faster. We also need to save what we have left of our oil supply in case we ever need it you just never no.


You have to understand that there are things that effect our climate/weather on many different timescales. For one, there are ocean oscillations that have approximately 60 year cycles, so weather, or weather patterns we're seeing now may not have occurred in the last 60 years at least. I don't know about you, but I'm only 41 y.o. and know I haven't seen it all.
Here's the key though. When they make claims of unprecedented, never before seen, all time record, etc...when you actually do the research, you will find it ALWAYS has precedence, especially if you look at all the different proxies we have available to us now, in addition to written history. A good example is Arctic sea ice. The "records" we're seeing are the SATELLITE record, all 35 years or so of it. But there are papers out there that prove it has completely disappeared for periods during the Holocene Optimum. There is also evidence that as recent as the MWP, it was gone in summer. So apparently we still aren't as warm as they claim we are, seeing how Mann and Hansen claim we're now warmer than during the MWP.


I can go with that, all through the 1940's most of the 50's and 60's and 70's this part of the world had pretty cold winters, and sustained periods of coldness, and rough weather to boot. 2009 winter was cold, 2010 winter was severe...questions about 2010 in particular! There are also questions about the modern temperature gathering, how they are sited, and questions about the validity of NOOA satellite findings, all part of the mechanics used by climate scientists.



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


Well again you are feeding the ignorants, when I say climate change I'm clearly not referring to "normal climate pasterns" but to the prevalence of abnormal ones.

As for the numbers I have only skimmed the claims of change. Since any scientific claim must be sourced and published (preferably in a recognized peer reviewed site, as to become relevant and verifiable/traceable) I see no point on shifting the numbers (even if possible in a non-scientific but propagandistic context). If we are talking about scientific papers even if a rouge scientist (or a group, working together) could produce false information. The factual data shouldn't be prone to change as it has already been made public, one would simple need to get new paper with the wrong facts get the source reference for the facts and contact the publisher of the new paper or the organization that employs the researcher...





top topics
 
89
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join