Snow because of global warming!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by bugscoe, Feb 13, 2010.

  1. Tresor

    Tresor

    Look how these pseudo-scientists used the word ''Anomaly''.

    Only Morons can get tricked by this :p

    There is nothing anomalous in this temeprature change. In fact the Rate of temperature changes over the last few thousand years is very stable. There were and there will be changes in temperature much more violent than these presented by the graph.

    What they showed is not an anomaly.
     
    #151     Feb 20, 2010
  2. There are no disclaimers. There is a fact that the change is relative to 1950-1980 baseline. This is clearly shown on the image. What is your problem with that?

    The assertion that there was a consensus amongst scientists in the 1970s that the world was cooling is not true, regardless of newspaper articles. Even back then the major concern was about warming driven by CO2.

    The current temperature readings come mostly via the World Meteorological Organization from the National Meteorological Services of countries around the world. Climate researchers do not choose the stations to use - they use what is provided by each individual country. Historical data is compiled from every available source. It is available to anybody free from the Global Historical climatology Network.

    All the nonsense about stations being dropped from the record is due to the fact that many historical sources are no longer are being updated.

    A account of how the GHCN database is maintained is found here http://www.babytrollblog.com/archives/images/ghcn_temp_overview.pdf

    How NASA GISS process the data (to correct for issues such as urban heat island) is described here:

    http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2001/2001_Hansen_etal.pdf

    The details of data processing have been publicly available for years.

    No allegations have been substantiated and none are likely to be.

    No doubt corruption occurs, but that doesn't mean that the environmental issues are not real and of pressing urgency.
     
    #152     Feb 20, 2010
  3. oh, this would be good the NEXT TIME YOU LOSERS CHANGE YOUR MINDS.:p
     
    #153     Feb 20, 2010
  4. I think you're confusing analysis of data with a fight between the "jocks" and the "nerds."
     
    #154     Feb 20, 2010

  5. ok, this would be good the NEXT TIME YOU LOSERS cook the data after you CHANGE YOUR MINDS.:D
     
    #155     Feb 20, 2010
  6. If you use more capital letters you'll be more likely to convince me that this actually happened. Perhaps you should also throw in a few dozen exclamation marks for good measure.
     
    #156     Feb 20, 2010
  7. jem

    jem

    I believe we do have pressing environmental issues.
    But, some of those issues are caused by the fact humans need to eat.

    Others are caused by the fact that businesses can buy politicians.

    I have no reason to believe -- and I mean zero reason to believe the government is ever working to a useful and meaningful solution to a problem - when it comes to pollution.

    Look at what just happened to health care.

    It started off with a call for useful change... by the time the insurance lobby was done with it - it was an abortion. Even Olberman said he would fight against (the first day).

    You can trust any program coming out of Washington... or sacramento.
    Not until lobbying (bribes) are stopped.
     
    #157     Feb 21, 2010