Global Warmists -- Read ( Climategate )

[Tristam]

Nature's editorial gets it right, this is required reading.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...l/462545a.html

[pahnphoenix]

HOLY SHIT THERE KAYNE THAT ISNT WHAT I SAID.

it is though, your post was idiotic. yes, graphs can (gasp) misrepresent the truth. so can *words*. holy shit i just blew your mind!

and if it's *not* what you meant, *what the fuck did you mean*? obviously you were implying that graphs and stats aren't credible because they can be used to distort the truth. that is so outrageously stupid i need to stop this post now.

[Meresgi]

it is though, your post was idiotic. yes, graphs can (gasp) misrepresent the truth. so can *words*. holy shit i just blew your mind!

and if it's *not* what you meant, *what the fuck did you mean*? obviously you were implying that graphs and stats aren't credible because they can be used to distort the truth. that is so outrageously stupid i need to stop this post now.

I didn't say they weren't credible, but they can be used to show pretty much whatever you want so people tossing out a graph going "Look this one right here shows 100% that humans arnt causing a change" will be met with someone else's graph showing humans ARE causing a change. The whole topic is pointless until actual proof is known and not speculative. Till then, drive your Prius or burn oil in your backyard, w/e floats your boat.

[CDF]

Thankfully the conclusions (in before induction can't "prove" anything) hinge on a bit more than a handful of graphs presented in a BG thread.

[Tristam]

Thankfully the conclusions (in before induction can't "prove" anything) hinge on a bit more than a handful of graphs presented in a BG thread.

Exactly, for example the fourth graph Max showed from the Vostok ice core data is only one graph in a paper literally riddled with figures, statistics, and interpretation that tie together in a way that tells a story.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal.../399429a0.html

Not noted by max is the close correlation with the data he showed and the CO2 concentration data from the same cores. Also from what I can tell, the largest "fluctuations" still occur over 8-10,000 years or so, so about one degree of warming per millenia? The IPCC predictions based on the various AGW models are 1.1 degree for this century alone at the absolute lowest end of the spectrum. Many scientists now think that the IPCC 4th assessment was far too tame and watered down to appease politicians. The statistical probability that such warming could occur to chance during natural climate cycles is less than 5% (which is the real answer to Zeolot's question I think).

edit: and that's just ONE paper among I don't know how many.

[Max™]

Oh, I did neglect to mention the Co2 relationships, though I did mention that it is the main thing which is obviously caused by humans.

We're about 100 ppm higher than the last glacial minimum peak.

It gets to temperatures like we see today naturally, the real question is what long term effects our fucking with the balance of the cycle will have.

[Kuya]

Relevant to this thread's interests:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...e-james-hansen

The scientist who convinced the world to take notice of the looming danger of global warming says it would be better for the planet and for future generations if next week's Copenhagen climate change summit ended in collapse.

n an interview with the Guardian, James Hansen, the world's pre-eminent climate scientist, said any agreement likely to emerge from the negotiations would be so deeply flawed that it would be better to start again from scratch.

"I would rather it not happen if people accept that as being the right track because it's a disaster track," said Hansen, who heads the Nasa Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.

"The whole approach is so fundamentally wrong that it is better to reassess the situation. If it is going to be the Kyoto-type thing then [people] will spend years trying to determine exactly what that means." He was speaking as progress towards a deal in Copenhagen received a boost today, with India revealing a target to curb its carbon emissions. All four of the major emitters – the US, China, EU and India – have now tabled offers on emissions, although the equally vexed issue of funding for developing nations to deal with global warming remains deadlocked.

Hansen, in repeated appearances before Congress beginning in 1989, has done more than any other scientist to educate politicians about the causes of global warming and to prod them into action to avoid its most catastrophic consequences. But he is vehemently opposed to the carbon market schemes – in which permits to pollute are bought and sold – which are seen by the EU and other governments as the most efficient way to cut emissions and move to a new clean energy economy.

Hansen is also fiercely critical of Barack Obama – and even Al Gore, who won a Nobel peace prize for his efforts to get the world to act on climate change – saying politicians have failed to meet what he regards as the moral challenge of our age.

In Hansen's view, dealing with climate change allows no room for the compromises that rule the world of elected politics. "This is analagous to the issue of slavery faced by Abraham Lincoln or the issue of Nazism faced by Winston Churchill," he said. "On those kind of issues you cannot compromise. You can't say let's reduce slavery, let's find a compromise and reduce it 50% or reduce it 40%."

He added: "We don't have a leader who is able to grasp it and say what is really needed. Instead we are trying to continue business as usual."

He has irked some environmentalists by espousing a direct carbon tax on fuel use. Some see that as a distraction from rallying support in Congress for cap-and-trade legislation that is on the table.

He is scathing of that approach. "This is analagous to the indulgences that the Catholic church sold in the middle ages. The bishops collected lots of money and the sinners got redemption. Both parties liked that arrangement despite its absurdity. That is exactly what's happening," he said. "We've got the developed countries who want to continue more or less business as usual and then these developing countries who want money and that is what they can get through offsets [sold through the carbon markets]."

[Gwynplaine]

That's no surprise really. Sticking with the indulgences metaphor, the more consistent viros like Hansen are the Martin Luthers who take what they advocate seriously (not that that's a good thing). If you listen you will even hear from the same type of people that they are against solar and wind energy. After all, to make energy at all you have to "blight" the environment somewhere somehow. They believe nature is intrinsically good on its own terms and so that just won't do. Their ideal and perfect energy policy would be to have none. And so to the consistent viros Obama and Gore are to be criticized for not going as far as they'd like.

[Tristam]

Most scientists are realists, favoring government support of alternative energies and a gradual move away from carbon based energy sources, or at least developing carbon capture technologies. But that's science, you have different opinions and shades of grey in between. There were a couple good perspectives pieces a couple days ago by a group from Shell and two basic researchers about what has to change from an economics and infrastructure standpoint. Even oil/energy companies are cognizant of what is going on in the atmosphere, and they are beginning to push themselves to overcome the massive inertia required to get things moving. They were good reads, and there's lots of common ground to be found when one looks at things objectively, but the sobering truth is that unless governments begin to really push and help develop alternative technologies and provide incentives to replace the current infrastructure (just like they did with oil and related carbon based energy sources) then nothing substantial will happen in our lifetime.

[Leif]

they were boxes of paper records that were thrown out in the 1980s, you dipshit. way to not quote that part.

You talk like the global warming fanaticism wasn't practiced like a religion 20 years ago.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

I was just curious if anyone has confirmed these were hacked and not some whistle-blower.

[Beckwin]

wow, that nature editorial clears up a lot. especially in cases where you've got internet libertarians screaming that the whole peer-review process/science academy is corrupt and now worthless... the reports that Mann and crew didn't like WERE included in the IPCC report.

[Rhinox]

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2300282


Wow seems conservatives learned nothing from Watergate.

[Leif]

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2300282


Wow seems conservatives learned nothing from Watergate.

If you have learned nothing from classic liberal victimology, if this story turns out to not be a complete hoax, it was likely a liberal who did such a thing.

There has been no documentation of any of the alleged incidents. All of the "facts" in the story consist of "guy says _____".

"People don't like it, so they try to discredit it, and the way they try to discredit it is by attacking the individual responsible for it," Mr. Weaver said.

An office gets broken in to months ago and this guy is conveniently screaming "It must be the conservatives!".

The pathetic thing about this story (as well as you Rhinox) is that there are no verifiable claims. There is just he said, she said. No police reports. No other documentation. Then this tool, Megan O'Toole, sees a great opportunity to write a story on it. Then you, Rhinox, dutifully report on the story as if it is pure fact and evidence that conservatives are behind it.

[Rhinox]

If you have learned nothing from classic liberal victimology, if this story turns out to not be a complete hoax, it was likely a liberal who did such a thing.

There has been no documentation of any of the alleged incidents. All of the "facts" in the story consist of "guy says _____".


An office gets broken in to months ago and this guy is conveniently screaming "It must be the conservatives!".

The pathetic thing about this story (as well as you Rhinox) is that there are no verifiable claims. There is just he said, she said. No police reports. No other documentation. Then this tool, Megan O'Toole, sees a great opportunity to write a story on it. Then you, Rhinox, dutifully report on the story as if it is pure fact and evidence that conservatives are behind it.

The office break-ins took place late last year, Mr. Weaver said, while the other alleged hacking attempts at his colleagues' offices -- all unsuccessful -- took place within the past few months.
Both campus police and the Saanich Police Department helped probe the office break-ins, Ms. Pitts said, but to date, no suspects have been identified nor arrests made.

Does it hurt to be wrong all the time?

[Rhinox]

btw fb surprised you haven't brought up that the government released the tiger woods scandal to take the american people minds away from 'climategate'

[Takedown3]

i cant tell who's trolling who

[Kuya]

Karl Marx has been trolling capitalists for centuries.

edit: okay, maybe a little over one century

[Leif]

Does it hurt to be wrong all the time?

What is with your thought process?

Seriously.

To refresh, you quoted the line

The office break-ins took place late last year, Mr. Weaver said, while the other alleged hacking attempts at his colleagues' offices -- all unsuccessful -- took place within the past few months.
Both campus police and the Saanich Police Department helped probe the office break-ins, Ms. Pitts said, but to date, no suspects have been identified nor arrests made.

Bolded the relevant part.

We don't let hearsay into a court room for a reason folks. You should know better than to quote "Nancy said Bill said Sally said Tina said George said Timmy said" as evidence. It's pathetic and shows that the author was too lazy (or realized that there was no factual basis behind the rumor line) to go back to the original source.


It's pathetic, lazy, and irresponsible to use such sloppy and nonlinear thinking. Why is it that so many people seem to have failed to learn this fifth grade lesson? You're either fudging the facts or you don't have enough credibility to be listened to. Take your pick.


To recap: "Police report" means an actual police report, not what someone says is in the police report. In this case, all there is is a bunch of already biased "professionals" claiming that these were crimes against global warming in anticipation for the climate summit. The credibility of this article is seriously in jeopardy. So let's do a little homework before we waste everyone's time with fudged facts and circular reasoning.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

So how about all these private planes to Copenhagen. Fucking polluters.