Old Rocks
Diamond Member
First of all, it's NOT "the whole of the scientific community".
Really? Care to point out a Scientific Society, a National Academy of Science, or even a major University that states that AGW is not a fact? Even in Outer Slobovia?
The more honest among them admit that the theories involve some pretty far-reaching assumptions about climatic processes not fully understood.
Totally untrue. The scientists state that AGW is a fact because of the known effects of GHGs. As far as the climatic processes are concerned, you are correct. We don't yet know how rapid the effect will be, what kind of and how soon the feedbackst, particularly from the Artic, will kick in, and what kind of effects the warming will have on worldwide weather patterns, although I beleive the last 11 months have given us a foretaste of that.
Second, if your assertion were true, why "Climategate"?
Because of a spin put on natural human bitching at those that were bitching at them. Most of what was said about the so called 'climategate' was lies.
Why fudge numbers; why suppress data that fails to support the desired conclusion? Why try to keep other data that does not support the desired conclusion out of sight, and out of publication in peer-reviewed journals?
The people you are claiming did these things were totally exonerated by their peers.
Do you deny this deliberate and malicious perversion of science for political ends? WELL, DO YOU?? So much for credibility.
Of course I do. Them there damned glaciers and icecaps are just melting to irritate you wingnuts.
After that demonstration of "integrity" I wouldn't believe a damn thing "scientists" like that said, if they had God and a mile high-mountain of data to back them up. Damn liars! Of coursed, academia is so packed with liberals and out-and-out commies and other far-left loons, that nothing that comes out of it, however ridiculous, or how big a lie, surprises me at all. And the foremost, best-know political advocate for this loony cult of Chicken Littles: Al "I invented the internet" Gore, Prince of Liars, who has told so many whoppers that he could not recognize the truth, if it bit him in the arse!
LOL.So you resent anybody that has the gumption to actually study a subject.
This would be ludicrous, if the political objective of it were not to put us all back with the Third World; having failed to bring these losers up to civilized standards, liberals now want us to abandon our system, and join them in misery. To hell with the Third World; let 'em starve! Give me one reason why I should care a fig what happens to them.
Of course, you have no reason to care whatsoever about your fellow man, or your children, or anything but yourself. You are a very good 'Conservative'
So those whose careers depend on their acceptance by the academic Left parrot the views the academic Left likes? I am so shocked! *sarcasm*.
On the second point, maybe you could tell us why AGW accounts for the FACT that around 900-1200 , the Vikings found Greenland actually WAS green. Where were the Greenland glaciers then? Oh, that's right, those came LATER. Ever thought of a NATURAL climate cycle? Whoops, can't have that, doesn't fit the "new religion"! Heresy! Out with it (and any other data we don't like)! Never let facts get in the way of a good lie; that's the Marxist way, right?
Climategate "lies"? Oh, really? So no one suppressed data that didn't fit? No one tried to prevent opposing view from being published? "The evil conservatives fabricated the whole thing"? Yeah, right! Do you believe in the Tooth Fairy, too, or does the Church of Trotsky not require that?
Exonerated by their peers? See, that's the problem; that's like trying the Nazis in a Nazi court under Nazi law, with a Nazi judge and jury (Hell, Eichmann would have been "exonerated" by that standard; so would Goering!). If that's too harsh, try this one: that's like letting the fox, the weasel, and the chicken hawk decide who raided the henhouse. "Henhouse? WHAT henhouse? I didn't see you, you didn't see me, and we didn't see a thing, judge!"
"So you resent anybody who has the gumption to actually study a subject?" No, I resent anyone willing to pervert that study for political ends and a predetermined conclusion.
"Of course you have no reason to care whatsoever about your fellow man, or your children, or anything but yourself...".
As a matter of fact, after a lifetime of caring and giving, my generosity and compassion has been exhausted (and abused) with no discernible result. Here's a quarter, call Al Gore. HIS "carbon footprint" is five times the size of mine, but hey, he "cares".
LOL. Where were the glaciers of Greenland during the MWP? About where they are now. It is doubtful that Greenland then was any warmer than Greenland is now. Not only that, by most studies, the overall warming was about 0.2 C, where today, the overall warming is 0.7 C. Not only that, the present warming involves the whole of the Arctic, and is far stronger for much of it than the MWP was.
Medieval Warm Period: rhetoric vs science
One of the most often cited arguments of those skeptical of global warming is that the Medieval Warm Period (800-1200 AD) was as warm as or warmer than today. Using this as proof to say that we cannot be causing current warming is a faulty notion based upon rhetoric rather than science. So what are the holes in this line of thinking?
Firstly, evidence suggests that the Medieval Warm Period was in fact warmer than today in many parts of the globe such as in the North Atlantic. This warming thereby allowed Vikings to travel further north than had been previously possible because of reductions in sea ice and land ice in the Arctic. However, evidence also suggests that some places were very much cooler than today including the tropical pacific. All in all, when the warm places are averaged out with the cool places, it becomes clear that the overall warmth was likely similar to early to mid 20th century warming. Since that early century warming, temperatures have risen well-beyond those achieved during the Medieval Warm Period across most of the Globe. This has been confirmed by the National Academy of Sciences Report on Climate Reconstructions. Further evidence (Figure 1) suggests that even in the Northern Hemisphere where the Medieval Warm Period was the most visible, temperatures are now beyond those experienced during Medieval times.
Secondly, the Medieval Warm Period has known causes which explain both the scale of the warmth and the pattern. It has now become clear to scientists that the Medieval Warm Period occurred during a time which had higher than average solar radiation and less volcanic activity (both resulting in warming). New evidence is also suggesting that changes in ocean circulation patterns played a very important role in bringing warmer seawater into the North Atlantic This explains much of the extraordinary warmth in that region. These causes of warming contrast significantly with today's warming, which we know cannot be caused by the same mechanisms.