Even prominent skeptics now agree, the earth is warming, and the effect is man-made.

[CrusaderFrank]

Wow Third thread on this! OK in the first 2 we find Richard Muller is a lying sack of shit, but after the thrid thread now I'm a believer

 

[ScienceRocks]

Wow Third thread on this! OK in the first 2 we find Richard Muller is a lying sack of shit, but after the thrid thread now I'm a believer

It appears that every data set says much the same thing... 1# They're right and you're wrong, 2# They're in on a big global scam.

If 2# then things maybe getting hairy very fast. Seriously, where is your data set?

 

[P@triot]

I don't understand how we get posts like this - stated as fact when they are in fact FALSE. The FACT is, the earth is COOLING. That is a 100% fact and it is part of the natural cycle. The earth goes through various heating and cooling phases that have nothing to do with pollution - and it is currently cooling and is on pace to do so for the next 10 years.

Sorry Global Warming Alarmists, The Earth Is Cooling - Forbes

 

[ScienceRocks]

I don't understand how we get posts like this - stated as fact when they are in fact FALSE. The FACT is, the earth is COOLING. That is a 100% fact and it is part of the natural cycle. The earth goes through various heating and cooling phases that have nothing to do with pollution - and it is currently cooling and is on pace to do so for the next 10 years.

Sorry Global Warming Alarmists, The Earth Is Cooling - Forbes

Nope the earth is warming about .012-.014c per year. http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_June_2012.png

You have to look at this without the enso and throughout the past decade.

 

[Vidi]

I don't understand how we get posts like this - stated as fact when they are in fact FALSE. The FACT is, the earth is COOLING. That is a 100% fact and it is part of the natural cycle. The earth goes through various heating and cooling phases that have nothing to do with pollution - and it is currently cooling and is on pace to do so for the next 10 years.

Sorry Global Warming Alarmists, The Earth Is Cooling - Forbes

Cooling?

Man, tell that to my electric bill.

 

[BDBoop]

I am naturally sceptical of anything paid for by the Koch Brothers.

That being said, WOW! Muller has been a thorn in the yes its real side for a long time. That he would suddenly change sides is fairly dramatic. And if he indeed has evidence as he claims that is stronger than previous data, then it could spell the end of the debate.

That being said, its freaking HOT!!! And Im in Minnesota!!!!

I know!! We have had the AC on 24/7 for the better part of a month. And no. This is NOT anywhere near the norm.

 

[IGetItAlready]

Prominent climate change skeptic Richard Muller, in a study funded by the Koch Brothers, admits he was wrong, and that Global Warming is not only real, but is man-made.

No, you didn't read that wrong.

A University of Berkeley study, funded by the Koch brothers, has provided conclusive data that agrees with previous assessments by other sources, that show Global Warming is in fact man-made.

Prominent climate change denier now admits he was wrong (+video) - CSMonitor.com

The problem at this point is with all the fabricated "proof" and cooked books in support of the man made warming theory.
The letter from March 28 of this year to NASA administrator Charles Bolden Jr, signed by 49 former NASA and GISS employees demanding that the two agencies return to their historic standards of, “making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements” is a pretty scathing indictment of the means employed to create their findings all by itself.

Add to that James Lovelock's recent admission that certainty in their theories two decades ago, "led to some alarmist books – mine included – because it looked clear cut, but it hasn’t happened.” and the University of Colorado’s Sea Level Research Group being busted adding 0.3mm each year to their sea level data and it's simply not selling anymore.

The only thing we know for sure at this point is that the end doesn't always justify the means. And those means often degrade the credibility of the end.

Letter to NASA

 

[BDBoop]

Prominent climate change skeptic Richard Muller, in a study funded by the Koch Brothers, admits he was wrong, and that Global Warming is not only real, but is man-made.

No, you didn't read that wrong.

A University of Berkeley study, funded by the Koch brothers, has provided conclusive data that agrees with previous assessments by other sources, that show Global Warming is in fact man-made.

Prominent climate change denier now admits he was wrong (+video) - CSMonitor.com

Interview with Muller.

Rachel Maddow Show

 

[daveman]

Muller has never been a skeptic.

If you have to lie to make your point -- your point isn't worth making. But, hey, leftists have to lie.

 

[Steelplate]

here's my take...the truth of the matter is, we don't truly know 100% whether this is man made or not....but here's what we do know. fossil fuels cause pollution. we pump all kinds of crap into our atmosphere, we pollute the water that we drink, we pollute the land that we use.

Doesn't it make sense to eliminate as much of this stuff as possible? Also...politically, reducing dependence on foreign oil can only help.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I am naturally sceptical of anything paid for by the Koch Brothers.

That being said, WOW! Muller has been a thorn in the yes its real side for a long time. That he would suddenly change sides is fairly dramatic. And if he indeed has evidence as he claims that is stronger than previous data, then it could spell the end of the debate.

That being said, its freaking HOT!!! And Im in Minnesota!!!!

No question it has been warming for the past 150 years, but the real question is why? It can't be explained any other way since around 1940 time frame as solar output hasn't been going up. You either have to put more energy into a system or slow the rate of removal. Really that simple.

Is the debate over? HELL, NO. Two things need to be answered.
1# Why did the rate of warming slow in the past 10 years to bring about the doubts? What's the causes.
2# I think this is mostly answered as solar activity hasn't want up...But maybe it's a "local" cycle that has to do with the oceans? Who really knows, but I can understand why you think it is purely global warming. Let's listen to both sides to understand what factors could be holding it back or effecting it.

The new solar cycles activities are up over the last year and coinciding with this 'hot' summer that has been predicted by sun spot theorists. But that is not 'hot' everywhere and there is nothing that has yet ruled out other contributing factors such as cosmic ray cloud formation, and natural methane cycles which would dwarf anything done by CO2.

The real mystery is why does anyone regard Muller as a skeptic in the first place?

Richard Muller: Naked Copenhagen - WSJ.com

But the bottom line is that 80% cuts in U.S. emissions will have only a tiny benefit. The bulk of our effort is best directed at helping the emerging economies conserve energy and move rapidly toward efficient solar, wind and nuclear power. Developing cheap carbon capture and sequestration is also a priority. Above all, we need to recognize that make-the-West-bear-the-burden Copenhagen proposals are meaningless.

Yeah, right, some skeptic and that was in 2009.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Muller was never a skeptic to begin with. You took the bate though. Opinions are not scientific evidence. They are, opinions.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Wow Third thread on this! OK in the first 2 we find Richard Muller is a lying sack of shit, but after the thrid thread now I'm a believer

It appears that every data set says much the same thing... 1# They're right and you're wrong, 2# They're in on a big global scam.

If 2# then things maybe getting hairy very fast. Seriously, where is your data set?

Government Scientists Add Half A Degree, Then Claim That Temperatures Are Above Average | Real Science

Government Scientists Add Half A Degree, Then Claim That Temperatures Are Above Average

Posted on June 9, 2012

Globally, NOAA reported in May that the average temperature in April was 1.17 degrees warmer than the average from the past century, making it the fifth-warmest April since at least 1880.

It was the 326th consecutive month that global temperatures exceeded the 20th-century average, NOAA said.

More record warmth as scientists warn of global tipping point – CNN.com

Here in the US, these same good people at NOAA have been adding half a degree on to all temperatures for the last 326 months. Then they tell us that we need to have our taxes raised, because their inflated temperatures have been above average for the last 326 months.

Uncorrupted US Temperature Data Showed Cooling From 1930 To 1999 | Real Science

Why Hansen Had To Corrupt The Temperature Record | Real Science

You people are arguing over 'corrected' data, which should be a red flag to anyone who has done real science as that 'correcting' process can easily alter the true meaning of data trends. Which outlyers you drop, how you correct for bad data instead of throwing it out, where you place your starting point and end point on cyclical records, etc, all can totally slant what the data appear to mean.

At NASA Hansen has been notorious among critics for heavy handedly chaning past data, especially the 1930's, in order to make present day temperatures appear higher than average.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Muller was never a skeptic to begin with. You took the bate though. Opinions are not scientific evidence. They are, opinions.

But dont scientists convene in an assembly and vote for what scientific truth is each year?

Or is it that they just do polls to decide what is acurate science now?

/sarcasm

When did consensus become part of the scientific process?

Lucky thing for Kepler, Einstein and others that they did their work before the consensus became so important to the process. lol

 

[JimBowie1958]

Another relevant question: what kind of integrity do people have when they take a quibbler like Muller and dress him up as an opponent then celebrate his 'conversion'?

I would say a bunch of liars who I wouldnt trust with my piggy bank, much less directing national taxes and expenditures across the whole globe via AGW carbon taxes and limits.

And for Gods Sake, BERKELY? Not a hotbed of rightwingers, no matter who pays for it.

I think the Koch brothers got conned, lol.

 

[saveliberty]

Global warming is now termed Climate change as a result of the models created from these studies not being able to predict with any level of reliability. There is a long series of poor scientific methods employed with this area of study. Using differing data sources which support the theory, instead of using a single source. Correcting those data sources. Gathering new data from weather stations which are located near growing heat sinks. Satellite data corrections due to incompatability with ground data. Peer review which has been shown to be corrupted by a minority of leadership which silences opposing opinions. It really is quite sad that this myth of man made global warming continues.

 

[Vast LWC]

Another relevant question: what kind of integrity do people have when they take a quibbler like Muller and dress him up as an opponent then celebrate his 'conversion'?

I would say a bunch of liars who I wouldnt trust with my piggy bank, much less directing national taxes and expenditures across the whole globe via AGW carbon taxes and limits.

And for Gods Sake, BERKELY? Not a hotbed of rightwingers, no matter who pays for it.

I think the Koch brothers got conned, lol.

Ahh, and here's a classic strategy...

Deny that a converted person was ever on your side to begin with. Pretend that he was always "just a plant".

Classic.

In fact, it turns out that Dr Muller was the original disprover of the "Hockey Stick"...

In a 2004 Technology Review article, Muller supported the findings of Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick in which they criticized the research, led by Michael E. Mann, which produced the so-called "hockey stick graph" of global temperatures over the past millennium, on the grounds that it did not do proper principal component analysis (PCA). In the article, Richard Muller stated:

"McIntyre and McKitrick obtained part of the program that Mann used, and they found serious problems. Not only does the program not do conventional PCA, but it handles data normalization in a way that can only be described as mistaken.
Now comes the real shocker. This improper normalization procedure tends to emphasize any data that do have the hockey stick shape, and to suppress all data that do not. To demonstrate this effect, McIntyre and McKitrick created some meaningless test data that had, on average, no trends. This method of generating random data is called "Monte Carlo" analysis, after the famous casino, and it is widely used in statistical analysis to test procedures. When McIntyre and McKitrick fed these random data into the Mann procedure, out popped a hockey stick shape!
That discovery hit me like a bombshell, and I suspect it is having the same effect on many others. Suddenly the hockey stick, the poster-child of the global warming community, turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics. How could it happen?"

The reason he is the founder and the current chairperson of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature ("BEST") project, is due to the fact that he believed the original readings were faulty, and he was quite vocal about it.

But, I'm sure that whatever evidence is presented, and whoever is converted, some people will find a way to rationalize it away.

 

[Vast LWC]

The new solar cycles activities are up over the last year and coinciding with this 'hot' summer that has been predicted by sun spot theorists. But that is not 'hot' everywhere and there is nothing that has yet ruled out other contributing factors such as cosmic ray cloud formation, and natural methane cycles which would dwarf anything done by CO2.

The real mystery is why does anyone regard Muller as a skeptic in the first place?

Richard Muller: Naked Copenhagen - WSJ.com

But the bottom line is that 80% cuts in U.S. emissions will have only a tiny benefit. The bulk of our effort is best directed at helping the emerging economies conserve energy and move rapidly toward efficient solar, wind and nuclear power. Developing cheap carbon capture and sequestration is also a priority. Above all, we need to recognize that make-the-West-bear-the-burden Copenhagen proposals are meaningless.

Yeah, right, some skeptic and that was in 2009.

Dude, you do realize that piece was to point out that reducing US carbon emissions would be an effort in futility, even if the theory behind man-made global warming was correct, right?

As he points out later in the article, he is not saying that is the case....

If the issue is rising emissions in the next several decades, the bottom line is simple: The developed world is rapidly becoming irrelevant.

Every 10% cut in the U.S. is negated by one year of China's growth....

Any cause for hope if you believe that this will lead to global warming?...

Notice the conditionals he uses.

He then goes on to point out how we're probably going to have to learn to live with the effects if the conclusions are correct, as the point of prevention has already past.

But yeah, I guess you're right... He must be a secret plant by the giant left-wing socialist conspiracy, right?

That's obviously a more reasonable explanation.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Muller was never a skeptic. It's all in there.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

But I see you're a diehard believer in the opinions. I'm holding out for scientific evidence.

Enjoy the opinions!