Koch Brothers funded Climate Research. What they found? Oooh, that's gotta hurt.

[rdean]

Two-thirds showed warming trends, with warm regions more than offsetting cool regions in developing a global average.

Money for the new study, dubbed the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, came from five foundations, including one established by Microsoft founder Bill Gates and another from the Charles Koch Charitable Foundation, widely seen as a source of money for conservative organizations and initiatives that have fought efforts to curb greenhouse-gas emissions.

Study rebuffs skeptics: global warming is real - US news - Christian Science Monitor - msnbc.com

Right wingers will say, "But you can't prove that adding billions and billions of tons of CO2 to the air every year causes it". Well, ask them if it helps?

These people say, "Clean air and water costs jobs". If those jobs cause our children to have cancer, how much are they worth? Right wingers hate abortion but are willing to give their children cancer and birth defects? I don't get the logic. Do these people ever think farther ahead than the next 10 minutes?

 

[Mad Scientist]

Fascinating!

A study that hasn't been published and peer reviewed is provided as proof of global warming. Oh excuse me, you warmists call it "climate change" now.


Fascinating!

 

[rdean]

Fascinating!

A study that hasn't been published and peer reviewed is provided as proof of global warming. Oh excuse me, you warmists call it "climate change" now.


Fascinating!

Don't forget "funded by the Krotch Brothers".

 

[Tank]

To much liberal hot air

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And the number of repeatable lab experiments showing how a 100PPM increase in CO2 causes warmer atmosphere and acidifies the oceans is still zero

 

[CrusaderFrank]

wait. Does Deany think that "science" get the results because of who funds it? Is that how Liberal "science" works?

 

[IanC]

Two-thirds showed warming trends, with warm regions more than offsetting cool regions in developing a global average.

Money for the new study, dubbed the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, came from five foundations, including one established by Microsoft founder Bill Gates and another from the Charles Koch Charitable Foundation, widely seen as a source of money for conservative organizations and initiatives that have fought efforts to curb greenhouse-gas emissions.

Study rebuffs skeptics: global warming is real - US news - Christian Science Monitor - msnbc.com

Right wingers will say, "But you can't prove that adding billions and billions of tons of CO2 to the air every year causes it". Well, ask them if it helps?

These people say, "Clean air and water costs jobs". If those jobs cause our children to have cancer, how much are they worth? Right wingers hate abortion but are willing to give their children cancer and birth defects? I don't get the logic. Do these people ever think farther ahead than the next 10 minutes?

rdean brings up a good point. 1/3 of the stations are cooling, whats up with that?

The BEST methodology also seems to claim very little impact for the Urban Heat Island effect. some say that urban areas only account for 1% of the area but does that mean urban areas only have 1% of the stations? of course not most readings are taken in areas that are influenced by man made constructions.

 

[gslack]

Two-thirds showed warming trends, with warm regions more than offsetting cool regions in developing a global average.

Money for the new study, dubbed the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, came from five foundations, including one established by Microsoft founder Bill Gates and another from the Charles Koch Charitable Foundation, widely seen as a source of money for conservative organizations and initiatives that have fought efforts to curb greenhouse-gas emissions.

Study rebuffs skeptics: global warming is real - US news - Christian Science Monitor - msnbc.com

Right wingers will say, "But you can't prove that adding billions and billions of tons of CO2 to the air every year causes it". Well, ask them if it helps?

These people say, "Clean air and water costs jobs". If those jobs cause our children to have cancer, how much are they worth? Right wingers hate abortion but are willing to give their children cancer and birth defects? I don't get the logic. Do these people ever think farther ahead than the next 10 minutes?

I already tore this story up in the other thread where the poster used Gizmodo as the source..

The "scientists" are dubious... Turns out the head scientist Mueller is the head of an Eco-consulting firm as well as head of the group that did the study. Also if you look at the list of people in the study group they are the same from the company...

This is from that post I made in that thread....

"Ah yes from the Great Gizmodo... yes that Bastian of .... What exactly?

Exactly what makes that scientists a vocal skeptic? I have never heard of him, and frankly I don't think a study by a group dedicated to furthering AGW theory based out of Berkley is the final word on this...

Now I will have to completely show the bullshit in that article...

The article mentions the study is from Berkeley Earth Project. and I followed that link. it gave me the ecomentalists vibe SO I looked at their "about us" page. And when I went I saw it was just names of people involved and links to them or stuff about them. SO I went to the first ones link, and guess what I found? A mention of his company named Muller & Associates Now can you guess what they do? Please follow the links and see the steps I took and see for yourself...

Yep.. Thats right he is the head guy at a sustainability consulting firm.. Sustainability... Thats the new term they are pushing, its kind of nicer than saying going green or ECO-friendly... From their site...

"GreenGov™ is a service offered by Muller & Associates for Governments, International Organizations, non profits, and other organizations that work with Government. The aim is to provide politically-neutral counsel that is broad in scope while rooted in the hard facts of state-of-the-art science and engineering. The key is to make the right patch between the best technologies and the strengths of the government. We know that to be effective the political dimension must be integrated into the technical plan from the start."

So your source linked to a science front-group for a Eco-consulting firm and had the unmitigated gall to call it science.... WTH?

This is the kind of crap that makes me the maddest in all of this.. Its the rise of anti-science and it fuels masses of ignorance... All of those scientists involved are no more scientific than the Pope... The fact is they used the university and any funds it may have gotten for research from the government to reach a specific and desired outcome all to further their own business.... And you people take issue with the heartland institute?

LOL pot, meet kettle..."

Please follow all the links in it you will see what I am talking about...

 

[IanC]

Muller is a highly respected scientist but he is no skeptic. there are a lot of Muller lectures on youtube which definitely put him down as supporting the IPCC position. his only act of skepticism has been excoriating Mann and his cohorts for publishing poor science. and rightfully so.

my main criticism of Muller is that he likes the limelight but doesnt seem to understand the ramifications and consequences of his off-the-cuff remarks. he thinks and speaks in scientific jargon which can be misinterpreted by the media. or perhaps he wants to be misinterpreted to be a hero for the 'right' side.

 

[Sallow]

Fascinating!

A study that hasn't been published and peer reviewed is provided as proof of global warming. Oh excuse me, you warmists call it "climate change" now.


Fascinating!

Ah. So all the other peer reviewed studies are what? Bupkis?

You guys are amazing!

 

[IanC]

the BEST study is a wonderful step forward in the right direction of openness. the data is now available and the methodology open to inspection. I cant see how all four of the papers will go through peer review without some changes being made though. especially the UHI paper which claims a negative impact on temperature, which seems at odds to reality.

 

[code1211]

Two-thirds showed warming trends, with warm regions more than offsetting cool regions in developing a global average.

Money for the new study, dubbed the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, came from five foundations, including one established by Microsoft founder Bill Gates and another from the Charles Koch Charitable Foundation, widely seen as a source of money for conservative organizations and initiatives that have fought efforts to curb greenhouse-gas emissions.

Study rebuffs skeptics: global warming is real - US news - Christian Science Monitor - msnbc.com

Right wingers will say, "But you can't prove that adding billions and billions of tons of CO2 to the air every year causes it". Well, ask them if it helps?

These people say, "Clean air and water costs jobs". If those jobs cause our children to have cancer, how much are they worth? Right wingers hate abortion but are willing to give their children cancer and birth defects? I don't get the logic. Do these people ever think farther ahead than the next 10 minutes?

I'm not at all sure what it is that you're trying to prove by this.

In the past, you have indicated that ANYTHING put forth after being tainted by the money of the Koch Brothers is tainted.

Now you hold this up as a Gospel and yet it is the fruit of the poisened tree.

All I ask is a little consistancy in your blind partisan bias.

 

[Old Rocks]

Now Code, we do get consistancy from you. Anything that benefits big energy corps is good, no matter what the damage it does to the citizens of this nation.

 

[Old Rocks]

the BEST study is a wonderful step forward in the right direction of openness. the data is now available and the methodology open to inspection. I cant see how all four of the papers will go through peer review without some changes being made though. especially the UHI paper which claims a negative impact on temperature, which seems at odds to reality.

The BEST papers will be reviewd and the finding and data of the climate scientists will be confirmed. And then you will disavow the results.

 

[Mad Scientist]

The "Climate Change Scam" is a great way to impose taxation on people. If you just raise taxes people will squeal. If you convince them that the taxation will "save da erff!" people will go along with it.

 

[edthecynic]

the BEST study is a wonderful step forward in the right direction of openness. the data is now available and the methodology open to inspection. I cant see how all four of the papers will go through peer review without some changes being made though. especially the UHI paper which claims a negative impact on temperature, which seems at odds to reality.

I have explained it to you over and over, but YOUR alternate "reality" will not let you see reality!

As I explained, the warming trends are measured by anomalies, not absolute temperature. Anomalies are measured against a 20 or 30 year average temperature for that particular station and if the station is near a heat source the average the anomaly is measured against will be artificially higher than if there was no heat source thus giving a lower anomaly.

So what we have is ass backwards CON$ bitching about stations near heat sources and when those stations are removed from the data the deniers bitch yet again because the warming trend increases. The deniers do not want more accurate data, they want data that supports their preconceived anti global warming bias.

 

[code1211]

Now Code, we do get consistancy from you. Anything that benefits big energy corps is good, no matter what the damage it does to the citizens of this nation.

That is not what I have implied. You are free to infer whatever you want, but it may lead you away from the truth of the matter.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Manmade Global Warming, it cant be shown in a lab, it can only be believed in.

 

[midcan5]

It is always curious to me where the warming deniers spend their time? Are they all locked in basements and have never experienced the changes in weather these past ??? years? I ride / commute by bicycle and being out in the weather for many, many years have noticed the changing weather. Why argue, there's nothing wrong with cleaning up the air. Car smog has improved with little additional costs. Time to protect our mother if we care about her and care about our kids and grandkids.

'Ex-climate sceptic now backs global warming'

"Professor Muller and his colleagues, including this year's physics Nobel winner, Saul Perlmutter, had suspected the previous work had been tainted by the "urban heat island effect", where increasing urbanisation around weather stations was causing the temperature increases recorded over the past half-century."

Ex-climate sceptic now backs global warming - Climate Change, Environment - The Independent

 

[midcan5]

Manmade Global Warming, it cant be shown in a lab, it can only be believed in.

Huh? "We challenged two leading British scientists to try to prove the science of global warming to a group of people whose views very loosely reflect national opinions.

And, as if that wasn't tough enough we asked them to do it in my kitchen.

Can they do it? Well, you can see for yourself." BBC - Ethical Man blog: In praise of scepticism

.