Myths busted at climate change conference

[longknife]

Okay, let's see our Globull Warming Gurus discuss this rationally – without all the name-calling, if possible.

Read the full piece @ Myths busted at climate change conference | Human Events

 

[Mr. H.]

Interesting stuff.

Don't think I'd enjoy having a name like Bastardi, though.

 

[hortysir]

Speakers also cited the Remote Sensing Systems satellite record which shows there now has been no global warming for 17 years and 10 months.

 

[skookerasbil]

Lets face it......the AGW climate crusaders have been taking crushing blows for quite some time now........sliding boackwards faster than a stone falling in water.

Go look at the thread PROOF THE SKEPTICS ARE WINNING on this page.........scores of links showing how much the AGW movement is falling away like a fad. Nobody cares about this shit anymore because most of the people think its fraudulent in 2014.

 

[flacaltenn]

Okay, let's see our Globull Warming Gurus discuss this rationally – without all the name-calling, if possible.

Read the full piece @ Myths busted at climate change conference | Human Events

All the noted "myths" there in the article barely puts a dent in the pile..
Didn't see any of the faulty press releases on papers that blew right past the actual results of Global Warming studies. Designed to purposely lead the press to extreme conclusions. Or the debunking of "the oceans' ate my warming" excuse that is going NOWHERE in further scientific investigation. Or the repeated lies about "rates of warming/CO2increase are now larger than at any point in XXXXX years" crappola.. Bilked from studies that could NEVER DETECT a 50 or 70 yr wide spike in either variable.

It's a start. But it's more of Boca Burger than a juicy steak dinner..

 

[mamooth]

Okay, let's see our Globull Warming Gurus discuss this rationally – without all the name-calling, if possible.

You'd look less hypocritical if you hadn't led off with namecalling.

Oh, I didn't see any myths busted in that propaganda puff piece, just a lot of unsupported fables, phony claims about what scientists supposedly believe, brazenly dishonest cherrypicks and lunatic conspiracy theories about the vast socialist conspiracy. Rather than telling us to do your homework, it would be your responsibility to post the data that busts the "myths". So do so. If you're not just parroting, it should be easy.

 

[Zander]

I have peer reviewed this thread and fully approve*

*subject to data adjustments to be amended and revised, as needed, at any later date, dependent upon exigencies of the moment.

 

[Crick]

First myth busted: Heartland's Climate Conference has any scientific merit WHAT - SO - EVER

 

[SSDD]

First myth busted: Heartland's Climate Conference has any scientific merit WHAT - SO - EVER

Typical....big on the ad hominem...zero substance. Clearly you either can't defend your myths.

 

[Old Rocks]

Okay, let's see our Globull Warming Gurus discuss this rationally – without all the name-calling, if possible.

Read the full piece @ Myths busted at climate change conference | Human Events

A load of bullshit. Heartland Institute is a far right wing organizations for idiots specializing in ignorance. Not a scientific meeting at all, but a politicial get together to deny what the real scientists are saying.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Okay, let's see our Globull Warming Gurus discuss this rationally – without all the name-calling, if possible.

Read the full piece @ Myths busted at climate change conference | Human Events

I have peer reviewed this post and find it 100% Accurate

 

[Old Rocks]

First myth busted: Heartland's Climate Conference has any scientific merit WHAT - SO - EVER

Typical....big on the ad hominem...zero substance. Clearly you either can't defend your myths.

Heartland Institute is a political organization, not a scientific organization. So their whole approach is totally flawed. The have already concluded that AGW is incorrect, and bring no evidence to show that it is, only political accusations and conspiracy theories.

 

[jc456]

First myth busted: Heartland's Climate Conference has any scientific merit WHAT - SO - EVER

Typical....big on the ad hominem...zero substance. Clearly you either can't defend your myths.

Heartland Institute is a political organization, not a scientific organization. So their whole approach is totally flawed. The have already concluded that AGW is incorrect, and bring no evidence to show that it is, only political accusations and conspiracy theories.

It's amazing to me that you with no evidence suggest someone doesn't have evidence. That is flippn hilarious s0n... lOSIng

BTW, are you also cricks? Seems you're answering for him/ her today and I haven't seen him/ her today.

 

[flacaltenn]

First myth busted: Heartland's Climate Conference has any scientific merit WHAT - SO - EVER

Typical....big on the ad hominem...zero substance. Clearly you either can't defend your myths.

Heartland Institute is a political organization, not a scientific organization. So their whole approach is totally flawed. The have already concluded that AGW is incorrect, and bring no evidence to show that it is, only political accusations and conspiracy theories.

Careful not to edit in your quote box -- Lemme give you an honest reply..

The United Nations is a political organization, not a scientific body. So their whole motivation is totally flawed. They have already concluded that AGW is correct and bring no evidence to show show that it is not, only political goals and conspiracy to exhort redistribution of wealth..

That about covers both sides -- don't it ??

 

[westwall]

Old Rocks, And all you others...you are no longer allowed to merely cut and paste. From now on you must adhere to the rules of the forum which state that you MUST have content of your own in every post.

 

[SSDD]

First myth busted: Heartland's Climate Conference has any scientific merit WHAT - SO - EVER

Typical....big on the ad hominem...zero substance. Clearly you either can't defend your myths.

Heartland Institute is a political organization, not a scientific organization. So their whole approach is totally flawed. The have already concluded that AGW is incorrect, and bring no evidence to show that it is, only political accusations and conspiracy theories.

I see you can't defend your myths either.

 

[Old Rocks]

Typical....big on the ad hominem...zero substance. Clearly you either can't defend your myths.

Heartland Institute is a political organization, not a scientific organization. So their whole approach is totally flawed. The have already concluded that AGW is incorrect, and bring no evidence to show that it is, only political accusations and conspiracy theories.

It's amazing to me that you with no evidence suggest someone doesn't have evidence. That is flippn hilarious s0n... lOSIng

BTW, are you also cricks? Seems you're answering for him/ her today and I haven't seen him/ her today.

Evidence, eh?

2012 AMS Information Statement on Climate Change

Climate is always changing. However, many of the observed changes noted above are beyond what can be explained by the natural variability of the climate. It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide. The most important of these over the long term is CO2, whose concentration in the atmosphere is rising principally as a result of fossil-fuel combustion and deforestation. While large amounts of CO2 enter and leave the atmosphere through natural processes, these human activities are increasing the total amount in the air and the oceans. Approximately half of the CO2 put into the atmosphere through human activity in the past 250 years has been taken up by the ocean and terrestrial biosphere, with the other half remaining in the atmosphere. Since long-term measurements began in the 1950s, the atmospheric CO2 concentration has been increasing at a rate much faster than at any time in the last 800,000 years. Having been introduced into the atmosphere it will take a thousand years for the majority of the added atmospheric CO2 to be removed by natural processes, and some will remain for thousands of subsequent years.

Water vapor also is an important atmospheric greenhouse gas. Unlike other greenhouse gases, however, the concentration of water vapor depends on atmospheric temperature and is controlled by the global climate system through its hydrological cycle of evaporation-condensation-precipitation. Water vapor is highly variable in space and time with a short lifetime, because of weather variability. Observations indicate an increase in globally averaged water vapor in the atmosphere in recent decades, at a rate consistent with the response produced by climate models that simulate human-induced increases in greenhouse gases. This increase in water vapor also strengthens the greenhouse effect, amplifying the impact of human-induced increases in other greenhouse gases.

Human activity also affects climate through changes in the number and physical properties of tiny solid particles and liquid droplets in the atmosphere, known collectively as atmospheric aerosols. Examples of aerosols include dust, sea salt, and sulfates from air pollution. Aerosols have a variety of climate effects. They absorb and redirect solar energy from the sun and thermal energy emitted by Earth, emit energy themselves, and modify the ability of clouds to reflect sunlight and to produce precipitation. Aerosols can both strengthen and weaken greenhouse warming, depending on their characteristics. Most aerosols originating from human activity act to cool the planet and so partly counteract greenhouse gas warming effects. Aerosols lofted into the stratosphere [between about 13 km (8 miles) and 50 km (30 miles) altitude above the surface] by occasional large sulfur-rich volcanic eruptions can reduce global surface temperature for several years. By contrast, carbon soot from incomplete combustion of fossil fuels warms the planet, so that decreases in soot would reduce warming. Aerosols have lifetimes in the troposphere [at altitudes up to approximately 13 km (8 miles) from the surface in the middle latitudes] on the order of one week, much shorter than that of most greenhouse gases, and their prevalence and properties can vary widely by region.

American Meteorlogical Society, not some liar claiming a Phd.

 

[Old Rocks]

And here we have the statement of the American Geophysical Union, a society of earth scientists that has the most scientists working directly on global warming.

AGU Statement on Climate Change | Climate Etc.

Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes.

“Human activities are changing Earth’s climate. At the global level, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases have increased sharply since the Industrial Revolution. Fossil fuel burning dominates this increase. Human-caused increases in greenhouse gases are responsible for most of the observed global average surface warming of roughly 0.8°C (1.5°F) over the past 140 years. Because natural processes cannot quickly remove some of these gases (notably carbon dioxide) from the atmosphere, our past, present, and future emissions will influence the climate system for millennia.

Extensive, independent observations confirm the reality of global warming. These observations show large-scale increases in air and sea temperatures, sea level, and atmospheric water vapor; they document decreases in the extent of mountain glaciers, snow cover, permafrost, and Arctic sea ice. These changes are broadly consistent with long-understood physics and predictions of how the climate system is expected to respond to human-caused increases in greenhouse gases. The changes are inconsistent with explanations of climate change that rely on known natural influences.

No equivocation or mincing of words here.

 

[Old Rocks]

Real geologists gathering evidence and doing real science.

The Geological Society of America - Position Statement on Climate Change

Scientific advances in the first decade of the 21st century have greatly reduced previous uncertainties about the amplitude and causes of recent global warming. Ground-station measurements have shown a warming trend of ~0.8 °C since the mid-1800s, a trend consistent with (1) retreat of northern hemisphere snow and Arctic sea ice in the last 40 years; (2) greater heat storage in the ocean over the last 50 years; (3) retreat of most mountain glaciers since 1850; (4) an ongoing rise of global sea level for more than a century; and (5) proxy reconstructions of temperature change over past centuries from archives including ice cores, tree rings, lake sediments, boreholes, cave deposits and corals. Both instrumental records and proxy indices from geologic sources show that global mean surface temperature was higher during the last few decades of the 20th century and the first decade of the 21st than during any comparable period during the preceding four centuries (National Research Council, 2006).

Measurements from satellites, which began in 1979, initially did not show a warming trend, but later studies (Mears and Wentz, 2005; Santer et al., 2008) found that the satellite data had not been fully adjusted for losses of satellite elevation through time, differences in time of arrival over a given location, and removal of higher-elevation effects on the lower tropospheric signal. With these factors taken into account, the satellite data are now in basic agreement with ground-station data and confirm a warming trend since 1979. In a related study, Sherwood et al. (2005) found problems with corrections of tropical daytime radiosonde measurements and largely resolved a previous discrepancy with ground-station trends. With instrumental discrepancies having been resolved, recent warming of Earth’s surface is now consistently supported by a wide range of measurements and proxies and is no longer open to serious challenge.

The geologic record contains unequivocal evidence of former climate change, including periods of greater warmth with limited polar ice, and colder intervals with more widespread glaciation. These and other changes were accompanied by major shifts in species and ecosystems. Paleoclimatic research has demonstrated that these major changes in climate and biota are associated with significant changes in climate forcing such as continental positions and topography, patterns of ocean circulation, the greenhouse gas composition of the atmosphere, and the distribution and amount of solar energy at the top of the atmosphere caused by changes in Earth's orbit and the evolution of the sun as a main sequence star. Cyclic changes in ice volume during glacial periods over the last three million years have been correlated to orbital cycles and changes in greenhouse gas concentrations, but may also reflect internal responses generated by large ice sheets. This rich history of Earth's climate has been used as one of several key sources of information for assessing the predictive capabilities of modern climate models. The testing of increasingly sophisticated climate models by comparison to geologic proxies is continuing, leading to refinement of hypotheses and improved understanding of the drivers of past and current climate change.

There is considerable more on both the AGU and GSA sites.

 

[Old Rocks]

You see, the whole of the scientific community states that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.