Pushing back

[tinydancer]

Those old warmers don't want to give up, do they?

Warmists plot secretly to kill off the Medieval Warming Period. Again

Remember how one of the great ambitions of the Climategate “scientists” was to “contain” the “putative” Medieval Warming Period? Well – guess what – they’re STILL at it.

Michael Mann, Phil Jones, Jonathan Overpeck, Eugene Wahl, Malcolm Hughes – just about anyone who’s anyone from the Climategate emails, in fact – have all been on a clandestine boondoggle to sunny Portugal, there to conspire how best to obliterate that embarrassing and inconvenient period of bounteous warmth between around 900 AD and 1280 AD known as the MWP


I love Delingpole. He is the funniest denier on the planet. God Bless his blog.

Warmists plot secretly to kill off the Medieval Warming Period. Again – Telegraph Blogs

Here's the original article from Anthony Watts. The close of it says it all...

Clearly, they seem to be embracing the existence of the MWP, but at the same time once again they appear to be trying to figure out how to minimize it.

When you see things like this (from MBH98 co-author Malcolm K. Hughes) on the MCA/MWP:

A case will be made for the abandonment of both of them, on the grounds that they are inappropriate, uninformative, and that they very probably divert attention from more revealing ways of thinking about the Earth’s climate over the past two millennia.

And look at the attendee list and lack of press coverage, you realize it’s the same gang of people running the same game all over again.

The key is, will they learn to shoot straight this time?


Mike Mann’s “secret” meeting on the Medieval Warm Period | Watts Up With That?

 

[konradv]

What does the MWP have to do with anything? You can't take the past as a template for the future, if underlying conditions have changed, like humans putting out more CO2 in days than all the volcanoes on earth do in a normal year. The MWP was caused by natural cycles. There's NOTHING natural about CO2 values that have gone up by about a third since the advent of the Industrial Revolution. GET IT?!?!

 

[IanC]

What does the MWP have to do with anything? You can't take the past as a template for the future, if underlying conditions have changed, like humans putting out more CO2 in days than all the volcanoes on earth do in a normal year. The MWP was caused by natural cycles. There's NOTHING natural about CO2 values that have gone up by about a third since the advent of the Industrial Revolution. GET IT?!?!

I believe he was trying to show that the big players on the 'hockey team' are continuing to try and bend the data to support their theories rather than adapting their theories to the data.

your concern with CO2 is valid up to a point but its importance has been vastly exaggerated.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

700 Climate Scientists and not a single one of them can show in a laboratory how a 200PPM increase in CO2 raises temperature

 

[uscitizen]

I learned recently that in Greenland the ground is rising an inch or so a year as the ice melts and relieves weight on the land.
Is this a double whammy on rising sea levels. the melting ice contributes to rising sea levels and seems like the rising land will displace more water causing rising sea levels as well?
I wonder if scientists have taken this into account?

Just a thought.
And this has nothing to do with WHY the ice is melting.

 

[IanC]

more on just how maleable temp data are in the hands of the 'hockey team'
from Hide the decline - Latest News (hidethedecline)

National Geographic circa 1976

Crutem 2006

combined

hmmm.... something suspicious has happened to the temperature decline from 1940-1975. good thing the climate scientists found the mistake in time, eh?

 

[skookerasbil]

meh.........politically irrelevant now that the House is solidly GOP. Nobody's going for that shit now........not even close.

So really........this effort is akin to a group of 700 scientists getting together to contemplate their navels in the bigger picture of things.

I just dont get the obsession with this stuff.........but then again, as an administrator, Im a function over form guy. To me, visiting this forum is like visiting a pro football team for a week long preparation.....meetings.....practices......video.........chalkboard.......more video.........more practice.........then the day of the game, the team skips the game and goes out for wings and beers.

Who cares about the stupid science if there is zero political will to do anything about it???

 

[HUGGY]

The game that is being played by the political pawns of the energy corperations has nothing to do with the research that is being done. It is all about keeping any information concerning a climate changing due to the burning of fossil fuels from influencing policy.

The most prominent researcher in the US, Dr. James Hansen gave his testimony and predictions in a hearing before Congress in 1988. His predictions have turned out to be correct. Yet Senator Inhofe will stand in public and lie about that.

The people that need to be standing before a court, not Congress, are the people denying actual research results, and lying to the public about the dangers that are becoming increasing apparent as the climate changes.

Hansen got busted faking temperature data. Hansen gave predictions and then made up data to make it work.

If climate change is so dangerous and using fossil fuels causes climate change than why is Oregon using more fossil fuel at a faster rate, creating more CO2, to make a windmills and solar panels. You use more fossil fuel to build green energy than if you just burn oil to make electricity. Besides, even a second grader can see making a copy of a copy makes a poor copy, using oil to make a windmill makes bad ecological sense.

You are a complete idiot. Statements like that don't further your point..they just show your total lack of critical thinking and honesty. We don't need howling monkeys debating the future of our energy needs. Go back to peeling bananas moron.

Your statement suggests that unless the components of windmills are not produced using already existing free electricity from windmills and parts not derived from petroleum that they are not better energy producers than just burning coal. Do you have any idea how stupid you are...No...I suppose you don't. Your statements aren't "flawed". They are insane. You are a perfect example why we must keep fundimentalists as far away from positions of deciding public policy as possible.

 

[mdn2000]

The game that is being played by the political pawns of the energy corperations has nothing to do with the research that is being done. It is all about keeping any information concerning a climate changing due to the burning of fossil fuels from influencing policy.

The most prominent researcher in the US, Dr. James Hansen gave his testimony and predictions in a hearing before Congress in 1988. His predictions have turned out to be correct. Yet Senator Inhofe will stand in public and lie about that.

The people that need to be standing before a court, not Congress, are the people denying actual research results, and lying to the public about the dangers that are becoming increasing apparent as the climate changes.

Hansen got busted faking temperature data. Hansen gave predictions and then made up data to make it work.

If climate change is so dangerous and using fossil fuels causes climate change than why is Oregon using more fossil fuel at a faster rate, creating more CO2, to make a windmills and solar panels. You use more fossil fuel to build green energy than if you just burn oil to make electricity. Besides, even a second grader can see making a copy of a copy makes a poor copy, using oil to make a windmill makes bad ecological sense.

You are a complete idiot. Statements like that don't further your point..they just show your total lack of critical thinking and honesty. We don't need howling monkeys debating the future of our energy needs. Go back to peeling bananas moron.

Your statement suggests that unless the components of windmills are not produced using already existing free electricity from windmills and parts not derived from petroleum that they are not better energy producers than just burning coal. Do you have any idea how stupid you are...No...I suppose you don't. Your statements aren't "flawed". They are insane. You are a perfect example why we must keep fundimentalists as far away from positions of deciding public policy as possible.

it is a fact, more demand for petroleum, we use more petroleum now because its used to make Wind Mills.

The worlds largest wind mill farm that produces a tiny bit of electricity increases demand for petroleum products substantially.

Do you know how stupid you are without investigating the demand for the raw materials used for the energy source you promote. You have never done that, boy is that stupid of you.

 

[skookerasbil]

Just a public service announcement to the k00ks..........I really suggest you assholes start your ark projects in your own back yard

 

[skookerasbil]

Hansen got busted faking temperature data. Hansen gave predictions and then made up data to make it work.

If climate change is so dangerous and using fossil fuels causes climate change than why is Oregon using more fossil fuel at a faster rate, creating more CO2, to make a windmills and solar panels. You use more fossil fuel to build green energy than if you just burn oil to make electricity. Besides, even a second grader can see making a copy of a copy makes a poor copy, using oil to make a windmill makes bad ecological sense.

You are a complete idiot. Statements like that don't further your point..they just show your total lack of critical thinking and honesty. We don't need howling monkeys debating the future of our energy needs. Go back to peeling bananas moron.

Your statement suggests that unless the components of windmills are not produced using already existing free electricity from windmills and parts not derived from petroleum that they are not better energy producers than just burning coal. Do you have any idea how stupid you are...No...I suppose you don't. Your statements aren't "flawed". They are insane. You are a perfect example why we must keep fundimentalists as far away from positions of deciding public policy as possible.

it is a fact, more demand for petroleum, we use more petroleum now because its used to make Wind Mills.

The worlds largest wind mill farm that produces a tiny bit of electricity increases demand for petroleum products substantially.

Do you know how stupid you are without investigating the demand for the raw materials used for the energy source you promote. You have never done that, boy is that stupid of you.

mdn.....these people are mental cases. If this forum is around in ten years, these assholes will still be posting up the same links they've been posting up for years now. That is THE definition of a mental disorder........doing things over and over and over and expecting a different outcome!!!

They COMPLETELY ignore my posts of sobering reality and think they are part of a mission that can be successful. Its fcukking hysterical to me. I come in here for a cup of coffee about twice a month and these k00ks are still posting up the same shit month after month after month. I get a kick out of pointing that out to some curious onlookers in my unique fashion.....but it doesnt deter them. They think we''re going to be a country of windmills in 10 years.

I say.......... "OK!!!!!!!!!!"

 

[HUGGY]

Does science answer to nobody when it demands changes in government policy?

Sure it should and must...just not to idiots like you and 2000. Don't worry your tiny brains over the spectre of scientific misinformation. There are plenty of folks that don't get fooled as easily as you that will look at the data and how it is gathered with scrutiny. Don't take it personal. Half of the population has an IQ of 100 or less. That means that there over 160 million people in our country I wouldn't trust to decide which *brand of oil to put in my car for me.

* It's a trick question fuckwit..in spite of what your television tells you..all commercially produced petroleum motor oil is the same. Same with gasoline. If you pay more for any "special" brand of oil or gas you are throwing money away. How do I know this? Because one of my grandfathers owned an oil refinery. I worked there as a late teenager for three years.

 

[mdn2000]

Does science answer to nobody when it demands changes in government policy?

Sure it should and must...just not to idiots like you and 2000. Don't worry your tiny brains over the spectre of scientific misinformation. There are plenty of folks that don't get fooled as easily as you that will look at the data and how it is gathered with scrutiny. Don't take it personal. Half of the population has an IQ of 100 or less. That means that there over 160 million people in our country I wouldn't trust to decide which *brand of oil to put in my car for me.

* It's a trick question fuckwit..in spite of what your television tells you..all commercially produced petroleum motor oil is the same. Same with gasoline. If you pay more for any "special" brand of oil or gas you are throwing money away. How do I know this? Because one of my grandfathers owned an oil refinery. I worked there as a late teenager for three years.

The data, you can link to data so your right, except they can not collect enough samples nor do they have a computer that can handle such a large amount of data.

Further they collect most data around the cities, thats easiest, that is were people live and collect weather data.

So lets see, as cities grow they generate more heat, that heat does not or is not felt beyond a minimal radius around the city. Despite the city being hotter the country outside the city stays the same.

Nice trick, weight the theory on data collected where its getting hotter and ignore the data that shows no change.

 

[HUGGY]

Does science answer to nobody when it demands changes in government policy?

Sure it should and must...just not to idiots like you and 2000. Don't worry your tiny brains over the spectre of scientific misinformation. There are plenty of folks that don't get fooled as easily as you that will look at the data and how it is gathered with scrutiny. Don't take it personal. Half of the population has an IQ of 100 or less. That means that there over 160 million people in our country I wouldn't trust to decide which *brand of oil to put in my car for me.

* It's a trick question fuckwit..in spite of what your television tells you..all commercially produced petroleum motor oil is the same. Same with gasoline. If you pay more for any "special" brand of oil or gas you are throwing money away. How do I know this? Because one of my grandfathers owned an oil refinery. I worked there as a late teenager for three years.

The data, you can link to data so your right, except they can not collect enough samples nor do they have a computer that can handle such a large amount of data.

Further they collect most data around the cities, thats easiest, that is were people live and collect weather data.

So lets see, as cities grow they generate more heat, that heat does not or is not felt beyond a minimal radius around the city. Despite the city being hotter the country outside the city stays the same.

Nice trick, weight the theory on data collected where its getting hotter and ignore the data that shows no change.

So you are saying you do not trust scientists to sample intelligently and furthermore you do not trust the scientists that independantly review the data and how it was collected. It is all just a huge conspiracy. Right.........

Us smart guys are like that...we do stuff just to fuck with you dumb guys... It's one of our most enjoyable past times. OOPS!!!! Did I just let the cat out of the bag???? My bad!

 

[antagon]

Why are congressional investigations a "threat?"

They are when they're totally political in nature. Those calling for them don't know the science and don't care.

your position is a non-scientific and ostensibly politically motivated. it could be motivated by a reticence to fact which negates your non-factual beliefs. i couldn't call it. something is responsible for the fact that you consistently have some lame excuse for eluding debate on the facts of the matter.

what's the latest?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The game that is being played by the political pawns of the energy corperations has nothing to do with the research that is being done. It is all about keeping any information concerning a climate changing due to the burning of fossil fuels from influencing policy.

The most prominent researcher in the US, Dr. James Hansen gave his testimony and predictions in a hearing before Congress in 1988. His predictions have turned out to be correct. Yet Senator Inhofe will stand in public and lie about that.

The people that need to be standing before a court, not Congress, are the people denying actual research results, and lying to the public about the dangers that are becoming increasing apparent as the climate changes.

Hansen is a known liar. He is a fraud. He perpetuates his fraud. I truly can't believe any intelligent person is still worshipping the religion of AGW.

At least Cucinnelli is going for Hansen's throat with this latest round of supboenas and I hope he nails his ass to the wall.

you calling somebody a liar and a fraud?



James E. Hansen (born March 29, 1941) heads the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City, a part of the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, Earth Sciences Division. He has held this position since 1981. He is also an adjunct professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia University.

- James Hansen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Old Rocks]

Why are congressional investigations a "threat?"

Why were the McCarthy investigations a threat to those he 'investigated'? This type of demagoguery has nothing to do with seeking the truth, and every thing to do with the corrosive politics of hatred. By making the scientists the object of derision and lies, the Conservatives can garner the money of the energy corperations.

 

[mdn2000]

Sure it should and must...just not to idiots like you and 2000. Don't worry your tiny brains over the spectre of scientific misinformation. There are plenty of folks that don't get fooled as easily as you that will look at the data and how it is gathered with scrutiny. Don't take it personal. Half of the population has an IQ of 100 or less. That means that there over 160 million people in our country I wouldn't trust to decide which *brand of oil to put in my car for me.

* It's a trick question fuckwit..in spite of what your television tells you..all commercially produced petroleum motor oil is the same. Same with gasoline. If you pay more for any "special" brand of oil or gas you are throwing money away. How do I know this? Because one of my grandfathers owned an oil refinery. I worked there as a late teenager for three years.

The data, you can link to data so your right, except they can not collect enough samples nor do they have a computer that can handle such a large amount of data.

Further they collect most data around the cities, thats easiest, that is were people live and collect weather data.

So lets see, as cities grow they generate more heat, that heat does not or is not felt beyond a minimal radius around the city. Despite the city being hotter the country outside the city stays the same.

Nice trick, weight the theory on data collected where its getting hotter and ignore the data that shows no change.

So you are saying you do not trust scientists to sample intelligently and furthermore you do not trust the scientists that independantly review the data and how it was collected. It is all just a huge conspiracy. Right.........

Us smart guys are like that...we do stuff just to fuck with you dumb guys... It's one of our most enjoyable past times. OOPS!!!! Did I just let the cat out of the bag???? My bad!

I am not saying that at all, its not a matter of trust, its a matter of reading their studies. If you read the actual study and not an article you will see that the scientist are smart enough to cover their asses. I even pointed this out in a link posted to an article, the study itself states explicitly that scientist do not have enough data thus constantly changing formulas, equations, programs and many assumptions.

Read the actual study and just about every scientist that is credible states this. this is stuff from the global warming scientist, how do you think it can be "exposed" if it is not being done.

This is not information that needs to be leaked, its stated in the reports and studies, hell, thats why they want more money to do more research, you think they need more research just to have a better argument. If they could prove there is global warming they would not need massive amounts of more research.

 

[mdn2000]

Why are congressional investigations a "threat?"

Why were the McCarthy investigations a threat to those he 'investigated'? This type of demagoguery has nothing to do with seeking the truth, and every thing to do with the corrosive politics of hatred. By making the scientists the object of derision and lies, the Conservatives can garner the money of the energy corperations.

Now your an expert on McCarthy, seems like all recent revelations from the files of the ex soviet union confirmed McCarthy, but why let those facts get in the way, truth, you seek the truth, now that is an Old Crock of shit if I ever heard one.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Why are congressional investigations a "threat?"

Why were the McCarthy investigations a threat to those he 'investigated'? This type of demagoguery has nothing to do with seeking the truth, and every thing to do with the corrosive politics of hatred. By making the scientists the object of derision and lies, the Conservatives can garner the money of the energy corperations.

Congress needs to investigate big corporate interests and their dirty money in politics. Instead, under the GOP they will be pushing another Whitewater type witch hunt wasting hundreds of millions of dollars.