This warmergate thing seems overblown.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by uscitizen, Dec 3, 2009.

  1. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    It appears to me like this data scandal is one group and their opponents are trying to paint the entire worldwide scientific community with the same brush and discredit all of them?
     
  2. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,164
    Thanks Received:
    14,902
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +36,898
    Whatever you do, don't read anything besides what's posted over at Hufferington.
     
  3. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    I have never been to that site. What is the url?
     
  4. amrchaos
    Offline

    amrchaos Pentheus torn apart

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    9,501
    Thanks Received:
    926
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Miami
    Ratings:
    +2,573
    No--they are not painting the worldide scientific community with a broad brush. Just the Global Warming supporters that runs around saying "We have a consensus, the debate is over". I found that annoying for quite awhile. Still, I listened to them due to the potential gravity of the situation being posed.
     
  5. nodoginnafight
    Offline

    nodoginnafight No Party Affiliation

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    11,755
    Thanks Received:
    1,069
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Location:
    Georgia
    Ratings:
    +1,497
    I don't know enough about the details to get very far into this, but there is no doubt that there have always been those who have a vested interest (economic interest) in trying to discredit the legitimate scientific work that has been done on climate change.

    A pox upon anyone who has provided this effort with ammo.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2009
  6. amrchaos
    Offline

    amrchaos Pentheus torn apart

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    9,501
    Thanks Received:
    926
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Miami
    Ratings:
    +2,573


    But, what if the Data is fixed? This can happen with scientists that has an outside agenda. So the data has to be restudied and more information collect before a final assessment can be made.

    There is a chance that Global warming is not real. Conidering the number of predictions that has failed to occur, there is asignificant chance it is not real.
     
  7. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    I'm just curious would the last man who stood on the moon for this nation a PHD in geology be part of that worldwide community?, because if he is, then he would be one of those calling into question this "settled science" of the IPCC along with Professors in Climatology from the University of Alabama, and many others. One more thing of note here, not all those members of the IPCC are experts in the study of Climate change as are those that call it into question, so to make the statement " world wide scientific community" is a bit of a stretch.
     
  8. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    Yes there is a chance that global warming is not real.
    There is also a chance that global warming is real but man is not causing it.
    There is a chance that man is causiing it.
    There is also a chance that global warming is real and is a combination of manmade and non manmade causes.

    for the sake of my grandchildren and their children I tend to err on the side of caution. This is the only place we have to live.

    Personally it does not matter to much for me as I will be gone in a few years at most anyway. And I own no beachfront property.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2009
  9. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,164
    Thanks Received:
    14,902
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +36,898
    The data showed the Earth has not warmed since 1996...go figure.
     
  10. nodoginnafight
    Offline

    nodoginnafight No Party Affiliation

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    11,755
    Thanks Received:
    1,069
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Location:
    Georgia
    Ratings:
    +1,497
    As to the notion that the wide-spread, global consensus position was artifically generated by emails making fun of the dissenters - I find it very hard to believe.

    Doran and Kendall Zimmerman, 2009
    A poll performed by Peter Doran and Maggie Kendall Zimmerman at Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago received replies from 3,146 of the 10,257 polled Earth scientists. Results were analyzed globally and by specialization. 76 out of 79 climatologists who "listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also have published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change" believe that mean global temperatures have risen compared to pre-1800s levels, and 75 out of 77 believe that human activity is a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures. Among all respondents, 90% agreed that temperatures have risen compared to pre-1800 levels, and 82% agreed that humans significantly influence the global temperature. Economic geologists and meteorologists were among the biggest doubters, with only 47 percent and 64 percent, respectively, believing in significant human involvement. A summary from the survey states that:
    "It seems that the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

    I don't think you generate that level of consensus through an email campaign. But I will continue to look for any indications that any of the data was artifically manipulated or scientifically invalidated.

    As it stands, the best information we have is that there is a 90% chance that climate change is being affected (to at least SOME degree) by human activity.

    If you confuse "weather" with "climate" or if you fail to understand the earth's convection cycles, then you don't have a prayer of understanding the climate change issue.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2009

Share This Page