The Uninhabitable Earth

[flacaltenn]

Time for a reprise...

Perfect.. That's pretty much how the American public has gotten their total knowledge of Climate science right there..

 

[flacaltenn]

Strangely, everyone who supposedly believes that manmade climate change is going to cause TEOTWAWKI (the end of the world as we know it) never act like they are preparing for TEOTWAWKI. In fact, they are doing the exact opposite.

You want me to believe that you believe this crap? Show me by your actions.

I am trying to get everyone to understand the risk we face and act to stop it. If you think the proper response to news of this sort is to say your prayers and then kiss your ass goodbye, then I'm afraid you're a useless coward and there's not much point talking to you.

What's the temperature anomaly gonna be in 2100? Help me understand the "risk"... Maybe that will help YOU understand why this whole farce is stalled out....

 

[Oddball]

Strangely, everyone who supposedly believes that manmade climate change is going to cause TEOTWAWKI (the end of the world as we know it) never act like they are preparing for TEOTWAWKI. In fact, they are doing the exact opposite.

You want me to believe that you believe this crap? Show me by your actions.

I am trying to get everyone to understand the risk we face and act to stop it. If you think the proper response to news of this sort is to say your prayers and then kiss your ass goodbye, then I'm afraid you're a useless coward and there's not much point talking to you.

What's the temperature anomaly gonna be in 2100? Help me understand the "risk"... Maybe that will help YOU understand why this whole farce is stalled out....

What should the temperature be in 2100?

The warmer clowns don't even have an answer for that.

 

[Crick]

WHY isn't this runaway circus train on the tracks anymore? Because, science doesn't appreciate being used and abused. Look at those 2 polling graphs again.. The bar charts aren't any more intimidating than reading a Pew Poll..,. YOU can even do it...,.,

Show us a decrease in the number of climate scientists that agree with the IPCC conclusions.

Show us an increase in the number of papers challenging those conclusions.

 

[Crick]

Strangely, everyone who supposedly believes that manmade climate change is going to cause TEOTWAWKI (the end of the world as we know it) never act like they are preparing for TEOTWAWKI. In fact, they are doing the exact opposite.

You want me to believe that you believe this crap? Show me by your actions.

I am trying to get everyone to understand the risk we face and act to stop it. If you think the proper response to news of this sort is to say your prayers and then kiss your ass goodbye, then I'm afraid you're a useless coward and there's not much point talking to you.

What's the temperature anomaly gonna be in 2100? Help me understand the "risk"... Maybe that will help YOU understand why this whole farce is stalled out....

There's a very good chance it will be +4C.

 

[Crick]

BTW -- MOST of those "dirty dozen" activists in labcoats are either DIRECT govt career employees or working at Govt funded centers of learning. The top 4 or 5 were directly in charge of the 3 major agencies that collect and collate ALL the fundamental Earth temperature data..

To whom are you referring?

 

[Natural Citizen]

Well, I just chipped an inch of ice off my sidewalk yesterday.

 

[Crick]

My sympathies. But that doesn't mean the planet has gotten colder. We've set several record high temperatures in the last week here in S Florida.

 

[BULLDOG]

="BULLDOG, post: 21876189, member: 49372"]Yes, it's better to rely on the experts like Alex Jones, and Steve Doocy for real science.

Given the actions of "real" scientists, you're probably right.

Professor Phil Jones was the center of the Global Warming Scam at East Anglia University. Their program was considered the epitome of Global Warming Information. The disclosure of thousands of e-mails proving their efforts to conceal information discredit and even prevent opposing views from being published has wrecked the scam, hopefully forever. Data used by the United Nations IPCC findings came from EAU

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing (it has now been disclosed that all the “raw data” was DUMPED!

There has been no global warming since 1995

Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes
[…]
Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

Read more: Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Daily Mail Online

Phil Jones has said that he considered suicide for his part in this fiasco.

Let us also recall: The e-mails leaked in the fall of 2009 allow us to trace the machinations of a small but influential band of British and US climate scientists who played the lead role in the IPCC reports. It appears that this group, which controlled access to basic temperature data, was able to produce a "warming" by manipulating the analysis of the data, but refused to share information on the basic data or details of their analysis with independent scientists who requested them -- in violation of Freedom of Information laws. In fact, they went so far as to keep any dissenting views from being published -- by monopolizing the peer-review process, aided by ideologically cooperative editors of prestigious journals, like Science and Nature.

We learn from the e-mails that the ClimateGate gang was able to "hide the decline" [of global temperature] by applying what they termed as "tricks," and that they intimidated editors and forced out those judged to be "uncooperative." No doubt, thorough investigations, now in progress or planned, will disclose the full range of their nefarious activities. But it is clear that this small cabal was able to convince much of the world that climate disasters were impending -- unless drastic steps were taken. Not only were most of the media, public, and politicians misled, but so were many scientists, national academies of science, and professional organizations -- and even the Norwegian committee that awarded the 2007 Peace Prize to the IPCC and Al Gore, the chief apostle of climate alarmism.

Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Daily Mail Online

Don't care. The vast majority of climate scientists are convinced it is real. Now, if you can show that thousands of them are considering suicide for their decision, you might have something.

so you need scientist now to convince you the climate changes?


its been obvious to 99% of us since we were in diapers

I trust a scientist's explanation of why it is changing more than I trust right wing radio's explanation.

 

[BULLDOG]

="BULLDOG, post: 21876189, member: 49372"]Yes, it's better to rely on the experts like Alex Jones, and Steve Doocy for real science.

Given the actions of "real" scientists, you're probably right.

Professor Phil Jones was the center of the Global Warming Scam at East Anglia University. Their program was considered the epitome of Global Warming Information. The disclosure of thousands of e-mails proving their efforts to conceal information discredit and even prevent opposing views from being published has wrecked the scam, hopefully forever. Data used by the United Nations IPCC findings came from EAU

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing (it has now been disclosed that all the “raw data” was DUMPED!

There has been no global warming since 1995

Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes
[…]
Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

Read more: Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Daily Mail Online

Phil Jones has said that he considered suicide for his part in this fiasco.

Let us also recall: The e-mails leaked in the fall of 2009 allow us to trace the machinations of a small but influential band of British and US climate scientists who played the lead role in the IPCC reports. It appears that this group, which controlled access to basic temperature data, was able to produce a "warming" by manipulating the analysis of the data, but refused to share information on the basic data or details of their analysis with independent scientists who requested them -- in violation of Freedom of Information laws. In fact, they went so far as to keep any dissenting views from being published -- by monopolizing the peer-review process, aided by ideologically cooperative editors of prestigious journals, like Science and Nature.

We learn from the e-mails that the ClimateGate gang was able to "hide the decline" [of global temperature] by applying what they termed as "tricks," and that they intimidated editors and forced out those judged to be "uncooperative." No doubt, thorough investigations, now in progress or planned, will disclose the full range of their nefarious activities. But it is clear that this small cabal was able to convince much of the world that climate disasters were impending -- unless drastic steps were taken. Not only were most of the media, public, and politicians misled, but so were many scientists, national academies of science, and professional organizations -- and even the Norwegian committee that awarded the 2007 Peace Prize to the IPCC and Al Gore, the chief apostle of climate alarmism.

Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Daily Mail Online

Don't care. The vast majority of climate scientists are convinced it is real. Now, if you can show that thousands of them are considering suicide for their decision, you might have something.

Convinced WHAT'S REAL??? 8DegC by 2100 as it was prior to 2000? Or the 2 or 3DegC prediction from the LAST IPCC farce?? All the estimates of critical parameters and predictions have GONE DONE constantly since this "big scare" started.. And there's been no monthly new predictions of 2100 temps or sea levels BECAUSE they are not as gloomy or hysterical as they were in 2000.. Or certainly 1980...

IN FACT -- MOST climate scientists AGREE that that the public and media have been MISLED about the science.. In the most comprehensive survey of climate scientists BY climate scientists and one of the few that it actually POLLED (not divined from abstracts) --- THE VAST MAJORITY agree with exactly what I told you above... From Bray and von Storch 2005 ---

So Bulldoggy -- WHAT do climate scientists agree on again? And what do they say aboutt the temperature anomaly is gonna be in 2100??

Unfortunately, I'm not a climate scientist, and as far as I know you aren't either. If I am mistaken, please present your credentials. Your charts and stuff mean nothing to me because I am not qualified to evaluate them, or even know if they are even pertinent to the discussion, because of that whole not being a climate scientist thing. The best I can do is go by what the leading climate scientists say.

I have seen more EKG readouts than most, and after having so many explained to me, I have a general idea what I'm looking at. However, if a qualified cardiologist tells me my interpretation is wrong, I'm not going to argue with him. If the vast majority of cardiologists looked at that readout, and agreed with the first, it would be stupid of me to try to explain where they were wrong, or say one of them had a messy office, so I must be right. I see the climate change issue in a similar light. I don't have the expertise to prove them wrong, so I have to rely on the best in the field. Who has the best credentials.

Of course, if you are a trained climate scientist, I will certainly consider your opinion on climate change along with the vast majority of other climate scientists, or, I could just rely on Alex Jones for my information like you seem to do..

You have no clue how science is organized and works. Ocasio-Cortez is a waitress with a bogus economics degree hawking a grand glitter farting Green Raw Meal because she KNOWS the world is gonna end in 12 years and she wants to SCARE THE PISS out of 5th graders..

Climate science is perhaps the most INTERDISCIPLINARY science that ever stalked the planet. You can write as a climate scientist on anything from rodents to atmospheric physics. It could not EXIST without about 10 important scientific specialties.. It has been largely based on data analysis and modeling which IS my specialty for my career.. I've found signals and images that nobody else had been able to do. From ocean acoustics to missile launch sites to breast tumors. My career tools have been used in over a dozen specialty disciplines and are VERY applicable to reading climate science.

ANYONE that can read thru a monthly issue of Scientific American can read and interpret climate science. And the fact that Scientific American has readership by virtually all of the science specialties shows how fungible (tradeable) science tools and skill are. I've had to learn specialties in MANY fields during my career, but I have valid credentials in Earth science from designing the image processing systems and algorithms STILL in use for analyzing Earth resources from space. Algorithms that include the EARLIEST "sea ice" calculators and land cover classifiers. So NONE of what I read in climate science intimidates me.. It's actually mostly 80% data preparation/analysis.. No more intimidating that learning marine mammal biology and communication than I've done for research contracts in the past.

Virtually no serious research scientist I've worked with has the "hoarder" office of Phil Jones. THat's just appalling. But it's NOT germane. What IS germane is that East Anglia has REPEATEDLY restricted access to their data and data prep methods for replication. That is the "coin of the realm" in science and how "theories" get verified...

This whole Clown convention has been skewed by a dozen or so "activists in labcoats" giving the media and the public a "catastrophic" interpretation of GW science. They gave cover to politicians and partisan journalists to LIE about what is known and generally agreed upon.. And THAT is what those graphs I gave you show.. The VAST MAJORITY of people working in this field object to the hype and distortions that had fueled this train. And it's over.. Those days are gone. You don't hear credible people hawking DOOM and destruction monthly in the media now. Except for those waitresses serving up Green Raw Meals so that they can control the entire economy and well-being of every citizen....

WHY isn't this runaway circus train on the tracks anymore? Because, science doesn't appreciate being used and abused. Look at those 2 polling graphs again.. The bar charts aren't any more intimidating than reading a Pew Poll..,. YOU can even do it...,.,

Got it. Science is such a general endeavor till there is no difference between any of the different disciplines. A physicist is the same as chemist is the same as a astronomer is the same as a mathematician is the same as a biologist. Of course all of those disciplines are subservient to someone who can code a little bit. I can build and code a little biofeedback devise based on galvanic effect. Does that make me a super scientist too? Does that mean my knowledge is the combination of all knowledge contained in each and every one of the scientific disciplines, or would that just make me a blow hard like you if I made that claim?

 

[Wyatt earp]

="BULLDOG, post: 21876189, member: 49372"]Yes, it's better to rely on the experts like Alex Jones, and Steve Doocy for real science.

Given the actions of "real" scientists, you're probably right.

Professor Phil Jones was the center of the Global Warming Scam at East Anglia University. Their program was considered the epitome of Global Warming Information. The disclosure of thousands of e-mails proving their efforts to conceal information discredit and even prevent opposing views from being published has wrecked the scam, hopefully forever. Data used by the United Nations IPCC findings came from EAU

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing (it has now been disclosed that all the “raw data” was DUMPED!

There has been no global warming since 1995

Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes
[…]
Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

Read more: Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Daily Mail Online

Phil Jones has said that he considered suicide for his part in this fiasco.

Let us also recall: The e-mails leaked in the fall of 2009 allow us to trace the machinations of a small but influential band of British and US climate scientists who played the lead role in the IPCC reports. It appears that this group, which controlled access to basic temperature data, was able to produce a "warming" by manipulating the analysis of the data, but refused to share information on the basic data or details of their analysis with independent scientists who requested them -- in violation of Freedom of Information laws. In fact, they went so far as to keep any dissentin
views from being published -- by monopolizing the peer-review process, aided by ideologically cooperative editors of prestigious journals, like Science and Nature.

We learn from the e-mails that the ClimateGate gang was able to "hide the decline" [of global temperature] by applying what they termed as "tricks," and that they intimidated editors and forced out those judged to be "uncooperative." No doubt, thorough investigations, now in progress or planned, will disclose the full range of their nefarious activities. But it is clear that this small cabal was able to convince much of the world that climate disasters were impending -- unless drastic steps were taken. Not only were most of the media, public, and politicians misled, but so were many scientists, national academies of science, and professional organizations -- and even the Norwegian committee that awarded the 2007 Peace Prize to the IPCC and Al Gore, the chief apostle of climate alarmism.

Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Daily Mail Online

Don't care. The vast majority of climate scientists are convinced it is real. Now, if you can show that thousands of them are considering suicide for their decision, you might have something.

so you need scientist now to convince you the climate changes?


its been obvious to 99% of us since we were in diapers

I trust a scientist's explanation of why it is changing more than I trust right wing radio's explanation.

Who listens to right wing radio?

Come on man didn't you pass the second grade when they were talking about ice ages and stuff?


.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Strangely, everyone who supposedly believes that manmade climate change is going to cause TEOTWAWKI (the end of the world as we know it) never act like they are preparing for TEOTWAWKI. In fact, they are doing the exact opposite.

You want me to believe that you believe this crap? Show me by your actions.

I am trying to get everyone to understand the risk we face and act to stop it. If you think the proper response to news of this sort is to say your prayers and then kiss your ass goodbye, then I'm afraid you're a useless coward and there's not much point talking to you.

You meant to say "get China to stop", right?

 

[Markle]

Strangely, everyone who supposedly believes that manmade climate change is going to cause TEOTWAWKI (the end of the world as we know it) never act like they are preparing for TEOTWAWKI. In fact, they are doing the exact opposite.

You want me to believe that you believe this crap? Show me by your actions.

I am trying to get everyone to understand the risk we face and act to stop it. If you think the proper response to news of this sort is to say your prayers and then kiss your ass goodbye, then I'm afraid you're a useless coward and there's not much point talking to you.

What's the temperature anomaly gonna be in 2100? Help me understand the "risk"... Maybe that will help YOU understand why this whole farce is stalled out....

There's a very good chance it will be +4C.

There's also a very good chance it will be -4C. About 7 degrees F. Do you really believe the temperature will change either way by SEVEN DEGREES in a blink?

 

[JGalt]

Strangely, everyone who supposedly believes that manmade climate change is going to cause TEOTWAWKI (the end of the world as we know it) never act like they are preparing for TEOTWAWKI. In fact, they are doing the exact opposite.

You want me to believe that you believe this crap? Show me by your actions.

I am trying to get everyone to understand the risk we face and act to stop it. If you think the proper response to news of this sort is to say your prayers and then kiss your ass goodbye, then I'm afraid you're a useless coward and there's not much point talking to you.

You meant to say "get China to stop", right?

It's never China's fault with the climate change loons. It's always that "we" have to do something about it, even though "we" aren't the world's biggest polluters.

And then the same people say out of the other side of their mouths "We shouldn't be the world's policemen" and "we shouldn't be involved in nation building."

 

[Sunsettommy]

="BULLDOG, post: 21876189, member: 49372"]Yes, it's better to rely on the experts like Alex Jones, and Steve Doocy for real science.

Given the actions of "real" scientists, you're probably right.

Professor Phil Jones was the center of the Global Warming Scam at East Anglia University. Their program was considered the epitome of Global Warming Information. The disclosure of thousands of e-mails proving their efforts to conceal information discredit and even prevent opposing views from being published has wrecked the scam, hopefully forever. Data used by the United Nations IPCC findings came from EAU

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing (it has now been disclosed that all the “raw data” was DUMPED!

There has been no global warming since 1995

Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes
[…]
Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

Read more: Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Daily Mail Online

Phil Jones has said that he considered suicide for his part in this fiasco.

Let us also recall: The e-mails leaked in the fall of 2009 allow us to trace the machinations of a small but influential band of British and US climate scientists who played the lead role in the IPCC reports. It appears that this group, which controlled access to basic temperature data, was able to produce a "warming" by manipulating the analysis of the data, but refused to share information on the basic data or details of their analysis with independent scientists who requested them -- in violation of Freedom of Information laws. In fact, they went so far as to keep any dissenting views from being published -- by monopolizing the peer-review process, aided by ideologically cooperative editors of prestigious journals, like Science and Nature.

We learn from the e-mails that the ClimateGate gang was able to "hide the decline" [of global temperature] by applying what they termed as "tricks," and that they intimidated editors and forced out those judged to be "uncooperative." No doubt, thorough investigations, now in progress or planned, will disclose the full range of their nefarious activities. But it is clear that this small cabal was able to convince much of the world that climate disasters were impending -- unless drastic steps were taken. Not only were most of the media, public, and politicians misled, but so were many scientists, national academies of science, and professional organizations -- and even the Norwegian committee that awarded the 2007 Peace Prize to the IPCC and Al Gore, the chief apostle of climate alarmism.

Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Daily Mail Online

Don't care. The vast majority of climate scientists are convinced it is real. Now, if you can show that thousands of them are considering suicide for their decision, you might have something.

Convinced WHAT'S REAL??? 8DegC by 2100 as it was prior to 2000? Or the 2 or 3DegC prediction from the LAST IPCC farce?? All the estimates of critical parameters and predictions have GONE DONE constantly since this "big scare" started.. And there's been no monthly new predictions of 2100 temps or sea levels BECAUSE they are not as gloomy or hysterical as they were in 2000.. Or certainly 1980...

IN FACT -- MOST climate scientists AGREE that that the public and media have been MISLED about the science.. In the most comprehensive survey of climate scientists BY climate scientists and one of the few that it actually POLLED (not divined from abstracts) --- THE VAST MAJORITY agree with exactly what I told you above... From Bray and von Storch 2005 ---

So Bulldoggy -- WHAT do climate scientists agree on again? And what do they say aboutt the temperature anomaly is gonna be in 2100??

Unfortunately, I'm not a climate scientist, and as far as I know you aren't either. If I am mistaken, please present your credentials. Your charts and stuff mean nothing to me because I am not qualified to evaluate them, or even know if they are even pertinent to the discussion, because of that whole not being a climate scientist thing. The best I can do is go by what the leading climate scientists say.

I have seen more EKG readouts than most, and after having so many explained to me, I have a general idea what I'm looking at. However, if a qualified cardiologist tells me my interpretation is wrong, I'm not going to argue with him. If the vast majority of cardiologists looked at that readout, and agreed with the first, it would be stupid of me to try to explain where they were wrong, or say one of them had a messy office, so I must be right. I see the climate change issue in a similar light. I don't have the expertise to prove them wrong, so I have to rely on the best in the field. Who has the best credentials.

Of course, if you are a trained climate scientist, I will certainly consider your opinion on climate change along with the vast majority of other climate scientists, or, I could just rely on Alex Jones for my information like you seem to do..

Then you shouldn't have any problem accepting these scientists and Researchers position on the topic, there are only 31,387 of them.....:, including Edward Teller, Freeman Dyson and Fred Singer.

Global Warming Petition Project

Summary of Peer-Reviewed Research

Most scientists have a detailed knowledge of their own narrow field of specialization, a general knowledge of fundamental science, an understanding of the scientific method, and a mental model that encompasses a broad range of scientific disciplines. This model serves as the basis of their thoughts about scientific questions.

When a scientist desires to refine his understanding of a specific scientific subject, he often begins by reading one or more review articles about that topic. As he reads, he compares the facts given in the review with his mental model of the subject, refining his model and updating it with current information. Review articles do not present new discoveries. The essential facts given in the review must be referenced to the peer-reviewed scientific research literature, so that the reader can check the assertions and conclusions of the article and obtain more detailed information about aspects that interest him.

A 12-page review article about the human-caused global warming hypothesis is circulated with the petition. To view the entire article in html, 150-dpi PDF, 300-dpi PDF, 600-dpi PDF, Spanish or figures alone in powerpoint or flash, click on the appropriate item in this sentence.

bolding mine

MORE HERE

 

[CrusaderFrank]

="BULLDOG, post: 21876189, member: 49372"]Yes, it's better to rely on the experts like Alex Jones, and Steve Doocy for real science.

Given the actions of "real" scientists, you're probably right.

Professor Phil Jones was the center of the Global Warming Scam at East Anglia University. Their program was considered the epitome of Global Warming Information. The disclosure of thousands of e-mails proving their efforts to conceal information discredit and even prevent opposing views from being published has wrecked the scam, hopefully forever. Data used by the United Nations IPCC findings came from EAU

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing (it has now been disclosed that all the “raw data” was DUMPED!

There has been no global warming since 1995

Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes
[…]
Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

Read more: Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Daily Mail Online

Phil Jones has said that he considered suicide for his part in this fiasco.

Let us also recall: The e-mails leaked in the fall of 2009 allow us to trace the machinations of a small but influential band of British and US climate scientists who played the lead role in the IPCC reports. It appears that this group, which controlled access to basic temperature data, was able to produce a "warming" by manipulating the analysis of the data, but refused to share information on the basic data or details of their analysis with independent scientists who requested them -- in violation of Freedom of Information laws. In fact, they went so far as to keep any dissenting views from being published -- by monopolizing the peer-review process, aided by ideologically cooperative editors of prestigious journals, like Science and Nature.

We learn from the e-mails that the ClimateGate gang was able to "hide the decline" [of global temperature] by applying what they termed as "tricks," and that they intimidated editors and forced out those judged to be "uncooperative." No doubt, thorough investigations, now in progress or planned, will disclose the full range of their nefarious activities. But it is clear that this small cabal was able to convince much of the world that climate disasters were impending -- unless drastic steps were taken. Not only were most of the media, public, and politicians misled, but so were many scientists, national academies of science, and professional organizations -- and even the Norwegian committee that awarded the 2007 Peace Prize to the IPCC and Al Gore, the chief apostle of climate alarmism.

Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Daily Mail Online

Don't care. The vast majority of climate scientists are convinced it is real. Now, if you can show that thousands of them are considering suicide for their decision, you might have something.

Convinced WHAT'S REAL??? 8DegC by 2100 as it was prior to 2000? Or the 2 or 3DegC prediction from the LAST IPCC farce?? All the estimates of critical parameters and predictions have GONE DONE constantly since this "big scare" started.. And there's been no monthly new predictions of 2100 temps or sea levels BECAUSE they are not as gloomy or hysterical as they were in 2000.. Or certainly 1980...

IN FACT -- MOST climate scientists AGREE that that the public and media have been MISLED about the science.. In the most comprehensive survey of climate scientists BY climate scientists and one of the few that it actually POLLED (not divined from abstracts) --- THE VAST MAJORITY agree with exactly what I told you above... From Bray and von Storch 2005 ---

So Bulldoggy -- WHAT do climate scientists agree on again? And what do they say aboutt the temperature anomaly is gonna be in 2100??

Unfortunately, I'm not a climate scientist, and as far as I know you aren't either. If I am mistaken, please present your credentials. Your charts and stuff mean nothing to me because I am not qualified to evaluate them, or even know if they are even pertinent to the discussion, because of that whole not being a climate scientist thing. The best I can do is go by what the leading climate scientists say.

I have seen more EKG readouts than most, and after having so many explained to me, I have a general idea what I'm looking at. However, if a qualified cardiologist tells me my interpretation is wrong, I'm not going to argue with him. If the vast majority of cardiologists looked at that readout, and agreed with the first, it would be stupid of me to try to explain where they were wrong, or say one of them had a messy office, so I must be right. I see the climate change issue in a similar light. I don't have the expertise to prove them wrong, so I have to rely on the best in the field. Who has the best credentials.

Of course, if you are a trained climate scientist, I will certainly consider your opinion on climate change along with the vast majority of other climate scientists, or, I could just rely on Alex Jones for my information like you seem to do..

Then you shouldn't have any problem accepting these scientists and Researchers position on the topic, there are only 31,387 of them.....:, including Edward Teller, Freeman Dyson and Fred Singer.

Global Warming Petition Project

Summary of Peer-Reviewed Research

Most scientists have a detailed knowledge of their own narrow field of specialization, a general knowledge of fundamental science, an understanding of the scientific method, and a mental model that encompasses a broad range of scientific disciplines. This model serves as the basis of their thoughts about scientific questions.

When a scientist desires to refine his understanding of a specific scientific subject, he often begins by reading one or more review articles about that topic. As he reads, he compares the facts given in the review with his mental model of the subject, refining his model and updating it with current information. Review articles do not present new discoveries. The essential facts given in the review must be referenced to the peer-reviewed scientific research literature, so that the reader can check the assertions and conclusions of the article and obtain more detailed information about aspects that interest him.

A 12-page review article about the human-caused global warming hypothesis is circulated with the petition. To view the entire article in html, 150-dpi PDF, 300-dpi PDF, 600-dpi PDF, Spanish or figures alone in powerpoint or flash, click on the appropriate item in this sentence.

bolding mine

MORE HERE

Chain yourself to the Chinese Embassy

 

[Markle]

Actually, the FACTS are easy to find. The AGW's just refuse to acknowledge them.

The Myth of the Climate Change '97%'

What is the origin of the false belief—constantly repeated—that almost all scientists agree about global warming?
By JOSEPH BAST and ROY SPENCER
May 26, 2014 7:34 pm

Last week Secretary of State John Kerry warned graduating students at Boston College of the "crippling consequences" of climate change. "Ninety-seven percent of the world's scientists," he added, "tell us this is urgent."

Where did Mr. Kerry get the 97% figure? Perhaps from his boss, President Obama, who tweeted on May 16 that "Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous." Or maybe from NASA, which posted (in more measured language) on its website, "Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities."

Yet the assertion that 97% of scientists believe that climate change is a man-made, urgent problem is a fiction. The so-called consensus comes from a handful of surveys and abstract-counting exercises that have been contradicted by more reliable research.

One frequently cited source for the consensus is a 2004 opinion essay published in Science magazine by Naomi Oreskes, a science historian now at Harvard. She claimed to have examined abstracts of 928 articles published in scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and found that 75% supported the view that human activities are responsible for most of the observed warming over the previous 50 years while none directly dissented.

Ms. Oreskes's definition of consensus covered "man-made" but left out "dangerous"—and scores of articles by prominent scientists such as Richard Lindzen, John Christy,Sherwood Idso and Patrick Michaels, who question the consensus, were excluded. The methodology is also flawed. A study published earlier this year in Nature noted that abstracts of academic papers often contain claims that aren't substantiated in the papers.

Read more at:
The Myth of the Climate Change '97%'

 

[fncceo]

Strangely, everyone who supposedly believes that manmade climate change is going to cause TEOTWAWKI (the end of the world as we know it) never act like they are preparing for TEOTWAWKI. In fact, they are doing the exact opposite.

You want me to believe that you believe this crap? Show me by your actions.

I am trying to get everyone to understand the risk we face and act to stop it. If you think the proper response to news of this sort is to say your prayers and then kiss your ass goodbye, then I'm afraid you're a useless coward and there's not much point talking to you.

What's the temperature anomaly gonna be in 2100? Help me understand the "risk"... Maybe that will help YOU understand why this whole farce is stalled out....

There's a very good chance it will be +4C.

So, basically, the temperature difference between 8am and 10am.

 

[Crick]

Strangely, everyone who supposedly believes that manmade climate change is going to cause TEOTWAWKI (the end of the world as we know it) never act like they are preparing for TEOTWAWKI. In fact, they are doing the exact opposite.

You want me to believe that you believe this crap? Show me by your actions.

I am trying to get everyone to understand the risk we face and act to stop it. If you think the proper response to news of this sort is to say your prayers and then kiss your ass goodbye, then I'm afraid you're a useless coward and there's not much point talking to you.

What's the temperature anomaly gonna be in 2100? Help me understand the "risk"... Maybe that will help YOU understand why this whole farce is stalled out....

There's a very good chance it will be +4C.

There's also a very good chance it will be -4C. About 7 degrees F. Do you really believe the temperature will change either way by SEVEN DEGREES in a blink?

No. The odds of it being -4C are indistinguishable from zero. When I say +4C I mean 4C higher than the global temperature prior to the start of the Industrial Revolution.We are already over +1C.

 

[Crick]

There's a very good chance it will be +4C.

So, basically, the temperature difference between 8am and 10am.

Don't be stupid.