What Global Warming?

[red states rule]

Now even some outlests in the liberal media are asjing the same question I have been asking for sometime



What global warming? West Palm shows few signs of rising temperatures
By Mark Hollis | Tallahassee Bureau
July 25, 2007

TALLAHASSEE A study of new government climate data finds that temperatures across Florida are on the rise, but some places such as West Palm Beach are experiencing fewer signs of warmer-than-normal weather.

Those findings, included in a report released Tuesday by a Tallahassee-based environmental advocacy group that studied climate statistics, presents a mixed picture for parts of South Florida.

While ocean breezes, cloudy days and certain weather patterns can keep local temperatures from spiking, scientists say South Floridians still have at least one major reason to be concerned about global warming: The possible rise of sea level leading to the loss of local beaches.

"Moving to West Palm Beach to a condo on the beach may be comfortable from a temperature and lifestyle standpoint, but it may not be your best bet [because of sea-level rise]," said Jeff Chanton, a geologist and oceanographer at Florida State University.

for the complete article

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/palmbeach/sfl-flftemps0725pnjul25,0,749955.story

 

[jodylee]

wether is complex and any change will occur over a long period of time and be so gradual it will be hiden by usuall fluctuations in weather, so it doen't matter which side of the argument you stand, there is no evidence

 

[red states rule]

wether is complex and any change will occur over a long period of time and be so gradual it will be hiden by usuall fluctuations in weather, so it doen't matter which side of the argument you stand, there is no evidence

The global warming nuts hate to see stories like this

 

[ReillyT]

Now even some outlests in the liberal media are asjing the same question I have been asking for sometime



What global warming? West Palm shows few signs of rising temperatures
By Mark Hollis | Tallahassee Bureau
July 25, 2007

TALLAHASSEE A study of new government climate data finds that temperatures across Florida are on the rise, but some places such as West Palm Beach are experiencing fewer signs of warmer-than-normal weather.

Those findings, included in a report released Tuesday by a Tallahassee-based environmental advocacy group that studied climate statistics, presents a mixed picture for parts of South Florida.

While ocean breezes, cloudy days and certain weather patterns can keep local temperatures from spiking, scientists say South Floridians still have at least one major reason to be concerned about global warming: The possible rise of sea level leading to the loss of local beaches.

"Moving to West Palm Beach to a condo on the beach may be comfortable from a temperature and lifestyle standpoint, but it may not be your best bet [because of sea-level rise]," said Jeff Chanton, a geologist and oceanographer at Florida State University.

for the complete article

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/palmbeach/sfl-flftemps0725pnjul25,0,749955.story

Did you actually read the article you posted? It actually suggests... pretty much throughout... that Florida's temperatures are increasing above "normal" (as defined in the article) - including West Palm Beach.

 

[red states rule]

Did you actually read the article you posted? It actually suggests... pretty much throughout... that Florida's temperatures are increasing above "normal" (as defined in the article) - including West Palm Beach.

Yes I read it

But the the myth of global warming is being exposed for what it is

A myth

The weather is not living up to the hype

 

[ReillyT]

wether is complex and any change will occur over a long period of time and be so gradual it will be hiden by usuall fluctuations in weather, so it doen't matter which side of the argument you stand, there is no evidence

Short term fluctuations in weather won't mask longer term trends. It just means that looking at the weather for any particular short-term period isn't a useful means for evaluating to what extent global warming is occurring. Scientist have no problem looking at temperature trends over decades and drawing conclusions from that data.

 

[red states rule]

Short term fluctuations in weather won't mask longer term trends. It just means that looking at the weather for any particular short-term period isn't a useful means for evaluating to what extent global warming is occurring. Scientist have no problem looking at temperature trends over decades and drawing conclusions from that data.

To bad their "conclusions" are full of crap

 

[ReillyT]

Yes I read it

But the the myth of global warming is being exposed for what it is

A myth

The weather is not living up to the hype

Well, if you read it, why would you post it to suggest that global warming isn't occurring? The article suggests that it is.

I am just saying, you should have posted a different article. This one doesn't support your proposition.

 

[ReillyT]

To bad their "conclusions" are full of crap

That was a pretty brilliant post. The way you weave stunning rhetoric with solid empirical data to support your position is truly awe-inspiring.

 

[red states rule]

That was a pretty brilliant post. The way you weave stunning rhetoric with solid empirical data to support your position is truly awe-inspiring.

List of Global Warming Skeptics Grows, Media Couldn’t Care Less
By Noel Sheppard | May 16, 2007 - 13:30 ET
While global warming alarmists like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore and his band of not so merry sycophants continue talking about a scientific consensus concerning man’s role in “climate change,” the list of scientists that have grown skeptical of this nexus continues to grow.

Unfortunately, a media obsessed with advancing hysteria on the subject refuse to acknowledge the existence of such folks as they continue to pound the table about the imminent doom to the planet.

With that in mind, Sen. James Inhofe’s office (R-Oklahoma) is preparing a “detailed and comprehensive sampling of scientists who have only recently spoken out against climate hysteria [that] will be forthcoming in a soon to be released U.S. Senate report.”

Inhofe’s communications director, Marc Morano, published a few of these names, as well as their backgrounds and conclusions, at Inhofe’s EPW Press Blog Tuesday:

Geophysicist Dr. Claude Allegre, a top geophysicist and French Socialist who has authored more than 100 scientific articles and written 11 books and received numerous scientific awards including the Goldschmidt Medal from the Geochemical Society of the United States, converted from climate alarmist to skeptic in 2006.
Geologist Bruno Wiskel of the University of Alberta recently reversed his view of man-made climate change and instead became a global warming skeptic.
Astrophysicist Dr. Nir Shaviv, one of Israel's top young award winning scientists, recanted his belief that manmade emissions were driving climate change.
Mathematician & engineer Dr. David Evans, who did carbon accounting for the Australian Government, recently detailed his conversion to a skeptic.
Climate researcher Dr. Tad Murty, former Senior Research Scientist for Fisheries and Oceans in Canada, also reversed himself from believer in man-made climate change to a skeptic.
Botanist Dr. David Bellamy, a famed UK environmental campaigner, former lecturer at Durham University and host of a popular UK TV series on wildlife, recently converted into a skeptic after reviewing the science and now calls global warming fears "poppycock."
Climate scientist Dr. Chris de Freitas of The University of Auckland, N.Z., also converted from a believer in man-made global warming to a skeptic.
Meteorologist Dr. Reid Bryson, the founding chairman of the Department of Meteorology at University of Wisconsin (now the Department of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences, was pivotal in promoting the coming ice age scare of the 1970’s ( See Time Magazine’s 1974 article “Another Ice Age” citing Bryson: & see Newsweek’s 1975 article “The Cooling World” citing Bryson) has now converted into a leading global warming skeptic.
Global warming author and economist Hans H.J. Labohm started out as a man-made global warming believer but he later switched his view after conducting climate research.
Paleoclimatologist Tim Patterson, of Carlton University in Ottawa converted from believer in C02 driving the climate change to a skeptic.
Physicist Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, chairman of the Central Laboratory for the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Radiological Protection in Warsaw, took a scientific journey from a believer of man-made climate change in the form of global cooling in the 1970’s all the way to converting to a skeptic of current predictions of catastrophic man-made global warming.
Paleoclimatologist Dr. Ian D. Clark, professor of the Department of Earth Sciences at University of Ottawa, reversed his views on man-made climate change after further examining the evidence.
Environmental geochemist Dr. Jan Veizer, professor emeritus of University of Ottawa, converted from believer to skeptic after conducting scientific studies of climate history.
Like many of you, I look forward to the full report being prepared by Sen. Inhofe’s office, and can’t way to see Charlie Gibson, Brian Williams, and Katie Couric begin their respective evening new broadcasts with these revelations.

Of course, I am not holding my breath.

http://newsbusters.org/node/12793

 

[ReillyT]

List of Global Warming Skeptics Grows, Media Couldn’t Care Less
By Noel Sheppard | May 16, 2007 - 13:30 ET
While global warming alarmists like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore and his band of not so merry sycophants continue talking about a scientific consensus concerning man’s role in “climate change,” the list of scientists that have grown skeptical of this nexus continues to grow.

Unfortunately, a media obsessed with advancing hysteria on the subject refuse to acknowledge the existence of such folks as they continue to pound the table about the imminent doom to the planet.

With that in mind, Sen. James Inhofe’s office (R-Oklahoma) is preparing a “detailed and comprehensive sampling of scientists who have only recently spoken out against climate hysteria [that] will be forthcoming in a soon to be released U.S. Senate report.”

Inhofe’s communications director, Marc Morano, published a few of these names, as well as their backgrounds and conclusions, at Inhofe’s EPW Press Blog Tuesday:

Geophysicist Dr. Claude Allegre, a top geophysicist and French Socialist who has authored more than 100 scientific articles and written 11 books and received numerous scientific awards including the Goldschmidt Medal from the Geochemical Society of the United States, converted from climate alarmist to skeptic in 2006.
Geologist Bruno Wiskel of the University of Alberta recently reversed his view of man-made climate change and instead became a global warming skeptic.
Astrophysicist Dr. Nir Shaviv, one of Israel's top young award winning scientists, recanted his belief that manmade emissions were driving climate change.
Mathematician & engineer Dr. David Evans, who did carbon accounting for the Australian Government, recently detailed his conversion to a skeptic.
Climate researcher Dr. Tad Murty, former Senior Research Scientist for Fisheries and Oceans in Canada, also reversed himself from believer in man-made climate change to a skeptic.
Botanist Dr. David Bellamy, a famed UK environmental campaigner, former lecturer at Durham University and host of a popular UK TV series on wildlife, recently converted into a skeptic after reviewing the science and now calls global warming fears "poppycock."
Climate scientist Dr. Chris de Freitas of The University of Auckland, N.Z., also converted from a believer in man-made global warming to a skeptic.
Meteorologist Dr. Reid Bryson, the founding chairman of the Department of Meteorology at University of Wisconsin (now the Department of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences, was pivotal in promoting the coming ice age scare of the 1970’s ( See Time Magazine’s 1974 article “Another Ice Age” citing Bryson: & see Newsweek’s 1975 article “The Cooling World” citing Bryson) has now converted into a leading global warming skeptic.
Global warming author and economist Hans H.J. Labohm started out as a man-made global warming believer but he later switched his view after conducting climate research.
Paleoclimatologist Tim Patterson, of Carlton University in Ottawa converted from believer in C02 driving the climate change to a skeptic.
Physicist Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, chairman of the Central Laboratory for the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Radiological Protection in Warsaw, took a scientific journey from a believer of man-made climate change in the form of global cooling in the 1970’s all the way to converting to a skeptic of current predictions of catastrophic man-made global warming.
Paleoclimatologist Dr. Ian D. Clark, professor of the Department of Earth Sciences at University of Ottawa, reversed his views on man-made climate change after further examining the evidence.
Environmental geochemist Dr. Jan Veizer, professor emeritus of University of Ottawa, converted from believer to skeptic after conducting scientific studies of climate history.
Like many of you, I look forward to the full report being prepared by Sen. Inhofe’s office, and can’t way to see Charlie Gibson, Brian Williams, and Katie Couric begin their respective evening new broadcasts with these revelations.

Of course, I am not holding my breath.

http://newsbusters.org/node/12793

I don't think that there that much disagreement about whether global warming is occurring. It is pretty clear that it is. The disagreement is about whether the change is man-made, so to speak (although I think the weight of scientific evidence indicates it is). If you would like to start a thread on this topic (although I am sure that this has been done), that might be better.

By the way, that was a much better use of articles to support your position.

 

[red states rule]

I don't think that there that much disagreement about whether global warming is occurring. It is pretty clear that it is. The disagreement is about whether the change is man-made, so to speak (although I think the weight of scientific evidence indicates it is). If you would like to start a thread on this topic (although I am sure that this has been done), that might be better.

By the way, that was a much better use of articles to support your position.

Global warming is nothing more then a war on capitalism by the kook left

 

[ReillyT]

Global warming is nothing more then a war on capitalism by the kook left

Well, to quote myself.

That was a pretty brilliant post. The way you weave stunning rhetoric with solid empirical data to support your position is truly awe-inspiring.

 

[red states rule]

Well, to quote myself.

When you have nuts of your side, like RFK Jr, saying if you don't believe in gloabl warming - you are a traitor; it shows how screwed up the enviro wackos are

and how desperate they are to scare people

 

[jodylee]

Short term fluctuations in weather won't mask longer term trends. It just means that looking at the weather for any particular short-term period isn't a useful means for evaluating to what extent global warming is occurring. Scientist have no problem looking at temperature trends over decades and drawing conclusions from that data.

exactly, so talking about a specific example of weather change in a particular area is usless, the only data to go off is long-term and global. sorry i've just repeated what you said.
but if we agree that the global temperature is going up, to what extent if any do humans have to play in this. and for me it comes down to the question, is Co2 causing temprature to increase. or is temperature causing Co2 to increase.

 

[ReillyT]

When you have nuts of your side, like RFK Jr, saying if you don't believe in gloabl warming - you are a traitor; it shows how screwed up the enviro wackos are

and how desperate they are to scare people

You are not a traitor. You just have your head in the sand.

By the way, to support the idea that man is influencing global warming, I am including this list that I grabbed from Wikipedia. I know that Wikipedia isn't the most reliable source in the world, but in this case, the entry does list the actual statements by the organizations (which I have redacted in the interest of space-saving). Please feel free to check for yourself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

To the proposition that man is inducing global warming (in at least some respect)

Statements by concurring organizations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007
Joint science academies’ statement 2007
Joint science academies’ statement 2005
Joint science academies’ statement 2001
U.S. National Research Council, 2001
American Meteorological Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Physics
American Astronomical Society
Federal Climate Change Science Program, 2006
American Association for the Advancement of Science
Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London
Geological Society of America
American Chemical Society
Engineers Australia (The Institution of Engineers Australia)

Statements by dissenting organizations
American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG)

 

[ReillyT]

exactly, so talking about a specific example of weather change in a particular area is usless, the only data to go off is long-term and global. sorry i've just repeated what you said.
but if we agree that the global temperature is going up, to what extent if any do humans have to play in this. and for me it comes down to the question, is Co2 causing temprature to increase. or is temperature causing Co2 to increase.

Gotcha. I misunderstood your post to suggest that any analysis of weather patterns (even long-term) won't yield evidence of global warming. I apologize. I clearly misunderstood.

 

[red states rule]

You are not a traitor. You just have your head in the sand.

By the way, to support the idea that man is influencing global warming, I am including this list that I grabbed from Wikipedia. I know that Wikipedia isn't the most reliable source in the world, but in this case, the entry does list the actual statements by the organizations (which I have redacted in the interest of space-saving). Please feel free to check for yourself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

To the proposition that man is inducing global warming (in at least some respect)

Statements by concurring organizations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007
Joint science academies’ statement 2007
Joint science academies’ statement 2005
Joint science academies’ statement 2001
U.S. National Research Council, 2001
American Meteorological Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Physics
American Astronomical Society
Federal Climate Change Science Program, 2006
American Association for the Advancement of Science
Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London
Geological Society of America
American Chemical Society
Engineers Australia (The Institution of Engineers Australia)

Statements by dissenting organizations
American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG)

According to nutty RFK JR (who travels in his private jet) you are


ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR., ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVIST: And so I`m going to tell you this, that the next time you see John Stossel, or Glenn Beck, or Rush Limbaugh, or Sean Hannity, these flat-Earthers, these corporate toadies, lying to you, lying to the American public, and telling you that global warming doesn`t exist, you send an e-mail to their advertisers and tell them you`re not going to buy their products anymore.

BECK: So what does RFK, Jr., think of these corporate toadies, what should happen to these people?

KENNEDY: This is treason. And we need to start treating them now as traitors.

BECK: Wow, I mean, since the penalty for treason is either imprisonment or execution, I`m a little curious as to which one Mr. Kennedy had in mind for me. I sent him a letter asking him just that question, and now he`s here to hand down my sentence.

http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/07/13/robert-f-kennedy-jr-on-glenn-beck/

 

[ReillyT]

According to nutty RFK JR (who travels in his private jet) you are


ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR., ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVIST: And so I`m going to tell you this, that the next time you see John Stossel, or Glenn Beck, or Rush Limbaugh, or Sean Hannity, these flat-Earthers, these corporate toadies, lying to you, lying to the American public, and telling you that global warming doesn`t exist, you send an e-mail to their advertisers and tell them you`re not going to buy their products anymore.

BECK: So what does RFK, Jr., think of these corporate toadies, what should happen to these people?

KENNEDY: This is treason. And we need to start treating them now as traitors.

BECK: Wow, I mean, since the penalty for treason is either imprisonment or execution, I`m a little curious as to which one Mr. Kennedy had in mind for me. I sent him a letter asking him just that question, and now he`s here to hand down my sentence.

http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/07/13/robert-f-kennedy-jr-on-glenn-beck/

Who cares? Is it really that important to you what RFK Jr. thinks? Isn't there a much more important issue to discuss and consider?

Maybe it is just me, but I don't know RFK Jr., and he doesn't hold a highly elected office, so I wouldn't especially be bent out of shape by any opinions he might hold.

I had a neighbor once who held some really wacky opinions. It this something we need to discuss?

 

[red states rule]

Who cares? Is it really that important to you what RFK Jr. thinks? Isn't there a much more important issue to discuss and consider?

Maybe it is just me, but I don't know RFK Jr., and he doesn't hold a highly elected office, so I wouldn't especially be bent out of shape by any opinions he might hold.

I had a neighbor once who held some really wacky opinions. It this something we need to discuss?

He is one of the lead nuts out there telling us how to live our lives

Like Al Gore

Of course stories like this debuk the global warming wackos

Mostly Mild Weather Greets Live Earth Global Warming Concert Goers
By Noel Sheppard | July 7, 2007 - 09:30 ET
Global warming skeptics have reveled the last few years in climate change rallies and events occurring at venues or towns experiencing colder than normal temperatures as well as late season snows.

It goes without saying that one of the funniest was House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-California) visit to Europe in April to discuss global warming with various European leaders just when parts of the continent were hit with some of the latest snows in history.

With that in mind, it would be only fitting if Live Earth concert goers around the world were greeted with sub-average temperatures as they come together to draw attention to the planet’s imminent doom caused by global warming.

The first concert began Saturday in Sydney, Australia, with temperatures fitting in perfectly for AGW skeptics looking for a chuckle (put down your soft drinks and coffee):

High of 53, low of 43, with an historical average daily high of 62 and average low of 43.


Gotta love it. So, the first Live Earth concert to warn the world about global warming will occur in temperatures almost ten degrees below normal.

Fabulous start for skeptics with a sense of humor.

Let’s see how things are setting up elsewhere:

Toyko saw a high of 78, a low of 71, with averages for this day of 82 and 70.


Marvelous. Two for two:

Shanghai made the alarmists happy, as temperatures soared into the mid-90s a good nine degrees more than normal.
Yet, Johannesburg, South Africa saw temperatures about three degrees below normal.
Hamburg, Germany concert goers also saw cool temperatures as highs only got into the low 60s well below the historical average for this day of 70.
London concert goers saw normal temperatures at Wembley Stadium around 70.
The same is true in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, where temperatures Saturday will reach normal highs of 79 degrees.
In East Rutherford, New Jersey, where the New York concert will be held, temperatures will get into the high 80s about six degrees above normal, but well below the all-time high for the day of 96.
Add it all up, and the Live Earth concerts designed to draw attention to global warming averaged a high temperature slightly below normal for this time of year.

Anybody want to bet that if this issue is even addressed, only the above average highs in New Jersey and China will get reported?

http://newsbusters.org/node/13947