Why AGW must be wrong.

[SpidermanTuba]

No, not crickets. it's just that his post has already been debated in this thread. Nothing new, and no need to go in circles with it. The fear mongers do not address the bias of the tainted research.

You haven't provided anything to address.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

It's amazing that while 99% of the scientists in the world agree that GW is a reality...

Do you have a definitive source for that outrageously exaggerated number, or are you --like IPCC, CRU and NASA-- just pulling a figure out of your ass?

Shouldn't you be busy falsifying AGW? Get to work man, global climate models aren't easy things to put together. Can you even write down the equations of hydrodynamics? If not, then you've got a lot of work to do.

 

[Oddball]

Yes, we do. They don't account for it. You simply haven't bothered to do any research whatsoever.

Past history disagrees with your assumption. There have been plenty of heating and cooling periods without the Man made CO2

The present warming trend cannot be accounted for without man-made Co2.

Just because you cannot explain it any other way doesn't mean that there isn't one.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Past history disagrees with your assumption. There have been plenty of heating and cooling periods without the Man made CO2

The present warming trend cannot be accounted for without man-made Co2.

Just because you cannot explain it any other way doesn't mean that there isn't one.

Right, but because I cannot explain it any other way, and neither can any of the 6 billion+ people on Earth, including the subset of those 6 billion who have dedicated their lives to the subject matter, I'm gonna go with that explanation until, and if, a better one comes along.

You don't even know what science is, do you?

 

[Oddball]

And we all know those "scientists" would never ever jimmy and fake evidence to get the results they want!

The move is a significant snub to both the IPCC and Dr Pachauri as he battles to defend his reputation following the revelation that his most recent climate change report included false claims that most of the Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035. Scientists believe it could take more than 300 years for the glaciers to disappear.

The body and its chairman have faced growing criticism ever since as questions have been raised on the credibility of their work and the rigour with which climate change claims are assessed.

India forms new climate change body - Telegraph

 

[Oddball]

....or ever use incomplete numbers or destroy evidence that contravenes their claims.

Phil Jones, the beleaguered British climate scientist at the centre of the leaked emails controversy, is facing fresh claims that he sought to hide problems in key temperature data on which some of his work was based.

A Guardian investigation of thousands of emails and documents apparently hacked from the University of East Anglia's climatic research unit has found evidence that a series of measurements from Chinese weather stations were seriously flawed and that documents relating to them could not be produced.

Leaked climate change emails scientist 'hid' data flaws | Environment | The Guardian

 

[SpidermanTuba]

And we all know those "scientists" would never ever jimmy and fake evidence to get the results they want!

Not sure where you got that idea. What we do know is that when scientists jimmy and fake evidence and other scientists find out, the latter are very eager to tattle on the former. How long did it take people to call out Fleischmann and Pons on their cold fusion BS? A few months?

 

[Oddball]

Punchline of the decade: "Peer review":

In our last story, referencing the work of the Telegraph, we touched on the what many consider inappropriate citations in the 2007 IPCC AR4 report. See here: IPCC Gate Du Jour: UN climate change panel based claims on student dissertation and magazine article One citation was an article in Climbing Magazine issue 208, while another was a student dissertation.

A look at IPCC’s referenced student dissertation shows more economic than climate concern Watts Up With That?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

....or ever use incomplete numbers or destroy evidence that contravenes their claims.

Phil Jones, the beleaguered British climate scientist at the centre of the leaked emails controversy, is facing fresh claims that he sought to hide problems in key temperature data on which some of his work was based.

A Guardian investigation of thousands of emails and documents apparently hacked from the University of East Anglia's climatic research unit has found evidence that a series of measurements from Chinese weather stations were seriously flawed and that documents relating to them could not be produced.

Leaked climate change emails scientist 'hid' data flaws | Environment | The Guardian

Hey thanks for the link


The revelations on the inadequacies of the 1990 paper do not undermine the case that humans are causing climate change, and other studies have produced similar findings. But they do call into question the probity of some climate change science

 

[Oddball]

And we all know those "scientists" would never ever jimmy and fake evidence to get the results they want!

Not sure where you got that idea. What we do know is that when scientists jimmy and fake evidence and other scientists find out, the latter are very eager to tattle on the former. How long did it take people to call out Fleischmann and Pons on their cold fusion BS? A few months?

Yeah....They find out.

That's why they've repeatedly ignored FOIA requests and have destroyed evidence that would show them to be the frauds that they are.

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
Keith will do likewise. He's not in at the moment - minor family crisis.

Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don't
have his new email address.

We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

As for FOIA Sarah isn't technically employed by UEA and she
will likely be paid by Manchester Metropolitan University.
I wouldn't worry about the code. If FOIA does ever get
used by anyone, there is also IPR to consider as well.
Data is covered by all the agreements we sign with people,
so I will be hiding behind them.

 

[Oddball]

The revelations on the inadequacies of the 1990 paper do not undermine the case that humans are causing climate change, and other studies have produced similar findings. But they do call into question the probity of some climate change science..

Note that they didn't show their work.....Just like CRU, NCAR, UCAR and NASA!!!

 

[SpidermanTuba]

And we all know those "scientists" would never ever jimmy and fake evidence to get the results they want!

Not sure where you got that idea. What we do know is that when scientists jimmy and fake evidence and other scientists find out, the latter are very eager to tattle on the former. How long did it take people to call out Fleischmann and Pons on their cold fusion BS? A few months?

Yeah....They find out.

That's why they've repeatedly ignored FOIA requests and have destroyed evidence that would show them to be the frauds that they are.

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
Keith will do likewise. He's not in at the moment - minor family crisis.

Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don't
have his new email address.

We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

As for FOIA Sarah isn't technically employed by UEA and she
will likely be paid by Manchester Metropolitan University.
I wouldn't worry about the code. If FOIA does ever get
used by anyone, there is also IPR to consider as well.
Data is covered by all the agreements we sign with people,
so I will be hiding behind them.

Disdain for skeptics and failure to comply with the law does not equal fake science, sorry. It just makes him a snob, not a fake.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

The revelations on the inadequacies of the 1990 paper do not undermine the case that humans are causing climate change, and other studies have produced similar findings. But they do call into question the probity of some climate change science..

Note that they didn't show their work.....Just like CRU, NCAR, UCAR and NASA!!!

What work haven't they shown?

 

[Oddball]

Of course, the IPCC would see to it that they got only the most qualified "scientist" to head up their little mob:

But let’s begin at the beginning. Mr Pachauri has no training whatsoever in climate science. This was known all the time, yet he heads the pontification panel which proliferates the new gospel of a hotter world. How come? Why did the United Nations not choose someone who was competent? After all, this man is presumably incapable of differentiating between ocean sediments and coral terrestrial deposits, nor can he go about analysing tree ring records and so on. That’s not jargon; these are essential elements of a syllabus in any basic course on climatology.
You cannot blame him. His degree and training is in railroad engineering. You read it right. This man was educated to make railroads from point A to point B.

The Hottest Hoax in the World | OPEN Magazine

 

[Oddball]

Can I blame global warming for not having my homework, or do I still need to say the dog ate it?

A complete list of things caused by global warming

 

[Oddball]

Of course, if the facts conflict with your predetermined conclusions, just change the criteria as to what the facts are!

I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep
them out somehow - even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is !
Cheers
Phil

 

[LibocalypseNow]

My prediction is that the Global Cooling Doomsday Cult will be revived as soon as the Global Warming Doomsday Cult loons are proven to be completely full of chit. "We're all gonna freeze to death!!!" will be their new mantra very soon. People really are sheep for the most part on stuff like this. It's actually pretty sad.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Of course, the IPCC would see to it that they got only the most qualified "scientist" to head up their little mob:

But let’s begin at the beginning. Mr Pachauri has no training whatsoever in climate science. This was known all the time, yet he heads the pontification panel which proliferates the new gospel of a hotter world. How come? Why did the United Nations not choose someone who was competent? After all, this man is presumably incapable of differentiating between ocean sediments and coral terrestrial deposits, nor can he go about analysing tree ring records and so on. That’s not jargon; these are essential elements of a syllabus in any basic course on climatology.
You cannot blame him. His degree and training is in railroad engineering. You read it right. This man was educated to make railroads from point A to point B.

The Hottest Hoax in the World | OPEN Magazine

They probably hired him for his administrative skills. He is the chancellor of a university. Perhaps he should have PhD's in all subject areas to qualify for that job

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Can I blame global warming for not having my homework, or do I still need to say the dog ate it?

I'm just trying to figure out what the fuck you are babbling about.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

My prediction is that the Global Cooling Doomsday Cult will be revived as soon as the Global Warming Doomsday Cult loons are proven to be completely full of chit. "We're all gonna freeze to death!!!" will be their new mantra very soon. People really are sheep for the most part on stuff like this. It's actually pretty sad.

I'm still waiting to see a single scientific paper predicting global cooling regardless of how much fossil fuels man burns.

I've been waiting in fact, for years to see such a paper. Apparently scientists only published their findings in popular magazines back then.