Why do so many people deny climate change

[Abraham3]

Interesting that you think a paper published in a reputable journal is an opinion.

It's irrelevant, as has been pointed out numerous times.

The fact that Michael Mann's Hockey Stick graph is a fraud is irrelevant?

This should be interesting.

In what way is it a fraud?

 

[bripat9643]

It's irrelevant, as has been pointed out numerous times.

The fact that Michael Mann's Hockey Stick graph is a fraud is irrelevant?

This should be interesting.

In what way is it a fraud?

McIntyre proved that Mann manipulated the data to produce the desired outcome. When you pump random white noise through Mann's algorithms, the result is still a hockey stick. If that isn't proof of scientific fraud, then perpetual motion machines and cold fusion are feasible.

 

[PMZ]

One of the sources of denier ignorance is that they have been instructed to avoid studying the IPCC documentation just like a few years ago they were instructed to avoid Wikipedia, both for the same reason. To maintain ignorance.

Here's, therefore, the ultimate exposure for them, the IPCC AR4 summarized by Wikipedia.

IPCC Fourth Assessment Report - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Of course it was the state of climate science then (2007), and is about to be superceded by AR5, the state of climate science now.

There can be no doubt that they'll want to burn AR5 too.

If AR5 doesn't acknowledge the pause in warming, it'll be good only for wrapping fish.

There has been no pause in warming. There's been a pause in the growth of surface temperatures. No surprise.

 

[PMZ]

Conservatives sure do hate people more educated than they. Which is most everyone.

Who are you more educated than?

Seriously?

High school freshmen -- by two years.

The continuation of Dave's unbroken string of lies.

 

[bripat9643]

One of the sources of denier ignorance is that they have been instructed to avoid studying the IPCC documentation just like a few years ago they were instructed to avoid Wikipedia, both for the same reason. To maintain ignorance.

Here's, therefore, the ultimate exposure for them, the IPCC AR4 summarized by Wikipedia.

IPCC Fourth Assessment Report - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Of course it was the state of climate science then (2007), and is about to be superceded by AR5, the state of climate science now.

There can be no doubt that they'll want to burn AR5 too.

If AR5 doesn't acknowledge the pause in warming, it'll be good only for wrapping fish.

There has been no pause in warming. There's been a pause in the growth of surface temperatures. No surprise.

ROFL! For 20 years now the priesthood of the Holy Church of Anthropogenic Global Warming has been saying the two are one and the same. It has only been since it became obvious to everyone that global temperatures have not been increasing that this theory of disappearing heat was contrived.

 

[PMZ]

Like most progressives, you make the mistake of confusing "educated" and "intelligent".

There is no particular intelligence required to regurgitate a professor's own opinions back at him and getting a good grade for it.

Is that your understanding of how PhDs are earned?

You didn't go to college, did you Dave.

Oh, look: Another prog who confuses "educated" with "intelligent".

George Bush was educated. Do you think he's intelligent?

There are many uneducated but intelligent. They don't know science but can do a good job solving ordinary problems. There are many unintelligent and uneducated. There are only a few unintelligent and educated. The can do lab work but not original research. There are a few intelligent and educated. In the field of climate science, they're the ones involved with the IPCC.

 

[PMZ]

Conservatives sure do hate people more educated than they. Which is most everyone.

Who are you more educated than?

Seriously?

70 percent of Americans older than 29. Much more in the field of science.

 

[PMZ]

Conservatives sure do hate people more educated than they. Which is most everyone.

Like most progressives, you make the mistake of confusing "educated" and "intelligent".

There is no particular intelligence required to regurgitate a professor's own opinions back at him and getting a good grade for it.

Is that your understanding of how PhDs are earned?

You didn't go to college, did you Dave.

I think we're close to finding out why Dave hates high achievers.

 

[PMZ]

http://climateaudit.files.wordpress.com/2005/09/mcintyre.mckitrick.2003.pdf

I asked for proof. You responded with just another opinion.

Wrong. The paper McIntyre and McKitrick wrote dissected Mann's Hockey Stick hoax and utterly destroyed it. For example, McIntyre demonstrated that if you pump pure noise through Mann's computer program that the result you get is still a hockey stick.

Mann is a fraud. You can't just cover your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears every time you're confronted with the evidence that your god is bogus.

Once Mann gets the political assassins in court the truth will be known. Not before.

 

[PMZ]

In 4.6 billion years. there has been only one constant to the climate of planet Earth, that constant is change.

What rational people do, is realize that the Gaea cult are moronic fuctards, and that anthropogenic global warming is the purvey of primitive apes attempting to convince others that the idiotic horseshit you peddle has some relation to legitimate science. Michael Mann is a fraud, guided by his idiotic religion, rather than by the results of scientific inquiry. Such is the case of the AGW crowd in general, who are really just a bunch of New Age nutjobs engaged in primitive animist worship.

The usual name for a belief for which there is no supporting evidence is a myth. Myths are very important in primitive cultures to explain things that are unexplained by the tribes knowledge.

We still have primitive sub cultures among us that employ myths to explain what they can't.

The post above is a good example of a myth of the primitive conservative subculture. It is a mythological explanation that's the basis for their worship of the god, Ignorance, who they believe rewards them with political power.

...says the guy who worships the IPCC.

Science and scientists. The people and process of the IPCC.

 

[bripat9643]

I asked for proof. You responded with just another opinion.

Wrong. The paper McIntyre and McKitrick wrote dissected Mann's Hockey Stick hoax and utterly destroyed it. For example, McIntyre demonstrated that if you pump pure noise through Mann's computer program that the result you get is still a hockey stick.

Mann is a fraud. You can't just cover your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears every time you're confronted with the evidence that your god is bogus.

Once Mann gets the political assassins in court the truth will be known. Not before.

Mann doesn't have the slightest chance of winning his suit. This case is an obvious SLAPP suit. You can look that up if you don't know what it means.

 

[bripat9643]

Is that your understanding of how PhDs are earned?

You didn't go to college, did you Dave.

Oh, look: Another prog who confuses "educated" with "intelligent".

George Bush was educated. Do you think he's intelligent?

There are many uneducated but intelligent. They don't know science but can do a good job solving ordinary problems. There are many unintelligent and uneducated. There are only a few unintelligent and educated. The can do lab work but not original research. There are a few intelligent and educated. In the field of climate science, they're the ones involved with the IPCC.

Why would anyone accept your judgement on that issue? Your credibility is zero.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Conservatives sure do hate people more educated than they. Which is most everyone.

Who are you more educated than?

Seriously?

70 percent of Americans older than 29. Much more in the field of science.

Is that why you thought plutonium was for bombs, not reactors,
because of your education?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I asked for proof. You responded with just another opinion.

Wrong. The paper McIntyre and McKitrick wrote dissected Mann's Hockey Stick hoax and utterly destroyed it. For example, McIntyre demonstrated that if you pump pure noise through Mann's computer program that the result you get is still a hockey stick.

Mann is a fraud. You can't just cover your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears every time you're confronted with the evidence that your god is bogus.

Once Mann gets the political assassins in court the truth will be known. Not before.

I can't wait.
The court won't excuse his lies like his fans do.

 

[Old Rocks]

Wrong. The paper McIntyre and McKitrick wrote dissected Mann's Hockey Stick hoax and utterly destroyed it. For example, McIntyre demonstrated that if you pump pure noise through Mann's computer program that the result you get is still a hockey stick.

Mann is a fraud. You can't just cover your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears every time you're confronted with the evidence that your god is bogus.

Once Mann gets the political assassins in court the truth will be known. Not before.

Mann doesn't have the slightest chance of winning his suit. This case is an obvious SLAPP suit. You can look that up if you don't know what it means.

Mann will win. Scientific evidence for his graph;

What evidence is there for the hockey stick?


Hockey stick is broken
“In 2003 Professor McKitrick teamed with a Canadian engineer, Steve McIntyre, in attempting to replicate the chart and finally debunked it as statistical nonsense. They revealed how the chart was derived from "collation errors, unjustified truncation or extrapolation of source data, obsolete data, incorrect principal component calculations, geographical mislocations and other serious defects" -- substantially affecting the temperature index.” (John McLaughlin)

What the science says...

Since the hockey stick paper in 1998, there have been a number of proxy studies analysing a variety of different sources including corals, stalagmites, tree rings, boreholes and ice cores. They all confirm the original hockey stick conclusion: the 20th century is the warmest in the last 1000 years and that warming was most dramatic after 1920.


The "hockey stick" describes a reconstruction of past temperature over the past 1000 to 2000 years using tree-rings, ice cores, coral and other records that act as proxies for temperature (Mann 1999). The reconstruction found that global temperature gradually cooled over the last 1000 years with a sharp upturn in the 20th Century. The principal result from the hockey stick is that global temperatures over the last few decades are the warmest in the last 1000 years.

 

[PMZ]

Wrong. The paper McIntyre and McKitrick wrote dissected Mann's Hockey Stick hoax and utterly destroyed it. For example, McIntyre demonstrated that if you pump pure noise through Mann's computer program that the result you get is still a hockey stick.

Mann is a fraud. You can't just cover your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears every time you're confronted with the evidence that your god is bogus.

Once Mann gets the political assassins in court the truth will be known. Not before.

Mann doesn't have the slightest chance of winning his suit. This case is an obvious SLAPP suit. You can look that up if you don't know what it means.

That’s not what the judge said after reviewing Mann's case.

 

[PMZ]

Oh, look: Another prog who confuses "educated" with "intelligent".

George Bush was educated. Do you think he's intelligent?

There are many uneducated but intelligent. They don't know science but can do a good job solving ordinary problems. There are many unintelligent and uneducated. There are only a few unintelligent and educated. The can do lab work but not original research. There are a few intelligent and educated. In the field of climate science, they're the ones involved with the IPCC.

Why would anyone accept your judgement on that issue? Your credibility is zero.

That’s not up to you, is it. You're an ordinary control freak and most people know exactly how to handle your kind.

 

[PMZ]

Who are you more educated than?

Seriously?

70 percent of Americans older than 29. Much more in the field of science.

Is that why you thought plutonium was for bombs, not reactors,
because of your education?

Plutonium is used in bombs and power plants. What does that have to do with your denying science?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

70 percent of Americans older than 29. Much more in the field of science.

Is that why you thought plutonium was for bombs, not reactors,
because of your education?

Plutonium is used in bombs and power plants. What does that have to do with your denying science?

Excellent! I'm glad I could dispel just a tiny bit of your ignorance.

 

[kiwina]

Frank said:
...Denying Climate change?" What a stupid thing to say....We question the hypothesis that an additional wisp of CO2 is melting the polar Ice caps.....Boo ******* hoo....Frank is a meany for daring to ask where our experiments are .....

Well, Frank - I don't see questioning as much as I see chuckle-headed leaps and spouting of pre-prepared talking points handed out by questionable sources. It seems that here, and on other message boards where the subject comes up, responses are completely ignored or misunderstood, with a complete circle back to original talking points that don't stand up to the data. Now, of course, I do not intend to say EVERYONE does this. I am saying it seems to be the trend.

You say people think you are mean? I wouldn't know about that. All I can say is it appears you leap fast with the tongue-fist. Maybe that is a case of hyper-argumentitis rather than being mean. Which ever, you seem VERY sure of your position.


Peach said:
When you have been lied to the first time about the climate becoming an ice age in the 70's then changed to warming you tend not to believe them. They also are not addressing why so many planets in our solar system climates are changing also. It seems to be tied to something that is happening to our Solar System not mankind's pollution.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'lied to'. You think scientists who study this lied? Or you read some sort of popular book which sensationalized ideas and then felt lied to? I'm not sure what you mean.

Let me ask you something. Let's assume for the sake of argument that mankind is NOT causing global warming. Rather, it is the product of some sort of planetary/solar system sort of thing going on. Even if this is the case, as we KNOW we can slow/change/effect what is occurring by changing our behavior, why not go ahead and do that?

ADDED NOTE FOR OROGENICMAN: Good morning! I realized I didn't even say hi! Hope you have a wonderful weekend and even better, get some good shots if you are going to LSA. Maybe there is a spot here for some photos.

K.

do I think that sciencetist lie, yes!! Ithink that they are just people like every one else and are offten so arrogent that they think that every one has to do exactly what the scientest say. Over my life time I have been told in an alrming way that the earth is doomed by meaters, the Sun exploding, Califorina sliding into the seas (won, be missed by a lot of us) wails going extint. You get the picture. The reality is that all of these are based on one false assumison "if things cuntuine the way they are going." No one can preduict the future when we talk about some thing so masive as the universe. To judge planet tempture only by the amount of C02 that may have been present is called too small example. There are many things that effect climate and all of them need to be studied.
There is something called the serenity prayer. It goes like this: God give me the curage to change what I can not change, and the wisdom to know the difference. When a person tries to change what he can not it will drive him nuts and and that is what these people who insist on all these things to control climate, and thay are driving the rest of us nuts with them. I sugested to Abe that if having solar enerigy was so important to hiim he could buy the panels and put them on his own house.
What is realy happing is that this issue is one of many verry low priorties that we fight about and insist that every one think as we do. The hope of the common people of 1776 was that they could have a country where they could think as they please. It is that verry freedom that has put us on top. Becuse we were free the Wright brothers could fly,