or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › An inconvenient truth
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

An inconvenient truth - Page 4

post #121 of 128
So... lead authors of IPCC Climate Change reports are biased, corrupt and cherry pick their data?

Sure you want to go there?

In 1996, Christy and Spencer won an AMS Special Award "for developing a global, precise record of earth's temperature from operational polar-orbiting satellites, fundamentally advancing our ability to monitor climate."

So, we have experts on both sides.

The most telling part of the article was this (which is why I bolded it):
Quote:
The problem is that the solutions being offered don't provide any detectable relief from this so-called catastrophe. Congress is now discussing an 80% reduction in U.S. greenhouse emissions by 2050. That's basically the equivalent of building 1,000 new nuclear power plants all operating by 2020. Now I'm all in favor of nuclear energy, but that would affect the global temperature by only seven-hundredths of a degree by 2050 and fifteen hundredths by 2100. We wouldn't even notice it.

Now, I've not heard the HIGW position on this facet - what are the advocates saying? What is their estimates of the results of reducing emissions by 80%?
post #122 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taskiss View Post

So... lead authors of IPCC Climate Change reports are biased, corrupt and cherry pick their data?

Sure you want to go there?

He's wrong and has been proven to be.
He denies what 97.4% of climatologists have concluded.
Why do you keep siding with those who have been proven wrong?
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #123 of 128
You say Mears proved Christy wrong?
Quote:
Christy and Spencer have helped RSS correct their data:

"Last January, I made a small change in the way TLT is calculated that reduced the absolute
Temperatures by 0.1K. But I only used the new method for 2007 (the error).
When the data are merged with MSU, MSU and AMSU are forced to be as close as possible to each
other over the 1999-2004 period of overlap. This caused the error to show up as a downward
jump in January 2007. To fix the problem, I reprocessed the 1998-2006 AMSU data using the new
code (like I should have done in the first place), and merged it with the MSU data.

We would like to thank John Christy and Roy Spencer, who were very helpful during the diagnosis process."

Carl Mears, RSS, January 16 2008

Mears doesn't sound as if he disqualifies Christy when it comes to temperature calculations to me...
post #124 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taskiss View Post

You say Mears proved Christy wrong?Mears doesn't sound as if he disqualifies Christy when it comes to temperature calculations to me...

Yes he does, as I linked to earlier. However, that doesn't mean that Christy and Spencer are total fools, and therefore, as is common in the scientific community, information is commonly shared.
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #125 of 128
Instead of cherry-picking one station in Antarctica to try and prove that it's cooling, instead why don't you look at the combined data from all the stations, which clearly shows warming. http://www.ipcc.ch/graphics/graphics...pg/fig-3-7.jpg

Part of AGW, is that cooling happens in some areas as a result of AGW. The second video here, the one with the penguin, explains this further. http://www.exploratorium.edu/webcast...owse&project=9
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #126 of 128
This explains why there's more ice- http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/pr...ase.php?id=838

Here's what you quoted Taskiss~
"The fact is that the ice cover is growing in the southern hemisphere even as the ice cover is more or less shrinking in the northern hemisphere. As you and I are talking today, global sea ice coverage is about 400,000 square kilometers above the long-term average - which means that the surplus in the Antarctic is greater than the deficit in the Arctic."
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #127 of 128
300,000/year death caused by climaye change related disaster

god did it, not us. It just likes to murder people.
post #128 of 128
Hmmm... A new report says climate change is already affecting the US.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...061601641.html

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › An inconvenient truth