“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#1141 Jul 26, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>

A follow-up study by the Skeptical Science team of over 12,000 peer-reviewed abstracts on the subjects of 'global warming' and 'global climate change' published between 1991 and 2011 found that of the papers taking a position on the cause of global warming, over 97% agreed that humans are causing it (Cook 2013)."
Don't you see that if you pose your survey questions or pick and choose certain aspects of a report or for that matter choose the peer-reviewed abstracts that will support your consensus the results tell you nothing?

"On the pages of the Guardian’s environment blog, Dana Nuccitelli (who is not a climate scientist) compiled a list of what he thought were Neil’s mistakes.‘These are your climate errors on BBC Sunday Politics‘, he proclaimed. But half of Nuccitelli’s rebuttals related to Neil’s treatment of the study into the extent of the scientific consensus on climate change, co-authored by Nuccitelli, which represents (according to the study) the views of 97% of scientists. Davey had cited the study during the interview, but Neil had said that it had been largely discredited.

(M)any sceptics have pointed out that the 97% figure encompasses the arguments of most climate sceptics. In evidence to the US Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee last week, Roy Spencer, a climate scientist who is routinely vilified for his apparent climate scepticism, claimed that his arguments fell within the 97% definition. Here in the UK, climate sceptic blogger and author of the Hockey Stick Illusion, Andrew Montford tweeted in the wake of the survey,‘isn’t everyone in the 97%? I am’. This prompted Met Office climate scientist, Richard Betts to poll the readers of the Bishop Hill blog,‘Do you all consider yourselves in the 97%?’. It seems that almost all do.

Just as Donald and Painter’s evidence to the STC reflected either naivety or a strategy, Nuccitelli’s survey results are either the result of a comprehensive failure to understand the climate debate, or an attempt to divide it in such a way as to frame the result for political ends. The survey manifestly fails to capture arguments in the climate debate sufficient to define a consensus, much less to make a distinction between arguments within and without the consensus position. Nuccitelli’s survey seems to canvas scientific opinion, but it begins from entirely subjective categories: a cartoonish polarisation of positions within the climate debate."

http://judithcurry.com/2013/07/26/the-97-cons...

A little skepticism is a good thing.

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#1142 Jul 26, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
Me thinks you lost sight of the fact that AGW and other theories are based on observable facts, whereas your God is a myth or allegorical being at best.
Or as someone once saith "religion is the last refuge of scoundrels"
Theories are posed, predictions are made, experiments and observations are conducted to test the theory. Predictions have been made regarding AGW, observations have been made and none of the predictions have come close to being correct. Where is the proof?
Tea Party Solution

Paradise, CA

#1143 Jul 27, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
A little skepticism is a good thing.
No, a lot of skepticism is a good thing. But you are NOT simply a skeptic. You are a through and through DENIER.

And that's NOT skepticism.
Tea Party Solution

Paradise, CA

#1144 Jul 27, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
Theories are posed, predictions are made, experiments and observations are conducted to test the theory. Predictions have been made regarding AGW, observations have been made and none of the predictions have come close to being correct. Where is the proof?
You're right, in a way. The climate projections have been too conservative.

"A comparison of past IPCC predictions against 22 years of weather data and the latest climate science find that the IPCC has consistently underplayed the intensity of global warming in each of its four major reports released since 1990.

The drastic decline of summer Arctic sea ice is one recent example: In the 2007 report, the IPCC concluded the Arctic would not lose its summer ice before 2070 at the earliest. But the ice pack has shrunk far faster than any scenario scientists felt policymakers should consider; now researchers say the region could see ice-free summers within 20 years.

Sea-level rise is another. In its 2001 report, the IPCC predicted an annual sea-level rise of less than 2 millimeters per year. But from 1993 through 2006, the oceans actually rose 3.3 millimeters per year, more than 50 percent above that projection."

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm...
Tea Party Solution

Paradise, CA

#1145 Jul 27, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
Your link talks about some kind of consensus. It doesn't show any evidence that the CO2 man has added to the atmosphere is solely responsible for the warming that ended in 1998.

1) As I've already posted, climate scientists have NEVER said that manmade CO2 is SOLEY responsible for the warming that has continued to this day. WHY do you need to put words into their mouths?

Regarding "no evidence": read the link.

As for consensus.
With regards to the IPCC, cognitive biases in the context of an institutionalized consensus building process have arguably resulted in the consensus becoming increasingly confirmed in a self-reinforcing way, to the detriment of the scientific process."
http://judithcurry.com/2012/10/28/climate-cha...
You pasted a long piece by rightie Judith Curry that simply postulates that scientists are frauds-- but in big words.

Show us how 97% of climate scientists are doctoring their studies and measurements just so they can be 'one of the gang' of their fellow fraudsters.

Big words don't impress me, but I know, Mises fan that you are, that they impress you.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#1146 Jul 27, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
Theories are posed, predictions are made, experiments and observations are conducted to test the theory. Predictions have been made regarding AGW, observations have been made and none of the predictions have come close to being correct. Where is the proof?
>
>

The proof is right in front of those who do not allow themselves to be blinded by absurd ideologies.

First off you have to understand the concepts of tolerances and trends....

Climatological events on a global scale will never occur with chronometric precision and temperature fluctuations will never be predicted to the thousandth of a degree...

Thus, tolerance wise on a planetary scale it makes little difference if the polar caps melt 5 years hence or are totally gone 50 years from now...just as it matters little weather the temperature will be 3F or 3.5F five decades from now.

Second, the things that really matter with AGW is temperature trends, and that temperatures have been rising right along with the rise of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere, and scientist have got that one pretty well nailed down, and ....

No amount of mindless rambling on your or anyones part will change that fact.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#1147 Jul 27, 2013
>
>

The proof is right in front of those who do not allow themselves to be blinded by absurd ideologies.

First off you have to understand the concepts of tolerances and trends....

Climatological events on a global scale will never occur with chronometric precision and temperature fluctuations will never be predicted to the thousandth of a degree...

Thus, tolerance wise on a planetary scale it makes little difference if the polar caps melt 5 years hence or are totally gone 50 years from now...just as it matters little weather the GLOBAL temperature RISE will be 3F or 3.5F five decades from now.

Second, the things that really matter with AGW is temperature trends, and that temperatures have been rising right along with the rise of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere, and scientist have got that one pretty well nailed down, and ....

No amount of mindless rambling on your or anyones part will change that fact.

Amended: added words GLOBAL and RISE to clarify matters for the wisenheimers.

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#1148 Jul 27, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
You pasted a long piece by rightie Judith Curry that simply postulates that scientists are frauds-- but in big words.
Ha ha. You crack me up! Big words indeed. Is that all that you got from the piece? You most likely didn't read it. Maybe the big words scared you? There is this interesting thing that can help with the big words. It is called a dictionary.

Oh. Judith Curry is a climate scientist.
http://curry.eas.gatech.edu/
Here is some of her work.
http://curry.eas.gatech.edu/onlinepapers.html

Some of it is in pdf form for your perusal.

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#1149 Jul 27, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
You're right, in a way. The climate projections have been too conservative.
Not so TP.
http://wwwp.dailyclimate.org/tdc-newsroom/201...

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#1150 Jul 27, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
No, a lot of skepticism is a good thing. But you are NOT simply a skeptic. You are a through and through DENIER.
Is there something wrong with denying things that are not true?
Local

Hidden Valley Lake, CA

#1151 Jul 27, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
Is there something wrong with denying things that are not true?
No Sam, speaking the truth remains to be a necessary part of life.
Especially when people like gramps/teepee are engaging in their mindless "goose step" nonsense perpetrated by socialist control freaks.
The flatearth mentality that these fools display is very disturbing.
Just read a bit from the sierra club site, you will see the same propaganda/links being offered every day.......... it is almost word for word.
The propaganda is losing steam as the sky has not fallen, the oceanside populations have not perished, the hundreds of killer hurricanes have not occured, but..........many more folks are poor and struggling due to liberal(green) federal regulation.....and high taxes are perpetrating an undue burden on the average American worker....at least those who actually have a job.
The 25 million who are not working?.......are waiting in vain for a liberal adminstration to get things like the Keystone Pipeline going........fat chance.
Oh, and btw.....crude oil is over $100 per barrel thanks to haters of the human race like gramps/teepee.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#1152 Jul 27, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
Is there something wrong with denying things that are not true?
>
>
Yes there is, especially when you have not even come close to prove them to be not true....

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#1154 Jul 27, 2013
Local wrote:
<quoted text>
No Sam, speaking the truth remains to be a necessary part of life.
Especially when people like gramps/teepee are engaging in their mindless "goose step" nonsense perpetrated by socialist control freaks.
The flatearth mentality that these fools display is very disturbing.
Just read a bit from the sierra club site, you will see the same propaganda/links being offered every day.......... it is almost word for word.
The propaganda is losing steam as the sky has not fallen, the oceanside populations have not perished, the hundreds of killer hurricanes have not occured, but..........many more folks are poor and struggling due to liberal(green) federal regulation.....and high taxes are perpetrating an undue burden on the average American worker....at least those who actually have a job.
The 25 million who are not working?.......are waiting in vain for a liberal adminstration to get things like the Keystone Pipeline going........fat chance.
Oh, and btw.....crude oil is over $100 per barrel thanks to haters of the human race like gramps/teepee.
The scientific method has somehow become obsolete and consensus is all that matters to these AGW warmists and their believers. It matters not how many people believe that 2 + 2 =5. Wrong is wrong.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#1155 Jul 27, 2013
Local wrote:
<quoted text>
No Sam, speaking the truth remains to be a necessary part of life.
Especially when people like gramps/teepee are engaging in their mindless "goose step" nonsense perpetrated by socialist control freaks.
The flatearth mentality that these fools display is very disturbing.
Just read a bit from the sierra club site, you will see the same propaganda/links being offered every day.......... it is almost word for word.
The propaganda is losing steam as the sky has not fallen, the oceanside populations have not perished, the hundreds of killer hurricanes have not occured, but..........many more folks are poor and struggling due to liberal(green) federal regulation.....and high taxes are perpetrating an undue burden on the average American worker....at least those who actually have a job.
The 25 million who are not working?.......are waiting in vain for a liberal adminstration to get things like the Keystone Pipeline going........fat chance.
Oh, and btw.....crude oil is over $100 per barrel thanks to haters of the human race like gramps/teepee.
>
>
Listen to you LOCO...

Spouting more nonsense about "socialist control freaks" the "sky falling" and shedding crocodile tears for "poor and struggling folks" whom in reality are the last thing on your shitty/little fettered conservative mind...

and don't you go around bellyaching about "$100 dollar per barrel" oil, especially now that the oil companies are tapping & fracking into the supposedly endless oil reservoirs of the Bakken formations...

You would have much more credibility were you to admit that once again you conservative dupes have been taken by the koch brothers and the oil companies...
Local

Hidden Valley Lake, CA

#1156 Jul 27, 2013
Yep, the ole socialist pos whining about what I said....but nothing of substance to prove what I said was incorrect......
The "sky is/has not fallen", the blevy of killer hurricanes have not happened(other than usual storms), and obamanomic has forced oil over $100 per barrel.
What else is new...lololol
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#1157 Jul 27, 2013
Local wrote:
Yep, the ole socialist pos whining about what I said....but nothing of substance to prove what I said was incorrect......
The "sky is/has not fallen", the blevy of killer hurricanes have not happened(other than usual storms), and obamanomic has forced oil over $100 per barrel.
What else is new...lololol
>
>
You are out of touch with reality LOCO if you think Katrina and Sandy were your usual storms, and if you really believe President OBAMA or any other President's economic policies have much effect on the price of crude then you have totally lost it....

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#1158 Jul 28, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
A follow-up study by the Skeptical Science team of over 12,000 peer-reviewed abstracts on the subjects of 'global warming' and 'global climate change' published between 1991 and 2011 found that of the papers taking a position on the cause of global warming, over 97% agreed that humans are causing it (Cook 2013)."
So much for the 97% figure that you have clinging to for your proof. Yet more lies by the AGW alarmist crowd.

"The Cook et al.(2013) study is obviously littered with falsely classified papers making its conclusions baseless and its promotion by those in the media misleading."

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/05/97-s...
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#1159 Jul 28, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
So much for the 97% figure that you have clinging to for your proof. Yet more lies by the AGW alarmist crowd.
"The Cook et al.(2013) study is obviously littered with falsely classified papers making its conclusions baseless and its promotion by those in the media misleading."
http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/05/97-s...
>
>
Mmmm yeah!

Sounds like half a dozen of them seem to be back pedaling and....

With statements like "...that the sun contributed (more or less) as much as the anthropogenic forcings...

and

"...In brief, I argue that human activity may increase temperatures over what they would otherwise have been without human activity... "

It is not hard to see how those scientific papers do lend their support to AGW...

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#1160 Jul 29, 2013
Too funny.
"Expert witnesses called by Sen. Barbara Boxer to testify during Senate Environment and Public Works hearings yesterday contradicted a key assertion made by President Barack Obama on climate change.

Speaking at a Democratic fundraiser less than a month before directing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to impose costly new restrictions on carbon dioxide emissions, Obama said,“we also know that the climate is warming faster than anybody anticipated five or 10 years ago.

However, climate scientists including United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) lead author Hans von Storch report temperatures have remained essentially flat for the past 10 years, and indeed for the past 15 years. Storch told Der Spiegel that 98 percent of IPCC climate models cannot replicate the prolonged pause in global warming, and IPCC may need to revise its computer models to correct their apparent warming bias.

During yesterday’s Environment and Public Works hearings, Sen. David Vitter asked a panel of experts, including experts selected by Boxer,“Can any witnesses say they agree with Obama’s statement that warming has accelerated during the past 10 years?”

For several seconds, nobody said a word. Sitting just a few rows behind the expert witnesses, I thought I might have heard a few crickets chirping, but I couldn’t tell for sure. We’ll give Obama the benefit of the doubt and count the crickets in the “maybe” camp.

After several seconds of deafening silence, global warming activist Heidi Cullen, who formerly served as a meteorologist for the Weather Channel, attempted to change the subject. Cullen said our focus should be on longer time periods rather than the 10-year period mentioned by Obama. When pressed, however, she contradicted Obama’s central assertion and said warming has slowed, not accelerated.

Several minutes later, Sen. Jeff Sessions returned to the topic and sought additional clarity. Sessions recited Obama’s quote claiming accelerating global warming during the past 10 years and asked,“Do any of you support that quote?”

Again, a prolonged and deafening silence ensued. Neither Cullen nor any of the other experts on the panel spoke a word, not even in an attempt to change the subject."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/...
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#1161 Jul 29, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
Too funny.
"Expert witnesses called by Sen. Barbara Boxer to testify during Senate Environment and Public Works hearings yesterday contradicted a key assertion made by President Barack Obama on climate change.
>
>
Yes, it' is funny and the less fools understands about the workings of the world around them the funnier things appear to them to be, or....

Why do you think that so many folks who ride the short bus have such a sunny disposition...???

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/why-the-gl...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Corning Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
US Army Says Hillary Disgrunted or Careless 15 hr Gossip 2
News Junk money: Junkers making the big bucks off 'c... (Aug '09) 16 hr Wittmeier Tool 14
The Clinton Crime Family at Work - Pay For Play 17 hr Sunshine Disinfects 4
Free The Nipple 17 hr Nipples 1
Lying Crooked Hillary Thu ANONYMOUS 2
Review: Paramount Trailer Park (Mar '13) Thu anonymous 24
Hillary Clinton Is A BIGOT Thu Middle of the road 1

Corning Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Corning Mortgages