Skull Valley lawmaker wants both sides of climate change taught to students

Feb 5, 2013 Full story: Verde Independent 1,644

Saying students are getting only one side of the debate, a state senator wants to free teachers to tell students why they believe there is no such thing human-caused "global warming.' The proposal by Sen.

Full Story
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#805 Apr 9, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
All the sea ice talk aside, it is quite clear that really when it comes to Antarctic ice, sea ice is not the most important thing to measure.
Actually, there is LESS sea ice in Antarctica. It is just spread out over a wider area during the winter freeze. Not that winter sea ice extent matters much to climate when you have no sunlight.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#806 Apr 9, 2013
"Climategate was not made up."

Yes it was. "climategate" is the claim that there was misrepresentation in the climate science based on a massive release of correspondence that was not intended for simple reading. Only one or two emails had language or statements which could be misinterpreted even then.

"Here is the question: Who Released The Climategate Emails And Why?"

Who is immaterial. Who cares who?

The intent of the release was to add confusion to the weaker minds and promote their spamming in public debate. It worked on you..

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#807 Apr 9, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
"Climategate was not made up."
Yes it was. "climategate" is the claim that there was misrepresentation in the climate science based on a massive release of correspondence that was not intended for simple reading. Only one or two emails had language or statements which could be misinterpreted even then.
"Here is the question: Who Released The Climategate Emails And Why?"
Who is immaterial. Who cares who?
The intent of the release was to add confusion to the weaker minds and promote their spamming in public debate. It worked on you..
spreading misinformation to for acceptance of global warming is nothing to be proud of.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#808 Apr 9, 2013
[QUOTE who="lyin' brian"] When will you learn it's a hoax?[/QUOTE]

People have learned that "lyin' brian" is not a hoax & is also a slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AND 4-time alleged & 4-time proud threatener.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#809 Apr 9, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, there is LESS sea ice in Antarctica. It is just spread out over a wider area during the winter freeze. Not that winter sea ice extent matters much to climate when you have no sunlight.
You should know you are in Canada...LOL You must be right.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#810 Apr 9, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>WOW.. why are you wasting your time here?
Rush to publish your stuff. The world awaits your book, NOT!
LOL.
WOW.. why are you wasting your time here?
Rush to publish your stuff. The world awaits your book, NOT!
LOL.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#811 Apr 9, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>What you think does not matter unless you compete with the scientists in their science arena. In other words, write up your stuff for submittal to science journals.
We refer to the established science here, not denier speculation from you.
Oh read my previous post for the rest.
Compete with what Scientists, not all are alarmists. Are you saying this little Forum here is only for those that have submitted to science journals? Have you? LOL you alarmists are so funny with your passion.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#812 Apr 9, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, there is LESS sea ice in Antarctica. It is just spread out over a wider area during the winter freeze. Not that winter sea ice extent matters much to climate when you have no sunlight.
True and the reality is mapped to compare in my link.

There is more:

http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/seaice/characteri...

Sea ice differs between the Arctic and Antarctic, primarily because of their different geography. The Arctic is a semi-enclosed ocean, almost completely surrounded by land. As a result, the sea ice that forms in the Arctic is not as mobile as sea ice in the Antarctic.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#813 Apr 9, 2013
Remember Rev. Gore's sea level scares: The sea level rise over the last 100 years has been 17-20cm, which is 6.7-7.7 inches, which the author alarmingly rounded up to 8 inches. But the real problem is the incredible bait and switch here. They are talking about the dangers of anthropogenic global warming, but include the sea level rise from all warming effects, most of which occured long before we were burning fossil fuels at anywhere near current rates. For example, almost half this rise was before 1950, where few argue that warming and sea level rise was due to man. In fact, sea level rise is really a story of a constant 2-3mm a year rise since about 1850 as the world warms from the little ice age. There has been no modern acceleration.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#814 Apr 9, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>WOW.. why are you wasting your time here?
Rush to publish your stuff. The world awaits your book, NOT[sic]!
LOL.
Awww you liked my post to present it back to me. Nice touch but you should have omitted "NOT."

Responding to your lies is highly satisfying. I'm not telling what I do the rest of my day.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#815 Apr 9, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Compete with what Scientists, not all are alarmists. Are you saying this little Forum here is only for those that have submitted to science journals? Have you? LOL you alarmists are so funny with your passion.
Er you post nonsense.

Nonresponsive.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#816 Apr 9, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
Remember Rev. Gore's sea level scares: The sea level rise over the last 100 years has been 17-20cm, which is 6.7-7.7 inches, which the author alarmingly rounded up to 8 inches. But the real problem is the incredible bait and switch here. They are talking about the dangers of anthropogenic global warming, but include the sea level rise from all warming effects, most of which occured long before we were burning fossil fuels at anywhere near current rates. For example, almost half this rise was before 1950, where few argue that warming and sea level rise was due to man. In fact, sea level rise is really a story of a constant 2-3mm a year rise since about 1850 as the world warms from the little ice age. There has been no modern acceleration.
You are no Al Gore.

Educate yourself about the sea-level rise:

1) The rate of change of sea level is not at all uniform across the globe; and 2) that sea level off the central coast of California has actually been falling since 1997.

More to correct you found here:

http://www.cencoos.org/sections/news/sea_leve...

P.S. You are going down the denier list as programmed by your masters.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#817 Apr 9, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
"Climategate was not made up."
Yes it was. "climategate" is the claim that there was misrepresentation in the climate science based on a massive release of correspondence that was not intended for simple reading. Only one or two emails had language or statements which could be misinterpreted even then.
"Here is the question: Who Released The Climategate Emails And Why?"
Who is immaterial. Who cares who?
The intent of the release was to add confusion to the weaker minds and promote their spamming in public debate. It worked on you..
I'd like to know who released the climategate files. They should be rewarded, the files show collusion, fraud, destruction of evidence and bad science. "Hide the decline" - Really?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#818 Apr 9, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I'd like to know who released the climategate files. They should be rewarded, the files show collusion, fraud, destruction of evidence and bad science. "Hide the decline" - Really?
This not what you want to hear:

On November 17, 2009, Mann awoke to find out that private correspondence he and other scientists had sent to the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit in the United Kingdom had been hacked and individual phrases disseminated in a way that implied they had falsified their findings. Climate contrarians focused on the words “trick” and “hide the decline”—which some said indicated that Mann had erased data that had shown a decline in twentieth-century temperatures. This was the smoking gun proving climate change was a hoax, critics asserted. The media, for their part, lapped it up.

The reality is different. The e-mail with the words “trick” and “hide the decline” was sent by Phil Jones, head of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit. It read,“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e. 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”

The “trick” Jones was referring to was Mann’s decision to show two kinds of data on the same chart—data from temperature proxies (like the tree rings) and actual temperature data (from thermometers). This was a trick in the sense of a clever move, not a deception: all the data were labeled, so readers could see where the proxy data end and the temperature records begin.

As for “hide the decline,” Jones wasn’t referring to declines in temperature; he was referring to a drop seen in certain types of tree-ring data after 1960. And he wasn’t referring to Mann’s work—but to that of another scientist, Keith Briffa of the University of East Anglia. Pre-1960, Briffa’s tree-ring density records track the temperature records. Post-1960, there is a decline in the response of certain trees to temperature (possibly due to pollution): the actual recorded temperatures are consistently higher than what the tree-ring data would predict. The temperature records are the more important and reliable data, so Briffa had to discard the tree-ring “decline” records. But the decline wasn’t hidden. It was clearly discussed and labeled in Briffa’s paper. And Mann’s paper didn’t rely on any of those data.

Since then, a half dozen independent inquiries in the United States and United Kingdom have cleared the climatologists involved of scientific wrongdoing.

http://www.yalealumnimagazine.com/articles/36...
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#819 Apr 9, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I'd like to know who released the climategate files. They should be rewarded, the files show collusion, fraud, destruction of evidence and bad science. "Hide the decline" - Really?
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Despite seven independent inquiries which said it did no such thing, conspiracy theorists on the internet continue to make this claim.
They prefer to construct their own reality rather than have any contact with the real world.
A troll wants to cause a commotion and get people ranting and raving because they want their presence on a forum or comments thread to be the main focus. They want the spotlight and attention on them.

Often they will play devils advocate, vigorously defending statements or positions they know to be illogical or untrue in an attempt to get people riled up.
http://www.insidersedge.co.uk/lifestyletips/h...

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#820 Apr 9, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Awww you liked my post to present it back to me. Nice touch but you should have omitted "NOT."
Responding to your lies is highly satisfying. I'm not telling what I do the rest of my day.
Yeah, Your own posts seem to apply to yourself, why do you have to lie so much to alarm everyone?

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#821 Apr 9, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Er you post nonsense.
Nonresponsive.
The world awaits your book.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#822 Apr 9, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>You are no Al Gore.
Educate yourself about the sea-level rise:
1) The rate of change of sea level is not at all uniform across the globe; and 2) that sea level off the central coast of California has actually been falling since 1997.
More to correct you found here:
http://www.cencoos.org/sections/news/sea_leve...
P.S. You are going down the denier list as programmed by your masters.
and Al Gore is no scientist, he actually flunked science. He has made millions from fools like you, he has mansions and flies around the world avoiding the winters. He's laughing all the way to the bank at you. And so am I...LOL> Remember Gore's scare tactics about the sea: We are told sea level is rising and will soon swamp all of our cities. Everybody knows that the Pacific island of Tuvalu is sinking....



Around 1990 it became obvious the local tide-gauge did not agree - there was no evidence of 'sinking.' So scientists at Flinders University, Adelaide, set up new, modern, tide-gauges in 12 Pacific islands.



Recently, the whole project was abandoned as there was no sign of a change in sea level at any of the 12 islands for the past 16 years

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#823 Apr 9, 2013
Some of the most memorable images from Al Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth, are the graphics that show how rising ocean levels will dramatically alter our planet’s coastlines. As Greenland’s ice sheets collapse, Gore predicts that our shores will be flooded and sea-bordering cities will sink beneath the water leaving millions of people homeless. His narration tells the audience that, due to global warming, melting ice could release enough water to cause at 20-foot rise in sea level “in the near future.”
Although he doesn’t give a clear time frame for the 20-foot sea level rise, Gore’s statement seems to contradict several recent reports, including one published in 2008, that predict much smaller rises during this century.
Gore lied. Al Gore is adding his alrmist hysteria. His outlandish projections are not supported by the scientific community. If he didn’t have the nerve to claim a 20ft water level increase no one would listen.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#824 Apr 9, 2013
Al Gore is a liar. His Church of Climatology brooks no opposition.Al gore is not about “helping the earth” but about lining his own pockets with his phoney environmentalism. Lord Momckton a British Climatologist and A British high court Judge have both refuted his lies. His propagandist film an “Inconvenient Truth, Should be renamed “An Opportunistic Lie” The UN Climate panel has falsified data and told outright lies to prove the political point of that there is man made global warming. Former UN climate panel scientists have resigned from the panel in protest at this and the fact that their reports are being edited by civil servants. Man made made global warming is a scam, a political underpinned by junk science.6089

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.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 5 min thewordofme 131,927
How would creationists explain... 2 hr jbandelin 293
An atheistic view on evolution vs. a godly view... 5 hr The Dude 466
Science News (Sep '13) 6 hr positronium 2,941
What you should know about Tuesday's vote on ev... (Feb '08) 20 hr IAMIOOWAN 516
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) Wed Brian_G 13,614
sea-dwelling dinosaur found alive (Apr '10) Wed The Dude 87
More from around the web