Be afraid, America! Be very afraid!
No matter how many times people like Nobel Laureate Al Gore claim that global warming isn't political, nothing can be further from the truth.
Take for example a bill in the California senate to require climate change be part of the science curricula in all public schools.
As reported in Friday's San Jose Mercury (emphasis added throughout, h/t Marc Sheppard):
A Silicon Valley lawmaker is gaining momentum with a bill that would require "climate change" to be among the science topics that all California public school students are taught.
The measure, by state Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, also would mandate that future science textbooks approved for California public schools include climate change.
Can you believe this nonsense? The warming part of the current cycle peaked in 1998, with nine consecutive cooler years since, and the largest state in the union is actually considering requiring the brainwashing of children with junk science.
And, since what happens legislatively in California typically sweeps the nation, be afraid, America! Be very afraid:
The state Senate approved the bill, SB 908, Jan. 30 by a 26-13 vote. It heads now to the state Assembly. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has taken numerous actions to reduce global warming, but he has yet to weigh in on Simitian's bill. Other Republicans in the Capitol, however, are not happy about the proposal.
Some say the science on global warming isn't clear, while others worry the bill would inject environmental propaganda into classrooms.
"I find it disturbing that this mandate to teach this theory is not accompanied by a requirement that the discussion be science-based and include a critical analysis of all sides of the subject," said Sen. Tom McClintock, R-Thousand Oaks, during the Senate debate.
Be afraid, America! Be very afraid, for McClintock is in the minority Party in the Senate, and the Assembly is also controlled by Democrats.
Add in a governor who seems to buy into this nonsense, and the brainwashing in California seems almost a metaphysical certitude.
How depressing.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I can almost see Al Gore living in the Psycho Motel
February 16, 2008 - 18:47 ET by Lame CherryLoved the photo caption of Tippy as she is much nicer to look at acting than Al Gore being himself.
The globalists are desperate in Bloomberg is making speeches on carbon tax and now Cali is attempting to indoctrinate students to try and get them to just "believe" so the entire dictatorial structure will be easier to implement.
The problem is the entire debate is about to shift to clean water taxed on every well in America and a food use tax. (Imagine a 30000 page tax code on good food and bad food.......and little imps being taught in school to keep eyes on their neighbors garbage for food use.) Once this shifts it will be no more global warming, but the real way to manipulate societies and that is depriving them of food and water.
I hope citizens are buying a few vegetable seeds for gardens and learning how to reproduce their own garden seeds as they flew allot of this in Europe and did allot of strange things in Iraq in trying to get farmers there to only use "approved" seeds.
Oh well back to Tippy..........makes me lonesome though for old Hollywood and the real babes they had back then.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
LC
February 16, 2008 - 18:52 ET by Noel SheppardLC,
I think you meant Janet. Tippy was in "The Birds." ns
What does Tom Cruise...
February 16, 2008 - 18:53 ET by ThalpyWhat does Tom Cruise have to say about it?
It Depresses Me, Too...
February 16, 2008 - 19:00 ET by Wildcatter1980...but, I wanted to note my agreement with Sen. McClintock's comments regarding teaching the science and providing critical analysis of ALL views on climate and what influences climate change.
Of greater import, why is it that it is a democrat who sponsors a requirement to teach a narrow topic like "climate change" rather than the more proper wide topic of the "climate and what influences changes in it" yet it is a republican is who calls for the properly reasoned approach to teaching the subject.
You don't have to answer that. ;-)
BTW, Noel, where can we find the support for the climate cooling since 1998? Is it here in Newsbusters? Thanks.
Just my $0.02
Junkscience.com
February 16, 2008 - 19:07 ET by IamTinmanis one of the best references and it has links to most of the others.
re:Junkscience.com
February 16, 2008 - 20:58 ET by Giles WinterbourneWell, it does live up to its name.
www.IPCC,ch is far more reliable, and does include the temp data you're looking for.
Giles
February 16, 2008 - 21:03 ET bywhat's your link?
it looks like you are trying to go to the the politically motivated and biased UN site
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
IPCC
February 17, 2008 - 00:50 ET by Giles Winterbournewww.ipcc.ch sorry about the comma.
One thing to note is that some deniers have enough actual science behind them that they are active in writing or reviewing the reports.
Also, to be thorough, the working groups often include studies that posit other causes - ex solar, or methane hydrates from the ocean, etc. Those are included in the body of lit and add to the effects cited in the summaries.
While the science is harder to follow in the WG reports, there are usually summaries that don't require graduate level science to understand. If we paid attention in HS science, we can follow the logic and cause and effect.
Notice that deniers often try to pull the wool by expecting you to follow pretty arcane points - which makes it easier to jump some crucial steps. Another advantage of reading through the comments on RealClimate.
Another Computer Illiterate
February 17, 2008 - 00:55 ET by PopularTechWhy are all Alarmists Computer Illiterate? RealClimate is a site created by Computer Illiterates to push their AGW Alarmist Position.
The IPCC is a Political Body and does not represent all scientists or any imagined consensus. What is included in their reports is biased and propaganda - deliberately manipulated to get the political outcome they wish.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
re:Illiterate
February 17, 2008 - 01:05 ET by Giles WinterbourneWell, you can go to Realclimate and read up on the credentials of the 7 scientists running it.
I think you'd have a hard time proving your contention they are 'illiterate'. That's also a huge generalization in your position, also pretty hard to prove.
Also, IPCC is transparent in their mission, easily read at www.ipcc.ch. But I've not seen a detailed explanation from anyone who says 'biased' 'propaganda''manipulated' 'political outcome'.
So, if you have some resource to cite, a study that walks through how they are biased, etc. please note it.
It would probably be far easier to talk about the research that supports the findings.
I have read their Credentials, they are not Computer Scientists
February 17, 2008 - 01:13 ET by PopularTechTwo have degrees in Mathematics NOT Computer Science thus why I state they are Computer Illiterate.
You apparently do not read much:
Independent Summary for Policymakers: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (PDF) (Fraser Institute)
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 2007 Analysis and Summary (Science & Public Policy Institute)
Why the IPCC should be disbanded (Science & Public Policy Institute)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
You would care to debate
February 17, 2008 - 01:22 ET by NL207You would care to debate these points?
care to debate
February 17, 2008 - 01:35 ET by Giles WinterbourneNo point in it here. Take the Computer illitarate argument to RC and see how it flies.And maybe research what they study and how before your leaps of logic.
Your other resources are not science resources but are astroturfed, petrofunded organizations. Not worth fingermuscle energy rehashing all the junk propagated from them - Been there, done that. Look around and you find enough examples to know that the arguements don't hold water and the discussions breakdown to stupid way too fast to enlighten anyone.
Obviously No Point When You Don't Have One
February 17, 2008 - 01:48 ET by PopularTechI think I will pass on posting where my posts can be edited at will, deleted or ignored (realclimate). The fact remains none of the scientists there are computer scientists.
I have science resources and then some. But since the IPCC is a political body you are going to get responses from other political organizations. Only seems fair right?
Not only does what I post hold water - they debunk the hysteria.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Let see ... you libs have
February 17, 2008 - 02:02 ET by NL207Let see ... you libs have short memories. Your friends at Realclimate took their taxpayer-funded tripe out for a test drive here. The results were not encouraging for your team.
RealClimate
February 17, 2008 - 01:10 ET by scamoramaRealClimate is run by NASA scientists who manage it while they are supposed to be at work -- at least that is the only explanation for the timestamps on some of Gavin's comments.
These people are cheating their employer (NASA, meaning YOU) and running a partisan website.
They should be fired.
Giles
February 17, 2008 - 01:59 ET byas you run to the politically motivated and biased UN, here is info from the site that you provided the link to:
well they flat out admit to promoting UN goals
re:Junkscience.com
February 16, 2008 - 21:57 ET by scamoramaThat was an original and witty response, Giles!
Come up with that on your own? Or did you read it at RealScience.org? (Now, THERE'S a "junk science" site)
re:Junkscience.com
February 17, 2008 - 00:43 ET by Giles WinterbourneLook through the threads on JS and note that rarely are any peer-reviewed studies cited for proof. Usually only the Press Releases of studies that MIGHT have data supporting denier claims. Or ipse dixit claims.
Compare the citations at RC. The conversations are science focused - not opinion based, then find some straw to clutch.
Funny thing about the PR hit; hen the study comes out, there is critical review in the science lit and often it is found that incomplete datasets, old datasets, bad math, illogical leaps are found in the paper. But it has that 'half-life' and floats around for a bit. Never to be cited in another research paper.
You want Peer Reviewed Studies?
February 17, 2008 - 00:48 ET by PopularTechDo you really want Peer-Reviewed Studies? Junk Science frequently links to them BTW.
Funny how these studies withstand Peer-Review and are frequently cited by many other papers later on.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
re: Peer Reviewed Studies?
February 17, 2008 - 01:08 ET by Giles WinterbourneYup, they and their supporters often say that.
However, can you link to a comment or a post that actually cites a peer-reviewed source? One that is actually published in the science field? over 90% of the posts are citing news articles; over 90% of the comments are opinion.
Wrong Answer - All The Peer Review You Want
February 17, 2008 - 01:30 ET by PopularTechPeer-Review Papers Skeptical of "Man-Made" Global Warming:
"No credible peer-reviewed scientist in the world disagrees any longer that the globe is warming and that humans are causing it."
- Laurie David, Producer 'An Inconvenient Truth'
1,500-Year Climate Cycle:
A 150,000-year climatic record from Antarctic ice
(Nature 316, 591 - 596, 15 August 1985)
- C. Lorius, C. Ritz, J. Jouzel, L. Merlivat, N. I. Barkov
A Pervasive Millennial-Scale Cycle in North Atlantic Holocene and Glacial Climates
(Science, Vol. 278. no. 5341, pp. 1257 - 1266, 14 November 1997)
- Gerard Bond, William Showers, Maziet Cheseby, Rusty Lotti, Peter Almasi, Peter deMenocal, Paul Priore, Heidi Cullen, Irka Hajdas, Georges Bonani
A Variable Sun Paces Millennial Climate
(Science, Vol. 294. no. 5546, pp. 1431 - 1433, 16 November 2001)
- Richard A. Kerr
Cyclic Variation and Solar Forcing of Holocene Climate in the Alaskan Subarctic
(Science, Vol. 301. no. 5641, pp. 1890 - 1893, 26 September 2003)
- Feng Sheng Hu, Darrell Kaufman, Sumiko Yoneji, David Nelson, Aldo Shemesh, Yongsong Huang, Jian Tian, Gerard Bond, Benjamin Clegg, Thomas Brown
Decadal to millennial cyclicity in varves and turbidites from the Arabian Sea: hypothesis of tidal origin
(Global and Planetary Change, Volume 34, Issues 3-4, Pages 313-325, November 2002)
- W. H. Bergera, U. von Rad
Late Holocene approximately 1500 yr climatic periodicities and their implications
(Geology, v. 26; no. 5; p. 471-473, May 1998)
- Ian D. Campbell, Celina Campbell, Michael J. Apps, Nathaniel W. Rutter, Andrew B. G. Bush
Possible solar origin of the 1,470-year glacial climate cycle demonstrated in a coupled model
(Nature 438, 208-211, 10 November 2005)
- Holger Braun, Marcus Christl, Stefan Rahmstorf, Andrey Ganopolski, Augusto Mangini, Claudia Kubatzki, Kurt Roth, Bernd Kromet
The 1,800-year oceanic tidal cycle: A possible cause of rapid climate change
(PNAS, vol. 97, no. 8, 3814-3819, April 11, 2000)
- Charles D. Keeling, Timothy P. Whorf
The origin of the 1500-year climate cycles in Holocene North-Atlantic records
(Climate of the Past Discussions, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp.679-692, 2007)
- M. Debret, V. Bout-Roumazeilles, F. Grousset, M. Desmet, J. F. McManus, N. Massei, D. Sebag, J.-R. Petit, Y. Copard, A. Trentesaux
Timing of abrupt climate change: A precise clock
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 30, No. 10, 2003)
- Stefan Rahmstorf
Timing of Millennial-Scale Climate Change in Antarctica and Greenland During the Last Glacial Period
(Science, Volume 291, Issue 5501, pp. 109-112, 2001)
- Thomas Blunier, Edward J. Brook
Widespread evidence of 1500 yr climate variability in North America during the past 14 000 yr
(Geology, v. 30, no. 5, p. 455-458, May 2002)
- André E. Viau, Konrad Gajewski, Philippe Fines, David E. Atkinson, Michael C. Sawada
Anthropogenic:
Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
(Energy & Environment, Volume 10, Number 5, pp. 439-468, 1 September 1999)
- Arthur B. Robinson, Noah E. Robinson, Willie Soon
Global warming
(Progress in Physical Geography, 27, 448-455, 2003)
- W. Soon, S. L. Baliunas
Human Contribution to Climate Change Remains Questionable
(EOS, Transactions, American Geophysical Society, Vol 80, page 183-187, April 20, 1999)
- S. Fred Singer
Industrial CO2 emissions as a proxy for anthropogenic influence on lower tropospheric temperature trends
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 31, L05204, 2004)
- A. T. J. de Laat, A. N. Maurellis
Implications of the Secondary Role of Carbon Dioxide and Methane Forcing in Climate Change: Past, Present, and Future
(Physical Geography, Volume 28, Number 2, pp. 97-125(29), March 2007)
- Soon, Willie
Methodology and Results of Calculating Central California Surface Temperature Trends: Evidence of Human-Induced Climate Change?
(Journal of Climate, Volume: 19 Issue: 4, February 2006)
- Christy, J.R., W.B. Norris, K. Redmond, K. Gallo
Modeling climatic effects of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions: unknowns and uncertainties
(Climate Research, Vol. 18: 259–275, 2001)
- Willie Soon, Sallie Baliunas, Sherwood B. Idso, Kirill Ya. Kondratyev, Eric S. Posmentier
Modeling climatic effects of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions: unknowns and uncertainties. Reply to Risbey (2002)
(Climate Research, Vol. 22: 187–188, 2002)
- Willie Soon, Sallie Baliunas, Sherwood B. Idso, Kirill Ya. Kondratyev, Eric S. Posmentier
Modeling climatic effects of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions: unknowns and uncertainties. Reply to Karoly et al.
(Climate Research, Vol. 24: 93–94, 2003)
- Willie Soon, Sallie Baliunas, Sherwood B. Idso, Kirill Ya. Kondratyev, Eric S. Posmentier
On global forces of nature driving the Earth's climate. Are humans involved?
(Environmental Geology, Volume 50, Number 6, August, 2006)
- L. F. Khilyuk and G. V. Chilingar
Quantitative implications of the secondary role of carbon dioxide climate forcing in the past glacial-interglacial cycles for the likely future climatic impacts of anthropogenic greenhouse-gas forcings
(arXiv:0707.1276, 07/2007)
- Soon, Willie
The continuing search for an anthropogenic climate change signal: Limitations of correlation-based approaches
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 24, No. 18, Pages 2319–2322, 1997)
- David R. Legates, Robert E. Davis
Antarctica:
A doubling in snow accumulation in the western Antarctic Peninsula since 1850
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 35, L01706, 2008)
- Elizabeth R. Thomas, Gareth J. Marshall, Joseph R. McConnell
First survey of Antarctic sub–ice shelf sediments reveals mid-Holocene ice shelf retreat
(Geology, v. 29; no. 9; p. 787-790, September 2001)
- Carol J. Pudsey, Jeffrey Evans
Orbitally induced oscillations in the East Antarctic ice sheet at the Oligocene/Miocene boundary
(Nature 413, 719-723, October 2001)
- Naish TR, Woolfe KJ, Barrett PJ, Wilson GS, Atkins C, Bohaty SM, Bücker CJ, Claps M, Davey FJ, Dunbar GB, Dunn AG, Fielding CR, Florindo F, Hannah MJ, Harwood DM, Henrys SA, Krissek LA, Lavelle M, van Der Meer J, McIntosh WC, Niessen F, Passchier S, Powell RD, Roberts AP, Sagnotti L, Scherer RP, Strong CP, Talarico F, Verosub KL, Villa G, Watkins DK, Webb PN, Wonik T
Past and Future Grounding-Line Retreat of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet
(Science, Vol. 286. no. 5438, pp. 280 - 283, October 1999)
- H. Conway, B. L. Hall, G. H. Denton, A. M. Gades, E. D. Waddington
Snowfall-Driven Growth in East Antarctic Ice Sheet Mitigates Recent Sea-Level Rise
(Science, Vol. 308. no. 5730, pp. 1898 - 1901, 24 June 2005)
- Curt H. Davis, Yonghong Li, Joseph R. McConnell, Markus M. Frey, Edward Hanna
Arctic
Actual and insolation-weighted Northern Hemisphere snow cover and sea-ice between 1973–2002
(Climate Dynamics, Volume 22, Issue 6-7, pp. 591-595, 2004)
- R. Pielke, G. Liston, W. Chapman, D. Robinson
Scary Arctic Ice Loss? Blame the Wind
(Science, Vol. 307. no. 5707, p. 203, 14 January 2005)
- Richard A. Kerr
Sea-ice decline due to more than warming alone
(Nature 450, 27, 1 November 2007)
- Julia Slingo, Rowan Sutton
CO2 lags Temperature changes:
180 years of atmospheric CO2 gas analysis by chemical methods
(Energy & Environment, Volume 18, Number 2, pp. 259-282(24), March 2007)
- Beck, Ernst-Georg
Ice core records of atmospheric CO2 around the last three glacial terminations
(Science, Vol. 283. no. 5408, pp. 1712 - 1714, 12 March 1999)
- Hubertus Fischer, Martin Wahlen, Jesse Smith, Derek Mastroianni, Bruce Deck
"High-resolution records from Antarctic ice cores show that carbon dioxide concentrations increased by 80 to 100 parts per million by volume 600 ± 400 years after the warming of the last three deglaciations."
Southern Hemisphere and Deep-Sea Warming Led Deglacial Atmospheric CO2 Rise and Tropical Warming
(Science, September 27, 2007)
- Lowell Stott, Axel Timmermann, Robert Thunell
The phase relations among atmospheric CO2 content, temperature and global ice volume over the past 420 ka
(Quaternary Science Reviews, Volume 20, Issue 4, Pages 583-589, February 2001)
- Manfred Mudelsee
Timing of Atmospheric CO2 and Antarctic Temperature Changes Across Termination III
(Science 14, Vol. 299. no. 5613, March 2003)
- Nicolas Caillon, Jeffrey P. Severinghaus, Jean Jouzel, Jean-Marc Barnola, Jiancheng Kang, Volodya Y. Lipenkov
"The sequence of events during Termination III suggests that the CO2 increase lagged Antarctic deglacial warming by 800 ± 200 years and preceded the Northern Hemisphere deglaciation."
Computer Climate Models:
A comparison of tropical temperature trends with model predictions
(International Journal of Climatology, 5 Dec 2007)
- David H. Douglass, John R. Christy, Benjamin D. Pearson, S. Fred Singer
Effects of bias in solar radiative transfer codes on global climate model simulations
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 32, L20717, 2005)
- Albert Arking
Global Climate Models Violate Scaling of the Observed Atmospheric Variability
(Physical Review Letters, Vol. 89, No. 2, July 8, 2002)
- R. B. Govindan, Dmitry Vyushin, Armin Bunde, Stephen Brenner, Shlomo Havlin, Hans-Joachim Schellnhuber
Quantifying the influence of anthropogenic surface processes and inhomogeneities on gridded global climate data
(Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 112, D24S09, 2007)
- Ross R. McKitrick, Patrick J. Michaels
Greenhouse Theory:
Are observed changes in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere really dangerous?
(Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology,v. 50, no. 2, p. 297-327, June 2002)
- C. R. de Freitas
Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations over the Last Glacial Termination
(Science, Vol. 291. no. 5501, 5 January 2001)
- Eric Monnin, Andreas Indermühle, André Dällenbach, Jacqueline Flückiger, Bernhard Stauffer, Thomas F. Stocker, Dominique Raynaud, Jean-Marc Barnola
Atmospheric CO2 fluctuations during the last millennium reconstructed by stomatal frequency analysis of Tsuga heterophylla needles
(Geology, v. 33; no. 1; p. 33-36, January 2005)
- Lenny Kouwenberg, Rike Wagner, Wolfram Kürschner, Henk Visscher
Can increasing carbon dioxide cause climate change?
(Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, Vol. 94, pp. 8335-8342, August 1997)
- Richard S. Lindzen
Cloud and radiation budget changes associated with tropical intraseasonal oscillations
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 34, L15707, 2007)
- Roy W. Spencer, William D. Braswell, John R. Christy, Justin Hnilo
CO2-induced global warming: a skeptic’s view of potential climate change
(Climate Research, Vol. 10: 69–82, 1998)
- Sherwood B. Idso
Does the Earth Have an Adaptive Infrared Iris?
(Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Volume 82, Issue 3, pp. 417–432, March 2001)
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ming-Dah Chou, and Arthur Y. Hou
Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics
(Physics, arXiv:0707.1161)
- Gerhard Gerlich, Ralf D. Tscheuschner
"A. there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, B. there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet, C. the frequently mentioned difference of 33 degrees Celsius is a meaningless number calculated wrongly, D. the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately, E. the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical, F. thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified."
Heat capacity, time constant, and sensitivity of Earth's climate system
(Accepted for publication in Journal of Geophysical Research)
- Stephen E. Schwartz
Phanerozoic Climatic Zones and Paleogeography with a Consideration of Atmospheric CO2 Levels
(Paleontological Journal, 2: 3-11, 2003)
- A. J. Boucot, Chen Xu, C. R. Scotese
The "Greenhouse Effect" as a Function of Atmospheric Mass
(Energy & Environment, Volume 14, Numbers 2-3, pp. 351-356, 1 May 2003)
- H. Jelbring
Greenland:
Global Warming and the Greenland Ice Sheet
(Climatic Change, Volume 63, Numbers 1-2, pp. 201-221(21), March 2004)
- Petr Chylek, Jason E. Box, Glen Lesins
Greenland warming of 1920–1930 and 1995–2005
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 33, 2006)
- Petr Chylek, M. K. Dubey, G. Lesins
Rapid Changes in Ice Discharge from Greenland Outlet Glaciers
(Science, Vol. 315. no. 5818, pp. 1559 - 1561, 16 March 2007)
- Ian M. Howat, Ian Joughin, Ted A. Scambos
Recent cooling in coastal southern Greenland and relation with the North Atlantic Oscillation
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 30, No. 3, 2003)
- Edward Hanna, John Cappelen
Recent Ice-Sheet Growth in the Interior of Greenland
(Science 11, Vol. 310. no. 5750, pp. 1013 - 1016, November 2005)
- Ola M. Johannessen, Kirill Khvorostovsky, Martin W. Miles, Leonid P. Bobylev
Hockey Stick:
A 2000-year global temperature reconstruction based on non-treering proxies
(Energy & Environment 18(7-8): 1049-1058, 2007)
- C. Loehle
Comment on "The Spatial Extent of 20th-Century Warmth in the Context of the Past 1200 Years"
(Science, Vol. 316. no. 5833, p. 1844, 29 June 2007)
- Gerd Bürger
Corrections to the Mann et al (1998) Proxy Data Base and Northern Hemisphere Average Temperature Series
(Energy & Environment, Volume 14, Number 6, pp. 751-771, 1 November 2003)
- Stephen McIntyre, Ross McKitrick
Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data
(Nature 433, 613-617, 10 February 2005)
- Anders Moberg, Dmitry M. Sonechkin, Karin Holmgren, Nina M. Datsenko and Wibjörn Karlén
Hockey sticks, principal components, and spurious significance
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 32, L03710, 2005)
- Stephen McIntyre, Ross McKitrick
"Their method, when tested on persistent red noise, nearly always produces a hockey stick shaped first principal component (PC1)"
Proxy climatic and environmental changes of the past 1000 years
(Climate Research, Vol. 23: 89–110, 2003)
- Willie Soon, Sallie Baliunas
Reply to comment by Huybers on "Hockey sticks, principal components, and spurious significance"
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 32, L20715, 2005)
- Stephen McIntyre, Ross McKitrick
Reply to comment by von Storch and Zorita on "Hockey sticks, principal components, and spurious significance"
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 32, L20714, 2005)
- Stephen McIntyre, Ross McKitrick
The M&M Critique of the MBH98 Northern Hemisphere Climate Index: Update and Implications
(Energy & Environment, Volume 16, Number 1, pp. 69-100, January 2005)
- Stephen McIntyre, Ross McKitrick
Hurricanes:
Can We Detect Trends in Extreme Tropical Cyclones?
(Science, Vol. 313. no. 5786, pp. 452 - 454, 28 July 2006)
- Christopher W. Landsea, Bruce A. Harper, Karl Hoarau, John A. Knaff
Causes of the Unusually Destructive 2004 Atlantic Basin Hurricane Season
(Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Volume 87, Issue 10, October 2006)
- Philip J. Klotzbach, William M. Gray
Comments
on "Impacts of CO2-Induced Warming on Simulated Hurricane Intensity and
Precipitation: Sensitivity to the Choice of Climate Model and
Convective Scheme"
(Journal of Climate, Volume 18, Issue 23, December 2005)
- Patrick J. Michaels, Paul C. Knappenberger, Christopher Landsea
Counting Atlantic Tropical Cyclones Back to 1900
(EOS, Transactions American Geophysical Union, Vol. 88, No. 18, Page 197, 2007)
- Christopher W. Landsea
Hurricanes and Global Warming
(Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Volume 86, Issue 11, November 2005)
- R. A. Pielke Jr., C. Landsea, M. Mayfield, J. Laver, and R. Pasch
Meteorology: Are there trends in hurricane destruction?
(Nature 438, E11, 22 December 2005)
- Roger A. Pielke, Jr
Sea-surface temperatures and tropical cyclones in the Atlantic basin
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 22, No. 33, L09708, 2006)
- Patrick J. Michaels, Paul C. Knappenberger, Robert E. Davis
Tropical Cyclones and Global Climate Change: A Post-IPCC Assessment
(Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Volume 79, Issue 1, January 1998)
- A. Henderson-Sellers, H. Zhang, G. Berz, K. Emanuel, W. Gray, C. Landsea, G. Holland, J. Lighthill, S.-L. Shieh, P. Webster, K. McGuffie
Kyoto:
Time to ditch Kyoto
(Nature 449, 973-975, 25 October 2007)
- Gwyn Prins, Steve Rayner
Medieval Warming Period - Little Ice Age:
A 700 year record of Southern Hemisphere extratropical climate variability
(Annals of Glaciology, vol. 39, p.127-132, 2004)
- P.A Mayewski, K. Maasch, J.W.C White, E.J. Steig, E. Meyerson, I. Goodwin, V.I. Morgan, T. van Ommen, M.A.J. Curran, J. Sourney, K. Kreutz
Coherent High- and Low-Latitude Climate Variability During the Holocene Warm Period
(Science, Vol. 288. no. 5474, pp. 2198 - 2202, 23 June 2000)
- Peter deMenocal, Joseph Ortiz, Tom Guilderson, Michael Sarnthein
Evidence for a 'Medieval Warm Period' in a 1,100 year tree-ring reconstruction of past austral summer temperatures in New Zealand
(Geophysical Research Letters. Vol. 29, no. 14, pp. 12-1 to 12-4. 15 July 2002)
- E. R. Cook, J. G. Palmer, R. D'Arrigo
Evidence for the existence of the medieval warm period in China
(Climatic Change, Volume 26, Numbers 2-3, March, 1994)
- De'Er Zhang
Glacial geological evidence for the medieval warm period
(Climatic Change, Volume 26, Numbers 2-3, March, 1994)
- Jean M. Grove, Roy Switsur
Late Holocene surface ocean conditions of the Norwegian Sea (Vøring Plateau)
(Paleooceanography, Vol. 18, No. 2, 1044, 2003)
- Carin Andersson, Bjørg Risebrobakken, Eystein Jansen, Svein Olaf Dahl
Low-Frequency Signals in Long Tree-Ring Chronologies for Reconstructing Past Temperature Variability
(Science, Vol. 295. no. 5563, pp. 2250 - 2253, 22 March 2002)
- Jan Esper, Edward R. Cook, Fritz H. Schweingruber
Medieval climate warming and aridity as indicated by multiproxy evidence from the Kola Peninsula, Russia
(Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, Volume 209, Issues 1-4, Pages 113-125, 6 July 2004)
- K. V. Kremenetski, T. Boettger, G. M. MacDonald, T. Vaschalova, L. Sulerzhitsky, A. Hiller
Medieval Warm Period, Little Ice Age and 20th century temperature variability from Chesapeake Bay
(Global and Planetary Change, Volume 36, Issues 1-2, March 2003, Pages 17-29)
- T. M. Cronin, G. S. Dwyer, T. Kamiya, S. Schwede, D. A. Willard
Reconstructing Climatic and Environmental Changes of the Past 1000 Years: A Reappraisal
(Energy and Environment, Vol. 14, Issues 2 & 3, April 11, 2003)
- Willie Soon, Sallie Baliunas, Sherwood B. Idso, Craig Idso, David R. Legates
"Many records reveal that the 20th century is likely not the warmest nor a uniquely extreme climatic period of the last millennium."
The Little Ice Age and Medieval Warm Period in the Sargasso Sea
(Science, Vol. 274. no. 5292, pp. 1503 - 1508, 29 November 1996)
- Lloyd D. Keigwin
The Little Ice Age and Medieval Warming in South Africa
(South African Journal of Science 96: 121-126, 2000)
- P. D. Tyson, W. Karlén, K. Holmgren and G. A. Heiss
The 'Mediaeval Warm Period' drought recorded in Lake Huguangyan, tropical South China
(Holocene, Vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 511-516, 2002)
- Guoqiang Chu, Jiaqi Liu, Qing Sun, Houyuan Lu, Zhaoyan Gu, Wenyuan Wang, Tungsheng Liu
The Medieval Warm Period in the Daihai Area
(Journal of Lake Sciences, Vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 209-216, Sep 2002)
- Z. Jin, J. Shen, S. Wang, E. Zhang
Tree-ring and glacial evidence for the medieval warm epoch and the little ice age in southern South America
(Climatic Change, Volume 26, Numbers 2-3, March, 1994)
- Ricardo Villalba
Was the Medieval Warm Period Global?
(Science, Vol. 291. no. 5508, pp. 1497 - 1499, 23 February 2001)
- Wallace S. Broecker
"The Little Ice Age and the subsequent warming were global in extent. Several Holocene fluctuations in snowline, comparable in magnitude to that of the post-Little Ice Age warming, occurred in the Swiss Alps. Borehole records both in polar ice and in wells from all continents suggest the existence of a Medieval Warm Period. Finally, two multidecade-duration droughts plagued the western United States during the latter part of the Medieval Warm Period. I consider this evidence sufficiently convincing to merit an intensification of studies aimed at elucidating Holocene climate fluctuations, upon which the warming due to greenhouse gases is superimposed."
Polar Bears:
Polar bears of western Hudson Bay and climate change: Are warming spring air temperatures the “ultimate” survival control factor?
(Ecological Complexity, Volume 4, Issue 3, Pages 73-84, September 2007)
- M.G. Dyck, W. Soon, R.K. Baydack, D.R. Legates, S. Baliunas, T.F. Ball, L.O. Hancock
Sea Level:
Estimating future sea level changes from past records
(Global and Planetary Change, Volume 40, Issues 1-2, Pages 49-54, January 2004)
- Nils-Axel Mörner
New perspectives for the future of the Maldives
(Global and Planetary Change, v. 40, iss. 1-2, p. 177-182. 2004)
- Nils-Axel Momer, Michael Tooley, Goran Possnert
Snowfall-Driven Growth in East Antarctic Ice Sheet Mitigates Recent Sea-Level Rise
(Science, Vol. 308. no. 5730, pp. 1898 - 1901, 24 June 2005)
- Curt H. Davis, Yonghong Li, Joseph R. McConnell, Markus M. Frey, Edward Hanna)
Solar:
A mechanism for sun-climate connection
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 32, 2005)
- Sultan Hameed, Jae N. Lee
A Millennium Scale Sunspot Reconstruction: Evidence For an Unusually Active Sun Since the 1940's
(Physical Review Letters 91, 2003)
- Ilya G. Usoskin, Sami K. Solanki, Manfred Schüssler, Kalevi Mursula, Katja Alanko
Altitude variations of cosmic ray induced production of aerosols: Implications for global cloudiness and climate
(Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 107, No. A7, 1118, 2002)
- Fangqun Yu
Celestial Climate Driver: A Perspective from Four Billion Years of the Carbon Cycle
(Geoscience Canada, Volume 32, Number 1, March 2005)
- Ján Veizer
Celestial driver of Phanerozoic climate?
(GSA Volume 13, Issue 7, July 2003)
- Nir J. Shaviv, Ján Veizer
Cosmic rays and Earth's climate
(Space Science Review 93: 155-166, 2000)
- Henrik Svensmark
Cosmic rays and climate - The influence of cosmic rays on terrestrial clouds and global warming
(Astronomy & Geophysics, Volume 41 Issue 4 Page 4.18-4.22, August 2000)
- E Pallé Bagó, C J Butler
Cosmic Rays, Clouds, and Climate
(Space Science Reviews, v. 94, Issue 1/2, p. 215-230, 2000)
- Nigel Marsh, Henrik Svensmark
Cosmoclimatology: a new theory emerges
(Astronomy & Geophysics, Volume 48 Issue 1 Page 1.18-1.24, February 2007)
- Henrik Svensmark
Empirical evidence for a nonlinear effect of galactic cosmic rays on clouds
(Royal Society of London Proceedings Series A, Vol. 462, Issue 2068, 2006)
- R. Giles Harrison, David B. Stephenson
Evidence of Solar Variation in Tree-Ring-Based Climate Reconstructions
(Solar Physics, Volume 205, Number 2, Pages 403-417, February 2002)
- M.G. Ogurtsov , G.E. Kocharov, M. Lindholm, J. Meriläinen, M. Eronen, Yu.A. Nagovitsyn
Evidence for a physical linkage between galactic cosmic rays and regional climate time series
(Journal Advances in Space Research, February 2007)
- Charles A. Perrya
Formation
of large NAT particles and denitrification in polar stratosphere:
possible role of cosmic rays and effect of solar activity
(Atmos. Chem. Phys., 4, 2273-2283, 2004)
- F. Yu
Geophysical, archaeological, and historical evidence support a solar-output model for climate change
(PNAS, Vol. 97, No. 23, 12433-12438, November 7, 2000)
- Charles A. Perry, Kenneth J. Hsu
Has solar variability caused climate change that affected human culture?
(Advances in Space Research, Volume 40, Issue 7, Pages 1173-1180, 2007)
- Joan Feynmana
Influence of Cosmic Rays on Earth's Climate
(Physical Review Letters - November 30, 1998 - Volume 81, Issue 22, pp. 5027-5030)
- Henrik Svensmark
Is solar variability reflected in the Nile River?
(Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 111, D21114, 2006)
- Alexander Ruzmaikin, Joan Feynman, Yuk L. Yung
Length of the Solar Cycle: An Indicator of Solar Activity Closely Associated with Climate
(Science, Vol. 254. no. 5032, pp. 698 - 700, November 1991)
- E. Friis-Christensen, K. Lassen
Linkages between solar activity, climate predictability and water resource development
(Journal of the South African Institution of Civil Engineering, Vol 49 No 2, Pages 32–44, June 2007)
- W J R Alexander, F Bailey, D B Bredenkamp, A van der Merwe, N Willemse
Long-Period Cycles of the Sun's Activity Recorded in Direct Solar Data and Proxies
(Solar Physics, Volume 211, Numbers 1-2, December, 2002)
- M.G. Ogurtsov, Yu.A. Nagovitsyn, G.E. Kocharov, H. Jungner
Low cloud properties influenced by cosmic rays
(Phys. Rev. Lett., 85(23), 5004-5007, 2000)
- Nigel D Marsh, Henrik Svensmark
On climate response to changes in the cosmic ray flux and radiative budget
(Journal of Geophysical Research, Volume 110, A08105, 2005)
- Nir J. Shaviv
On the possible contribution of solar-cosmic factors to the global warming of XX century
(Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences: Physics, Volume 71, Number 7, July, 2007)
- M. G. Ogurtsov
On the relationship of cosmic ray flux and precipitation
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 28, No. 8, pp. 1527–1530, 2001)
- Dominic R. Kniveton and Martin C. Todd
Persistent Solar Influence on North Atlantic Climate During the Holocene
(Science, Vol. 294. no. 5549, pp. 2130 - 2136, 7 December 2001)
- Gerard Bond, Bernd Kromer, Juerg Beer, Raimund Muscheler, Michael N. Evans, William Showers, Sharon Hoffmann, Rusty Lotti-Bond, Irka Hajdas, Georges Bonani
Phenomenological solar contribution to the 1900–2000 global surface warming
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 33, L05708, 2006)
- N. Scafetta, B. J. West
Phenomenological solar signature in 400 years of reconstructed Northern Hemisphere temperature record
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 33, L17718, 2006)
- N. Scafetta, B. J. West
Reconstruction of solar irradiance since 1610: Implications for climate change
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 22, No. 23, PAGES 3195–3198, 1995)
- Judith Lean, Juerg Beer, Raymond Bradley
Reply to Lockwood and Fröhlich – The persistent role of the Sun in climate forcing
(Danish National Space Center Scientific Report, 3/2007)
- H. Svensmark, E.Friis-Christensen
Regional tropospheric responses to long-term solar activity variations
(Advances in Space Research, Volume 40, Issue 7, Pages 1167-1172, 2007)
- O.M. Raspopov, V.A. Dergachev, A.V. Kuzmin, O.V. Kozyreva, M.G. Ogurtsov, T. Kolström and E. Lopatin
Rhodes Fairbridge and the idea that the solar system regulates the Earth’s climate
(Journal of Coastal Research, SI 50, pp. 955-968, 2007)
- Richard Mackey
Solar correlates of Southern Hemisphere mid-latitude climate variability
(International Journal of Climatology, Volume 22, Issue 8 , Pages 901 - 915, 27 May 2002)
- Ronald E. Thresher
Solar Cycle Variability, Ozone, and Climate
(Science, Vol. 284. no. 5412, pp. 305 - 308, 9 April 1999)
- Drew Shindell, David Rind, Nambeth Balachandran, Judith Lean, Patrick Lonergan
Solar total irradiance variation and the global sea surface temperature record
(Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 96, NO. D2, Pages 2835–2844, 1991)
- George C. Reid
Solar Variability Over the Past Several Millennia
(Space Science Reviews, Volume 125, Issue 1-4, pp. 67-79, Friday, December 22, 2006)
- J. Beer, M. Vonmoos, R. Muscheler
Suggestive correlations between the brightness of Neptune, solar variability, and Earth's temperature
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 34, L08203, 2007)
- H. B. Hammel, G. W. Lockwood
Surface warming by the solar cycle as revealed by the composite mean difference projection
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 34, L14703, 2007)
- Charles D. Camp, Ka Kit Tung
The Antarctic climate anomaly and galactic cosmic rays
(physics/0612145v1, 2006)
- Henrik Svensmark
The link between the solar dynamo and climate - The evidence from a long mean air temperature series from Northern Ireland
(Irish Astronomical Journal, vol. 21, no. 3-4, p. 251-254, 09/1994)
- C.J. Butler, D.J. Johnston
Variations in Radiocarbon Concentration and Sunspot Activity
(Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 66, p.273, 01/1961)
- Stuiver, M.
Variations in the Earth's Orbit: Pacemaker of the Ice Ages
(Science, Vol. 194. no. 4270, pp. 1121 - 1132, 10 December 1976)
- J. D. Hays, John Imbrie, N. J. Shackleton
Variation of Cosmic Ray Flux and Global Cloud Coverage - a Missing Link in Solar-Climate Relationships
(Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 59, 1225-1232, 1997)
- Henrik Svensmark, Eigil Friis-Christensen
Variations
of solar coronal hole area and terrestrial lower tropospheric air
temperature from 1979 to mid-1998: astronomical forcings of change in
earth's climate?
(New Astronomy, Volume 4, Issue 8, Pages 563-579, January 2000)
- W. Soon, S. Baliunas, E. S. Posmentier, P. Okeke
Variable solar irradiance as a plausible agent for multidecadal variations in the Arctic-wide surface air temperature record of the past 130 years
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 32, L16712, 2005)
- Willie W.-H. Soon
What do we really know about the Sun-climate connection?
(Advances in Space Research, Volume 20, Issue 4-5, p. 913-921, 1997)
- Eigil Friis-Christensen, Henrik Svensmark
Will We Face Global Warming in the Nearest Future?
(Geomagnetism i Aeronomia, Vol. 43, pp. 124-127, 2003)
- V. S. Bashkirtsev, G. P. Mashnich
Species Extinctions:
Dangers of crying wolf over risk of extinctions
(Nature 428, 799, 22 April 2004)
- Richard J. Ladle, Paul Jepson, Miguel B. Araújo & Robert J. Whittaker
Temperatures:
A test of corrections for extraneous signals in gridded surface temperature data
(Climate Research, Vol. 26: 159-173, 2004)
- Ross McKitrick, Patrick J. Michaels
Altitude dependence of atmospheric temperature trends: Climate models versus observation
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 31, L13208, 2004)
- David H. Douglass, Benjamin D. Pearson, S. Fred Singer
Analysis of trends in the variability of daily and monthly historical temperature measurements
(Climate Research, Vol. 10: 27-33, 1998)
- Patrick J. Michaels, Robert C. Balling Jr, Russell S. Vose, Paul C. Knappenberger
Conflicting Signals of Climatic Change in the Upper Indus Basin
(Journal of Climate, Volume 19, Issue 17, p. 4276–4293, September 2006)
- H. J. Fowler, D. R. Archer
Disparity of tropospheric and surface temperature trends: New evidence
(Geophysical Research Letters, VOL. 31, L13207, 2004)
- David H. Douglass, Benjamin D. Pearson, S. Fred Singer, Paul C. Knappenberger, Patrick J. Michaels
Differential trends in tropical sea surface and atmospheric temperatures since 1979
(Geophysical Research Letters, VOL. 28, NO. 1, PAGES 183–186, 2001)
- Christy, J.R., D.E. Parker, S.J. Brown, I. Macadam, M. Stendel, W.B. Norris
Documentation of uncertainties and biases associated with surface temperature measurement sites for climate change assessment.
(Amer. Meteor. Soc., 88:6, 913-928, 2007)
- Pielke Sr., R.A. J. Nielsen-Gammon, C. Davey, J. Angel, O. Bliss, N. Doesken, M. Cai., S. Fall, D. Niyogi, K. Gallo, R. Hale, K.G. Hubbard, X. Lin, H. Li, S. Raman
Does a Global Temperature Exist?
(Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics, June 2006)
- Christopher Essex, Ross McKitrick, Bjarne Andresen
Estimation and representation of long-term (>40 year) trends of Northern-Hemisphere-gridded surface temperature: A note of caution
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 31, L03209, 2004)
- Willie W.-H. Soon, David R. Legates, Sallie L. Baliunas
Multi-scale analysis of global temperature changes and trend of a drop in temperature in the next 20 years
(Springer Wien, Volume 95, January, 2007)
- Lin Zhen-Shan, Sun Xian
Nature of observed temperature changes across the United States during the 20th century
(Climate Research, Vol. 17: 45–53, 2001)
- Paul C. Knappenberger, Patrick J. Michaels, Robert E. Davis
Natural signals in the MSU lower tropospheric temperature record
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 27, No. 18, pp. 2905–2908, 2000)
- Patrick J. Michaels, Paul C. Knappenberger
Observed warming in cold anticyclones
(Climate Research, Vol. 14: 1–6, 2000)
- Patrick J. Michaels, Paul C. Knappenberger, Robert C. Balling Jr, Robert E. Davis
Revised 21st century temperature projections
(Climate Research, Vol. 23: 1–9, 2002)
- Patrick J. Michaels, Paul C. Knappenberger, Oliver W. Frauenfeld, Robert E. Davis
Test for harmful collinearity among predictor variables used in modeling global temperature
(Climate Research, Vol. 24: 15-18, 2003)
- David H. Douglass, B. David Clader, John R. Christy, Patrick J. Michaels, David A. Belsley
Tropospheric temperature change since 1979 from tropical radiosonde and satellite measurements
(Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 112, D06102, 2007)
- John R. Christy, William B. Norris, Roy W. Spencer, Justin J. Hnilo
What may we conclude about global tropospheric temperature trends?
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 31, L06211, 2004)
- Christy, J.R., W.B. Norris
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Pop Tech
February 17, 2008 - 01:36 ET bynormally i don't appreciate the long lists of un-commented upon links as i like to see the logic and debate; but in this case Giles did ask for it. ( looking about: Where's Free with his comprehensive list award?)
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Geez, it's like the monolith from 2001.
February 17, 2008 - 01:45 ET by tracheostomyMy neck's getting a crick in it.
If Free's CL Awards were medals, PT wouldn't be able to walk upright.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
re:All The Peer Review You Want
February 17, 2008 - 01:48 ET by Giles WinterbourneYou said that JS quotes peer-reviewed sources routinely;
This isn't a list of JS posts or Comments citing peer reviewed material. But congrats on the good copy/paste skills.
Now; if you go to www.ipcc.ch and open any one chapter of any one Working Group report, you'll find 10-16 pages of double columned, single spaced citations of peer reviewed studies and research.
Any one chapter will have more than what you copied in here. Then x that by 9-10 chapters and x that by the Working Groups.
And then do a bit of alt F and discover that many of your sources are in those reports..... Their research is already factored in. While they may prove a point, it is not enough to discount the trends.
Maybe you need to read Junk Science More
February 17, 2008 - 02:01 ET by PopularTechHave fun look through the archives. Many of the science stories that are linked to are press releases for new papers or scientific studies. He also obviously includes many news stories on subjects as well.
I understand that dealing with the reality that Peer Reviewed Science Exists debunking the hysteria you so much cherish is hard to take but you will get over it.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Now; if you go to
February 17, 2008 - 02:29 ET by Giles WinterbourneNow; if you go to www.ipcc.ch
and open any one chapter of any one Working Group report, you'll find
10-16 pages of double columned, single spaced citations of peer
reviewed studies and research.
Any one chapter will have more than what you copied in here. Then x that by 9-10 chapters and x that by the Working Groups.
That's Nice
February 17, 2008 - 02:48 ET by PopularTechThose reports cover a vast amount of subject matter and not even remotely do all those papers cited by the IPCC deal directly with man-made global warming. There are many more papers then what I cited. Each paper I cited can cite dozens more.
500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares (Heartland Institute)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
vast amount of subject matter
February 17, 2008 - 03:13 ET by Giles WinterbourneThat would be because before assigning anthropogenic CO2 as the cause, climate scientists want to look at all possible causes.
So, solar, methane hydrates, orbits, volcanic, etc are all explored.
In fact, IPCC WG 1 SPM( http://www.ipcc.ch/p...) page 4 has a chart listing all forcings and their individual effects, so you can look at CO2, ozone, etc. and see what the total body of research says. Many of your sources are in the IPCC citations because of this.
Skeptics tend to cherry-pick and try to say the latest and greatest 'disproves' AGW, not realizing that data (or the studies that it was derived from) are already accounted for .
"Of the more than 29,000 observational data series, from 75 studies, that show significant change in many physical
and biological systems, more than 89% are consistent with the direction of change expected as a response to
warming" http://www.ipcc.ch/p...
Cherry Picked Indeed
February 17, 2008 - 03:23 ET by PopularTechIt is nice that the IPCC can Cherry Pick what it wishes to ignore to propagandize it's point which is to prove Man is causing Global Warming and not be honest about it in a purely scientific way.
The fact remains a vast amount of those sources have nothing to do with Man-Made Global Warming.
"Forcings" is a made up figure that has no real value. It is used as propaganda for the weak minded who do not understand science or the bogus computer models they use.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Unfortunately, I no longer
February 17, 2008 - 08:10 ET by danboUnfortunately, I no longer have the source and sections/subsections. IPCC has some interesting definitions of Climate Change. In one section it defines climate change as change of any cause. Natural and man made. However in later portions it is defined as anthropogenic. Consequently in one section of IPCC, a paper on the PDO or NAO or solar cycles is accept. Then through the magic of IPCC it becomes evidence of anthropogenic warming. (This later definition may be in the same policy where they specify that we're to pay for the worlds response.)
But then IPCC is really the UN. And we know the UN is beyond reproach. After all look at what UN troops that go in to maintain peace. Like sitting by when genocide goes on. Or rape. Or selling donated food. Then there's food for oil.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
You place too much faith in
February 17, 2008 - 03:52 ET by NL207You place too much faith in peer review. Consider the flagship paper of the 3AR, from 2001. It features as one of its most important results a very well know peer-reviewed paper by Mann, Bradley and Hogan [MBH98]. This paper purports to prove that the 1990's were the warmest decade in the last 600 years. Its successor paper, [MBH99], makes the same claim over the last 1000 years. MBH98 was published in Nature, one of the two leading peer-reviewed science journals in this country. MBH99 first appeared in the Journal of the AGU, another highly ranked peer-reviewed journal.
Now, look around the 4AR, released in 2007. You will notice these two papers are not even mentioned, whereas in 2001 they had been the cornerstones. How could this be?
Very simple. These papers were discredited. They were first fundamentally criticized by McIntyre and McKitrick, two Canadian Statisticians. This is their critique, also peer-reviewed. Michael Mann and his co-conspirators vigorously attacked M&M. The coup de grace was finally delivered by Dr. Edward Wegman, a noted statistician from George Mason University. You don't believe this debunking was effective? MBH98 isn't even listed in the 4AR as a reference, that is how effective this was.
One might ask how a paper that was accepted for publication in Nature could be so completely discredited. Simple: Peer review does not guarantee the validity of any paper. It only serves to discover its acceptability. A paper acceptable for publication can still contain gross erros or even outright fraud.
The entire IPCC process and approach is politically motivated and is disingenuous. This tract discusses in detail what is scintifically incorrect about the IPCC approach.
Nice job NL
February 17, 2008 - 04:10 ET by RESTLESS 1Are we going through this again? Peer review means nothing if a preconcieved agenda is being pushed. You have hit the nail on the head.
M&M
February 17, 2008 - 04:16 ET by Giles WinterbourneAnd further commenting on M&M's work found their math was flawed, not reproducible, and didn't look at the full dataset of Mann, et al.
Also, 4th still does use Mann, et al and augments it with several other studies that use other datasets and comes up with the same overall trends. Take a look at chapter 6 of WG I, I think around page 18 or so.
Several studies were done of Mann, et al and came up with a general conclusion that while there were some minor errors, the work held up to scrutiny.
"The basic conclusion of Mann et al. (1998, 1999) was that the late 20th
century warmth in the Northern Hemisphere was unprecedented during at
least the last 1,000 years. This conclusion has subsequently been
supported by an array of evidence that includes both additional
large-scale surface temperature reconstructions and pronounced changes
in a variety of local proxy indicators, such as melting on ice caps and
the retreat of glaciers around the world, which in many cases appear to
be unprecedented during at least the last 2,000 years." http://books.nap.edu...
"But in a 155-page report, the 12-member panel convened by the National
Academies said "an array of evidence" supported the main thrust of the
paper. Disputes over details, it said, reflected the normal
intellectual clash that takes place as science tests new approaches to
old questions." Revkin NYT June 2006
If you had actually read
February 17, 2008 - 19:30 ET by NL207If you had actually read Wegman's critique of Dr. Mann's paper and his conduct, you would know that Mann was anything but forthcoming in releasing his entire dataset to reviewers. The same is true of his algorithms. Moreover, Wegman agrees with the M&M analysis. So does nearly every other statistician that has reviewed the situation. Simply put, Mann cherry picked his data and used unsound statistical methodology. Wegman comes right out and says this.
The critiques of M&M's math you are referring to come from no less an authority than Mann himself, and from other researchers allied with Mann, such as Biffra, who have much to lose if Mann's work is repudiated.
The truth of this matter is completely captured by the IPCC's abandonment of the Mann papers in 4AR after they played such a prominent role in 3AR. Learn to live with this truth. If either MBH98 or MBH99 still had a shred of credibility, they would have continued to be featured by IPCC. They are not featured. In fact, they are very difficult to find. The reference you refer to is a single chart, which traces 12 separate reconstructions, no two of which agree, and one of which is MBH99. It is on page 467, not page 18 as you had claimed. The absence of MBH98 and MBH99 from any featured role is conspicuous proof of what the scientific community at large thinks of them.
The NYT is not a reputable publication in the scientific or any other field.
Now ... please explain to me what the Beer-Lambert Law is and why you alarmists think you can ignore it.
Game Over on the 'Hockey Stick'
February 17, 2008 - 10:01 ET by PopularTechEverytime they fed Mann's program random noise it produced a Hockey Shape = Game Over.
Hockey sticks, principal components, and spurious significance
(Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 32, L03710, 2005)
- Stephen McIntyre, Ross McKitrick
"Their method, when tested on persistent red noise, nearly always produces a hockey stick..."
What is the ‘Hockey Stick’ Debate About? (PDF) (Ross McKitrick, Ph.D. Environmental Economist)
NAS report "Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the last 200 Years" (National Academy of Sciences)
"With respect to methods, the committee is showing reservations concerning the methodology of Mann et al.. The committee notes explicitly on pages 91 and 111 that the method has no validation (CE) skill significantly different from zero. In the past, however, it has always been claimed that the method has a significant nonzero validation skill. Methods without a validation skill are usually considered useless.
[...] Thus, the public perception that the hockeystick as truthfully describing the temperature history was definitely false.
We find it disappointing that the method of Mann et al. was not sufficiently described in the original publication, and thus not peer-reviewed prior to publication, and that no serious efforts were made to allow independent researchers to check the performance of the methods and of the data used."
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
You'd think that we would
February 17, 2008 - 04:25 ET by RESTLESS 1You'd think that we would be beyond the tit for tat of peer review or consensus, as it has been proven that neither means a hill of beans.
I can't believe that anyone still hangs on to this idiotic belief in apolyptic scenarios. You gotta hand it to them though, they are stubborn.
apolyptic scenarios
February 17, 2008 - 04:40 ET by Giles WinterbourneThe Stern report talks of a 1% cost of GDP if we start now. Hardly apoplectic.
Though he does figure a 20% cost if we wait....
http://www.radioneth...
And he figures 20% base on
February 17, 2008 - 05:00 ET by RESTLESS 1And he figures 20% base on what. Has he not seen the abysmal failure of the Kyoto protocol?
Stern (1) grossly
February 17, 2008 - 05:09 ET by NL207Stern (1) grossly understates the actual cost of doing anything at all significant and (b) completely ignores the opportunity cost of slowed growth and diverted capital.
This is simple logic. Show me the government program that actually cost what it was originally projected to cost and actually achieved all the goals originally set forth. Stern claims the carbon remediation is going to do this. The liklyhood it will is as near to zero as makes no difference.
re Junkscience.com
February 17, 2008 - 00:58 ET by Giles WinterbourneRead up about Milloy at Sourcewatch and ExxonSecrets - check his credentials, funding, and ties to the old tobacco deniers.
You might decide his bone fides aren't quite up to snuff to cite.
Consider that JunkScience and many denier sites have strong ties to corporate money. YOU have no control of their agenda. While you may not like UN, at least you can vote in reps to the state and fed government that can support your POV and you have some voice.
So, look at why you feel it is more important to support Exxon's record profit taking v. seeking representation of your taxes.
to support Exxon's record
February 17, 2008 - 01:07 ET byto support Exxon's record profit taking v. seeking representation of your taxes.
what does a companys P&L statement have to do with the bias of the UN? What record percentage of profit did Exxon make? What percentage profit did Albore make? What percentage of my income do you wish to steal?
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
botg, Giles gave himself up with the statement you highlighted.
February 17, 2008 - 01:57 ET by R D HelmClearly he is a socialist, as are most all of the enviro-kooks, which explains his derision for Exxon's profits, and most likely his hatred of free-enterprise in general.
This, in my view, pretty much discounts everything he says here.
And his suport for UN generated anything is a huge bonus, IYKWIM.
yes RD
February 17, 2008 - 02:06 ET byby his blatant questioning of motive, Giles revealed his own!!
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Giles
February 17, 2008 - 01:21 ET by Noel SheppardGiles.
I would appreciate it if you stopped calling people that don't believe this unproven nonsense "deniers." Its offensive and rude. Right now, I'm asking nicely. ns
Sourcewatch and ExxonSecrets are funded by Far Left Wing Sources
February 17, 2008 - 01:35 ET by PopularTechwww.ExxonSecrets.org
$$$ Funded by Greenpeace
- Greenpeace (Discover the Networks)
"Founded in 1970 as a loose assortment of Canadian anti-nuclear agitators, American expatriates, and underground journalists calling themselves the "Don't Make a Wave Committee," Greenpeace is today the most influential group of the environmental Left. [...]
Taking issue with Greenpeace's anti-biotech stance, Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore left the organization and now laments that the group has become "dominated by leftwingers and extremists who disregard science in the pursuit of environmental purity."
According to a December 20, 2005 New York Times report, "the F.B.I. investigated possible financial ties between [Greenpeace] members and militant groups like the Earth Liberation Front and the Animal Liberation Front." [...]
An expose of Greenpeace's fundraising practices carried out in 2003 by Public Interest Watch (PIW), a nonprofit watchdog group, led to a report disclosing that Greenpeace uses its Greenpeace Fund, a tax-exempt entity debarred from engaging in political advocacy and lobbying by the IRS tax code, to illegally direct funds to Greenpeace Inc., a tax-exempt organization permitted to engage in lobbying and advocacy but not to accept tax-deductible funds. PIW calculated that in 2000, $4.25 million was provided by the Greenpeace Fund in this way.
Greenpeace is heavily funded by many foundations, among which are the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Bauman Family Foundation, the Blue Moon Fund, the Columbia Foundation, the Compton Foundation, the Minneapolis Foundation, the Nathan orgasmings Foundation, the Scherman Foundation, Ted Turner's Turner Foundation. The organization has also drawn support from numerous celebrities, including singers Sting, Tom Jones, and Elton John, who have sponsored its "save the rainforest" campaigns. In 2004, Greenpeace received $15,844,752 in grants, and held net assets of $1,893,548. That same year, the Greenpeace Fund received grants totaling $6,866,534 and held net assets of $7,532,018."
www.Sourcewatch.org
$$$ Funded by The Center for Media and Democracy
- Center for Media and Democracy (Discover the Networks)
"In CMD's view, capitalism generally, and corporations in particular, are the principal root causes of societal ills in the U.S. and abroad. The Capital Research Center, which rates the ideological leanings of nonprofit organizations, places CMD near the extreme far left of the spectrum. The website ActivistCash, which provides "information about the funding source[s] of radical anti-consumer organizations and activists," characterizes CMD as "a counterculture public relations effort disguised as an independent media organization." [...]
CMD was founded by the leftist writer and environmental activist John Stauber, who continues to serve as the Center's Executive Director. Stauber began his activism in high school when he organized anti-Vietnam War protests and early Earth Day events. The co-author (with SourceWatch founder Sheldon Rampton) of six books, Stauber created the now-defunct website Vote2StopBush.org. He is also an unpaid advisor to several organizations, including the Action Coalition for Media Education, the Center for Food Safety, the Liberty Tree Foundation, the Media Education Foundation, and the Organic Consumers Association.
The aforementioned Sheldon Rampton currently serves as CMD's Research Director. A graduate of Princeton University, Rampton was formerly an outreach coordinator for the Wisconsin Coordinating Council on Nicaragua, a group established in 1984 to oppose President Reagan's efforts to stop the spread of Communism in Central America, and currently dedicated to promoting a leftist vision of "social justice in Nicaragua through alternative models of development and activism."
An April 2001 commentary in the liberal publication Village Voice said of Rampton and Stauber: "These guys come from the far side of liberal."
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
'Global Warming' Stopped in 1998
February 16, 2008 - 21:30 ET by PopularTechThere IS a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998 (Robert M. Carter, Ph.D. Paleontology, The Daily Telegraph, UK)
Bob Carter also covers it in his lecture here:
Bob Carter: Climate Change - Is CO2 the cause? (Video) (37min) (Robert (Bob) M. Carter, Ph.D. Paleontology)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Pop Tech
February 16, 2008 - 21:35 ET byno doubt due to the huge drop in CO2 levels at that time and since!!
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
re Stopped in 1998
February 17, 2008 - 00:37 ET by Giles WinterbourneNo, not really. Check the NASA, NOAA sites 2007 tied 1998. Arctic ice melt increased, Greenland icemelt accelerated, there were ocean warming and acidification rises.
One problem with citing people like Carter, et at, is that their duplicity and inaccurate use of stats is readily proven.
Always worth seeing what the general POV of science is saying about denier info - all too often it is cherry-picked, misquoted, incomplete. In short, not accurate and has a pretty short half life where it gets spread quickly, then disproven, then hangs around for a while till something like snopes points it out.
Yes Really
February 17, 2008 - 00:46 ET by PopularTechI try not to check sites that dishonestly manipulate temperature data and have poor records of keeping temperatures.
How not to measure temperature (Anthony Watts, Meteorologist)
Odd USHCN Weather Stations (Surface Stations)
Always worth seeing alarmists using data that has been manipulated from it's original observational recording or taken using biased methods.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
surface stations
February 17, 2008 - 01:25 ET by Giles WinterbourneNote that this 'controversy' has been pretty thoroughly debunked in the science lit. Also, you're looking only at a very small sample of stations in the US, while the G in AGW stands for Global.
And, that the surface stations are only one of many different sets of data that all correlate. The 'errors' being shown, have virtually no effect on the total amount of data from a wide range of resources - sats. ocean. ice, etc. Not to mention other countries and their data.
The basic point is that deniers clutch at whatever will seem to prove a preconceived point, then drop it when it doesn't gain traction.
Think of it this way; you have a brain. If your understanding of the situation is only from looking at one side,, it is easier to be manipulated. Obviously, I'm one of your 'GW alarmists', but I spend 20-25% of the time I spend studying AGW on denier sites. Why? Partly to discuss it with deniers; partly to follow their logic; partly to keep up with latest resources and arguments.
Conversely, if you spent time on RC or read through IPCC summaries or reports, then you'd know when denier logic flaws would show up, you'd have a better idea of the range of study involved. And maybe, just maybe, using that brain, see some of the logical fallacies that are being used..
Now You are lying
February 17, 2008 - 01:40 ET by PopularTechThe controversy over the temperature stations has not been debunked in any science literature. Currently they have not even finished auditing all the surface stations yet. BTW satellites show next to no warming.
I've read RealClimate, the IPCC ect.. both full of overly wordy nonsense. Alarmist are easily fooled by any claim of refutation or extensive use of words. They are unable to actually look at the actual REAL verifiable data and come to a sane conclusion.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
auditing
February 17, 2008 - 02:24 ET by Giles WinterbourneWhere? Who?
Really, no satellite data with warming?
I'd posit your '
I've read RealClimate, the IPCC ect.. both full of..." (sb: all full of) isn't thorough, esp IPCC which has much discussion of sat data.
Little to No Warming
February 17, 2008 - 03:07 ET by PopularTechAccurate "Thermometers" in Space - The State of Climate Measurement Science (NASA)
Even with the corrections for orbital decline the warming is mild. But that is besides the point a 0.6c warming over 100 years does not mean it is caused by man-made CO2.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Giles
February 17, 2008 - 01:46 ET by Noel SheppardGiles,
I've asked you once to stop referring to people that don't believe this nonsense as deniers. Once more, and you're banned. Period!
ns
Which I haven't since your
February 17, 2008 - 02:26 ET by Giles WinterbourneWhich I haven't since your first comment. Watch the time stamps.
What is preferred term, then?
How about that you are an idiot?
February 17, 2008 - 02:54 ET by PopularTechWhat do you mean preferred term? You mean that you are an idiot? Don't be stupid you deliberately choose to call those who disagree with you "deniers" for propaganda reasons.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
PT
February 17, 2008 - 03:34 ET by Noel SheppardPT,
If I'm going to request that Giles not refer to us as deniers, it does seem reasonable that we don't refer to him as an idiot, don't you think? ns
Since you are such a
February 17, 2008 - 02:56 ET by NL207Since you are such a science whiz, perhaps you'd like to explain to me just what the Beer-Lambert Law is.
Giles
February 17, 2008 - 03:28 ET by Noel SheppardGiles,
Well, that's not really true, is it? After all, my first request for you to cease using this offensive epithet was at 00:21 ET. Four minutes later, slightly below my warning, you used it again here. That's what led me to issue a second warning at 00:46 ET.
Potentially unlike what your used to at RC, we here actually deal in verifiable facts, and aren't easily misled by statements thinly veiled as such. Or, do I need to get some "peers" to "review" my assertions before you'll believe them? :-)
As for what term I'd prefer to be referred by, Noel does quite well. As for those that don't believe there is sufficient evidence to unquestionably prove that man is responsible for warming the planet, why not call us realists? After all, despite all the table pounding on your side, it is indeed a grand leap of faith necessary to believe man can control or impact earth's climate. :-) ns
Sorry, I meant to say since
February 17, 2008 - 04:03 ET by Giles WinterbourneSorry, I meant to say since I read your first warning.
I'm seeing opinions, but not (other than the mega post) linkage. And that probably could have been filled by a link to the orig source. Not that it referenced the actual thread which was what peer reviewed material JunkScience cites.
Peer review is an active process looking for errors in logic, improper quoting, math errors - think of it as having an editor reviewing your work. Many minds. Saying 'CO2 is dropping' without citing where you heard it add credibility to your argument if the source is a valid (say not a newspaper editorial that doesn't cite where they got the information) resource.
Realist doesn't work well as a defining term when the body of evidence just doesn't match the stridency of your illogical position.
Giles
February 17, 2008 - 04:29 ET by Noel SheppardGiles,
Excuse me, but you posted here claiming that you hadn't used the word "deniers" since my first comment, and admonished me to "Watch the time stamps."
Then, you sent a PM to me stating, "FYI - I haven't [used the word "deniers"] since your first comment stamped :20 or :21."
Now, hours later, you claim, "Sorry, I meant to say since I read your first warning."
And you dare question the stidency of my logic?
This explains why you place so much credence in peer review as "an active process looking for errors in logic, improper quoting, math errors." In fact, you might consider in the future getting your comments here reviewed before you post them. :-) ns
What body of evedence are
February 17, 2008 - 04:50 ET by RESTLESS 1What body of evedence are you referring to? the completely debunked (except in the msm) IPCC report? The same report that Algore alludes to with all of his fear mongering? Where in the IPCC report do they say that Manhattan and Florida will be under water in 20 years?
Are you Professor Truth reincarnated? Real Climate does not entertain any arguments against AGW, then claims to refute all arguments. We allow you to state your side, then show you the error of your ways.
Btw, we are skeptics, NOT deniers. But "realists" rings true.
Al Gore, as Norman Bates?
February 16, 2008 - 19:02 ET by danboAl Gore, as Norman Bates? Seems fitting. Proprietor of the Bates Motel of pseudo science.
Where's mama?
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
What is even spookier is
February 16, 2008 - 19:05 ET by bigtimerWhat is even spookier is other states will follow Calif. with this absolute B.S. no matter the proof that this is B.S. like record breakers here in the NW from this winter in some parts...but never mind silly little issues like that.
All I can do anymore is shake my head and be glad our kids are grown and hope the best for all the rest.
Past pathetic what I see happening in this country and to our children.
Like Oregon
February 16, 2008 - 21:58 ET by scamoramaOregon will, of course, jump on this so they can keep their self-proclaimed status as "The Greenest State".
According to Joe D'Aleo, our record-setting snowfalls in the Cascades are the result of the huge La Nina in the Pacific -- which is also the cause of the tornados we've seen elsewhere (there was a tornado in Vancouver, WA of all places). Think the California "climate curriculum" will even mention the PDO? Or the AMO?
BTW: take a look at the correlation between the PDO+AMO and US temperatures here:
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/warming-trend-pdo-and-solar-correlate-better-than-co2/#more-597
My own rule of thumb is,
February 16, 2008 - 22:51 ET by Scout FinchMy own rule of thumb is, whenever there appears to be bipartisan support of something faddish and specious like this, it's way past being serious, and it's only done to look like Congress is "doing something".
Myself? I'd rather Congress do "nothing" than "something" that turns out to be harmful and costly.
Agreed Scout. I would
February 17, 2008 - 05:11 ET by RESTLESS 1Agreed Scout. I would consider it a beneficial expenditure if our tax dollars were spent keeping congress critters from doing anything.
So, where is the ACLU?
February 16, 2008 - 19:13 ET by R D HelmIs this not essentially the same thing as government advocating a particular religion? I thought that was a no-no in government schools. :-^)
This nonsense has to be stopped. It is bad enough that the socialists who control our government schools have turned most of our children into mind-numbed bands of blithering, dependent idiots, but now they want to further indoctrinate them into the Cult of Climate Change.
Depressing, indeed.
The Only Thing The ACLU Is Interested In Pushing...
February 16, 2008 - 20:14 ET by Wildcatter1980...is their own agenda. Otherwise, they'd be suing the various states, cities, towns and municipalties that have installed red light cameras and/or photo radar systems to nab "alleged" violators without having to chase them down and thus have a real living person (police officer) to confront in court.
Just my $0.02
The problem is your local politicians.
February 17, 2008 - 11:32 ET by sarcasmoThe ACLU took an ACLUish position early on the issue. Nobody listened, because "9/11 changed everything." Or something.
Anyway, there's a "test" version of one of these Orwellian monsters about 2 blocks from where I live. It's very-lucky I'm not 16 years old anymore. ;)
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
re So, where is the ACLU?
February 16, 2008 - 20:59 ET by Giles WinterbourneNo, science isn't religion;
Though many deniers want their facts to be taken on faith rather than proof.
re: science is not religion
February 16, 2008 - 21:06 ET byhow true but AGW is.
Also there are certain assumptions in the definition of science that some use which are religious
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Correct Science is NOT Religion and AGW is NOT Science
February 16, 2008 - 21:23 ET by PopularTechSince you are all about proof, please prove to me man-made global warming using the scientific method. I believe the ones asking for faith are those of the AGW religion:
Al Gore's Amen Corner (FrontPage Magazine)
Confession box for 'eco-sinners' (Metro.co.uk)
Environmentalism as Religion (Michael Crichton, A.B. Anthropology, M.D. Harvard)
Gore Uses Religion to Attract 'Global Warming' Converts (CNSNews)
Gore's Global Warming Religion (Ann Coulter, Human Events)
Is Global Warming a Sin? (Alexander Cockburn, Counterpunch)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
As a former student of
February 16, 2008 - 22:52 ET by danboAs a former student of anthropology I have to point out. Evolution is still a theory. There is lots of evidence that it occured. But we still don't know why. Just ideas. And we did have a little thing called piltdown. A forgery paraded as the truth.
I have no problem with being challenged. It keeps science honest. Why does the non science of global warming demand that everyone follow blindly. And there be no other approach. AGW is a religion. It's based on a dogma. With no discent allowed.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Evolution is still a theory
February 17, 2008 - 01:28 ET by Giles WinterbourneSo's gravity; but there isn't much debate.
And really, you could pull up a better 'example' than Piltdown, if you were trying to prove a point. Perhaps you should listen to Hovid's tapes more closely.
Please explain to us
February 17, 2008 - 07:28 ET by danboPlease explain to us the cause of gravity.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
gravity
February 17, 2008 - 08:03 ET by Agnosticmass and distance
Otherwise it is the subjective importance of situation.
Sorry agnostic. Those are
February 17, 2008 - 08:25 ET by danboSorry agnostic. Those are variables that effect the amount of observed gravatational pull. I asked for the "cause". There is a reason for my inquiry that relates to the topic.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
danbo
February 17, 2008 - 12:35 ET by AgnosticTrue, they are variables but unless my memory is shot there is no constant. If your asking what is it exactly what is gravity in terms of what creates the effect then I would have to say that as theories go I tend to believe the magenetic field created by a cumulative effect of atomic particles is about as realistic as anything I've read about. But I have to admit my experience with physics at the astrophysics scale is well beyond what I studied.
Plus there was a little sarcasm in my statement considering it had already been conceded that it was a theory. NOM.
Fact is. No one knows what
February 17, 2008 - 14:17 ET by danboFact is. No one knows what causes gravity. There is talk of a graviton. Yet last time I looked, no one has proved it existed.
To see the effects of something, and to know it's causes are two different things. As the temperture records have been so adjusted, and based on such questionable data that is the 1st problem. To everyone but those who want to believe.
Then, with as many variables as there are in climate to say that that the cause of any climate change without question is only for the fathfull. That is the second problem.
This is a house of cards. And it's falling.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Sure we do
February 17, 2008 - 14:22 ET by general companyFact is. No one knows what causes gravity.
Actualy we do, Mass creates gravity, the larger the Mass the stronger the Gravitational pull is.
"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain
Gravity
February 17, 2008 - 15:34 ET by scamoramaBut how does mass "create" gravity?
The General Theory supposes that mass warps space, and predicts the effects of that warpage, but doesn't explain how mass does it.
For that matter, although Maxwell's equations do a good job of predicting the effects of magnetism, I have yet to find anyone who can explain what magnetism is.
Large Masses colliding or
February 17, 2008 - 16:11 ET by general companyLarge Masses colliding or being effected by other large Masses or Black Holes will cause warping of Time and Space. The theories are better exsplained in these 2 books, I have read Kip's, the other is on recomendation to me. The last is a video that tries to explain about Gravity's effects. I have personaly talk to most of these folks on this subject, thing is their are many more questions then answers right now, but trust me when I say real progress and exciting new info is just on the horizon. BTW, I also know a few folks that are working with magnetic fields as well, I just aint one of them. But the questions of what is magnetism or gravity, I dont fully understand, I mean what is light? Is it not enough to know these thing exsits, then try to better understand them?
Sorry I dont know how to do the clever link thing.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/m02357w0x436141p/
http://www.amazon.com/Black-Holes-Time-Warps-Commonwealth/dp/0393312763/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1203277442&sr=8-2
http://www.einsteinsmessengers.org/
"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain
Actually...
February 17, 2008 - 18:23 ET by scamoramaMasses don't have to be colliding or doing much of anything. According to theory, a mass in motion will throw off gravity waves, but a stationary mass still bends space.
Thanks for the links.
If you are mathematically inclined, I'll suggest you find a copy of Chandrasekhar's "The Mathematical Theory of Black Holes" or "Exact Solutions of Einstein's Field Equations" by Kramer, Stephani, MacCallum and Herlt. Both are in my library.
Giles, science is not a religion for those who believe in God.
February 16, 2008 - 23:13 ET by R D HelmBut to those who do not, it essentially has become a religion, as it is, in a sense, a branch of secular humanism, a religion in and of itself.
Humans have within their nature the desire to believe in something larger than themselves. This trait has been present throughout history, from very primitive societies on up to highly advanced ones. As many of the Climate Change adherents are agnostic, if not outright atheists, they have filled their needs in this area by attaching themselves to the idea of man having the power to impact the weather. It has become their version of a "religion."
re So, where is the ACLU?
February 16, 2008 - 20:59 ET by Giles WinterbourneNo, science isn't religion;
Though many deniers want their facts to be taken on faith rather than proof.
though many alarmists don't
February 16, 2008 - 21:08 ET bythough many alarmists don't want the science examined or debated
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Neal Boortz
February 16, 2008 - 19:41 ET by thoridflyEvolution, Earth Day, rectosexuality ... and now "global" warming ... is there anything on the humanist agenda that hasn't been pushed on our kids?
I see why Neal Boortz wants to get rid of the federal education budget.
Censored Global Warming Videos
February 16, 2008 - 20:07 ET by PopularTechHow many of these videos do you think will be shown:
Censored Global Warming Videos
I guarantee you that the propaganda movie 'An Inconvenient Lie' will be part of the curriculum.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Next thing we know, they'll
February 16, 2008 - 20:11 ET by Roger the ShrubberNext thing we know, they'll be trying to teach Intelligent Design in school.
I am sure the press would take notice of that.
re Next thing we know, they'll
February 16, 2008 - 21:01 ET by Giles WinterbourneWell, I thing it was already tried; remember Dover?
Then you surely remember
February 17, 2008 - 10:38 ET by Roger the ShrubberThen you surely remember the outrage by the media and your leftist comrades that you snuggle up to? Oddly, your "progressive" amigos are silent now.
However, thank you for agreeing with me that teaching either "theory" as fact is, well, stupid.
Whoops, Sorry if I hurt your feelings. But hey, I am not the one bowing at the GW altar, now, am I?
Not theories
February 17, 2008 - 12:31 ET by DarkCurrentNeither AGW nor ID qualify as theories. Both are simply hypotheses at best. I guess AGW will be abandoned first since it's more easily tested.
Now that I think about it that way, I don't think ID even qualifies as a hypothesis since I can't see any way that it can be tested...
I agree. "Hypothesis" is a
February 18, 2008 - 08:18 ET by Roger the ShrubberI agree. "Hypothesis" is a more apt term.
Neither stand up under testing. Good point.
Since when do politicians dictate what a text book contains?
February 16, 2008 - 21:20 ET by c5thenHow many politicians had to pass the law that dictates that continental drift is taught? How about microbiology? Remember the huge battle over getting thermodynamics into the high school curiculum?
The harder they push to force it on society, the more and more like a sham it is shown to be.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
re:Since when do politicians dictate what a text book contains?
February 17, 2008 - 00:31 ET by Giles WinterbourneGenerally, state level ed sets curriculum, often with help of national organizations for subject areas. But curriculum is also set at local levels by text book choice, local and regional history.
But there are fed gov requirements like 'Constitution Day' curriculum, and $$ for specific programs.
But. at least at state level, curriculum can come from legislature, which ultimately controls ed dept.
Those aren't politicians, those are bureaucrats
February 17, 2008 - 11:33 ET by c5thenThey are generaly educators who work for the State Dept. of Education. This is only the second time in history that I am aware of where elected officials who have little to no knowledge and background of the topic will pass a law dictating that a specific topic is taught in the schools. The first time was when Darwinism was dictated instead of (not with) Creationsism/Intelligent Design. This time its Anthropogenic Global Warming even though the climate is cyclical and no one can deny that. They are going to teach the children that THIS TIME it's our fault, all the other times was a natural occurance.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
There were sex ed
February 17, 2008 - 12:37 ET by Giles WinterbourneThere were sex ed requirements tied to fed $$
NCLB specified fields of study to be emphasized, so kids lost advanced classes in many topics.
At a state level, large states (like Texas) have a state buy. So TB companies match curriculum in their books to suit. So, if you live in a state with less influence, your kids are getting another state's curriculum
Not to nitpick, but isn't
February 16, 2008 - 21:41 ET by clarkfkNot to nitpick, but isn't Alaska the largest state in the union?
Let them teach gorbal warming in school. It will just make all of them look that much stupider in the long run when everyone starts screaming "ice age" again in 10 or so years...
clark
February 16, 2008 - 21:46 ET bypopulation------we're talking schools here
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
cf... Yep Ak. is...and a
February 16, 2008 - 21:51 ET by bigtimercf...
Yep Ak. is...and a mighty LOL!
Great points you have made....although at this point the nutcases and liars when it comes to this subject have too much invested and too much to gain by not still denying all of this in another ten years yet...even if we are covered with ice.
Just us and our off-springs will still be paying for all this BS...another great way to take our hard-earned tax-paying dollars, this of course will become universal if they have their way...which they are working on it...I see no way out at this point with who we have running for our next leaders.
You know..
February 16, 2008 - 21:46 ET by Sick-n-TiredI was at a conference last week and heard (and met) an informal 15 minute talk by Dr. Michael Economides---probably one of the smartest economists I have ever listened to. Anyways, he nailed it on the head when he said something to the effect that "one of the most devestating casualties of AGW will be science and scientists". Well, I think we are definately seeing "first blood" by this bill, and it isn't just a flesh wound. Trust me Noel, as a scientist myself, I am VERY, VERY AFFRAID.
"Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat's dream. If you control carbon, you control life," Richard Lindzen - March 2007.
I have to agree. I don't
February 16, 2008 - 22:41 ET by danboI have to agree. I don't consider myself a scientist. I have had training in the scientific process and research. I fear the worse casualty of this fiasco will be science itself.
It'll take decades for anyone to respect the scientific process, after these folks have finished.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Could one, just one of these globull warming kooks
February 17, 2008 - 00:12 ET by JoggerNottell me what the ideal temp for the earth should be? and why? Once we get there, What do we do now? I am waiting.....sigh....
My ideal temp
February 17, 2008 - 10:53 ET by GForcetell me what the ideal temp for the earth should be?
77* Fahrenheit
why?
Because it's a comfortable temp
Once we get there, What do we do now?
Bury your toes in the sand while sipping an adult beverage saying to yourself, " I'm glad I bought that HumV"
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it"-Aristotle
-
February 17, 2008 - 10:42 ET by dahliatraversGiles Winterbourne.
AGW purports to be a scientific theory. This is how it works when a "scientific theory" is put forward. Proof of the theory is offered. That proof is examined by scientists and others.
In this case, the theory of AGW has stood up poorly to examination. There have been a myriad of problems, some of them pointed to in this comment thread. One of the biggest is a major weakness in the computer models, the scientific foundation upon which AGW is built. (And this is so basic, even non-scientists can understand.) The computer models which claim to prove AGW have excluded the two biggest global warming factors: the effects of the sun and clouds.
It is, therefore, frightening indeed, that an unproven "scientific" theory might in turn be the basis for trillions of dollars in carbon taxes and considerable human suffering and could, stunningly, be taught LIKE A PROVEN SCIENTIFIC THEORY in school. (As to the latter, it's as though the theory of a flat earth is being taught.)
In point of fact, AGW (or its sly, deceptive new name, "climate change") could not be further from a proven scientific theory.
sun and clouds
February 17, 2008 - 12:30 ET by Giles WinterbourneBoth are discussed, all the literature reviewed. Look at Working Group 1, chapters 1-6. Also in the WG1 summary, there is a chart listing the strength of the forcings of solar. Clouds generally are showing a negative effect.
I'm not sure where you are reading about models, there are several programs around, you can even download some to run yourself.
AGW isn't 'proven' by models, there is enough emperical data for that, the models help in predictions and in tying paleo data to current data.
The Computer Models are Useless
February 17, 2008 - 14:58 ET by PopularTechSince anyone who understands Computer Science knows that the computer models are useless I find it laughable you claim that they are not used as proof. This is a new one.
So please provide me with the empirical data that proves "man-made" global warming via the scientific method. I have yet to see any.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
-
February 18, 2008 - 00:02 ET by dahliatraversAre you really minimizing computer models? That's not what most AGW advocates do; as Pop Tech said, just the opposite. Usually, it's "Look at and bow before these magnificent computer models".
As for running these models myself, why would I bother if they do not include the two biggest influences on climate: clouds and the effects of the sun? Come to think of it, why is anyone bothering with these models? How can the predictions made by such inadequate models be viewed in any way as valid or useful?
But okay, the computer models are not such a big deal. So if not these, what is the "empirical" proof of AGW? Remember, AGW is purported to be a scientific theory and must, therefore, be scientifically proven. It is not sufficient to simply assert that the .7 degree temperature rise (and that piece of date itself is in question due to the ... er, "adjusting" of the data) over the last 100+ years is due to man's CO2 and, by the way, the temperature rise is going to continue and steepen and really, really bad things are going to happen. Especially when so many "scientists" are bound and determined to ignore the effects of the sun.
Global Warming 125,000 years ago
February 17, 2008 - 11:20 ET by ThisnThatI'm all for real education in the schools, as long as the classes start off by discussing the global warming that occured 125,000 years ago when the Earth's temperatures were 5 degrees warmer than today and Greenland was covered with forests similiar to Sweden's today.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
reducing GHGs
February 17, 2008 - 12:58 ET by Giles WinterbourneA Solar Grand Plan
By 2050 solar power could end U.S. dependence on
foreign oil and slash greenhouse gas emissions
http://www.sciam.com...
Eliminating fossil fuels is friggin' cheap
A third of our military budget could cure our carbon addiction
Government Controlled Breathing - A Communist Dream
February 17, 2008 - 15:07 ET by PopularTechPlease since there is no reason to reduce carbon emmissions, forcing soviet style regulation making everyone use crap plug-in hybrids that are fueled by 88% inefficient solar power is exactly like something Karl Marx could only dream of. This is not a communist country yet.
You are absolutely delusional about our "carbon addiction" which makes no sense since we breath out CO2 and have it in our blood, how long until that is banned?
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Federal Education
February 17, 2008 - 20:36 ET by kiwikitI think parents should just admit that the dumbest people are those who have to become educrats and to ecourage our children to be skeptical of EVERYTHING teachers say. Their influence over children is disgraceful given their talents!