http://michellemalkin.com/...ar-in-the-millenium/
I always said, that guy James Hansen, who many regard as a global warming ‘expert’, is a schiester, who has no idea what he is talking about. He’s a complete chicken-shit fraud and all of his scare tactics about global warming are a complete fucking joke.
I was wondering when someone would bring this matter up in the LR, and also what the reaction would be. So far at least, it appears there will be none. Perhaps some people would prefer to see this thread sink to the bottom.
This is all bullshit to being with. The fact people ignore the earth is billions of years old and we’ve only been keeping records for a small amount of time always amuses me. People will go to great lengths to believe whatever they want to believe. Problem being now, these people have somehow gained media attention and political influence.
I like the theory going around global warming and SUV’s caused the Minnesota bridge to collapse. Idiots.
“The fact people ignore the earth is billions of years old and we’ve only been keeping records for a small amount of time always amuses me”
You know how you said in the other thread that you were not an economics expert? that might possibly apply to this to.
Data did not simply start to become available 50, 100 or 200 years ago when we started keeping records. The data that is available from ice cores goes back a lot further. The data on changes in climate from geological surveys, mud cores, sedimentation rates etc goes back millions of years.
I am not going to engage in a debate about whether it is happening or not, but your comment indicates either a complete lack of knowledge about the subject or a desire to only believe what you want to believe irrespective of the science.
“People will go to great lengths to believe whatever they want to believe.”
Interesting statement that can go both ways.
“Problem being now, these people have somehow gained media attention and political influence.”
Again, that one can go both ways. It’s amazing what millions in lobbying, advertising, and special interest money can do.
“I like the theory going around global warming and SUV’s caused the Minnesota bridge to collapse.”
Who said that?
Mojo: Unfortunately, some still want to believe it, some use it for political and monetary gain. Watch for the continuing lingo change from ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’. Then they can blame every weather incident on man.
LD
I want Global Warming: rising ocean levels will wipe out the Blue states.
So 1998 is the second warmest year and the two warmest also occurred in the recent past and in the post-Industrial Revolution age? That undercuts theories of GW?
Dude, it’s hot as hell. You can clearly see that global warming is occuring, especially in the southern us.
And from the same article;
The effect of the correction on global temperatures is minor (some 1-2% less warming than originally thought)
Followed by;
but the effect on the US global warming propaganda machine could be huge.
Which is exactly what all this is about. People in this country don’t respond rationally to facts and science, they respond irrationally to the media’s interpretation of the science. Science will claim the potential for something based a myriad of studies and the media will “pick a position” and report an imminent major disaster coming based on the most “spectacular” of those studies.
The public are generally easily manipulated on both sides of this as well as most other discussions. To believe everything about GW’ing without questioning it is just as bad as to believe it doesn’t exist without questioning that standpoint. None the less a major portion of the population falls on one side or the other and then ends up ardently supporting their position regardless of information available. Not surprisingly just like positions on political parties for alot of people.
~Matt
“So 1998 is the second warmest year and the two warmest also occurred in the recent past and in the post-Industrial Revolution age? That undercuts theories of GW?”
Well, since the data in question only goes back to 1882, ALL of the temperatures in the data set are “in the post-Industrial Revolution age.” So yes, the three warmest post-IR years are themselves post-IR. 
Within that segment, it’s interesting, though, that the first and third warmest years were in the first half of that period, not the second.
Of course, this is US data, not global data. Personally, I don’t think it proves anything one way or the other.
90 degrees in the mojave dessert in August…that looks like a cold summer day to me. Only 89 in Miami…86 in Brownsville, TX…90 degrees in Pheonix. I would take those temps anyday. The temperature map you present is NOT and indication of global warming.
Interesting documentary on YouTube - ‘The Great Global Warming Swindle’.
Seems like a BBC special divided into 8 10 minute chunks. Only watched the first, but it was pretty interesting.
“The temperature map you present is NOT and indication of global warming.”
At last, something you and I can agree upon. Except, of course, for that spelling error.
On the other hand, the previous record for Raleigh on August 10 was 99 degrees. Today is expected to be 103. Again, though, that is not an indication of global warming. It is just damned hot, and made my run virtually unbearable.
Rob you CLEARLY don’t understand. This is merely the beginning of a major cover up that proves that the thousands, hundred of thousands, of hours put in by scientists on the subject is a conspiracy. It’s fairly clear that they have all based all of their calculations and studies on these single data points. GW’ing is obviously a hoax. End of discussion.
/sarcasm off
~Matt
Yes it was interesting but a good portion was based on facts that have similarly found to be incorrect as the data that started this thread. Particularly that the temps in one of the XXXspheres was not warming. Apparently there was a error there that eventually was found to prove that the XXXsphere was warming. Again scientific error. Also one of the graphs in the documentary is mis marked and a few other pretty blatant “errors”. The odd thing was that this documentary was produced AFTER the error about the XXXXsphere was found and corrected, still they reported it using the old data.
There’s a good deal of “Marketing” going on on both sides of this argument. I wish they’d all freakin’ knock it off and simple present the info instead of position.
~Matt
Damn, I just converted my SUV to run on manure, or bullshit. My dung injection system is almost perfected.
Oh come on, next your going to tell me that the fact we got flooded out around here a couple days ago ISN’T because of global warming. You KNOW it is.
~Matt
Although I haven’t taken all those course…I really don’t think you had to to answer your question. I think one has to answer the question of just how much of the GW’ing science is based solely on this data in the first place. I’m guessing next to none of it. Really hard to build a global climatology model on 6 or seven temperature data points, no?
~Matt
Thank you for the correction.
“Watch for the continuing lingo change from ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’.”
I always thought you guys were joking about this, but maybe some folks don’t understand that pushing the term “climate change” was begun by the Bush administration because it was a softer term than Global Warming. Heck, Frank Luntz who was an advisor to Bush and the Republicans takes credit for that act.