Global warming man made? - Does it matter?

Global warming man made? - Does it matter?

by deepshade Published on November 25th, 2009, 11:52 am Rift: News

Let's not forget the media bias. There truely is a double standard...
http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2009/20091124124528.aspx

There are a lot of people squirming right now. Getting it all out in the light of day is the best way to sort through it all.

[A Person]

Reality does have a well known liberal bias. Maybe you can explain in your own words what you feel is so damning in the emails that proves climate change is not happening?

[deepshade]

Reality does have a well known liberal bias. Maybe you can explain in your own words what you feel is so damning in the emails that proves climate change is not happening?

The intellectual dishonesty contained in the emails that I have read so far, exposes the attempts to squash any contrary evidence or debate in order to place their agenda in the forefront. I have not claimed that "climate change" is not happening. What is funny is that the term has changed from "global warming" to "climate change" and that in itself allows for any shift either way to be construed as a crisis to be dealt with imediately.

So to prove climate change is not happening is a faux argument to begin with. The climate changes all the time and has been for....billions and billions of years.....

[A Person]

The intellectual dishonesty contained in the emails that I have read so far

What is funny is that the term has changed from "global warming" to "climate change" and that in itself allows for any shift either way to be construed as a crisis to be dealt with imediately.

Speaking of "intellectual dishonesty"...

Climate change is the preferred term for "global climate warming due to an enhanced anthropogenic greenhouse effect" or 'inadvertent climate modification" because it encompasses all the climate changes that are occurring due to warming - it's not just the temperature, it's precipitation, deglaciation, sea ice melting, vegetation, sea levels etc.

Global warming refers to surface temperature increases, while climate change includes global warming and everything else that increasing greenhouse gas amounts will affect.

So to prove climate change is not happening is a faux argument to begin with. The climate changes all the time and has been for....billions and billions of years.....

The climate has indeed been changing ever since the Earth has had one. For much of the Earth's history the climate could not support oxygen breathing life and rapid climate changes are accompanied by mass extinctions. So - given that 'climate change' is a well understood short way of saying 'inadvertent climate modification' - since we now know with a high degree of confidence that human activity is contributing to an enhanced greenhouse effect that is forcing global warming and associated rapid climate change which may well result in adverse effects on humanity - perhaps it's a good idea to study this scientifically (you know with real scientists, not 'Canada free press pundits with no scientific education) and do something about it.

What is rather interesting in this 'conspiracy' is that there is no shortage of money for climate change skeptics while there is for government funded universities and public research facilities. So if scientists were money driven they would be busy fabricating evidence that the Earth wasn't warming to get more money from the carbon energy industries.

Unfortunately they would still have to explain the liberal bias reality seems to have

athabasca_glacier.jpg (23.24 KiB) Viewed 110 times

[deepshade]

A Person Wrote:
What is rather interesting in this 'conspiracy' is that there is no shortage of money for climate change skeptics while there is for government funded universities and public research facilities. So if scientists were money driven they would be busy fabricating evidence that the Earth wasn't warming to get more money from the carbon energy industries.

No, the money trail leads to carbon credits, you know the ones that Al Gore's company will be charging for....
You missed the point again.... Nice pictures of glaciers though. To bad you don't have any of them from the ice age, then you could really show how much the climate has warmed. Thanks for the lecture though..... you're right, speaking of intellectual dishonesty....

[A Person]

No, the money trail leads to carbon credits, you know the ones that Al Gore's company will be charging for....

To support that, you will need to show that climate scientists around the world benefit from carbon credits and have done for the last twenty years or so. Which of course they haven't. To suggest that researchers set up this elaborate hoax over decades so that Al Gore could make some money by investing in carbon neutral power is ludicrous in the extreme. But then conspiracy theories usually are.

Al Gore is a politician and businessman, not a climate scientist. We can all take what he says with a large pinch of salt. It doesn't automatically make the underlying science wrong however. Oil and coal mining companies have made far more money than Al Gore could ever hope to.

[deepshade]

No, the money trail leads to carbon credits, you know the ones that Al Gore's company will be charging for....

To suggest that researchers set up this elaborate hoax over decades so that Al Gore could make some money by investing in carbon neutral power is ludicrous in the extreme. But then conspiracy theories usually are.

Yep, Now I can agree with that. But then, I never said this was the case. Big Al is just taking advantage of it.

Al Gore is a politician and businessman, not a climate scientist. We can all take what he says with a large pinch of salt.

Wooo Hoooo.. Now I really agree with that.... But you know he did win the Nobel Peace prize.....Kind of diminishes the award now, but that is another story....

[BecauseHeLives]

More coverup from the global warming folks. Apparently, these "scientists" didn't want to reveal how unscientific they really were until a fredom of information request was ordered.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,577 ... latestnews

Scientists at the University of East Anglia have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit CRU was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

The admission follows the leaking of a thousand private emails sent and received by Professor Phil Jones, the CRU’s director. In them he discusses thwarting climate sceptics seeking access to such data.
In a statement on its website, the CRU said: "We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenized) data."

The CRU is the world’s leading center for reconstructing past climate and temperatures. Climate change sceptics have long been keen to examine exactly how its data were compiled. That is now impossible.