Al Bore Blather

Discussion in 'Blazers OT Forum' started by Denny Crane, Nov 10, 2008.

  1. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    What's anecdotal about it? That the scientists' predictions were completely wrong?
     
  2. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    As near as I can tell, the little hash marks on the bottom represent 50 years each, so the 10 missing years would be about 1/4 of one of those. Easy to see.
     
  3. barfo

    barfo triggered obsessive commie pinko Staff Member Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    32,643
    Likes Received:
    22,677
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Blazer OT board
    50/10=4? Yes, the hash marks represent 50 years. So the missing EIGHT years would be about 1/6th of one of those. But that's not really relevant, since we don't have the data.

    barfo
     
  4. Minstrel

    Minstrel Top Of The Pops Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    26,226
    Likes Received:
    14,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    User Interface Designer
    Location:
    Hello darkness, my old friend
    Doesn't need to be a straight line to be steadily upward.

    Not particularly relevant. It hasn't dropped anywhere near enough to be more than statistical noise. This is just part of it not being a straight line. But, again, it doesn't have to be a straight line to illustrate upward movement.
     
  5. barfo

    barfo triggered obsessive commie pinko Staff Member Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    32,643
    Likes Received:
    22,677
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Blazer OT board
    Did the scientists predict the snowfall for the winter of 2008? No? Then they weren't wrong. The article, rightly, talks about average snowfall. Everyone knows that there is year-to-year fluctuation, and one snowy year doesn't disprove anything.

    If next winter there is less than average snow at those resorts, will you be convinced that global warming is real, based on that one data point? No, I thought not. So why should I take your one data point seriously?

    barfo
     
  6. ly_yng

    ly_yng Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,156
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Robot Mailman
    I'd just add that there's no reason to think there's a direct correlation between snowfall and temperature. Snow doesn't necessarily fall on the coldest days of the year - it falls when there's the highest temperature gradient between the upper and lower atmosphere (or rather, once you're near freezing, the gradient is more important than the temperature).

    Climate science is incredibly complicated, which is why the global warming deniers are in such a tenuous position - global temperatures increasing with increased CO2 content is just an incredibly obvious conclusion, due to the greenhouse effect. Proving it's going to cause more or less snow or more or less powerful hurricanes is a LOT harder.
     
  7. ly_yng

    ly_yng Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,156
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Robot Mailman
    I'd note that temperatures also appear to have fallen over the 1940s, before continuing the skyrocketing trend of the next half-century.

    Climate science is HIGHLY nonlinear, but something like more greenhouse gas --> more greenhouse effect isn't that difficult to predict. Individual years may fall one way or the other due to some sort of localized phase change, but we're trapping more heat with CO2. That's got to go somewhere - it's either going to move a low energy phase into a high energy phase (melting glaciers come to mind) or it's going to heat the earth.
     
  8. ly_yng

    ly_yng Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,156
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Robot Mailman
    I take that to mean that you agree there's at least a REASON why people would believe CO2 emissions could lead to higher temperatures.

    By the way, you can say things like CO2 is a "good thing" or that .00035 is a super-duper small number, but that super-duper small number is causing somewhere between 9%-26% of the Earth's greenhouse effect. The Earth's black-body temperature is around 0 degrees, and it's average temperature is around 57 degrees, so it's safe to say that CO2 content (which has increased by about 30% since 1750) is responsible for at least 5-6 of those degrees.
     
  9. MARIS61

    MARIS61 Real American

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,007
    Likes Received:
    5,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Yankee
    Location:
    Beautiful Central Oregon
    New Math? :dunno:
     
  10. rocketeer

    rocketeer Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2003
    Messages:
    3,250
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    38
    remember your "role model" thread when you said you could get a triple digit number? what kind of math was that?
     
  11. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Which is it: 9% or 26%?
     
  12. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Century, my bad.
     
  13. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    <table width="95%" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td width="145">[​IMG] </td> <td> </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <table width="95%" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr> <td>Earth on the Brink of an Ice Age
    </td> </tr> <tr> <td>
    </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <table width="95%" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr valign="middle"> <td width="80" bgcolor="#ffffff">11.01.2009</td> <td bgcolor="#ffffff"> [​IMG]Source: Pravda.Ru</td> <td bgcolor="#ffffff"> [​IMG]URL: http://english.pravda.ru/science/earth/106922-earth_ice_age-0</td> </tr></tbody></table>
    <table width="95%" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr> <td> The earth is now on the brink of entering another Ice Age, according to a large and compelling body of evidence from within the field of climate science. Many sources of data which provide our knowledge base of long-term climate change indicate that the warm, twelve thousand year-long Holocene period will rather soon be coming to an end, and then the earth will return to Ice Age conditions for the next 100,000 years.

    Ice cores, ocean sediment cores, the geologic record, and studies of ancient plant and animal populations all demonstrate a regular cyclic pattern of Ice Age glacial maximums which each last about 100,000 years, separated by intervening warm interglacials, each lasting about 12,000 years.

    Most of the long-term climate data collected from various sources also shows a strong correlation with the three astronomical cycles which are together known as the Milankovich cycles. The three Milankovich cycles include the tilt of the earth, which varies over a 41,000 year period; the shape of the earth’s orbit, which changes over a period of 100,000 years; and the Precession of the Equinoxes, also known as the earth’s ‘wobble’, which gradually rotates the direction of the earth’s axis over a period of 26,000 years.

    According to the Milankovich theory of Ice Age causation, these three astronomical cycles, each of which effects the amount of solar radiation which reaches the earth, act together to produce the cycle of cold Ice Age maximums and warm interglacials.

    Elements of the astronomical theory of Ice Age causation were first presented by the French mathematician Joseph Adhemar in 1842, it<script></script> was developed further by the English prodigy Joseph Croll in 1875, and the theory was established in its present form by the Czech mathematician Milutin Milankovich in the 1920s and 30s. In 1976 the prestigious journal “Science” published a landmark paper by John Imbrie, James Hays, and Nicholas Shackleton entitled “Variations in the Earth's orbit: Pacemaker of the Ice Ages,” which described the correlation which the trio of scientist/authors had found between the climate data obtained from ocean sediment cores and the patterns of the astronomical Milankovich cycles. Since the late 1970s, the Milankovich theory has remained the predominant theory to account for Ice Age causation among climate scientists, and hence the Milankovich theory is always described in textbooks of climatology and in encyclopaedia articles about the Ice Ages.

    In their 1976 paper Imbrie, Hays, and Shackleton wrote that their own climate forecasts, which were based on sea-sediment cores and the Milankovich cycles, "… must be qualified in two ways. First, they apply only to the natural component of future climatic trends - and not to anthropogenic effects such as those due to the burning of fossil fuels. Second, they describe only the long-term trends, because they are linked to orbital variations with periods of 20,000 years and longer. Climatic oscillations at higher frequencies are not predicted... the results indicate that the long-term trend over the next 20,000 years is towards extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation and cooler climate."

    During the 1970s the famous American astronomer Carl Sagan and other scientists began promoting the theory that ‘greenhouse gasses’ such as carbon dioxide, or CO2, produced by human industries could lead to catastrophic global warming. Since the 1970s the theory of ‘anthropogenic global warming’ (AGW) has gradually become accepted<script></script> as fact by most of the academic establishment, and their acceptance of AGW has inspired a global movement to encourage governments to make pivotal changes to prevent the worsening of AGW.

    The central piece of evidence that is cited in support of the AGW theory is the famous ‘hockey stick’ graph which was presented by Al Gore in his 2006 film “An Inconvenient Truth.” The ‘hockey stick’ graph shows an acute upward spike in global temperatures which began during the 1970s and continued through the winter of 2006/07. However, this warming trend was interrupted when the winter of 2007/8 delivered the deepest snow cover to the Northern Hemisphere since 1966 and the coldest temperatures since 2001. It now appears that the current Northern Hemisphere winter of 2008/09 will probably equal or surpass the winter of 2007/08 for both snow depth and cold temperatures.

    The main flaw in the AGW theory is that its proponents focus on evidence from only the past one thousand years at most, while ignoring the evidence from the past million years -- evidence which is essential for a true understanding of climatology. The data from paleoclimatology provides us with an alternative and more credible explanation for the recent global temperature spike, based on the natural cycle of Ice Age maximums and interglacials.

    In 1999 the British journal “Nature” published the results of data derived from glacial ice cores collected at the Russia ’s Vostok station in Antarctica during the 1990s. The Vostok ice core data includes a record of global atmospheric temperatures, atmospheric CO2 and other greenhouse gases, and airborne particulates starting from 420,000 years ago and continuing through history up to our present time.

    The graph of the Vostok ice core data shows that the Ice Age maximums and the warm interglacials occur within a regular cyclic<script></script> pattern, the graph-line of which is similar to the rhythm of a heartbeat on an electrocardiogram tracing. The Vostok data graph also shows that changes in global CO2 levels lag behind global temperature changes by about eight hundred years. What that indicates is that global temperatures precede or cause global CO2 changes, and not the reverse. In other words, increasing atmospheric CO2 is not causing global temperature to rise; instead the natural cyclic increase in global temperature is causing global CO2 to rise.

    The reason that global CO2 levels rise and fall in response to the global temperature is because cold water is capable of retaining more CO2 than warm water. That is why carbonated beverages loose their carbonation, or CO2, when stored in a warm environment. We store our carbonated soft drinks, wine, and beer in a cool place to prevent them from loosing their ‘fizz’, which is a feature of their carbonation, or CO2 content. The earth is currently warming as a result of the natural Ice Age cycle, and as the oceans get warmer, they release increasing amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.

    Because the release of CO2 by the warming oceans lags behind the changes in the earth’s temperature, we should expect to see global CO2 levels continue to rise for another eight hundred years after the end of the earth’s current Interglacial warm period. We should already be eight hundred years into the coming Ice Age before global CO2 levels begin to drop in response to the increased chilling of the world’s oceans.

    The Vostok ice core data graph reveals that global CO2 levels regularly rose and fell in a direct response to the natural cycle of Ice Age minimums and maximums during the past four hundred and twenty thousand years. Within that natural cycle, about every 110,000 years global temperatures, followed by global CO2 levels, have peaked at<script></script> approximately the same levels which they are at today.

    About 325,000 years ago, at the peak of a warm interglacial, global temperature and CO2 levels were higher than they are today. Today we are again at the peak, and near to the end, of a warm interglacial, and the earth is now due to enter the next Ice Age. If we are lucky, we may have a few years to prepare for it. The Ice Age will return, as it always has, in its regular and natural cycle, with or without any influence from the effects of AGW.

    The AGW theory is based on data that is drawn from a ridiculously narrow span of time and it demonstrates a wanton disregard for the ‘big picture’ of long-term climate change. The data from paleoclimatology, including ice cores, sea sediments, geology, paleobotany and zoology, indicate that we are on the verge of entering another Ice Age, and the data also shows that severe and lasting climate change can occur within only a few years. While concern over the dubious threat of Anthropogenic Global Warming continues to distract the attention of people throughout the world, the very real threat of the approaching and inevitable Ice Age, which will render large parts of the Northern Hemisphere uninhabitable, is being foolishly ignored.

    Gregory F. Fegel

    <!-- AUTOLINKS ON -->
    </td> </tr> </tbody></table>
    © 1999-2006. «PRAVDA.Ru». When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, hyperlink to PRAVDA.Ru should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of PRAVDA.Ru's editors. ​
     
  14. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    I could have posted this in one of the other threads about Obama's cabinet choices, but it really illustrates just why there is this man made global warming hoax in the first place. See the bolded parts. Yeah, it's the Washington Times but if you find fault with the source, at least show why the journalism in this piece is faulty.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/12/obama-climate-czar-has-socialist-ties/

    Obama climate czar has socialist ties


    Stephen Dinan (Contact)


    Until last week, Carol M. Browner, President-elect Barack Obama's pick as global warming czar, was listed as one of 14 leaders of a socialist group's Commission for a Sustainable World Society, which calls for "global governance" and says rich countries must shrink their economies to address climate change.

    By Thursday, Mrs. Browner's name and biography had been removed from Socialist International's Web page, though a photo of her speaking June 30 to the group's congress in Greece was still available.
    Socialist International, an umbrella group for many of the world's social democratic political parties such as Britain's Labor Party, says it supports socialism and is harshly critical of U.S. policies.

    The group's Commission for a Sustainable World Society, the organization's action arm on climate change, says the developed world must reduce consumption and commit to binding and punitive limits on greenhouse gas emissions.

    Mr. Obama, who has said action on climate change would be a priority in his administration, tapped Mrs. Browner last month to fill a new position as White House coordinator of climate and energy policies. The appointment does not need Senate confirmation.

    Mr. Obama's transition team said Mrs. Browner's membership in the organization is not a problem and that it brings experience in U.S. policymaking to her new role.

    "The Commission for a Sustainable World Society includes world leaders from a variety of political parties, including British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who succeeded Tony Blair, in serving as vice president of the convening organization," Obama transition spokesman Nick Shapiro said.

    "Carol Browner was chosen to help the president-elect coordinate energy and climate policy because she understands that our efforts to create jobs, achieve energy security and combat climate change demand integration among different agencies; cooperation between federal, state and local governments; and partnership with the private sector," Mr. Shapiro said in an e-mail.

    Mrs. Browner ran the Environmental Protection Agency under President Clinton. Until she was tapped for the Obama administration, she was on the board of directors for the National Audubon Society, the League of Conservation Voters, the Center for American Progress and former Vice President Al Gore's Alliance for Climate Protection.

    Her name has been removed from the Gore organization's Web site list of directors, and the Audubon Society issued a press release about her departure from that organization.

    Republicans said Mrs. Browner's work with Socialist International raises questions.

    "Does she agree with the group's positions on global governance - that the United States should abdicate its international leadership to international organizations? Does she support its position that the international community should be the ultimate arbiter of climate change policy?" said Antonia Ferrier, a spokeswoman for House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican.

    "These are questions that merit answers - especially when you consider this group's deep skepticism about America's ability to be a force for positive change in the world," she said.

    An aide on the Obama team said its information shows that Mrs. Browner resigned from the organization in June 2008. The aide, who asked not to be named because he was discussing internal matters, said the transition team was aware she had been a member of the group when she was vetted.

    The Socialist International Web site didn't have a copy of her June 30 speech, but the agenda for the meeting had her scheduled to speak as part of a panel on "How do we strengthen the multilateral architecture for a sustainable future?"

    Other panel participants were Sergey Mironov, speaker of the Russian legislature's upper chamber and a close ally of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin; Zhang Zhijun, vice minister of the International Department of the Chinese Communist Party's Central Committee; and Jesus Caldera, a former Minister of Employment and Social Affairs of the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party.

    A woman answering the phone at Socialist International's headquarters in London said all officers were traveling.

    Nobody from the organization returned a message left Friday.

    Socialist International bills itself as the world body of democratic socialist movements. It includes members ranging from Israel's Labor Party and France's Socialist Party to Angola's MPLA, which won the 1970s Angolan civil war with the aid of Soviet arms and Cuban troops.

    The organization distinguishes itself from violent or revolutionary communist parties. However, some such groups, including the Chinese Communist Party, have been invited to its events as guest organizations.
    The Democratic Socialists of America, not the Democratic Party, is listed as the group's U.S. representative. But Mrs. Browner was listed as an individual member of Socialist International, but not a member of the DSA.

    While agreeing with Mr. Obama on the need for action to address climate change, the organization wants more draconian policies than the president-elect's preferred solution.

    During the presidential campaign, Mr. Obama called for a cap-and-trade system to control carbon emissions. He argued that such a system is efficient and lets the free market determine where it's easiest to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

    Socialist International says such "flexible mechanisms" do not clamp down hard enough on polluters.
    The organization often takes a decidedly critical view of the U.S.

    At this summer's meeting, the group issued a statement on economics that blasted the "neo-liberal market ideology and the unilateralist, U.S.-dominated approach in the global economic system," and attacked the U.S. for dominating international financial institutions.

    At its meeting earlier in 2008 in Santiago, Chile, Socialist International endorsed "global governance" as the solution to the world's problems of peace and climate change.

    At a July meeting in St. Petersburg, the commission said developed countries "should think of decreasing current consumption levels" - which would mean shrinking their economies - in order to help the environment.

    Socialist International regularly blasts the construction of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border. The fence was approved by both houses of Congress, including with Mr. Obama's vote in the Senate.

    Socialist International was congratulatory when Mr. Obama won the election, issuing a statement noting that "the sky may seem a bit brighter today" but warning still that "there are enormous global challenges that must be addressed effectively and without delay."
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2009
  15. lukewarmplay

    lukewarmplay Hired Goons

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,000
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I've only read this last page, but fwiw, warming is supposed to be associated with increased precipitation, which includes snowfall. The atmosphere's generally going to be holding more moisture. Sorry if this point was made earlier.
     
  16. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    You have to admit this is pretty funny.

    http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=9698958

    Gore ice sculpture unveiled in Fairbanks
    <table style="display: none;" id="wnStoryBox" name="D20" align="left" bgcolor="#ffffff" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="3" width="180"> <tbody><tr> <td> <!--AD 180x150 LOCAL--> <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td align="center">[​IMG]</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="center"><iframe id="wnsz_20" name="wnsz_20" allowtransparency="true" style="visibility: hidden;" border="1" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" height="150" width="180">&lt;SCRIPT LANGUAGE='JavaScript1.1'&gt;if (document.layers) {document.write('&lt;SCR' + 'IPT language=JavaScript1.1 SRC=/Global/ad.asp?type=single&amp;cls1=News&amp;src1=loc&amp;spct1=100&amp;sz1=wnsz_20&amp;callType=script /&gt;'); document.close();}&lt;/SCRIPT&gt;</iframe><script language="JavaScript1.1">coreAdsCreate('wnsz_20', 'loc', '100', 'wnsz_20', 'News');</script></td> </tr> <tr> <td align="center"> [​IMG]
    </td> </tr> </tbody></table>
    </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <!-- -->
    Associated Press - January 19, 2009 8:14 PM ET

    FAIRBANKS, Alaska (AP) - Al Gore is now a wintertime fixture in Fairbanks.
    Well, make that an ice sculpture of the 2007 Nobel Prize winner and leader in the movement to draw attention to climate change and global warming.

    Local businessman Craig Compeau unveiled the frozen likeness on Monday.

    The 8 1/2-foot-tall, 5-ton sculpture dominates a downtown street corner from its perch on the back of a flatbed truck.

    Compeau says he's a "moderate" critic of global warming theories. He used Monday's unveiling of the sculpture to invite Gore to Fairbanks -- where it was 22 degrees on Monday -- to explain his global warming theories.

    He says it will stand through March, unless it melts before then.

    Information from: Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, http://www.newsminer.com

     
  17. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    This is funny, too. And typical.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article5536973.ece

    Met Office forecasts a supercomputer embarrassment

    A new £33m machine purchased to calculate how climate change will affect Britain, has a giant carbon footprint of its own

    For the Met Office the forecast is considerable embarrassment. It has spent £33m on a new supercomputer to calculate how climate change will affect Britain – only to find the new machine has a giant carbon footprint of its own.

    “The new supercomputer, which will become operational later this year, will emit 14,400 tonnes of CO2 a year,” said Dave Britton, the Met Office’s chief press officer. This is equivalent to the CO2 emitted by 2,400 homes – generating an average of six tonnes each a year.
     
  18. barfo

    barfo triggered obsessive commie pinko Staff Member Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    32,643
    Likes Received:
    22,677
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Blazer OT board
    Yes, but it would be a lot funnier if they provided a photo of the sculpture.

    barfo
     
  19. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Where did they ever find 8 1/2 tons of ice near the arctic to make that sculpture? I am told it's all melted.
     
  20. barfo

    barfo triggered obsessive commie pinko Staff Member Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    32,643
    Likes Received:
    22,677
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Blazer OT board
    Since when do computers emit CO2?

    barfo
     

Share This Page