Global warming sham, "evidence" manipulated

According to the data after the biasing was removed, the 1930s were the hottest in the last century and not the 1990s. It would appear that some government fellows decided the best way to ingratiate themselves and get funding was to bias the data to show things that were not true; like man made global warming.

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2...the-year-2000/

I'll report and you decide

According to the data after the biasing was removed, the 1930s were the hottest in the last century and not the 1990s. It would appear that some government fellows decided the best way to ingratiate themselves and get funding was to bias the data to show things that were not true; like man made global warming.

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2...the-year-2000/

I'll report and you decide Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Right, the guy you believe is right...... because he is the guy you believe. I'll not belabor Goddard's credentials or again point out that virtually every single climatologist on the face of the fucking planet disagrees with Mr. Goddard.....and the Admiral. It's the era of the new Know Nothings.

Anyway, there is a much better argument/discussion at the bottom of the Admiral's link than you are ever going to find on the here. Save yourself the time and just go read it. One added benefit is that the Admiral didn't post there so you don't have to waste any time reading his idiotic meanderings......

One added benefit is that the Admiral didn't post there so you don't have to waste any time reading his idiotic meanderings...... Originally Posted by timpage

The Admiral reminds me more of Gilligan.

The Admiral reminds me more of Gilligan. Originally Posted by WTF

Exactly.

Regardless of what Al Gore and his ilk would have us believe there is more than one side to the global warming debate.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/e...global-cooling

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/e...ice-hit-record

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-L...-scandal-grows

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/...ole-in-global/

CO2 GOOD; CLIMATE CHANGE BUNK; GREENS ARE RAGING EXTREMISTS, SAYS GREENPEACE CO-FOUNDER


by JAMES DELINGPOLE 19 Jun 2014 625



"Climate change" is a theory for which there is "no scientific proof at all" says the co-founder of Greenpeace. And the green movement has become a "combination of extreme political ideology and religious fundamentalism rolled into one."

Patrick Moore, a Canadian environmentalist who helped found Greenpeace in the Seventies but subsequently left in protest at its increasingly extreme, anti-scientific, anti-capitalist stance, argues that the green position on climate change fails the most basic principles of the scientific method.

"The certainty among many scientists that humans are the main cause of climate change, including global warming, is not based on the replication of observable events. It is based on just two things, the theoretical effect of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, predominantly carbon dioxide, and the predictions of computer models using those theoretical calculations. There is no scientific "proof" at all."


Moore goes on to list some key facts about "climate change" which are ignored by true believers.

1. The concentration of CO2 in the global atmosphere is lower today, even including human emissions, than it has been during most of the existence of life on Earth.

2. The global climate has been much warmer than it is today during most of the existence of life on Earth. Today we are in an interglacial period of the Pleistocene Ice Age that began 2.5 million years ago and has not ended.

3. There was an Ice Age 450 million years ago when CO2 was about 10 times higher than it is today.

4. Humans evolved in the tropics near the equator. We are a tropical species and can only survive in colder climates due to fire, clothing and shelter.

5. CO2 is the most important food for all life on earth. All green plants use CO2 to produce the sugars that provide energy for their growth and our growth. Without CO2 in the atmosphere carbon-based life could never have evolved.

6. The optimum CO2 level for most plants is about 1600 parts per million, four times higher than the level today. This is why greenhouse growers purposely inject the CO2-rich exhaust from their gas and wood-fired heaters into the greenhouse, resulting in a 40-80 per cent increase in growth.

7. If human emissions of CO2 do end up causing significant warming (which is not certain) it may be possible to grow food crops in northern Canada and Russia, vast areas that are now too cold for agriculture.

8. Whether increased CO2 levels cause significant warming or not, the increased CO2 levels themselves will result in considerable increases in the growth rate of plants, including our food crops and forests.

9. There has been no further global warming for nearly 18 years during which time about 25 per cent of all the CO2 ever emitted by humans has been added to the atmosphere. How long will it remain flat and will it next go up or back down? Now we are out of the realm of facts and back into the game of predictions.

Moore makes his remarks in the foreword to a new book by bestselling Australian geologist Dr Ian Plimer called Not For Greens. The book describes the various, complex industrial processes which go into the making of just a single teaspoon, starting with the mining of various metals.
If Greenpeace's membership remained true to their principles they would have to eat with their bare hands because, as Moore notes, they are opposed to mining in all its forms.

"If you ask them for the name of any mine that is operating in an environmentally acceptable standard you will draw a blank. They have become so cornered by their own extremism that they must deny their daily use of cell phones, computers, bicycles, rapid transit, and yes, the simple teaspoon."

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-L...ce-co-founder/

Regardless of what Al Gore and his ilk would have us believe there is more than one side to the global warming debate.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/e...global-cooling

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/e...ice-hit-record

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-L...-scandal-grows

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/...ole-in-global/ Originally Posted by cowboy8055

Al Gore hasn't been a player in the debate for years. You can dig up whatever kind of hyper-partisan bullshit links you like.....and, you can believe whatever you want. But, the proposition stands : virtually every single climatologist in the world today believes you're wrong. It's like I said. We' ve entered the new era of the Know Nothings. They don't care about science or scientific proof unless it aligns with their pre-existing conservative beliefs. It's why all the religious whackos line up with the GOP. Fucking fairy tails become truth to the sheep.

Right, the guy you believe is right...... because he is the guy you believe. I'll not belabor Goddard's credentials or again point out that virtually every single climatologist on the face of the fucking planet disagrees with Mr. Goddard.....and the Admiral. It's the era of the new Know Nothings.

Anyway, there is a much better argument/discussion at the bottom of the Admiral's link than you are ever going to find on the here. Save yourself the time and just go read it. One added benefit is that the Admiral didn't post there so you don't have to waste any time reading his idiotic meanderings...... Originally Posted by timpage

George Orwell explained how this worked.

“He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.”
― George Orwell, 1984

got that Libtard? see how that works now? Any "scientist" who fakes their data is a fraud and these people are FRAUDS.

Fakegate: The Obnoxious Fabrication of Global Warming

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterfer...lobal-warming/

Regardless of what Al Gore and his ilk would have us believe there is more than one side to the global warming debate.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/e...global-cooling

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/e...ice-hit-record

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-L...-scandal-grows

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/...ole-in-global/ Originally Posted by cowboy8055

Exactly right. That said, while the so-called "Climate Change" is irrelevant, the real point is the massive over-polluting of this Planet. that will destroy this Planet far faster than a few degrees on a thermometer.

Global warming sham, "evidence" manipulated Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

What if I changed the verbiage a bit?

Iraq War sham, "evidence" manipulated
Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Would you bee so keen to post nonstop about it?

Global warming is a sham the same way cigarettes causes cancer is a scam.

SNICK

Al Gore hasn't been a player in the debate for years. You can dig up whatever kind of hyper-partisan bullshit links you like.....and, you can believe whatever you want. But, the proposition stands : virtually every single climatologist in the world today believes you're wrong. Actually, that isn't true. It's like I said. We' ve entered the new era of the Know Nothings. They don't care about science or scientific proof unless it aligns with their pre-existing conservative beliefs. It's why all the religious whackos line up with the GOP. Fucking fairy tails become truth to the sheep. Originally Posted by timpage

Ijs

Right, the guy you believe is right...... because he is the guy you believe. I'll not belabor Goddard's credentials or again point out that virtually every single climatologist on the face of the fucking planet disagrees with Mr. Goddard..... (this called a lie and in this case a really big lie) and the Admiral. It's the era of the new Know Nothings.

Anyway, there is a much better argument/discussion at the bottom of the Admiral's link than you are ever going to find on the here. Save yourself the time and just go read it. One added benefit is that the Admiral didn't post there so you don't have to waste any time reading his idiotic meanderings...... Originally Posted by timpage

This is not about Goddard's credentials. That is a straw man argument. He is a blogger who is quoting people with credentials. Like Al Gore pretends he is a climatologist. Goddard doesn't make that claim which gives him more credibility than Gore.

However Goddard has been right when he said that warmist treat "climate sceptics" like Jews in 1930s Germany. Many warmists have publicly stated that deniers should be "reeducated" or "put in camps". How does if feel to be on the side of the new Nazis Timmie?

You should go read Patrick Moore. He was a member of Greenpeace and he is a climatologist. He has strong doubts about when the public has been fed.

Do you like that taste Timmie?

It's like I said. We' ve entered the new era of the Know Nothings. Originally Posted by timpage

I know it. Obama zombies everywhere.

Here are a few scientists who don't believe in global warming:

Freeman Dyson, professor emeritus of the School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study; Fellow of the Royal Society

Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan emeritus professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and member of the National Academy of SciencesNils-Axel Mörner, retired head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics department at Stockholm University, former chairman of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution (1999–2003)
Garth Paltridge, retired chief research scientist, CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research and retired director of the Institute of the Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre, visiting fellow Australian National University
Peter Stilbs, professor of physical chemistry at Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm
Philip Stott, professor emeritus of biogeography at the University of London
Hendrik Tennekes, retired director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute
Fritz Vahrenholt, German politician and energy executive with a doctorate in chemistry

Here are a few more who believe that global warming is natural;

Khabibullo Abdusamatov, astrophysicist at Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
Tim Ball, professor emeritus of geography at the University of Winnipeg
Robert M. Carter, former head of the school of earth sciences at James Cook University
Ian Clark, hydrogeologist, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa
Chris de Freitas, associate professor, School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science, University of Auckland
David Douglass, solid-state physicist, professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University
William M. Gray, professor emeritus and head of the Tropical Meteorology Project, Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University
William Happer, physicist specializing in optics and spectroscopy, Princeton University
Ole Humlum, professor of geology at the University of Oslo
Wibjörn Karlén, professor emeritus of geography and geology at the University of Stockholm.
William Kininmonth, meteorologist, former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology
David Legates, associate professor of geography and director of the Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware
Anthony Lupo, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Missouri
Tad Murty, oceanographer; adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa
Tim Patterson, paleoclimatologist and professor of geology at Carleton University in Canada.
Ian Plimer, professor emeritus of Mining Geology, the University of Adelaide.
Arthur B. Robinson, American politician, biochemist and former faculty member at the University of California, San Diego
Murry Salby, atmospheric scientist, former professor at Macquarie University
Nicola Scafetta, research scientist in the physics department at Duke University
Tom Segalstad, head of the Geology Museum at the University of Oslo
Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia
Willie Soon, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
Roy Spencer, principal research scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville
Henrik Svensmark, Danish National Space Center
George H. Taylor, former director of the Oregon Climate Service at Oregon State University
Jan Veizer, environmental geochemist, professor emeritus from University of Ottawa

Of course there are some who don't know if or what causes global warming;

Syun-Ichi Akasofu, retired professor of geophysics and founding director of the International Arctic Research Center of the University of Alaska Fairbanks.
Claude Allègre, French politician; geochemist, emeritus professor at Institute of Geophysics (Paris).
Robert Balling, a professor of geography at Arizona State University.
John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, contributor to several IPCC reports.
Petr Chylek, space and remote sensing sciences researcher, Los Alamos National Laboratory.
David Deming, geology professor at the University of Oklahoma.
Ivar Giaever, professor emeritus of physics at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
Vincent R. Gray, New Zealander physical chemist with expertise in coal ashes
Keith Idso, botanist, former adjunct professor of biology at Maricopa County Community College District and the vice president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
Antonino Zichichi, emeritus professor of nuclear physics at the University of Bologna and president of the World Federation of Scientists.


If you look them up they are some pretty big names here.