I was wrong about global warming

[CanuckInUSA 0]

This just in from Russia during the Copenhagen conference.

In case someone is in too much of a rush, the crux of this article reads "the Russians are suggesting that the entire global temperature record used by the IPCC is a crock." Why? "The IPCC had used only 25% of the data reported by Russia's weather stations and that over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations". That is pretty substantial considering Russia occupies 12.5% of the world’s land mass.

More proof that Al Gore and the IPCC are liars and have tampered with their data. What is the matter Al?
Why do you continue to selectively use some but not all the data in order to further your political agenda?

Of course I fully expect the Climategate preachers to lay into to me now telling me that I am full of shit and that it is the Russians who are lying not Al and their beloved IPCC friends and colleagues. But the funny thing happened to me on the way to pressing the submit button. I realized that Russia and Canada have a lot in common. We are the two largest land mass countries in this world, we both get to experience some really really nasty cold weather for many months of a calendar year, both Canada and Russia will be royally screwed by the "Cap and Trade" scam as we burn fuels trying to keep ourselves from freezing to death and finally Russians and Canadians know so much more about hockey sticks than Al Gore could ever dream of knowing. Somebody please highstick Al Gore. Besides being used to score goals, Al needs to experience first hand what damage a hockey stick can do to your designer elitist dental work. If Liberals are allowed to celebrate when Berlusconi is assaulted (BTW I do not support Berlusconi), then Russians and Canadians can celebrate when Al Gore loses his teeth with the very same hockey stick he was caught telling lies with.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[billvon 3,120]

>I know it is hard for you to accept this, but we do have modern cities up
>here in Canada.

And I know that it's hard for you to accept, but we do have snow down here, too. And it's a lot like your snow.

>If we do not burn fuels to keep ourselves warm, we will die.

Then by all means, burn fuels. Methane (natural gas) is a good one.

>But we know you feel that we should be charged excessive "Cap and
>Trade" taxation just to keep ourselves alive up here.

Nope, I don't think that.

>After all people who burn carbon need to be severely punished in your
>new world order?

Nope. Two strikes.

>We know that you view Al Gore as a God, we know you view everything
>the IPCC says as gospel.

Strike three, yer out!

When one is speaking from a position of ignorance, it might be better to speak a little less.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

When one is speaking from a position of ignorance, it might be better to speak a little less.

Does this advice also apply to Al Gore and the IPCC?

Why do they selectively use some but not all the data?
Selective data is not science, it is propaganda.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[justinb138 0]

Quote

>Dr. Spencer’s research has been entirely supported by U.S. government
>agencies: NASA, NOAA, and DOE. He has never been asked by any oil
>company to perform any kind of service. Not even Exxon-Mobil.

True. But he is a member of the Heartland Institute, which is heavily funded by Exxon-Mobil (and many other oil companies.)

I find the more people proclaim their independence from oil company funding the more likely it is that they are actually funded by such organizations. Sure fooled you.

How is Exxon-Mobil funding the Heartland Institute any different than than governments funding the AGW scientists?

Like Exxon-Mobil, the governments have a vested interest in the conclusions of the research - no AGW and they lose their excuse for more power and control. I'm sure they wouldn't go to great lengths to protect that.

[billvon 3,120]

>Does this advice also apply to Al Gore and the IPCC?

I'm afraid I don't share your Al Gore obsession. Don't really care what he says.

>Why do they selectively use some but not all the data?

Because not all the data is valid. I've thrown out reams of test data because the testing methodology was flawed.

[billvon 3,120]

>How is Exxon-Mobil funding the Heartland Institute any different
>than than governments funding the AGW scientists?

Exxon-Mobil is in business to make money. Governmental representatives do what they do to get re-elected. Doesn't mean either one is good or evil. Just means that they have different goals.

>Like Exxon-Mobil, the governments have a vested interest in the
>conclusions of the research.

Yes, they do. If climate change starts to cause more problems, and they are still denying it exists, they get voted out of office. Hence, they have a vested interest in understanding the science.

[justinb138 0]

Quote

Yes, they do. If climate change starts to cause more problems, and they are still denying it exists, they get voted out of office. Hence, they have a vested interest in understanding the science.

Going to ignore that last part of my statement? Or do you think that power and control isn't in the interest of the government?

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Yes, they do. If climate change starts to cause more problems, and they are still denying it exists, they get voted out of office. Hence, they have a vested interest in understanding the science.

Going to ignore that last part of my statement? Or do you think that power and control isn't in the interest of the government?

But but but....it's UNPRECEDENTED WARMING!!!! 2008 was the WARMEST YEAR EVER!!!

Uh....pay no attention to those ice-core records, k?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,120]

>Or do you think that power and control isn't in the interest of
>the government?

Sure it is. And if they can control people by using AGW as an excuse to pass laws that give them more power, they will try to do that. If they can do that by convincing people that the denier movement is a righteous and holy defense of freedom, they will do that. Do you really think Sarah Palin is denying global warming because she's smart enough to analyze the data involved? Or is she doing it to accrue more political power? Denial is the best political angle she's found in years.

Arnold put it pretty well:

"You have to ask: what was she trying to accomplish? Is she really interested in this subject or is she interested in her career and in winning the nomination? You have to take all these things with a grain of salt."

[billvon 3,120]

>2008 was the WARMEST YEAR EVER!!!

Lying again, Mike? The problem with lies like that is that it's very easy to check on your honesty via the net.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

When one is speaking from a position of ignorance, it might be better to speak a little less.

Does this advice also apply to Al Gore and the IPCC?

Why do they selectively use some but not all the data?
Selective data is not science, it is propaganda.

Color me surprised... that two of the LARGEST countires with landmasses the farthest north MIGHT have an agenda of denying that warming is occuring on this planet.

Canada and Russia stand to gain drastically when the growing season extends further north due to climate change.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

>2008 was the WARMEST YEAR EVER!!!

Lying again, Mike? The problem with lies like that is that it's very easy to check on your honesty via the net.

What do you expect from someone who claimed Washington DC became a state when it started levying a city income tax?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>2008 was the WARMEST YEAR EVER!!!

Lying again, Mike? The problem with lies like that is that it's very easy to check on your honesty via the net.

I'm following the sterling example of the man-made global warming scientists....or was it the Goreacle®? I can't keep track of which one spouted which bullshit anymore.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

>2008 was the WARMEST YEAR EVER!!!

Lying again, Mike? The problem with lies like that is that it's very easy to check on your honesty via the net.

What do you expect from someone who claimed Washington DC became a state when it started levying a city income tax?

All that education and STILL unable to comprehend sarcasm - amazing.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,120]

>I'm following the sterling example . . . I can't keep track of which one
>spouted which bullshit anymore.

OK. So you're just posting bullshit. No problem; that's what this forum is here for.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Canada and Russia stand to gain drastically when the growing season extends further north due to climate change.

I welcome global warming ... I am sick and tired of freezing my ass off.

No matter what I say the new "Climate Change" religion will reign supreme in some people's eyes. But here is something to ponder. What is the matter, don't you believe in evolution? Does your new "Climate Change" religious views include thinking that Mother Nature will not adapt like she always has? ROFLMAO ... and some of you call yourself scientists who all of a sudden will ignore evolution. Must be nice to live in a bubble where the new religion charts exactly what will happen to the world.

It's true Virginia yes there is a Santa Claus and all the ice in the world will melt within 5 years from this Copenhagen summit unless you buy into our Cap and Trade system right now. The IPCC has already confirmed this as fact (using their doctored data).

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[billvon 3,120]

>I welcome global warming ... I am sick and tired of freezing my ass off.

Unfortunately the change you'll see will be a few degrees; not really enough to keep you warmer.

> Does your new "Climate Change" religious views include thinking that
> Mother Nature will not adapt like she always has?

Nature will indeed adapt as it always has. We may just not like the adaptations. In the past, such adaptations have included mass extinctions - which have opened the door for other species to fill the (now-vacated) niche.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Nature will indeed adapt as it always has. We may just not like the adaptations. In the past, such adaptations have included mass extinctions - which have opened the door for other species to fill the (now-vacated) niche.

The insect is probably the only species that will be around for any length of time (assuming they have water and something to eat). Humans will probably create many glow in the dark glass parking lots soon what with Iran/Israel + USA's support of Israel, Russia's historical support of Iran, the Jihadist being so close to having control of Pakistan's nukes and India their historical foe living next door with their own nukes. Not sure where China's 1+ billion people will fit in this puzzle but they can't ignore glass parking lots. In summary all this shit is poised to hit the fan before Al Gore's ice melts and in the end the species with the best chance at some sort of future will be the insects.

But least we forget, many many many moons from now the planet is doomed anyway once the sun burns out.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[billvon 3,120]

>In summary all this shit is poised to hit the fan before Al Gore's ice melts

Eh, in the 60's everyone thought nuclear war was imminent. That was 50 years ago. We seem to be able to make the right decisions more often than not.

>and in the end the species with the best chance at some sort of future will be the insects.

Why? Radiation? The area around Chernobyl is one of the healthiest ecosystems in the Ukraine. Moose, wild horses, eagles, bears and birds have made a big comeback. Sadly, removing people and adding lots of radiation was, overall, a plus for wildlife.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Why? Radiation? The area around Chernobyl is one of the healthiest ecosystems in the Ukraine. Moose, wild horses, eagles, bears and birds have made a big comeback. Sadly, removing people and adding lots of radiation was, overall, a plus for wildlife.

See we can actually agree on something in this thread and life on this planet is not doomed. Mother Nature will find a way to adapt as she has done in the past. Now Human life? ... haha ... we humans are a cancer. I agree we have done damage to this planet and we have even caused some species to go extinct with our selfishness and stupidity. Maybe we can agree on something else here now. Would you agree that the human population growth in the last century is partially responsible for the damage we have done? There are too many humans ... especially in the developing world.

But Cap and Trade doesn't address this problem, unless you are open to the idea used in the 70s science fiction flick "Logan's Run".

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

>2008 was the WARMEST YEAR EVER!!!

Lying again, Mike? The problem with lies like that is that it's very easy to check on your honesty via the net.

What do you expect from someone who claimed Washington DC became a state when it started levying a city income tax?

You and your bro bill have lost this thread bad. I am surprised you stuck you neck into it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

As will man

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>2008 was the WARMEST YEAR EVER!!!

Lying again, Mike? The problem with lies like that is that it's very easy to check on your honesty via the net.

What do you expect from someone who claimed Washington DC became a state when it started levying a city income tax?

You and your bro bill have lost this thread bad. I am surprised you stuck you neck into it

Don't dislocate your shoulder while patting yourself on the back. You'll need the use of your arm to pull your foot from your mouth.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>2008 was the WARMEST YEAR EVER!!!

Lying again, Mike? The problem with lies like that is that it's very easy to check on your honesty via the net.

What do you expect from someone who claimed Washington DC became a state when it started levying a city income tax?

You and your bro bill have lost this thread bad. I am surprised you stuck you neck into it

Don't dislocate your shoulder while patting yourself on the back. You'll need the use of your arm to pull your foot from your mouth.

My arm and shoulder are just fine oh perturbed one.



Sad you have lost a couple of your sorry arguments against the "deniers" me thinks


Oh, and it in not MY hoof that needs an extraction

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[riddler 0]

Quote

Why do they selectively use some but not all the data?
Selective data is not science, it is propaganda.

Not true: poor tests = bad data. One always throws out bad data, even if it is slightly corrupt. If the premise of the test is false, you throw out the test.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD