Global Warming Swindle

[MikeWM]

Vern beat me to the gun. My son showed me this:

video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9005566792811497638&q=The+Great+Global+Warming+Swindle&hl=en

No one besides Vern seems to have watched the video. It takes a little more than an hour. Everyone should see it. It was aired on British television on March 9.

It’s being repeated as I type, so I thought I’d take a look. It’s reasonably well-argued when viewed in isolation. But then so is ‘Loose Change’, which has been shown on the TV in various European countries. When viewed not in isolation, I’m far from convinced.

The credibility of IPPC UN report is also totally suspect due to the censorship that occured of the final report.

I think you have very different ideas of ‘censorship’ and ‘totally suspect’ then I have.

Carbon dioxide is irrelevant to tmeperature.

Well, it plainly isn’t. They are clearly very closely correlated. You may question the direction of causality, but there is certainly a link.

It goes into the history and the philosophy of this idea and the culprits range from right to left. The romanticization of peasant life seems to be a recurrent theme among the anti-carbon crowd. Just do without they say. Yeah, right.

Actually, when you put it that way, it makes the anti-carbon crowd sound rather like this guy called Jesus I guess that’s what my Bishop is getting at when he talks about climate change and the idea that we should ‘live simply so that others can simply live’.

Mike

 

[MikeWM]

It’s reasonably well-argued when viewed in isolation.

I take that back. The political stuff at the end about Africa and development was so full of holes and emotive strawmen that I couldn’t help but smile at how silly it was.

Mike

 

[Al_Masetti]

Just this morning I did not see Al Gore down by the creek, clad in a bark cloth breech clout, grubbing for freshwater mussels and eating them raw.

Mussels are icky.

Jet planes are cool.

 

[GregoryPalamas]

I take that back. The political stuff at the end about Africa and development was so full of holes and emotive strawmen that I couldn’t help but smile at how silly it was.

Mike

I think I’ll start a new thread on Africa.

CDL

 

[GregoryPalamas]

I take that back. The political stuff at the end about Africa and development was so full of holes and emotive strawmen that I couldn’t help but smile at how silly it was.

Mike

I think I’ll start a new thread on Africa.

CDL

 

[GregoryPalamas]

I take that back. The political stuff at the end about Africa and development was so full of holes and emotive strawmen that I couldn’t help but smile at how silly it was.

Mike

I think I’ll start a new thread on Africa.

CDL

 

[MikeWM]

It’s being repeated as I type, so I thought I’d take a look. It’s reasonably well-argued when viewed in isolation. But then so is ‘Loose Change’, which has been shown on the TV in various European countries. When viewed not in isolation, I’m far from convinced.

And I’m right not to be. Here’s one of the most succinct articles I’ve ever seen. It rips the whole programme to little tiny pieces.

guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,2032575,00.html

The arguments are wrong, and have been proven to be wrong. But as Monbiot says

Until recently, when found to be wrong, scientists went back to their labs to start again. Now, emboldened by the denial industry, some of them, like the film-makers, shriek “censorship!”. This is the best example of manufactured victimhood I have come across. If you demonstrate someone is wrong, you are now deemed to be silencing him.

Amen to that.

Mike

 

[2shelbys]

And I’m right not to be. Here’s one of the most succinct articles I’ve ever seen. It rips the whole programme to little tiny pieces.

No it does not. It only addresses two of the major points. First, it points out problems with the work of Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen et.al but neglects to mention the work of Dr Sami Solanki, the director of the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Germany. His research proved conclusively that the sun is indeed burning hotter now than at any time in recorded history. Second, it points out the claimed errors in satellite data that showed little or no warming without bothering to mention that the lack of warming shown in the satellite data has been confirmed by three other methods of measurement: john-daly.com/cause/cause.htm

The arguments are wrong, and have been proven to be wrong.

You are correct about that but you are wrong about which arguments have been proven to be wrong. Here is a page of links to articles that debunk pretty much every claim that the Global Warming Chicken Littles make. It should keep you busy for quite some time. If you actually read any of it.
john-daly.com/guests.htm

 

[MikeWM]

No it does not. It only addresses two of the major points.

You don’t think if two of the major points of the program are shown to be wrong - and quite easily shown to be wrong - then the rest is just a little… shall we say… suspect?

You are correct about that but you are wrong about which arguments have been proven to be wrong. Here is a page of links to articles that debunk pretty much every claim that the Global Warming Chicken Littles make. It should keep you busy for quite some time. If you actually read any of it.
john-daly.com/guests.htm

It’s a bit out of date

Mike

 

[2shelbys]

You don’t think if two of the major points of the program are shown to be wrong - and quite easily shown to be wrong - then the rest is just a little… shall we say… suspect?

It’s a bit out of date

Mike

That is the problem. They are not shown to be wrong nor is the independent research that conformed them using other methods. Are you implying that scientific data has a shelf life?

 

[MikeWM]

That is the problem. They are not shown to be wrong nor is the independent research that conformed them using other methods. Are you implying that scientific data has a shelf life?

More that I was interested why the site hasn’t been updated for some time - there is usually some reason, however irrelevant.

Pure raw data doesn’t age (assuming it is correct, given the calculation errors alluded to in Monbiot’s article), but any interpretation put on that data may well go out of date if theories are developing and being refined.

Mike

 

[gilliam]

Yesterday’s New York Times:

[A] report last June by the National Academies seemed to contradict Mr. Gore’s portrayal of recent temperatures as the highest in the past millennium. Instead, the report said, current highs appeared unrivaled since only 1600, the tail end of a temperature rise known as the medieval warm period…

“Nowhere does Mr. Gore tell his audience that all of the phenomena that he describes fall within the natural range of environmental change on our planet,” Robert M. Carter, a marine geologist at James Cook University in Australia, said in a September blog. “Nor does he present any evidence that climate during the 20th century departed discernibly from its historical pattern of constant change.”

In October, Dr. Easterbrook made similar points at the geological society meeting in Philadelphia. He hotly disputed Mr. Gore’s claim that “our civilization has never experienced any environmental shift remotely similar to this” threatened change. Nonsense, Dr. Easterbrook told the crowded session. He flashed a slide that showed temperature trends for the past 15,000 years. It highlighted 10 large swings, including the medieval warm period. These shifts, he said, were up to “20 times greater than the warming in the past century.”

 

[2shelbys]

More that I was interested why the site hasn’t been updated for some time - there is usually some reason, however irrelevant.

Pure raw data doesn’t age (assuming it is correct, given the calculation errors alluded to in Monbiot’s article), but any interpretation put on that data may well go out of date if theories are developing and being refined.

Mike

Yes, in this case it is because John Daly passed away in 2004.

 

[2shelbys]

Yesterday’s New York Times:

[/indent]

I also noticed this:

Benny J. Peiser, a social anthropologist in Britain who runs the Cambridge-Conference Network, or CCNet, an Internet newsletter on climate change and natural disasters, challenged the claim of scientific consensus with examples of pointed disagreement.
“Hardly a week goes by,” Dr. Peiser said, “without a new research paper that questions part or even some basics of climate change theory,” including some reports that offer alternatives to human activity for global warming.

and:

Paul Reiter, an active skeptic of global warming’s effects and director of the insects and infectious diseases unit of the Pasteur Institute in Paris, faulted Mr. Gore for his portrayal of global warming as spreading malaria.
“For 12 years, my colleagues and I have protested against the unsubstantiated claims,” Dr. Reiter wrote in The International Herald Tribune. “We have done the studies and challenged the alarmists, but they continue to ignore the facts.”

If there are so many skeptics (as those of us who look know), why is this the very first mention of them in the U.S. MSM?

 

[MikeWM]

Yes, in this case it is because John Daly passed away in 2004.

That’s quite a good reason, I suppose. But hasn’t someone taken over the site? Someone must be paying for it, at least.

Mike

 

[GregoryPalamas]

“Taking the Gospel to Old Blighty” by Wesley Pruden

“Both Al and Dave aspire to something called “carbon neutrality” and are trying to offset their emissions by trading indulgences with lesser beings. When Al flies off to hither and back to yon in a private jet to perform his duties as public scold, scarfing “dirty” jet fuel, he tries to offset these emissions by taking other energy-saving steps, such as installing smaller light bulbs in his closets. Truthfully, it’s inconvenient, but who will risk stubbing his toe in a dim closet to save the planet if Al won’t?”

images.washtimes.com/national/pruden.htm

I guess that means I can now install a light fixture in my closet. I also read that Mr. Dave Cameron rides his bicycle to Parliament. Of course his chaffeur follows in his limo carrying his briefcase. Also Mr. Cameron, the good green Torey, installed a wind turbine on top of his house in order to cut down on carbon emissions. Read the article to see what happened to that.

At least this “Global Warming” nonsense is providing us with something to laugh at. The only problem is it distracts us from serious issues. Then again…maybe we’ve all been too serious of late.

CDL

 

[rlg94086]

I thought you might enjoy this from Best-of-the-Web:
opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110009785

’An Over-Representation of Factual Presentations’
After our item yesterday on scientists critical of Al Gore’s “global warming” alarmism, a reader called our attention to an interview with Gore that appeared last May in a publication called Grist:
Q: There’s a lot of debate right now over the best way to communicate about global warming and get people motivated. Do you scare people or give them hope? What’s the right mix?
**Gore: **I think the answer to that depends on where your audience’s head is. In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.
“An over-representation of factual presentations of how dangerous it is.” Isn’t that what people accused President Bush of offering vis-à-vis the erstwhile Iraqi regime? Didn’t this lead a certain former vice president to thunder, "He betrayed this country! He played on our fears!"?

 

[2shelbys]

I thought you might enjoy this from Best-of-the-Web:
opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110009785

Is this an awesome post or what? Not surprising if you know Al Gore. “Over representation”, or as it is known in most circles, LYING, has always been his favorite political tool. You remember, he invented the internet, “Love Story” was written about him and Tipper, he initiated the “Love Canal” investigation, the various events he attended where he received illegal campaign contributions were OK because he “didn’t know they were fundraisers”, the one about the poor little girl who had to stand all day during class because there were not enough seats, the one about being “involved” with the strategic reserve since it’s beginning (even though it was established years before he was in Congress, telling a union meeting that his mother sang “look for the union label” to him as a lullaby (it was written when he was almost 30), his sister was “the very first peace corps volunteer” (she was a paid employee at their HQ and never went into the field), he “grew up on a farm” (no, he grew up in Washington D.C.), he claimed that “half of his campaign staff were women” when there were none, man, I could go on all night but it just makes it that much more sad that there are still people out there that trust anything he says.

 

[Al_Masetti]

“There is no controlling legal authority”. … a claim so audacious that it left everyone breathless.

 

[2shelbys]

“There is no controlling legal authority”. … a claim so audacious that it left everyone breathless.

Ah, how could I leave that gem out?