Major scandal; Now proven that the entire global warming threat is based on fabricated data

[John21652]

from the UK’s The Telegraph

This week has been truly historic. It has marked the beginning of the landslide that is collapsing the whole AGW imposture. The pseudo-science of global warming is a global laughing stock and Copenhagen is a farce. In the warmist camp the Main Man is a railway engineer with huge investments in the carbon industry. That says it all. The world’s boiler being heroically damped down by the Fat Controller. Al Gore, occupant of the only private house that can be seen from space, so huge is its energy consumption, wanted to charge punters $1,200 to be photographed with him at Copenhagen. There is a man who is really worried about the planet’s future.

And from Mark Steyn “Hookers Are Killing Polar Bears And Now You Can’t Water Your Lawn.”

 

[Calliso]

So since us AGW acceptors keep getting told it seems that we really must look at this icecap website I thought I would take a quick look.

First I see the often repeated claim that water vapor is 95% of the greenhouse effect.

This isn;t true and water vapor cannot be the cause of global warming either. why is explained in this link. yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2008/02/common-climate-misconceptions-the-water-vapor-feedback-2/

Then the claim that co2 levels are really low at this time. Well they are higher then they have been for the past about 15 million years. climate.ucla.edu/news/article.asp?parentid=4676

Of course levels have been much higher too but the climate was also much different during those times too.

And the claim about the temperature change and co2 levels.

grist.org/article/historically-co2-never-caused-temperature-change

skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm

 

[paully]

Who is the author of this site? Is he a former architect?

I don’t know what you’re talking about. www.icecap.us is a site set up by credible scientists. Oh…I forgot…you’re a lawyer.

 

[paully]

Are you speaking of the site setup by a former architect?

I wish I knew what you were talking about. Read about Joseph D’aleo. Dr Patricks, Dr Ball and others. These are climatologists. I wish I knew what you were talking about with architectures. BTW…I’ve seen your name before. The SYFY channel.

 

[paully]

So since us AGW acceptors keep getting told it seems that we really must look at this icecap website I thought I would take a quick look.

First I see the often repeated claim that water vapor is 95% of the greenhouse effect.

This isn;t true and water vapor cannot be the cause of global warming either. why is explained in this link. yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2008/02/common-climate-misconceptions-the-water-vapor-feedback-2/

Then the claim that co2 levels are really low at this time. Well they are higher then they have been for the past about 15 million years. climate.ucla.edu/news/article.asp?parentid=4676

Of course levels have been much higher too but the climate was also much different during those times too.

And the claim about the temperature change and co2 levels.

grist.org/article/historically-co2-never-caused-temperature-change

skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm

Actually you are correct. According to my teacher water vapor makes up betweeneen 3 and 4% of the atmosphere. OOOOPS sorry…it does make up 95% of the greenhouse gasses. I called the local weather office. They agreed.

 

[sidbrown]

I don’t know what you’re talking about. www.icecap.us is a site set up by credible scientists. Oh…I forgot…you’re a lawyer.

Credible scientists? I looked up some of the expert scientists listed at:
icecap.us/index.php/go/experts
and here is what I found:
Robert C. Balling Jr -Balling has received $408,000 in research funding from the fossil fuel industry over the last decade (of which his University takes 50% for overhead). Contributors include ExxonMobil, the British Coal Corporation, Cyprus Minerals and OPEC.

Sallie Baliunas – Between December 1998 and September 2001 she was listed as a Scientific Adviser to the Greening Earth Society, a group that was funded and controlled by the Western Fuels Association (WFA), an association of coal-burning utility companies.

Robert M. Carter- Sits on the advisory board os the Institute of Public Affairs which is funded by the mining and tobacco industry along with Monsanto.

 

[itinerant1]

Vatican Newspaper Slams the Copenhagen Summit over Population Control, "Nihilism"

COPENHAGEN, December 18, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In a front-page commentary in the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano yesterday, the President of the Vatican Bank took the Copenhagen summit to task over its “nihilism,” and consequent emphasis on population control and de-industrialization.

“Nihilistic thought, with its rejection of any objective truth and values causes serious damage when applied to economics,” wrote Ettore Gotti Tedeschi. He recalled as an example the “disastrous consequences” of Malthus’ argument that population growth causes poverty, as well as the theory that the economy is morally autonomous, which he said has led to an “overly consumerist and materialistic” mentality.

However, he said that, when applied to environmental issues, nihilism produces “even more serious damage.” In this case it leads to the attempt “to solve climate problems - where much confusion reigns - through lowering the birth rate and de-industrialization, rather than through the promotion of values that lead the individual to his original dignity.”

Tedeschi criticized the Copenhagen climate conference for applying such nihilistic thinking to the environment, an approach that he says causes “more conflicts than solutions.” (Continue reading this article at LifeSite News )

 

[itinerant1]

COPENHAGEN

Positive Steps Don’t Depend on Global Accord: Holy See

Lifestyles

Archbishop Migliore said these efforts “are about working on lifestyles, as the current dominant models of consumption and production are often unsustainable from the point of view of social, environmental, economic and even moral analysis. We must safeguard creation – soil, water and air – as a gift entrusted to everyone, but we must also and above all prevent mankind from destroying itself.”

“The degradation of nature is directly connected to the culture that shapes human coexistence,” he affirmed. “When the human ecology is respected within society, the environmental ecology will benefit. The way humanity treats the environment influences the way it treats itself.”

Read this article at ZENIT

 

[kimmielittle]

Credible scientists? I looked up some of the expert scientists listed at:
icecap.us/index.php/go/experts
and here is what I found:
Robert C. Balling Jr -Balling has received $408,000 in research funding from the fossil fuel industry over the last decade (of which his University takes 50% for overhead). Contributors include ExxonMobil, the British Coal Corporation, Cyprus Minerals and OPEC.

Sallie Baliunas – Between December 1998 and September 2001 she was listed as a Scientific Adviser to the Greening Earth Society, a group that was funded and controlled by the Western Fuels Association (WFA), an association of coal-burning utility companies.

Robert M. Carter- Sits on the advisory board os the Institute of Public Affairs which is funded by the mining and tobacco industry along with Monsanto.

Hiyas

I’m afraid you have an argumentum ad hominem here.

Over a ten 10 ] year period $408,000 was received. 1/2 goes to the university. Leaving $204,000 divided by 10 years is what… $24,000 dollars a year…Which of course, has to produce test results. This amount somehow lines his pockets?

Proving his scientific data faulty? He no longer is an expert?

By your reasoning alone…you’ve proved COP15 a hoax…CRU a hoax…IPCC a hoax:shrug:

I hope this helps

 

[kimmielittle]

Vatican Newspaper Slams the Copenhagen Summit over Population Control, "Nihilism"

COPENHAGEN, December 18, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In a front-page commentary in the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano yesterday, the President of the Vatican Bank took the Copenhagen summit to task over its “nihilism,” and consequent emphasis on population control and de-industrialization.

“Nihilistic thought, with its rejection of any objective truth and values causes serious damage when applied to economics,” wrote Ettore Gotti Tedeschi. He recalled as an example the “disastrous consequences” of Malthus’ argument that population growth causes poverty, as well as the theory that the economy is morally autonomous, which he said has led to an “overly consumerist and materialistic” mentality.

However, he said that, when applied to environmental issues, nihilism produces “even more serious damage.” In this case it leads to the attempt “to solve climate problems - where much confusion reigns - through lowering the birth rate and de-industrialization, rather than through the promotion of values that lead the individual to his original dignity.”

Tedeschi criticized the Copenhagen climate conference for applying such nihilistic thinking to the environment, an approach that he says causes “more conflicts than solutions.” (Continue reading this article at LifeSite News )

Hiyas

Thanks for the link.
I thought this would be coming.

 

[paully]

Hiyas

I’m afraid you have an argumentum ad hominem here.

Over a ten 10 ] year period $408,000 was received. 1/2 goes to the university. Leaving $204,000 divided by 10 years is what… $24,000 dollars a year…Which of course, has to produce test results. This amount somehow lines his pockets?

Proving his scientific data faulty? He no longer is an expert?

By your reasoning alone…you’ve proved COP15 a hoax…CRU a hoax…IPCC a hoax:shrug:

I hope this helps

Thank you kimmie. But don’t pick on Sid. Maybe he lives on $24k a year. Perhaps even an extravagant lifestyle as an architecture designing buildings with huge carbon footprints.

Has he ever checked to see what the AGCC psuedo scientists receive from governments and private sector companies that are lining their pockets with this AGCC research money? Gorie details are an inconvenient truth!!!

 

[kimmielittle]

"How do we know human activities cause climate change?
Fossil fuel burning is responsible for climate change because of the way in which an increased concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere alters the planet’s energy budget and makes the surface warmer.

The most fundamental measure of Earth’s climate state is the globally averaged surface air temperature. We define climate change as an extended trend in this temperature. Such a change cannot happen unless something forces the change. Various natural climate forcings exist. For example, periodic changes in the Earth’s orbit about the sun alter the seasonal and latitudinal distribution of solar radiation at the planet’s surface; such variations can be linked to Earth’s ice ages over the past two million years. Changes in solar output influence how much of the sun’s energy the Earth’s surface receives as a whole; more or less solar energy means warmer or cooler global climate. Explosive volcanic eruptions inject sulfur dioxide and dust high into the stratosphere, blocking some of the sun’s energy from reaching the surface and causing it to cool. These are climate forcings because they alter the planet’s radiation or energy budget.

An increase in the atmosphere’s concentration of carbon dioxide is also a climate forcing: it leads to a situation in which the planet absorbs more solar radiation than it emits to space as longwave radiation. This means the system gains energy. The globally averaged temperature will increase as a result. This is in accord with a fundamental principle of physics: conservation of energy. As humans burn fossil fuels, adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, globally average temperature rises as a result.

For more information about the human contribution to climate change, visit:

•US Climate Change Science Program:
climatescience.gov/

•NASA Earth Observatory, Global Warming Update:
earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Library/GlobalWarmingUpdate/
•Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Climate Change:
epa.gov/climatechange/
•Pew Research Center
pewclimate.org/global-warming-basics/
•UK Met Office, Guide to Climate Change
metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/
•University of Colorado: Learn More About Climate Change
learnmoreaboutclimate.colorado.edu/
•United Nations Climate Change Compendium Report, 2009
unep.org/compendium2009/
"
See: nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/faq.html#anthropogenic

Hiyas

Lets see…
MET is tied to CRU and Climategate
United Nations is tied to IPCC who is involved with CRU and ClimateGate
EPA won’t release data under Freedom of Information
NASA GISS ]won’t release data under Freedom of Information AND Home to Dr. James Hansen…

I hope this helps

 

[Calliso]

Actually you are correct. According to my teacher water vapor makes up betweeneen 3 and 4% of the atmosphere. OOOOPS sorry…it does make up 95% of the greenhouse gasses. I called the local weather office. They agreed.

It does not make up 95% of the greenhouse** EFFECT **though read the link please. Water vapor cannot be the cause of the warming…because of the short time it stays in the atmosphere. Without a sustained temperature rise you cannot get a higher absolute humidity. If you just add a bunch of water vapor to the atmosphere for instance the “extra” will just precipatate within like 10 days or so.

 

[Calliso]

And once again since I keep seeing claims that the data is not being released or whatever. Here is links to several points of data. About 95% of the data has been released. realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources/

 

[paully]

It does not make up 95% of the greenhouse** EFFECT **though read the link please. Water vapor cannot be the cause of the warming…because of the short time it stays in the atmosphere. Without a sustained temperature rise you cannot get a higher absolute humidity. If you just add a bunch of water vapor to the atmosphere for instance the “extra” will just precipatate within like 10 days or so.

The amount of moisture in the atmosphere is around 4% and is static. It is the greatest contributor to greenhouse gases. That is why there is never dew or frost on a cloudy night. The clouds act as a blanket (greenhouse) to keep the heat trapped near the earth. It’s also why stays warmer at night when its very humid. At least that’s what the weather folks at the NOAA National Weather Service told me when I called.

But how would they know?

 

[kimmielittle]

And once again since I keep seeing claims that the data is not being released or whatever. Here is links to several points of data. About 95% of the data has been released. realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources/

Hiyas

According to NASA’s page it has not

nasa.gov/columbia/foia/index.html Here is their list of FOI releases

Here is a statement made dec 03 2009
washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/03/researcher-says-nasa-hiding-climate-data/

Mark Hess, public affairs director for the Goddard Space Flight Center which runs the GISS laboratory, said they are working on Mr. Horner’s request, though he couldn’t say why they have taken so long.
“We’re collecting the information and will respond with all the responsive relevant information to all of his requests,” Mr. Hess said. “It’s just a process you have to go through where you have to collect data that’s responsive.”

There is good reason to be asking for the data…as:

NASA’s GISS was forced to update its data in 2007 after questions were raised by Steve McIntyre, who runs ClimateAudit.com.
GISS had initially listed the warmest years as 1998, 1934, 2006, 1921 and 1931. After Mr. McIntyre’s questions GISS rejiggered the list and 1934 was warmest, followed by 1998, 1921, 2006 and then 1931. But since then, the list has been rewritten again so it now runs 1998, 2006, 1934, 1921, 1999.

And

The numbers matter. Under pressure in 2007, NASA recalculated its data and found that 1934, not 1998, was the hottest year in its records for the contiguous 48 states. NASA later changed that data again, and now 1998 and 2006 are tied for first, with 1934 slightly cooler.

The Freedom of Information Act requires agencies to respond to requests within 20 days. Mr. Horner says he’s never received an official acknowledgement of his three separate FOIA requests, but has received e-mails showing the agency is aware of them.
He said he has provided NASA with a notice of intent to sue under FOIA, but said he also hopes members of Congress get involved and demand the information be released.
NASA and CRU data are considered the backbone of much of the science that suggests the earth is warming due to manmade greenhouse gas emissions. NASA argues its data suggests this decade has been the warmest on record.
On the other hand, data from the University of Alabama-Huntsville suggests temperatures have been relatively flat for most of this decade.

It has been over two years and waiting.

As to Mr Gore’s friends website suggesting the all data from CRU has been provided:

The center [CRU} has also had to acknowledge in response to a freedom of information request under British law that it tossed out much of the raw data that it used to draw up the temperature models that have underpinned much of the science behind global warming.

I hope this helps
[/quote]

 

[paully]

I’m sitting here and thinking. Why can’t both sides of this discussion realize that there are pieces of information from both sides that express the truth. My teacher has the book “The Satanic Gasses” which obviously is about AGCC. Yes, and it’s written by scientists that dispute AGCC. In part they do it by comparing CO2 emissions over the last hundred years and comparing temperature trends. They don’t add up as the IPCC would like us to believe. There has been some warming, but not in line with emissions since the industrial revolution. In the grand scheme of things the earth has been warming and cooling for 13.7 billion years. Has anyone checked out the non-governmental panel on climate change. They have facts also, but they dispute the almost militant IPCC.

Nothing will ever be done to attempt to reasonably address potential AGCC because even as Christians who are debating this, we really haven’t shown a whole lot of charity toward each other. We seem to think that if our side is correct, then we are totally correct. Therefore the other must be totally incorrect, and that just doesn’t make sense.

We’ve told those that disagree with us that they don’t seek the truth. But the people that agree with us do seek the truth. HUH??? I don’t know of anyone that has all the facts and truth about anything. Both sides on this thread have shown little ability to accept some of what the other side says. (except a few such as Kimmielittle).

We’ve exceeded 800 posts and not a single thing has been settled. I’ve never seen such at times discrete and other times blatant insults thrown at people in this thread just because they don’t see eye to eye.

My guess is that if we were thrown into a room without knowing who each other is, we would probably have great time as long as we stayed away from the topic of AGCC.

Finally, I don’t think that any of us doesn’t agree that whether there is AGCC or not, we have abused God’s creation. Squandered resources. Fouled our air and water. That has to stop. But for some that means buying a Prius. For others that means cutting down on meat. Geeeeesh, the power of methane in the arguement is 20 times greater than CO2.
For some it might mean not using air conditioning as much. The list goes on and on as to what various people do to chip in a little to tackle something much bigger than AGCC. I don’t like waking up when its 64 in the house, but my parents want to conserve. They recycle. They limit driving. They buy eggs and poultry from a friend that raises chickens, humanely. They use fans to help with air conditioning in the summer.

Well, it’s the happy time of year. It would be nice if we could remember that. Not many of us has shown the charity that Jesus would probably like us to show.

Merry Christmas
Paully

 

[qui_est_ce]

And once again since I keep seeing claims that the data is not being released or whatever. Here is links to several points of data. About 95% of the data has been released. realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources/

Kimmie-
Didn’t you have post that linked realclimate to one of Al Gore’s cohorts?

 

[qui_est_ce]

Are you speaking of the site setup by a former architect?

Al Gore is a former politician. I have no problem with persons funding research. Maybe the architect wants to get ideas on how to build houses suited for the climates in which they are built?

Do the American Bishops have to be social workers in order to fund the social work of the Catholic Church?

The real issue is the deceits have dealt the AGCC movement a severe blow.

Hey Paully, got snow?

 

[paully]

Al Gore is a former politician. I have no problem with persons funding research. Maybe the architect wants to get ideas on how to build houses suited for the climates in which they are built?

Do the American Bishops have to be social workers in order to fund the social work of the Catholic Church?

The real issue is the deceits have dealt the AGCC movement a severe blow.

Hey Paully, got snow?

It’s a coming!!! Blizzard warning in effect late today through sunday afternoon. 18 to 24 inches! Winds gusting as high as 50 mph. Can’t wait!!! :extrahappy: