Page 261 of 366 FirstFirst ... 161211251257258259260261262263264265271311361 ... LastLast
Results 3,901 to 3,915 of 5480
  1. #3901
    Joined
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Crazy AZ USA
    Posts
    3,516

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    The relevant material is 00:00 to 08:30

    Last edited by AeroSim; 02-20-2011 at 11:04 AM. Reason: Added time band note
    "We say in our platform that we believe that the right to coin money and issue money is a function of government....

    Those who are opposed to this proposition tell us that the issue of paper money is a function of the bank and that the government ought to go out of the banking business. I stand with Jefferson rather than with them, and tell them, as he did, that the issue of money is a function of the government and that the banks should go out of the governing business."

    William Jennings Bryan.

  2. #3902
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    E n g l a n d
    Posts
    10,978

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    1979 : Skylab Failure Caused By NASA Not Understanding How Solar Cycles Warm The Atmosphere

    by steven goddard

    32 years later, NASA still refuses to admit that warming is due to solar activity.
    Check this out:

    http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2...he-atmosphere/

  3. #3903
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    E n g l a n d
    Posts
    10,978

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    You're not allowed to defraud the fraud it seems:

    SEC Charges Seven in Global Warming Pump-and-Dump Scheme

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    2011-46

    Washington, D.C., Feb. 18, 2011 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged a group of seven individuals who perpetrated a fraudulent pump-and-dump scheme in the stock of a sham company that purported to provide products and services to fight global warming.

    The SEC alleges that the group included stock promoters, traders, and a lawyer who wrote a fraudulent opinion letter. The scheme resulted in more than $7 million in illicit profits from sales of stock in CO2 Tech Ltd. at artificially inflated prices. Despite touting impressive business relationships and anti-global warming technology innovations, CO2 Tech did not have any significant assets or operations. The company was purportedly based in London, and its stock prices were quoted in the Pink Sheets
    http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2011/2011-46.htm


    European Union faces legal action over fraudulent carbon emissions trading

    Court case in Belgium has been brought by TCEI of Italy, which is hoping to recover 267,991 stolen carbon trading permits

    Terry Macalister

    [Insert stock photo of a power stations's cooling towers belching steam here]

    The European Union faces legal and political challenges over its handling of the carbon markets which remain in chaos after a cyber attack forced partial closure of the Emissions Trading Scheme.

    EU officials are due in a Belgian court on Monday to answer a request to name companies in possession of stolen allowances after a legal challenge by an Italian company affected by the fraud.

    And on Wednesday the EU's climate change committee will try to reassure national governments and carbon exchanges that they have the right level of security in place to reassure nervous market users.

    British energy minister Greg Barker has sent a letter to the EU demanding that standards need to be raised to UK levels to prevent further thefts.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...ding-market-eu

  4. #3904
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,282

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    ^^^
    CO2 Tech did not have any significant assets or operations
    Like you need a brick and mortar operation to sell ghost farts. I could do it from my lappy at Starbucks.

    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  5. #3905
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,282

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    More telling evidence from those climategate emails that "changed nothing". Warmers reminiscing about how they nearly got caught in a flaw they themselves knew about.

    “On the Scent”

    Here is an excerpt from a troubling Climategate email that hasn’t been discussed much (if at all) – from Raymond Bradley to Frank Oldfield of PAGES (172. 0963233839.txt) on July 20, 2000. I’m presenting only an excerpt today, but will discuss more from this email on another occasion.

    Bradley stated of MBH98-99 results:

    in the verification period, the biggest “miss” was an apparently very warm year in the late 19th century that we did not get right at all. This makes criticisms of the “antis” difficult to respond to (they have not yet risen to this level of sophistication, but they are “on the scent”).
    In a system of “full, true and plain disclosure”, such as that governing the offering of securities to the public, it is the responsibility of the author to report adverse results. The “biggest miss” in the verification period was something that concerned Bradley; it was his responsibility to disclose it. “Antis” should not have been obliged to try to figure out material adverse results that Bradley and his coauthors had failed to report.

    And, needless to say, when someone did achieve the “level of sophistication” to figure out what they were doing, the Team did what they could do delay and obfuscate.

    The MBH decision to withhold verification r^2 statistics for early periods looks even worse in the context of this email. Withholding low verification r^2 statistics and withholding information about “big misses” both suppressed verification period problems and both kept “antis” “off the scent”. I’ve commented on other occasions about MBH withholding adverse verification r^2 results for early periods (even though they published a colorful map of verification r^2 statistics in the AD1820 step when they were favorable, they did not report verification r^2 statistics for earlier steps when the statistics were adverse).

    In my opinion, the philosophy and attitudes expressed here – concerns about potential critics being on “the scent” – and the associated conduct – withholding adverse information about verification r^2 statistics and big misses – are far more repugnant than revealing the identity of a peer reviewer. However, while the community has taken umbrage at the revelation of the identity of a peer reviewer, they remain unoffended by conduct designed to keep critics off “the scent” through withholding adverse results.
    ^^^ As good an example as any of they current state of the warmers "climate science".
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  6. #3906
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    A Little South of Sanity
    Posts
    12,925

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    Quote Originally Posted by otoc View Post
    Hey Ace, where ya been? Vacation going well? It's been a nice break at this end......
    Last edited by SteveW; 02-23-2011 at 09:35 AM.

  7. #3907
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,282

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    Phil Jones requests Mann, Briffa, Wahl and Ammann “delete any emails”, Wahl admits he complied. Nuthintoseehere... keep movin'...



    New Light on “Delete Any Emails”



    In related news...

    Hiding the Decline

    &

    Hiding the Decline: Part II

    Apparently not everyone is satisfied that the warmers "investigated" themselves and found all to be satisfactorily on the level. Those nigglin facts still gettin in the way of a complete witewash.

    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  8. #3908
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,282

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    ^^^ Hidentehdecline..

    Hide the Decline – 2 pictures for 2000 comments

    Judith Curry has tackled the ‘Hide the Decline’ issue at her blog Climate Etc. The issue is that data was hidden from policymakers (and the public) so as to present a ‘simpler’ message… and other data spliced in to perhaps give a very different message?

    Remember it is all about the idea of ‘unprecedented’ global warming because the politicians, media and public were warned by graphs like this….

    Tree ring data – Thermometers spliced in.


    Tree Ring Data.


    In the video link in Judith Curry’s article the second graph is how ‘all scientists at Berkeley’ would present the data.

    The fact that the proxies temperature decline when the thermometer readings are going up, would indicate that they are NOT a good proxy for past temperature. As temp reconstructions proxies (tree rings) were used to explain or ‘sell’ the idea that modern temperatures were ‘unprecedented’ so global warming ‘must’ be down to humans and that policy makers should something now.

    I think even the most unscientifically trained politician, person in the media and member of the public can now see the problem with proxies, especially if you look at the 2 graphs above.. The screen captures are from the video Judith Curry links to (part I):

    No point talking here about it here, go to where the debate is. http://judithcurry.com/2011/02/22/hiding-the-decline/

    http://judithcurry.com/2011/02/23/hi...cline-part-ii/

    http://judithcurry.com/2011/02/24/hi...line-part-iii/

    At the Bishop Hill blog, at least one scientist has chimed in to support Professor Judith Curry

    Professor Jonathon Jones (Physics – Oxford University)

    People have asked why mainstream scientists are keeping silent on these issues. As a scientist who has largely kept silent, at least in public, I have more sympathy for silence than most people here. It’s not for the obvious reason, that speaking out leads to immediate attacks, not just from Gavin and friends, but also from some of the more excitable commentators here.

    Far more importantly most scientists are reluctant to speak out on topics which are not their field. We tend to trust our colleagues, perhaps unreasonably so, and are also well aware that most scientific questions are considerably more complex than outsiders think, and that it is entirely possible that we have missed some subtle but critical point.

    However, “hide the decline” is an entirely different matter. This is not a complicated technical matter on which reasonable people can disagree: it is a straightforward and blatant breach of the fundamental principles of honesty and self-criticism that lie at the heart of all true science. The significance of the divergence problem is immediately obvious, and seeking to hide it is quite simply wrong. The recent public statements by supposed leaders of UK science, declaring that hiding the decline is standard scientific practice are on a par with declarations that black is white and up is down. I don’t know who they think they are speaking for, but they certainly aren’t speaking for me.

    I have watched Judy Curry with considerable interest since she first went public on her doubts about some aspects of climate science, an area where she is far more qualified than I am to have an opinion. Her latest post has clearly kicked up a remarkable furore, but she was right to make it.

    The decision to hide the decline, and the dogged refusal to admit that this was an error, has endangered the credibility of the whole of climate science. If the rot is not stopped then the credibility of the whole of science will eventually come into question.

    Judy’s decision to try to call a halt to this mess before it’s too late is brave and good. So please cut her some slack; she has more than enough problems to deal with at the moment.

    If you’re wondering who I am, then you can find me at the Physics Department at Oxford University. Feb 23, 2011 at 10:29 PM | Jonathan Jones
    Last edited by AMDScooter; 02-26-2011 at 12:48 AM.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  9. #3909
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    E n g l a n d
    Posts
    10,978

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    For supposedly clever people they're pretty slow on the uptake.

  10. #3910
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    E n g l a n d
    Posts
    10,978

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    Propaganda mouthpiece Scientific American is almost apoplectic that some people aren't buying the new religion:

    Why Are Americans So Ill-Informed about Climate Change?

    Scientists and journalists debate why Americans still resist the consensus among research organizations that humans are warming the globe

    By Robin Lloyd

    As glaciers melt and island populations retreat from their coastlines to escape rising seas, many scientists remain baffled as to why the global research consensus on human-induced climate change remains contentious in the U.S.

    The frustration revealed itself during a handful of sessions at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington, D.C., this past weekend, coming to a peak during a Friday session, "Science without Borders and Media Unbounded".

    Near the forum’s conclusion, Massachusetts Institute of Technology climate scientist Kerry Emanuel asked a panel of journalists why the media continues to cover anthropogenic climate change as a controversy or debate, when in fact it is a consensus among such organizations as the American Geophysical Union, American Institute of Physics, American Chemical Society, American Meteorological Association and the National Research Council, along with the national academies of more than two dozen countries.

    "You haven't persuaded the public," replied Elizabeth Shogren of National Public Radio. Emanuel immediately countered, smiling and pointing at Shogren, "No, you haven't." Scattered applause followed in the audience of mostly scientists, with one heckler saying, "That's right. Kerry said it."

    Such a tone of searching bewilderment typified a handful of sessions that dealt with the struggle to motivate Americans on the topic of climate change. Only 35 percent of Americans see climate change as a serious problem, according to a 2009 poll by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press

    Cont...
    Arrogant idiots. They just don't get it at all.

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ericans-so-ill

  11. #3911
    Joined
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Crazy AZ USA
    Posts
    3,516

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    Quote Originally Posted by Enmore View Post
    Propaganda mouthpiece Scientific American is almost apoplectic that some people aren't buying the new religion:



    Arrogant idiots. They just don't get it at all.

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ericans-so-ill
    Geez- what a dmsh*t. Perhaps because there really ISN'T a consensus among scientific americans
    "We say in our platform that we believe that the right to coin money and issue money is a function of government....

    Those who are opposed to this proposition tell us that the issue of paper money is a function of the bank and that the government ought to go out of the banking business. I stand with Jefferson rather than with them, and tell them, as he did, that the issue of money is a function of the government and that the banks should go out of the governing business."

    William Jennings Bryan.

  12. #3912
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    E n g l a n d
    Posts
    10,978

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    It's the same old lefty elitist argument that the ignorant masses just need to be 'educated' and they'll come round to the 'correct' way of thinking.

    Arrogant jerks.

  13. #3913
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    E n g l a n d
    Posts
    10,978

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    Over in Australia, they've seen the unedifying spectacle of the leader of one totally faith-based religion attacking a leader of another totally faith-based religion:

    BoM chief lashes Pell over climate stance

    The head of the Bureau of Meteorology has rebuked Cardinal George Pell for his scepticism about climate change, insisting the man has been misled.

    Sydney's Catholic Archbishop is an outspoken disbeliever in man-made global warming, arguing that it was hotter during the Middle Ages and carbon dioxide levels are not historically high:

    Bureau chief Greg Ayers used an appearance at a Senate estimates hearing yesterday to rip into the cardinal's personal views.

    He said the core of his arguments were based on a book by Australian scientist Ian Plimer called Heaven and Earth: Global Warming the Missing Science.

    But Cardinal Pell's convictions were misplaced, Dr Ayers said.

    "The contents of the book are simply not scientific," he told the committee.

    "The cardinal has been misled."
    I wouldn't cross the Catholic church mate; They've been at this a lot longer than you guys have. Heck, they've probably forgotten where all the bodies are buried by now.

    BTW, the Australian Bureau of Meteorology is even more rabidly warmist than the British Met Office, if that's possible. They've both been co-opted by warmist political appointees and in their hunt for their share of the global warming cash mountain.

    http://www.smh.com.au/environment/cl...222-1b324.html

  14. #3914
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    E n g l a n d
    Posts
    10,978

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    Weatherman John Coleman nails it:

    Global Warming Blog

    By John Coleman

    2-22-2011

    There is a story I heard that I keep thinking about. It really underlines the problem I have in trying to counter the bad science behind the global warming scare predictions. So here is the story:

    A group of over 200 environmentalists were in an auditorium listening to a symposium about climate change, i.e. global warming or climate disruption. One of the speakers asked, "If I could instantly produce a genie with a magic wand to stand here before you today. And if, that genie could wave his magic wand and wall-la....carbon dioxide would no longer be a greenhouse gas that produced uncontrollable global warming....How many in this room would be happy, satisfied and pleased?" Two people out of two hundred hesitatingly raised their hands. Of the others, some smirked, some laughed and some yelled out, "No, no. Hell no."

    I cannot testify that this event actually occurred. But, I heard it as though it was a truthful report. In any case it haunts me because it demonstrates what I perceive to be something akin to the actual state of affairs in our efforts to quiet the Algorian scare predictions about the consequences of global warming. There are large segments of the population that believe the global warming pronouncements. They have heard them over and over again from people they trust and respect, in school, on television, in the news and in their communities. They have become "believers", not unlike those who believe in a set of religious beliefs. All good Democrats believe in global warming, after all, it is the science of one of their key heroes, former Vice President and Senator Al Gore. And all good environmentalists are aboard the global warming band wagon. And, for all of them, the Agenda is what is important. Their Agenda is to eliminate fossil fuels and the internal combustion engine from our civilization. The carbon dioxide, CO2, thing is simply the means to the end. And if the means is not true; who cares. It is only the Agenda that is important. To all of these people, my effort to debunk the CO2 greenhouse gas science is irrelevant.

    When I present my scientific arguments in a speech, their common reaction, "so what" and they ask me, even if you are right, isn't the change to clean energy still the best move for our society? When I make my argument in response, that I also favor alternate energy, but that it will be thirty to fifty years before it can replace fossil fuels as the primary source of power for our civilization and that alternate energy in its current state of development is not economically viable, they doubt my facts. They have heard the hype and bought the dream without stopping to absorb the reality.

    Next, when they realize they have not persuaded me to join their point of view, they challenge me with "And, what if it turns out that you are wrong and Al Gore is right? Your argument could cost us everything as climate change makes the Earth unlivable. So let's just eliminate the greenhouse gases as insurance." I argue back that the insurance will financially destroy us, wreck our way of life and that because I am right about the science, the move to alternate energy will not make an iota difference in our climate.

    At this point, they dismiss me a stupid, old heretic.

    My only option is to keep trying. That is why I make the new videos like the one posted on February 22nd. But, I am frustrated and not optimistic about penetrating our scientific institutions and organizations that are in the control of their well paid scientists and persuading them to reconsider the roll of carbon dioxide and accept climate reality. What are the odds they will "see the light" and abandon their richly rewarding global warming positions? Nil, I fear.

    It appears, as of now, victory, if it were to come, would be on a political level, not a scientific one. Just as "the climate according to Al Gore" has become the Democrat Party mantra, "global warming is not real" has become the rally call of the Republican Party. As a Journalist (I am a member of the television news team at KUSI-TV) I try hard to avoid taking political positions. For instance, I pass on invitations to speak at political events even when handsome stipends are offered.

    So I keep focused on the bad science behind global warming. If my team (There are over 31,000 scientists on my team) can make headway in correcting the science, then I will be happy to let the politics, environmentalism and alternate energy movement fight the policy battles without me.

    John Coleman
    http://www.kusi.com/story/14072205/global-warming

    The video on this link is worth a viewing too.

  15. #3915
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    E n g l a n d
    Posts
    10,978

    Re: The Great Global Warming Thread (merged)

    It's positively Baltic ...in the Baltic:

    Deep freeze puts Baltic on track for record ice

    Following another extended stretch of sub-zero temperatures, ice coverage on the Baltic Sea is greater than it's been in nearly a quarter century, Sweden's meteorological agency reports.

    About 250,000 square kilometres of the Baltic Sea are now covered in ice according to the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI).

    The last time so much of the Baltic was frozen was the winter of 1986-87, when ice covered nearly 400,000 square kilometres of the sea's surface.

    SMHI warns that ice coverage on the Baltic could expand further in the coming days, possibly setting a new record.
    http://www.thelocal.se/32262/20110225/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •