| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Will anthropogenic global warming be revealed as a political sham? |
| Yes, in the next 6 months |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Yes, in the next 12 months |
|
16% |
[ 1 ] |
| Yes, in the next 24 monthd |
|
83% |
[ 5 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 6 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2009 7:48 am Post subject: The anthropogenic global warming poll |
 |
|
| This poll is intended to reduce redundant threads. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
RufusW
Joined: 14 Jun 2008
Location: Busan
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2009 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Errr... this should be deleted, right? Because it doesn't have a 'no' option. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2009 7:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RufusW wrote: |
| Errr... this should be deleted, right? Because it doesn't have a 'no' option. |
Nor should one use two negatives in a sentence.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now.
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/10/01/ross-mckitrick-defects-in-key-climate-data-are-uncovered.aspx
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7168
http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2Q5ZGExZTc3ZTlmMTA5OTdhOGRjNzdlNmU4N2M4ZTg=
| Quote: |
This story deserves to be told.
1: In 1998, a paper is published by Dr. Michael Mann, then at the University of Virginia, now a Penn State climatologist, and co-authors Bradley and Hughes. The paper is named: Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties, and Limitations. The paper becomes known as MBH98.
The conclusion of tree ring reconstruction of climate for the past 1,000 years is that we are now in the hottest period in modern history, ever.
See the graph http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/image/mann/manna_99.gif
Steve McIntyre, a Canadian mathematician in Toronto, suspects tree rings aren't telling a valid story with that giant uptick at the right side of the graph, implicating the 20th century as the "hottest period in 1000 years," which alarmists latch onto as proof of AGW. The graph is dubbed the "Hockey Stick" and becomes famous worldwide. Al Gore uses it in his movie An Inconvenient Truth in the famous "elevator scene."
2: Steve attempts to replicate Michael Mann's tree ring work in the paper MBH98, but is stymied by lack of data archiving. He sends dozens of letters over the years trying to get access to data but access is denied. McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, of the University of Guelph publish a paper in 2004 criticizing the work. A new website is formed in 2004 called Real Climate, by the people who put together the tree ring data and they denounce the scientific criticism:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/false-claims-by-mcintyre-and-mckitrick-regarding-the-mann-et-al-1998reconstruction/
3: Years go by.McIntyre is still stymied trying to get access to the original source data so that he can replicate the Mann 1998 conclusion. In 2008 Mann publishes another paper in bolstering his tree ring claim due to all of the controversy surrounding it. A Mann co-author and source of tree ring data (Professor Keith Briffa of the Hadley UK Climate Research Unit) used one of the tree ring data series (Yamal in Russia) in a paper published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society in 2008, which has a strict data archiving policy. Thanks to that policy, Steve McIntyre fought and won access to that data just last week.
4: Having the Yamal data in complete form, McIntyre replicates it, and discovers that one of Mann's co-authors, Briffa, had cherry picked 10 tree data sets out of a much larger set of trees sampled in Yamal.
5: When all of the tree ring data from Yamal is plotted, the famous hockey stick disappears. Not only does it disappear, but goes negative. The conclusion is inescapable. The tree ring data was hand-picked to get the desired result.
These are the relevant graphs from McIntyre showing what the newly available data demonstrates.
http://www.climateaudit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/rcs_chronologies1.gif
http://www.climateaudit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/rcs_merged.gif |
I am very surprised that environmentalists cherry picked data to make their models reflect desired outcomes. Completely surprised. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
Now.
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/10/01/ross-mckitrick-defects-in-key-climate-data-are-uncovered.aspx
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7168
http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2Q5ZGExZTc3ZTlmMTA5OTdhOGRjNzdlNmU4N2M4ZTg=
| Quote: |
This story deserves to be told.
1: In 1998, a paper is published by Dr. Michael Mann, then at the University of Virginia, now a Penn State climatologist, and co-authors Bradley and Hughes. The paper is named: Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties, and Limitations. The paper becomes known as MBH98.
The conclusion of tree ring reconstruction of climate for the past 1,000 years is that we are now in the hottest period in modern history, ever.
See the graph http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/image/mann/manna_99.gif
Steve McIntyre, a Canadian mathematician in Toronto, suspects tree rings aren't telling a valid story with that giant uptick at the right side of the graph, implicating the 20th century as the "hottest period in 1000 years," which alarmists latch onto as proof of AGW. The graph is dubbed the "Hockey Stick" and becomes famous worldwide. Al Gore uses it in his movie An Inconvenient Truth in the famous "elevator scene."
2: Steve attempts to replicate Michael Mann's tree ring work in the paper MBH98, but is stymied by lack of data archiving. He sends dozens of letters over the years trying to get access to data but access is denied. McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, of the University of Guelph publish a paper in 2004 criticizing the work. A new website is formed in 2004 called Real Climate, by the people who put together the tree ring data and they denounce the scientific criticism:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/false-claims-by-mcintyre-and-mckitrick-regarding-the-mann-et-al-1998reconstruction/
3: Years go by.McIntyre is still stymied trying to get access to the original source data so that he can replicate the Mann 1998 conclusion. In 2008 Mann publishes another paper in bolstering his tree ring claim due to all of the controversy surrounding it. A Mann co-author and source of tree ring data (Professor Keith Briffa of the Hadley UK Climate Research Unit) used one of the tree ring data series (Yamal in Russia) in a paper published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society in 2008, which has a strict data archiving policy. Thanks to that policy, Steve McIntyre fought and won access to that data just last week.
4: Having the Yamal data in complete form, McIntyre replicates it, and discovers that one of Mann's co-authors, Briffa, had cherry picked 10 tree data sets out of a much larger set of trees sampled in Yamal.
5: When all of the tree ring data from Yamal is plotted, the famous hockey stick disappears. Not only does it disappear, but goes negative. The conclusion is inescapable. The tree ring data was hand-picked to get the desired result.
These are the relevant graphs from McIntyre showing what the newly available data demonstrates.
http://www.climateaudit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/rcs_chronologies1.gif
http://www.climateaudit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/rcs_merged.gif |
I am very surprised that environmentalists cherry picked data to make their models reflect desired outcomes. Completely surprised. |
The 'environmentalists,' i.e. wide scientific community, don't even rely on the hockey stick model anymore.
Anyway, even if mises is right that atmospheric global warming is a sham, there's still the problem of rising acidity in the ocean. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OneWayTraffic
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 1:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
What impresses me is how they (ie those damn environmentalists) orchestrated the breakup of the Larsen B shelf. Quite a trick to make a 12 thousand year stable chunk of ice the size of Rhode island up and disappear.
No need to cherry pick that, it's bleeding obvious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| OneWayTraffic wrote: |
What impresses me is how they (ie those damn environmentalists) orchestrated the breakup of the Larsen B shelf. Quite a trick to make a 12 thousand year stable chunk of ice the size of Rhode island up and disappear.
No need to cherry pick that, it's bleeding obvious. |
Big whoop. Where is the evidence that was caused by humans? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RufusW
Joined: 14 Jun 2008
Location: Busan
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Errr.. no seriously, mods, are you there? This should be deleted... there's no 'no' response. AKA - it's propaganda. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 12:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RufusW wrote: |
| Errr.. no seriously, mods, are you there? This should be deleted... there's no 'no' response. AKA - it's propaganda. |
The OP can't express his position by setting up a slanted poll? What's the big deal? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Whether man-caused global warming is true or not, I want most of the changes it would necessitate to happen anyway. People arguing against global warming are incredibly suspicious individuals. If global warming is even a possibility, why would anyone say "Let's not play it safe." If it turned out to be true, by playing it safe we would have done immeasurable good for ourselves and the other species of our planet. If it turned out to be false, we'd still have made a number of very important and independently valuable improvements to our society.
If you've got a problem with some specific proposal meant to combat global warming, that's definitely a discussion worth having though. I'm personally against any sort of "cap and trade" system, for example. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| People arguing against global warming are incredibly suspicious individuals. |
Why? Claim, evidence. The evidence isn't there. The open mind will question dogma. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| People arguing against global warming are incredibly suspicious individuals. |
Why? Claim, evidence. The evidence isn't there. The open mind will question dogma. |
If their motives are purely scientific, I agree they're reasonable. I feel the vast majority of individuals arguing against global warming are not motivated by purely scientific concerns. For the most part they're ideologues who would argue against global warming no matter what. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 11:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I recycle. I drive a Honda. I can easily refer to myself as environmentally concerned. But GW is a complete sham. I first heard of it in the 5th grade and had it shoved down my throat for the rest of my school days. The evidence isn't there.
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/10/02/lawrence-solomon-the-end-is-near.aspx
The evidence suggests the exact opposite of GW is occurring. The globe is becoming cooler. Which models predicted this?
Despite this, I support restricting carbon emissions via a petroleum tax that increases every year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 11:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| I recycle. I drive a Honda. I can easily refer to myself as environmentally concerned. |
And, to be frank, I don't take issue with you personally talking about this subject. Honestly I feel you're a fairly intellectually honest person. So, when I say "most people who blah blah blah," I'm not including you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
