Has Global warming been a flat-out hoax all along?

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I'm fascinated by people who are so gullible and so easily led by any conspiracy theory that comes along designed to broaden government powers. The absolute narcissism one must suffer from to believe that man can control the climate of the entire planet and assure a positive outcome must make your egos an increasing burden to be around. IMO, such beliefs are evidence of a lack of scientific understanding and a clear vulnerability to manipulation by predatory political and economic forces.

[HAL 9000 96]

'The public' and 'its' perception are definitely important to politicians that care about votes, sure. I wonder though- could 'that' public and the 'perception' you refer to be really a code for people that do not fully comprehend the issue of what it is they are 'doubting'??

Get back to me when you wish to make more substantive, scientific claims. And not pseudo-political ones about fraudulent science being 'apparently' performed by a small group.

Hal, I don't use code. I ask questions.

Every time I am asked to give a report, my practice is to explain in ways that a layman, with no specific knowledge of the subject, can understand what I have written. Nowhere in the AGW debate has this kind of report/summary/explanation been given. The scientific community is hell bent on keeping the jargon scientific, then writing off dissenters as uninformed idiots, rather in the way that you just did.

Hence, the public perception is veering round to doubting the climatologists and believing that they have something to hide. My whole point was that this is rather counter-productive, when the need is to garner public support for measures to protect our environment.

It would be better to be more substantial. Want political questions?? I'm fine with that. I'm sure there are sufficient political pundits on this site to answer your most deep questions. If you want actual scientific questions... I can guarantee that most of those same pundits are NOT the right people to trust with honest, rational answers.

Scientific jargon is what it is. No need to have a hissy fit about assigning value to it. CO2 is CO2, also perhaps 'that gas that gives you a headache if you inhale too much of it' but it pays to be aware of not just what it is and what it does, but also where it is in a complex atmospheric system.

Public opinion is easy to manipulate- as we can see and relate to the increasing amount of short-attention spans in this era. I certainly wish more of the public would pay attention in science class (to avoid that problem with that 'jargon'). This is an issue of pure and simple ignorance being supported by a political agenda. Plain and simple.

Absolute bollocks.

It's the lazy way out for a scientist to say,"I did my job, if the public don't believe me, or understand me, it's not my problem."

I don't give a damn about political pundits spinning it to the left and the right. I want the scientists to come out and explain it so that people who didn't pay attention in science class can grasp the issue. Because, like it or not, they need to understand it just as much as the intelligentsia.

Well there you go. Be careful what you wish for on that. If indeed, its a case where those that have not reached a level of understanding with a more 'aware' audience, and its the responsibility of those 'in the know' to lift them out of their ignorance... then the same philosophy MUST be applied to all other instances where this is the 'case.'

I myself, on these boards, have given science classes to a couple of forum members. I think you were around for those. And you should know what came of such classes- in very layman's terms. Not much. Why? Because the ignorance being supported by preconceived political agendas already negated any effect of substance and context on actual coming to terms with real science.

If its bollocks to you, its your problem mate.

[Ban Hammer 14,619]

I'm fascinated by people who are so gullible and so easily led by any conspiracy theory that comes along designed to broaden government powers. The absolute narcissism one must suffer from to believe that man can control the climate of the entire planet and assure a positive outcome must make your egos an increasing burden to be around. IMO, such beliefs are evidence of a lack of scientific understanding and a clear vulnerability to manipulation by predatory political and economic forces.

and of course, the government loves it. why would they turn down the chance to get more power?

[SuperDuper! 230]

[HAL 9000 96]

They just want to take our guns away.

[Ban Hammer 14,619]

They just want to take our guns freedom away.

fixxored

[HAL 9000 96]

Oh Noes!

The evils are coming! The evils are coming!

[Peikko 1,575]

Ah, those climate scientist and their diabolical conspiracy. Perhaps they poured acid in the sea and turned giant hair dryers on the glaciers in Greenland just to bolster their theories? Can't put anything past them, they are so desperate to socialize the populace or is it lieberalize the masses? What is the scientists ulterior motive? Do they have shares in new technologies? Or, do they just want free trips to Copenhagen?

Scientists absolutely hate freedom, they long to be part of a governmental mega-versity laboratory.

[Danno 1,228]

Oh Noes!

The evils are coming! The evils are coming!

I'm wondering, whats the square footage of your house HAL?

Did you run A/C last summer?

[Danno 1,228]

The drum beat grows[/size]

=======================

From The Sunday Times

November 29, 2009

Climate change data dumped

Jonathan Leake, Environment Editor

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

Related Links

The admission follows the leaking of a thousand private emails sent and received by Professor Phil Jones, the CRU’s director. In them he discusses thwarting climate sceptics seeking access to such data.

In a statement on its website, the CRU said: “We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.”

The CRU is the world’s leading centre for reconstructing past climate and temperatures. Climate change sceptics have long been keen to examine exactly how its data were compiled. That is now impossible.

Roger Pielke, professor of environmental studies at Colorado University, discovered data had been lost when he asked for original records. “The CRU is basically saying, ‘Trust us’. So much for settling questions and resolving debates with science,” he said.

Jones was not in charge of the CRU when the data were thrown away in the 1980s, a time when climate change was seen as a less pressing issue. The lost material was used to build the databases that have been his life’s work, showing how the world has warmed by 0.8C over the past 157 years.

He and his colleagues say this temperature rise is “unequivocally” linked to greenhouse gas emissions generated by humans. Their findings are one of the main pieces of evidence used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which says global warming is a threat to humanity.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/envi...icle6936328.ece

[HAL 9000 96]

Ah, those climate scientist and their diabolical conspiracy. Perhaps they poured acid in the sea and turned giant hair dryers on the glaciers in Greenland just to bolster their theories? Can't put anything past them, they are so desperate to socialize the populace or is it lieberalize the masses? What is the scientists ulterior motive? Do they have shares in new technologies? Or, do they just want free trips to Copenhagen?

Scientists absolutely hate freedom, they long to be part of a governmental mega-versity laboratory.

I for one would love personally benefitting from one of those huge grants. It seems some fools still think those grants go to line personal bank accounts, so if that were the case I better change fields and make my data fit my model.

As evidenced in Danno's new article post, a conspiracy is most definitely insinuated. Right up along with all his other insinuating posts. Seems like conspiracies are a dime a dozen with him.

To be honest about how data is collected, processed, and reported, we can always defer to how significant data is handled. Statistical analysis (I know this will fly over Danno's head) defines significant data in a very specific way. Data that is unusable is also very clearly identified as such. While I am not defending a total data purge (it can be sotred on peripheral formats), usually once properly processed, one can backtrack to the raw. Furthermore, again with statistical determinism- things like the 1.5IQR Rule is a simple method of devising numerical data as usable or not: basically, highest data point that represents the 75th percentile of the data minus the lowest data point that represents the 25th percentile of the data. Any data point that is 1.5 times this range can be considered outlier data, and can be discarded due to collection variability.

Regarding my apartment- less than 1200 square feet. Two bedrooms with wood floors and high ceilings. In the summer time, here and at previous apartments in previous years, the central A/C was used on average less than 4 times for a total of 2 hours each run on AUTO with the thermostat set at 72 degrees Fahrenheit. During the cold months, the heating was used a little more- obviously, and only while we were inside the apartment. Set no higher than 68 degrees Fahreneit for periods leading up to bedtime; at which point it would be turned off to allow for a more deep, hibernative sleep period. The windows have been treated and at times of cold, I seal the juntions with neoprene rubber and draft-stopping window plastics, which the cats love to test for tensile strength. The cats also enjoy lounging on the rugs about the floor on colder days.

And we humans inside the apartment are quite comfortable inside while keeping the gas and electric bills within reasonable levels.

Any more idiotic questions about what I do with my personal space can be addressed to me via PM.

[Danno 1,228]

Ah, those climate scientist and their diabolical conspiracy. Perhaps they poured acid in the sea and turned giant hair dryers on the glaciers in Greenland just to bolster their theories? Can't put anything past them, they are so desperate to socialize the populace or is it lieberalize the masses? What is the scientists ulterior motive? Do they have shares in new technologies? Or, do they just want free trips to Copenhagen?

Scientists absolutely hate freedom, they long to be part of a governmental mega-versity laboratory.

I for one would love personally benefitting from one of those huge grants. It seems some fools still think those grants go to line personal bank accounts, so if that were the case I better change fields and make my data fit my model.

As evidenced in Danno's new article post, a conspiracy is most definitely insinuated. Right up along with all his other insinuating posts. Seems like conspiracies are a dime a dozen with him.

To be honest about how data is collected, processed, and reported, we can always defer to how significant data is handled. Statistical analysis (I know this will fly over Danno's head) defines significant data in a very specific way. Data that is unusable is also very clearly identified as such. While I am not defending a total data purge (it can be sotred on peripheral formats), usually once properly processed, one can backtrack to the raw. Furthermore, again with statistical determinism- things like the 1.5IQR Rule is a simple method of devising numerical data as usable or not: basically, highest data point that represents the 75th percentile of the data minus the lowest data point that represents the 25th percentile of the data. Any data point that is 1.5 times this range can be considered outlier data, and can be discarded due to collection variability.

Regarding my apartment- less than 1200 square feet. Two bedrooms with wood floors and high ceilings. In the summer time, here and at previous apartments in previous years, the central A/C was used on average less than 4 times for a total of 2 hours each run on AUTO with the thermostat set at 72 degrees Fahrenheit. During the cold months, the heating was used a little more- obviously, and only while we were inside the apartment. Set no higher than 68 degrees Fahreneit for periods leading up to bedtime; at which point it would be turned off to allow for a more deep, hibernative sleep period. The windows have been treated and at times of cold, I seal the juntions with neoprene rubber and draft-stopping window plastics, which the cats love to test for tensile strength. The cats also enjoy lounging on the rugs about the floor on colder days.

And we humans inside the apartment are quite comfortable inside while keeping the gas and electric bills within reasonable levels.

Any more idiotic questions about what I do with my personal space can be addressed to me via PM.

Wait a minute, HAl are you admitting you live in the northern part of the country..... and even though the -Earth is in the balance- you can not manage to get by without A/C in your home (I dare not ask about your use in the car).

If you and Al Gore don't make any more than, passing efforts, how are the rest of us suppose to take it serious?

But I admire your honest admission.

Edited November 30, 2009 by Danno

[HAL 9000 96]

Ah, those climate scientist and their diabolical conspiracy. Perhaps they poured acid in the sea and turned giant hair dryers on the glaciers in Greenland just to bolster their theories? Can't put anything past them, they are so desperate to socialize the populace or is it lieberalize the masses? What is the scientists ulterior motive? Do they have shares in new technologies? Or, do they just want free trips to Copenhagen?

Scientists absolutely hate freedom, they long to be part of a governmental mega-versity laboratory.

I for one would love personally benefitting from one of those huge grants. It seems some fools still think those grants go to line personal bank accounts, so if that were the case I better change fields and make my data fit my model.

As evidenced in Danno's new article post, a conspiracy is most definitely insinuated. Right up along with all his other insinuating posts. Seems like conspiracies are a dime a dozen with him.

To be honest about how data is collected, processed, and reported, we can always defer to how significant data is handled. Statistical analysis (I know this will fly over Danno's head) defines significant data in a very specific way. Data that is unusable is also very clearly identified as such. While I am not defending a total data purge (it can be sotred on peripheral formats), usually once properly processed, one can backtrack to the raw. Furthermore, again with statistical determinism- things like the 1.5IQR Rule is a simple method of devising numerical data as usable or not: basically, highest data point that represents the 75th percentile of the data minus the lowest data point that represents the 25th percentile of the data. Any data point that is 1.5 times this range can be considered outlier data, and can be discarded due to collection variability.

Regarding my apartment- less than 1200 square feet. Two bedrooms with wood floors and high ceilings. In the summer time, here and at previous apartments in previous years, the central A/C was used on average less than 4 times for a total of 2 hours each run on AUTO with the thermostat set at 72 degrees Fahrenheit. During the cold months, the heating was used a little more- obviously, and only while we were inside the apartment. Set no higher than 68 degrees Fahreneit for periods leading up to bedtime; at which point it would be turned off to allow for a more deep, hibernative sleep period. The windows have been treated and at times of cold, I seal the juntions with neoprene rubber and draft-stopping window plastics, which the cats love to test for tensile strength. The cats also enjoy lounging on the rugs about the floor on colder days.

And we humans inside the apartment are quite comfortable inside while keeping the gas and electric bills within reasonable levels.

Any more idiotic questions about what I do with my personal space can be addressed to me via PM.

Wait a minute, HAl are you admitting you live in the northern part of the country..... and even though the -Earth is in the balance- you can not manage to get by without A/C in your home (I dare not ask about your use in the car).

If you and Al Gore don't make any more than, passing efforts, how are the rest of us suppose to take it serious?

Try reading again.

I thought I asked for idiotic questions to be sent to me via PM.

I walk to work too, and my fuel economy is great, too. Your FAIL is noted though.

[Susita 175]

It's totally made up. As a matter of fact, I don't believe any of those new-fangled scientists. There's only two I really pay attention to:

[Danno 1,228]

Ah, those climate scientist and their diabolical conspiracy. Perhaps they poured acid in the sea and turned giant hair dryers on the glaciers in Greenland just to bolster their theories? Can't put anything past them, they are so desperate to socialize the populace or is it lieberalize the masses? What is the scientists ulterior motive? Do they have shares in new technologies? Or, do they just want free trips to Copenhagen?

Scientists absolutely hate freedom, they long to be part of a governmental mega-versity laboratory.

I for one would love personally benefitting from one of those huge grants. It seems some fools still think those grants go to line personal bank accounts, so if that were the case I better change fields and make my data fit my model.

As evidenced in Danno's new article post, a conspiracy is most definitely insinuated. Right up along with all his other insinuating posts. Seems like conspiracies are a dime a dozen with him.

To be honest about how data is collected, processed, and reported, we can always defer to how significant data is handled. Statistical analysis (I know this will fly over Danno's head) defines significant data in a very specific way. Data that is unusable is also very clearly identified as such. While I am not defending a total data purge (it can be sotred on peripheral formats), usually once properly processed, one can backtrack to the raw. Furthermore, again with statistical determinism- things like the 1.5IQR Rule is a simple method of devising numerical data as usable or not: basically, highest data point that represents the 75th percentile of the data minus the lowest data point that represents the 25th percentile of the data. Any data point that is 1.5 times this range can be considered outlier data, and can be discarded due to collection variability.

Regarding my apartment- less than 1200 square feet. Two bedrooms with wood floors and high ceilings. In the summer time, here and at previous apartments in previous years, the central A/C was used on average less than 4 times for a total of 2 hours each run on AUTO with the thermostat set at 72 degrees Fahrenheit. During the cold months, the heating was used a little more- obviously, and only while we were inside the apartment. Set no higher than 68 degrees Fahreneit for periods leading up to bedtime; at which point it would be turned off to allow for a more deep, hibernative sleep period. The windows have been treated and at times of cold, I seal the juntions with neoprene rubber and draft-stopping window plastics, which the cats love to test for tensile strength. The cats also enjoy lounging on the rugs about the floor on colder days.

And we humans inside the apartment are quite comfortable inside while keeping the gas and electric bills within reasonable levels.

Any more idiotic questions about what I do with my personal space can be addressed to me via PM.

Wait a minute, HAl are you admitting you live in the northern part of the country..... and even though the -Earth is in the balance- you can not manage to get by without A/C in your home (I dare not ask about your use in the car).

If you and Al Gore don't make any more than, passing efforts, how are the rest of us suppose to take it serious?

Try reading again.

I thought I asked for idiotic questions to be sent to me via PM.

Sorry Bud, maybe others jump when the veins pop out on your pencil neck but not me.

If I feel like sending you a PM, I will.

B)