Global cooling

swchandler · Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588

I noted after reading James Taylor's commentary, there are a number of other articles that he has written for Forbes recently denying the existence of human induced global warming and any evidence of climate change. I'm sure that he's being paid well to create doubt. In my view, it's quite reminiscent of the "doubt" campaign employed by big tobacco interests in the early 60s. Despite all the evidence that readily supports something untoward is happening, all you need to do is find a tidbit of doubt or some deviance in the data to continually cast doubt on the scene. Also, they're quick to brand folks that don't agree with them as "alarmists", and use the label over and over again in their propaganda campaign.

pueno · Joined: 03 Mar 2007 Posts: 2807

mac · Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 2:06 pm Post subject:

So Nit Wit--you think it is acceptable scientific technique to snip 10 years off a record that goes more than 100 years, and then draw conclusions? And you wonder why I think we should burn your school--or at least fire its science teachers?

From the science free world directly to you, funded by the tobacco and coal industry, and reposted by dupes. Cheap amusement, no intellectual content. But keep it up.

isobars · Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935

nw30 · Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 7:03 pm Post subject:

Iso, you forgot hurricane Sandy, if it wasn't for global warming, that hurricane would have never happened, just ask jimmymac or nwodeno.

pueno · Joined: 03 Mar 2007 Posts: 2807

isobars · Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935

GURGLETROUSERS · Joined: 30 Dec 2009 Posts: 2643

In talking about climate change (global warming) with normal sane friends and associates, it is clear that there is now a growing sense of anger. I think this is fairly easy to explain.

It is the feeling of being manipulated and treated as ignorant fools, incapable of applying reason form what they are told are accurate FACTS! To keep it short and relevant I'll cite our winter 'extreme' flooding event.

Climate change authorities always insist that single, or even a series (our 3 extreme winters) of weather events can never be used to show a long term trend. Yet these same authorities then link a single extreme event (the flooding) to an incresing (their assumption) long term trend. This is illogical.

1) they claim the winter flooding and rainfall was the worst on record. That is a LIE! Historical records detaillmassive winter storm patterns (without accurately recorded figures, but eye witness accounts of the actual devestation) which were probably more severe. (Especially a winter series of storms in the 1700's)

2) The widespread flooding has been acknowledged to primarily be due to the cessation of necessary dredging operations of culverts, streams, and rivers which has ALWAYS been necessary to prevent flooding.

(Will continue.)

GURGLETROUSERS · Joined: 30 Dec 2009 Posts: 2643

In trying to explain the growing anger and scepticism of many rational people, I could list at least eight further examples of manipulative presentation by the authorities, but there is no need to. The flooding example is clear enough.

According to climate change certainty, it is one of an increasing number of extreme weather events -despite their claim that it is unpreceedented and the worst ever - which it was not) which will increasingly occur. If that is not an assumption (not yet proven) I don't know what is!

As I say, this is but a single bone on contention amongst many of us, and a clear example of manipulation of what may be reality. But they will brook no dissent in presenting their 'facts.'

It is clear that the whole issue has partially been highjacked by ignorance and massive assumption on BOTH sides, probably more so on the 'denier' wing which kind of gives the 'warmers' a moral highground. But they are seen (by many of us) to be using this to manipulate us. That is what we object to.

I've no idea (Goggled it, but little the wiser) how the NOAA so called scandle (manipulation of data) may be correct or otherwise, but, yet again, it appears to follow the same pattern of manipulating opinion.

mac · Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:46 am Post subject:

GT--pundits from the left spin extreme events, perhaps less egregiously than the henchmen for coal and oil. Two facts stand out about extreme events. Good scientists say, to pundits questions, that no particular event can be traced to global warming. We have had extreme storms since before the increase in carbon dioxide. But modeling has predicted an increase in the number and intensity of such events--which we may be seeing. Second, more heat in the oceans means more energy for storms.

Time series analysis involves using the entire data set and looking for patterns. There are both long term and short term phenomena that affect the average temperature. Unlike NW, you know that.