Hadley CRU files/emails hacked!

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

But we are not talking about simple climate change. We are talking about anthropogenic climate change. We are talking about human produced green house gases causing the climate to change at a rate greater than that of normal.

The AGW claim, with their computer models, that if we keep producing CO2 then temperatures will keep rising and all hell breaks loose. Everyone keeps saying "the only scientists who understand this are the real climate scientists" - the ones who models show this. But we don't even have temperatures rising now! How can we put stock in the long term predictability of their models when they can't even predict a year in advance?

We all need to do our part to help the environment, but we aren't on some fasttrack to hell that's worth all this hysteria.

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

I'll ask again, you seem to have too short an attention span to read to the bottom of the post.
What will you tell you're grandkids you did to stop AGW if it turns out it was real?

Now to make sure my question isn't at the bottom of my post I'll add some other stuff here. Just waffling on so if you lose interest half way through you might have already read my question. Hopefully that is enough waffling on now.

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

You've missed the point. The trend has been upward and according to climate scientists there is nothing in this so-caled "flat line" that disproves this hypothesis because it has happened in the past and is expected. You are doing exactly what you claim to hate and that is jump to conclusions based on short term data. Climate is not based on a single year's worth of information so forecasting a year into the future is pointless. In fact that is called weather, not climate. Think long term here. Even 11 years is not long term and especially not where climate and large complex natural systems are concerned.

You are looking for some golden answer that explains everything perfectly as if we have been studying this for hundreds of years in controlled environments. This is not QED or genetic biology. We can only test some hypotheses directly (due to not being able to shrink the solar system and put it in a lab) and the others have to be based on models and observations. It's kinda like going back 90yrs and tellin Thomas Hunt Morgan he is full of shit because he cannot explain genes and chromosomes in a perfectly clear and concise theory of gentetics. It may not be perfect but all of the data is pointing in the same direction which is AWG.

I'm not here to make you a "believer", you must come to your own conclusions but so far you don't seem to be reading anything other than these posts. If you were you would come up with better questions like Tim does.

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

To me, the fasttrack we need to be on is nuclear. Also filling in with solar, wind, hydro and coal and domestic oil. The sooner we get off foreign oil, the better. After that, the sooner we get off oil/coal the better due to pollution considerations (not CO2). Nuclear and solar are the future of energy, in my opinion. Of course, conservation is always important as well.

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

What a boring question. I'm sure he will just say "I was already doing everything I could do. We didn't know if AGW was real or not because the data was shaky at best."

 

Hard to turn a blind eye when the denialist present no new or real information. What are we turning a blind eye to? There is nothing there to see.

Anyone who calls Shawn a troll needs to look up what a troll is. Shawn contributes a great deal to the PriusChat website, not only in these climate debates, a troll does little but stir up the legitamate members of a forum with unsuported dribble, looks like DocBooks and his toy truck driving mates qualify for the title.

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

This is not meant to sound facetious: so basically we can't prove, conclusively, that CO2 causes accelerated AGW. A lot of the science leans that way, but we can't test it and don't really know for sure.

Is there data out there that shows CO2 is causing climate change at a rate greater than that of normal?

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

But your grand kids will say,

 

....unless he was a "denialist" and then he'd be a troll who abused his grandkids.

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

No, and you can't disprove it either. So is your solution sit back and lets see what happens, then unwreck the train if it turns out it was true after all?

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

Thank you.

Isn't this the biggest criticism of AGW? That it's all correlation of CO2 and temperature?

Increased climate change could be caused by people becoming more promiscuous since the industrial revolution. Or maybe it's caused by people becoming better athletes, or maybe as we have increased desires to own small dogs the global temperature increases. I could present graphs showing all of those to correlate with global warming. And you couldn't disprove any of it. You can't disprove something that's not testable. I thought you were supposed to be one of the people that "knows science."

This is why us "denialists" can't accept AGW at this current time - the data is simply not conclusive!

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

Just say "I don't want to answer.
It is just a question of ethics. When I am about to do something, I like to ask myself 2 questions,
Would I be happy to have to world know what I am doing?
Would my grand kids approve? (would I approve of my grandfather having done the same?)

My grandfather was a train driver, he drove big old steam trains in his early career. His occupation used a lot of coal and contributed a lot of CO2 to the atmosphere, but they didn't know it was doing harm to the environment so it can't be said they were negligent.
There is strong evidence we are harming the environment with CO2 emissions.

For people who think all the evidence should be chucked out regarding AGW because there is a suspicion some scientists were falsifying data, if Winona Ryder stole a dress would that mean she is in poverty? Does it mean all celebrities are criminals?
Does one shonky science hose make all science houses that have come to the same conclusions as the shonks shonky?

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

Equally plausible, scientifically.

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

I will tell them that there is nothing that can be done to "stop" it -- because there isn't. There, how's that?

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

It's pretty bad the AGW were falsifying data and they still can't prove AGW

 

Unfortunate that you feel the need to come to the defense of a troll. And yes, I know what a troll is -- they live under bridges and pull wings off flies for enjoyment.

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

Uh --- yes, and yes

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

Thank you for saying you thought I understood science, I'm just a high-school dropout, ex-mechanic public servant with an interest in the environment.

What I was saying in the post you responded to above is, once you have conclusive proof, after all the lab is the whole planet, it will be too late to take corrective action, it might be too late now.

When Scott of the Antarctic was trekking about the South Pole region alone during the Discovery Expedition 1901 - 1904, he fell into an ice ravine, suspended only by a rope attached to his sled. He was exhausted from walking in the extreme conditions and could easily have given up, cut the rope and fallen to his death in the ice. But he saw the rope, which was cutting into the ice shelf above him as his escape, he mustered his strength and climbed the rope, collapsed on the surface and was unconscious for an unknown length of time then continued his trek. He might have climbed half way up the rope when the sled took off into the hole with him, or he may not have had the energy when he reached the top to pull himself out of the hole, but he still made the effort. Scott eventually made it back to Australia, then England, got married to his girlfriend and fathered a child before returning to the polar region for a second attempt at the pole.

Should he have just cut the rope as there was no hard evidence he would make it out of the hole alive? Or should he have just hung there and pretended everything was OK?

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

Cool, now we really know how you think.

 

Re: So called "scientists" fake data to promote GW religion - for years!

Uh --- yes