Is Global Warming Unstoppable?

That's why I find my page 1, post #4 reply super appropriate!

 

Wow.

Snow on the ground, in southern Louisiana

Yep, we're on a crash course to natural disaster with global warming

 

Regardless whether global warming, global cooling or just climate change is occurring, for me: winters are milder, winter snow storms aren't as bad as I remember as a kid and it seems to me that our summers are no worse.

This fall here in NH has been above normal; yesterday touched 68F. My heating bill is way down. In my mind there are some good aspects of the warming trend.

 

Please don't confuse weather with climate.

 

Wow the snow is crazy here in southern Louisiana. Usually this time of year I'm still wearing short sleeve shirts. People aren't sure how to drive in it because we almost never have snow. Sure has been a cold winter so far!

 

Nearly 80 in Boston yesterday,,,,Like I said, don't confuse weather with climate.

 

Wow it's super cold outside right now! And snow in Louisiana!

Probably our coldest winter in years.

 

Looks like its time to patch all of the inaccurate climate models again

BBC News - Study shows variability in ocean's CO2 uptake

 

Is 10 years of cooling weather or climate?

Don't confuse fraudulent science with the truth. Don't confuse a religious fervor for the myth of catastrophic AGW with natural climate cycles.

 

What cooling? If you don't trust the data, and reject the science, how can you depend on it to support a conclusion?

 

It's really quite simple.

I reject the idea that raw temperature data can be run through a series of mathematical steps to exaggerate an ideological agenda. I am skeptical when the scientists doing this refuse to release the data and methodology they utilize to support their conclusions.

It seems all their efforts are designed to make it appear warmer than it is in reality. If even they produce oh, let's say a graph, that demonstrates cooling over the last decade or so, then I assume with some confidence that it has cooled.

Then I read an E-mail in which one of these scientists laments, '"The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't".

 

BLUNT BY KNUTZ (guest hosted)

A little levity - if you have a sense of humor.

 

It really is that simple.

For those interested in fact-based ideas:

A Climate Change Reading List For Laypeople : NPR

A Climate Change Reading List For Laypeople
NPR - December 3, 2009

The Copenhagen conference on climate change is set to begin Monday, December 7. Both the policy and science aspects of the issue can be overwhelming.

NPR science correspondent Richard Harris offers a suggested reading list to help shed some light on the climate change debate.

Break Through by Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger
Earth: The Sequel by Fred Krupp and Miriam Horn
Storms Of My Grandchildren by James Hansen
The Great Warming by Brian Fagan
What's The Worst That Could Happen? by Greg Craven
Global Warming, Looking Beyond Kyoto edited by Ernesto Zedillo
Consumer Guide To Home Energy Savings by Jennifer Thorne Amann, Alex Wilson and Katie Ackerly

 

Alric avoids another inconvenience by suggesting we look elsewhere. The elephant in the room now is 'Climategate,' and Alric is feeding the pigeons peanuts.

Aren't you the Alric who has always insisted on peer-reviewed papers as a basis for any discussion? That's right - you are. A reading list for those who prefer real data to leftist eco-polemic:

Popular Technology.net: 450 Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism of "Man-Made" Global Warming

 

This is a pfd., it's only 3 pages in length and any layperson should be able to comprehend it:

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Alaska_Climate.pdf

It is a simple demonstration of what happens when NCDC and IPCC and, you know, the other 'real climate scientists' get through taking raw temperature readings and massaging them.

For those who allow their eyes to look, their ears to hear and their brains to function, an epiphany can occur.

Yes, it really can happen. Look:
http://www.greenworldtrust.org.uk/Science/MyStory.htm

 

There is something I don't get from the deiners. They like to think that Global warming is some giant fiction dreamed up in some vast conspiracy.

It is clear (to me) who benefits from global warming denial, (big oil/petro oligarchies/ petro cleptocracies/big coal/big transport/big utility etc.
(I can also see who loses and in some sense, in what order they lose, the environment/native people in arctic areas/poor people in Asia/poor people in Afrcia/poor people,,,,,)

What is not clear to me, IF this is a vast conspiracy, who benefits, and more importantly how do they benefit and to what extent. I'm sure I will hear that "academics/scientists will benefit, but I don't think that they have anywhere near the political and/or economic clout that the above winners have.

I can also predict that "socialists/communists/social democrats/"big government supporters etc" and once again I don't think that these folks have the political/economic clout.

I suspect, that if you don't like the science, and you fall into the "denialist" camp, you might be wise to "follow the money".

Icarus


PS:
And please, don't give me the line about "how many millions that Al Gore has made". EVEN if that were true, it can't hold a candle to the billions that XOM/CVX/Peabody/ConED etc. etc. make every year, ans spend every year supporting the status quo.

 

Encouraging news breaking:

After all these years of stonewalling, the mortar is beginning to crumble. Unfortunately, a 'subset' may not be enough to allay concern. We should be able to look at EVERYTHING!!

Met Office: Release of global-average temperature data


The Met Office has announced plans to release, early next week, station temperature records for over one thousand of the stations that make up the global land surface temperature record.
This data is a subset of the full HadCRUT record of global temperatures, which is one of the global temperature records that have underpinned IPCC assessment reports and numerous scientific studies. The data subset will consist of a network of individual stations that has been designated by the World Meteorological Organisation for use in climate monitoring. The subset of stations is evenly distributed across the globe and provides a fair representation of changes in mean temperature on a global scale over land.

 

It will take much more than a short post to fully explain to Icarus the 'why' of the fraudulent science.

Fraudulent hockey sticks and hidden data « JoNova

I've got to go to work. In the meantime, peruse the above.

 

I can tell you it will take more that blogposts that reinforce your preconceptions.

 

Let me make sure I have things straight. It's ok to post non-"peer reviewed" stuff if it is PRO-AGW, but not ok if it is CON-AGW.

Ok, cool. Thanks!