Climategate

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by flamesftw

So is betting on the iffy "science" behind global warming or climate change or whatever they are calling it today. Compared to that i like my odds actually.

Oi. You REALLY missed the point there.

I would take that action at $10,000. However, I'm doubting either of us will be around "in 200 years" to see who wins.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by flamesftw

Compared to that i like my odds actually.

Do share ... what secret information are you basing your bet on?

[driveway]

I hate it when people who don't understand what science is or how it works complain about it, use it poorly or denigrate it.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Bagor

That's one brave bet.

Well being as the "man caused global warming scientists" have failed to be right on every one of their short term temperature models maybe they should stick to going long as well.

Yours isn't the first rookie cult to make that mistake. The Jehovah Witnesses and the Seven Day Adventist's both made the mistake of predicting the return of Christ when they were just starting out. It caused them both some pain and a few lost followers before they learned to avoid predicting short term events. Nope your cult would be much better off just making predictions for say 20 years or even 50 years down the road. Then when they prove to be false you will already have new leadership in place with "better science" to lead your followers a little farther down the garden path. I see from those e-mails
that you guys are already learned to "trick" history in order to make it confirm your dogma. You guys will do just fine. This is just a hiccup in the road.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Well being as the "man caused global warming scientists" have failed to be right on every one of their short term temperature models maybe they should stick to going long as well.

What you talking about? Noah's model was spot on.

Shame on you.

[TheU]

[Devils'Advocate]

nm

[TheU]

cool

[Pastiche]

The amount of blind faith in the scientific community really is amusing to me, especially on a topic so grand and vast that we cannot even begin to comprehend even the basic ideas behind our climate and how it works.

What's amusing to me is your blithe illogical nonsense. Blind faith in science? Have you been treated for health issues using modern medicine? Flown on an airplane? Used any other thing that relies on the scientific method for it's development and innovation? Why do you cherry pick what science you get to believe it and what you don't? The science that you don't agree with?

This thread is depressing.

[HOZ]

It keeps getting uglier!

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 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.

How convenient! So will people continue to quote information from this source?

BUT WAIT!!! They are willing to NOW hand over the massaged data!!!

Another nice run down int he Ottawa Citizen

[wooohooo]

It's an interesting topic. I took few courses in EAS (Earth and Atomospheric Sciences) about weather and climate etc and a few in Chemistry and the enviornment. All my EAS professors were ranting about how if we don't stop the CO2, NOx, SOx etc. emissions, we're going to die. Increased flooding from polar ice caps melting, areas once fertile will die and then the storms will become so insane it's hard to even fathom it.

The chemistry courses were a lot more conserved. While this possibly could happen they of course took a more scientific approach. Aerosol increases can cause increase in temperature through the net chain reactions and melting of polar ice caps can cause a change in albedo... etc. Then they go on to say while this does increase the temperature of the earth as some models have seen, it is not to say that this is not part of the global scale. Temperatures do fluctuate by a fair degree. Also, while we do have more CO2 emissions, the amount of CO2 sinks have also increased. Regardless, we're not sure if this increase in Global warming gases will do anything at all... but it's better to play it safe than sorry.

[Bagor]

The dailymash with an exclusive.

GLACIERS in the Alps, Andes and Himalayas have stopped melting after the release of secret emails showing climate change scientists are at it.

The Donnelly ice shelf has seen the error of its ways

Vast ice sheets across the globe gained up to four inches just hours after it emerged experts at the University of East Anglia had been manipulating data in a bid to knock-off early.

Meanwhile in the Antarctic the 200 square mile Donnelly ice shelf changed direction and headed back towards the continent where it then reattached itself to the slightly larger McPartlin ice shelf.

Climate change sceptic and fully-qualified blogger Martin Bishop said: "As soon as these emails were released the world's glaciers resumed their normal, icey behaviour, as long-predicted by some of London's most important journalists.

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/e...-200911252254/

[Calgaryborn]

[quote=wooohooo;2178049]It's an interesting topic. I took few courses in EAS (Earth and Atomospheric Sciences) about weather and climate etc and a few in Chemistry and the enviornment. All my EAS professors were ranting about how if we don't stop the CO2, NOx, SOx etc. emissions, we're going to die. Increased flooding from polar ice caps melting, areas once fertile will die and then the storms will become so insane it's hard to even fathom it.

The chemistry courses were a lot more conserved. While this possibly could happen they of course took a more scientific approach. Aerosol increases can cause increase in temperature through the net chain reactions and melting of polar ice caps can cause a change in albedo... etc. Then they go on to say while this does increase the temperature of the earth as some models have seen, it is not to say that this is not part of the global scale. Temperatures do fluctuate by a fair degree. Also, while we do have more CO2 emissions, the amount of CO2 sinks have also increased. Regardless, we're not sure if this increase in Global warming gases will do anything at all... but it's better to play it safe than sorry.[/quote]

I guess that depends on how much your willing to pay to play.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Bagor

The dailymash with an exclusive.



http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/e...-200911252254/

So if we are lucky and this trend continues maybe they will be able to grow crops in Greenland again like the Vikings did.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

So if we are lucky and this trend continues maybe they will be able to grow crops in Greenland again like the Vikings did.

Don't be silly. It was a spoof piece. The ice shelfs aren't really growing.

[666DanceParty]

It doesnt take a scientist to walk outside and realize that we are not experiencing the -15 to -30C temperatures that we are somewhat accustomed to having this late in Movember, but after reading a lot of this thread I am wondering how many people are actually eager to start paying these carbon taxes and help make these millionaires that propose them a few more millions.

I personally believe that whether the man-made global warming thing is for real, or a fraud, it is every single human being's responsibility to do what they can to preserve this beautiful planet and that comes down to the most basic of things. For instance, do we really need to use so much plastic when the Pacific Ocean is now a garbage dump of plastic that will never break down? (just an example)

However, after reading through this thread and as much as i could on the subject, I personally find it important to try to look at all sides of the spectrum because you never know when some snaky politician is just trying to con you into paying new taxes that will in the end profit them substantially.

To me, if someone is trying to expose something that they think is a fraud, I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt and listen to what they have to say.... like this for instance...
http://briefingroom.typepad.com/the_...a-is-real.html (again, just an example...)

I'm no scientist, and I know I'll likely get flamed for daring to find an alternate perspective, but forgive me for not just sitting here and letting Al Gore and his croneys tell me how it is.

At the same time, there has been a lot of informative stuff on this thread so thank you for that.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

So if we are lucky and this trend continues maybe they will be able to grow crops in Greenland again like the Vikings did.

In the 6000 years this planet has been around.

[Billy Tallent]

Originally Posted by driveway

I hate it when people who don't understand what science is or how it works complain about it, use it poorly or denigrate it.

+1

It's like trying to describe the colours of a rainbow to a blind man.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by 666DanceParty

To me, if someone is trying to expose something that they think is a fraud, I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt and listen to what they have to say.... .

Really? Do you believe that 9/11 was an inside job? Have you watched all the Youtube videos? Do you give the guys producing these videos the benefit of the doubt? How about the Holocaust deniers?

I'm willing to bet that you don't give most conspiracy theorists the time of day, but you will make an exception in this case because it's easier to "do nothing" like the conservatives say than to "do something" like the environmentalists say.

[Calgaryborn]