Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-25-2009, 02:32 PM   #31
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
RichardS's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nelson Bay, NSW, Australia
Posts: 2,418
QuoteOriginally posted by mickeyobe Quote
Here is a little more fuel for the "Hoax" fire.

RealClearPolitics - ClimateGate: The Fix is In

Mickey
Thanks for the link, Mickey. A few global warming cultists I know need to read this

Richard.

11-25-2009, 03:28 PM   #32
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Mallee Boy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,904
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by mickeyobe Quote
Here is a little more fuel for the "Hoax" fire.

RealClearPolitics - ClimateGate: The Fix is In

Mickey
Andrew Bolt is well known over here Mickey, and he has his supporters and detractors, but he calls it as he sees it with a big streak of independance.

Sadly all we will see now (and are seeing) is passive dismissal of these leaked emails as "one of those things" and a rash of of counter claims saying how dire the situation really is.

Australia now looks as though it will embrace some sort of ETS ? Carbon scheme which will ensure that we the mug voters will pay more for what we need to live our daily lives and will boost the profit lines of the big end of town.

Given that Australia contributes 1.4% of the annual Global CO2 emissions our contribution is going to be really important. So while other countries will do nothing (eg India & China) we will pay through the nose and send our employment overseas. Madness.

I know some people who are great supporters of the pro-climate change argument who will vehemently argue the case. I am saddened however by their hypocrisy.....they are a couple (2), they drive one of the biggest SUV's on the market (I believe it has been "off road" when they park it on the lawn to wash it....which they do regularly using a running hose (despite water restrictions), if you go into their home in the middle of the day you will find most lights on and the air con running flat out with windows & doors open (no, its not an evaporative type)....but they are committed to reducing carbon emissions, just ask them, they will tell you in no uncertain terms, complete with all the "facts" and quotes from erstwhile organisations such as the UN etc.
If they get a bit cold during winter here (where it is still very mild & you wear shorts year 'round)...they will turn on a heater rather than go and put on different clothing.

It seems their committment does not extend to what they do on a daily basis....its what OTHER people do that matters.

This is very common behaviour and symptomatic of our modern society, yep we are all concerned citizens, so long as someone else actually does something.

End of rant.
11-25-2009, 04:24 PM   #33
Veteran Member
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,563
No, stolen random emails edited and taken out of context by parties unknown doesn't make the deniers' 'hoax' accusations any more credible than it is when they present edited and taken out of context, misappropriated or just plain manufactured *science* to claim global warming is a hoax."


The emails don't even *say* anything that represents a 'gotcha,' unless, perhaps, you assume a priori that a scam exists and decide fragments of people's personal emails are *about* said assumed hoax.

None of this makes doing what the deniers want the least bit sane, sustainable, or responsible, anyway.

For people who claim to be so savvy and watchful about 'hoaxers,' you're awful credulous about what some previously-biased spin doctors with obvious ulterior motives say.... About what a hacker and thief told them.
11-25-2009, 06:55 PM   #34
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Canberra, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,462
QuoteOriginally posted by Mallee Boy Quote
Andrew Bolt is well known over here Mickey, and he has his supporters and detractors, but he calls it as he sees it with a big streak of independance.
That's like saying Fox News leans a little to the right.

11-25-2009, 07:16 PM   #35
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 659
QuoteOriginally posted by Das Boot Quote
I love when something like this happens. There's not a lot of reporting on this yet, but give it another month or so and the government run media will not be able to ignore it. It seems that a hacker has gained entrance into a CRU and grabbed some very damaging data & emails and distributed them for the world to see (>60MB worth). There are emails explaining how temps had been altered because they didn't fit the theory. A hijack of a once well respected journal to disregard opposing theories and refusing to publish them altogether. Omission of a thousand years worth of data because it didn't fit. This is nothing but manufactured science to fit an agenda - plain and simple.

here's the link
CRU has Apparently Been Hacked - Hundreds of Files Released
By looking at the responses in this thread, it seems very transparent who receives their news ("knowledge") from Fox news. Please y'all, save yourselves the embarrassment by getting the facts straight before making a post.

With all due respect to the OP.... your comments make little sense. I've spend a good part of the day reading these emails and found absolutely nothing that suggests:
a) A global climatology conspiracy, to think this is nothing short of 'nutty';
b) Deliberate falsification of data;

FYI, assuming the emails were not modified, emails do not constitute scientific ANYTHING. They are merely PERSONAL emails reflecting PERSONAL thoughts and emotions. To assume anything more simply means you have a vested interest or religious zealousness of believing that man-made climate change doesn't exist.

Religious zealousness, either way is dangerous!

Although I have scientific background.... this is my personal [not really scientific] opinion:

1. Climate change is happening!
Simple proofs: The Arctic/Antarctic ice sheets are rapidly melting. Within ten years the Arctic will become ice free for the first time in recorded human history. On both the north and south pole, terrible environmental consequences are occurring.

2. The sun has solar cycles and yes, it appears that solar cycles have a huge impact on earth temperatures, though the correlation is not fully understood. Proof: one of the coldest periods in recent human history occurred during a solar cycle known as the Maunder Minimum. Ice core samples (esp. the recent Greenland core samples) clearly show definite and extreme climate changes over the past 10K years.

3. 'Much' human impact to climate is [apparently] slight compared to other factors such as the sun, volcanoes, etc. What does have a larger impact is massive deforestation and the destruction of ecosystems, which help balance CO2 absorption. Whether or not I am correct with my assumptions is not relevant!

This is the important part!
In my opinion, climatologists have placed way too much emphasis on human caused climate change and not enough human caused pollution and habitat destruction. We need to continue our efforts to slow down the polluting of the Earth, whether or not climate change is caused by humans!

Thinking that we can continue our destructive path is simply ignorant Neanderthal thinking, akin to the turn of the century belief that the Oceans or North America's Great Lakes were too vast for humans to pollute! Do I really need to cite any more proof, it would take weeks to offer a single percent of the proof that exist were humans have already destroyed the environment and severely impacted local habitats and in some cases local climates [aka micro climates].

4. Picking on Al Gore (fools like to spell his name as Algore which is the epitome of juvenile) serves what purpose? At least he is trying to make a positive change based on the facts he has. What have you done? Al Gore has a lot of respect throughout the world. The same CANNOT be said about any ultra-conservative minded American in recent years; in fact, I think most of them are an embarrassment on the world stage. Please correct me if I am wrong. Name one or two.

5. Not wanting to do anything about climate change/reduction of polution because you want a few extra dollars in your pocket is the epitome of selfishness and short sightedness. This is akin to the attitude that nearly killed off the buffalo (when the conservationist sounded the alarm at the turn of the century, they were written off as fringe nuts too.... how people soon forget!).....etc...

6. Contrary to what others have claimed, reduction of pollutants is the same issue as climate change! As mentioned earlier, too much focus on human caused climate change!

Last edited by pentaxmz; 11-25-2009 at 07:31 PM.
11-25-2009, 09:29 PM   #36
graphicgr8s
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by pentaxmz Quote
By looking at the responses in this thread, it seems very transparent who receives their news ("knowledge") from Fox news. Please y'all, save yourselves the embarrassment by getting the facts straight before making a post.

With all due respect to the OP.... your comments make little sense. I've spend a good part of the day reading these emails and found absolutely nothing that suggests:
a) A global climatology conspiracy, to think this is nothing short of 'nutty';
b) Deliberate falsification of data;

FYI, assuming the emails were not modified, emails do not constitute scientific ANYTHING. They are merely PERSONAL emails reflecting PERSONAL thoughts and emotions. To assume anything more simply means you have a vested interest or religious zealousness of believing that man-made climate change doesn't exist.

Religious zealousness, either way is dangerous!

Although I have scientific background.... this is my personal [not really scientific] opinion:

1. Climate change is happening!
Simple proofs: The Arctic/Antarctic ice sheets are rapidly melting. Within ten years the Arctic will become ice free for the first time in recorded human history. On both the north and south pole, terrible environmental consequences are occurring.

2. The sun has solar cycles and yes, it appears that solar cycles have a huge impact on earth temperatures, though the correlation is not fully understood. Proof: one of the coldest periods in recent human history occurred during a solar cycle known as the Maunder Minimum. Ice core samples (esp. the recent Greenland core samples) clearly show definite and extreme climate changes over the past 10K years.

3. 'Much' human impact to climate is [apparently] slight compared to other factors such as the sun, volcanoes, etc. What does have a larger impact is massive deforestation and the destruction of ecosystems, which help balance CO2 absorption. Whether or not I am correct with my assumptions is not relevant!

This is the important part!
In my opinion, climatologists have placed way too much emphasis on human caused climate change and not enough human caused pollution and habitat destruction. We need to continue our efforts to slow down the polluting of the Earth, whether or not climate change is caused by humans!

Thinking that we can continue our destructive path is simply ignorant Neanderthal thinking, akin to the turn of the century belief that the Oceans or North America's Great Lakes were too vast for humans to pollute! Do I really need to cite any more proof, it would take weeks to offer a single percent of the proof that exist were humans have already destroyed the environment and severely impacted local habitats and in some cases local climates [aka micro climates].

4. Picking on Al Gore (fools like to spell his name as Algore which is the epitome of juvenile) serves what purpose? At least he is trying to make a positive change based on the facts he has. What have you done? Al Gore has a lot of respect throughout the world. The same CANNOT be said about any ultra-conservative minded American in recent years; in fact, I think most of them are an embarrassment on the world stage. Please correct me if I am wrong. Name one or two.

5. Not wanting to do anything about climate change/reduction of polution because you want a few extra dollars in your pocket is the epitome of selfishness and short sightedness. This is akin to the attitude that nearly killed off the buffalo (when the conservationist sounded the alarm at the turn of the century, they were written off as fringe nuts too.... how people soon forget!).....etc...

6. Contrary to what others have claimed, reduction of pollutants is the same issue as climate change! As mentioned earlier, too much focus on human caused climate change!
Well it's obvious you get your news from msnbc.
Al Gore is a moron. You need to learn to follow the money. The only thing he has done is make a docucomedy full of inconvenient lies. Oh he also has made 90 million dollars off GCC.
There is nothing wrong with reducing pollution. Saying GCC is man made is at best foolish. Remember back in the 70's we were facing the next ice age.
11-25-2009, 11:15 PM   #37
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Northern Sweden
Posts: 48
There is certainly nothing wrong with being sceptic to what science has to say since it is not uncommon that today's facts is inaccurate tomorrow. However, it is a completely different ball game to be ignorant of what the majority of the world of science agrees on, in this case mankinds alteration of the future climate of our planet.

Those who screams the loudest that global warming is a mass conspiracy are often a certain cliché of people cut from the same cloth as those who once refused to belive that the world was round.

As for Fox News being a source for Fair and balanced* news Stewart mocks Hannity for inflating Bachmann rally attendance, trying to pass 9-12 rally footage off as Bachmann rally footage | Media Matters for America

*That has to be an inside joke


Last edited by Smirf; 11-26-2009 at 12:10 AM.
11-26-2009, 12:39 AM   #38
Veteran Member
SteveM's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,294
QuoteOriginally posted by Smirf Quote
There is certainly nothing wrong with being sceptic to what science has to say since it is not uncommon that today's facts is inaccurate tomorrow. However, it is a completely different ball game to be ignorant of what the majority of the world of science agrees on, in this case mankinds alteration of the future climate of our planet.
I agree....and I am so glad you agree that based on the fact you have indicated that "the majority of scientists" that we are responsible for climate change....(I always get a kick out of these wild statements). It would ignorant that mankind is not altering the climate of the planet. After all, the simpletons stated that the oceans are too large, "we can't devastate the fish stocks", "we can't disturb the spawning streams"....NOT. Gee.."it is too large"..."too many fish"...."too Dynamic".....for mere mortals to make an impact.....NOT Same with the air....

Life is so much easier when we can transfer our responsibility to a "supreme being"...we can continue to have a parent around when we are adults and not take responsibility of our actions. "gee....it would be silly to thing we mere mortals can impact a river or lake". People will always make excuses as to why they should not do the right thing. It is much easier to take the easier way out.

For all of the years on earth.....solar change in 40 years....not 5000 years?...give me a break


If you believe in god....you will need to answer for your actions...not use him to hide behind.

Betty Crocker is not a scientist.....

Last edited by SteveM; 11-26-2009 at 12:58 AM.
11-26-2009, 04:25 AM   #39
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
RichardS's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nelson Bay, NSW, Australia
Posts: 2,418
QuoteOriginally posted by Mallee Boy Quote
Andrew Bolt is well known over here Mickey, and he has his supporters and detractors, but he calls it as he sees it with a big streak of independance.

Sadly all we will see now (and are seeing) is passive dismissal of these leaked emails as "one of those things" and a rash of of counter claims saying how dire the situation really is.

Australia now looks as though it will embrace some sort of ETS ? Carbon scheme which will ensure that we the mug voters will pay more for what we need to live our daily lives and will boost the profit lines of the big end of town.

Given that Australia contributes 1.4% of the annual Global CO2 emissions our contribution is going to be really important. So while other countries will do nothing (eg India & China) we will pay through the nose and send our employment overseas. Madness.

I know some people who are great supporters of the pro-climate change argument who will vehemently argue the case. I am saddened however by their hypocrisy.....they are a couple (2), they drive one of the biggest SUV's on the market (I believe it has been "off road" when they park it on the lawn to wash it....which they do regularly using a running hose (despite water restrictions), if you go into their home in the middle of the day you will find most lights on and the air con running flat out with windows & doors open (no, its not an evaporative type)....but they are committed to reducing carbon emissions, just ask them, they will tell you in no uncertain terms, complete with all the "facts" and quotes from erstwhile organisations such as the UN etc.
If they get a bit cold during winter here (where it is still very mild & you wear shorts year 'round)...they will turn on a heater rather than go and put on different clothing.

It seems their committment does not extend to what they do on a daily basis....its what OTHER people do that matters.

This is very common behaviour and symptomatic of our modern society, yep we are all concerned citizens, so long as someone else actually does something.

End of rant.
Goodonya, mate. A very restrained rant, I think, considering the disaster that's about to befall us so that the megalomaniac messianic munchkin can find another excuse to bestride the world's stage. I find it very difficult to be as rational as you are when I'm faced with total lunacy by that lying little turd, Rudd. Wong, Turnbull and all the other warming cultists are equally guilty because they persist in pushing the global warming cult.

It may be a coincidence ... or not. The ETS will result in huge profits for merchant banks such as Goldman Sachs. Guess who was CEO of Goldman Sachs before he went into parliament.

I'm sure it's a coincidence.

Richard.
11-26-2009, 08:08 AM   #40
Veteran Member
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,563
QuoteOriginally posted by RichardS Quote
Goodonya, mate. A very restrained rant, I think, considering the disaster that's about to befall us so that the megalomaniac messianic munchkin can find another excuse to bestride the world's stage. I find it very difficult to be as rational as you are when I'm faced with total lunacy by that lying little turd, Rudd. Wong, Turnbull and all the other warming cultists are equally guilty because they persist in pushing the global warming cult.
Trust me, calling someone a 'cult' over and over and over does not make it so. This is just the blind anger of those who've been duped by policies that didn't work... It's called 'denial' for a reason.

Ever notice how it progresses like the 'stages of grief?' What people are grieving for is the notion the world's unlimited for various purposes. Some people would like to keep as many as possible in denial and anger to make sure that nothing changes about what's for them some very profitable irresponsibility.

This whole saying 'Cult, cult, cult,' comes from those who have *always* considered anything environmentalist to be *blasphemous,* because, according to them, man's supposed to have 'dominion' over the world, not *respect* for it.

In the radical Right circles, they've always conflated environmentalism with... Paganism. (As if that were such a horrible and unacceptable thing to be, (or somehow a 'cult,' even with no such authority structures) to begin with. They've been accusing Al Gore of being one since his first book came out, but, no, he's not. I'd know. Really. ) The notion is, 'You can't look at that, that's against your religion.'

So, it's kind of about trying to associate anyone in the way of corporate irresponsibility... with some other people who are also widely-defamed as a 'cult,' and thus claim there's some vast, malicious, and highly-organized conspiracy... All to get a couple of grants. Or, what, kickbacks from carbon credits? Are you serious?

Maybe you're just having difficulty being rational at *all,* there.






QuoteQuote:
It may be a coincidence ... or not. The ETS will result in huge profits for merchant banks such as Goldman Sachs. Guess who was CEO of Goldman Sachs before he went into parliament.

I'm sure it's a coincidence.

Richard.

The *banks,* if you hadn't noticed, Richard, find a way to profit off *anything* involving money changing hands. The only way that most find acceptable to do something about the pollution, diminishing oil supplies, rising oil prices, and energy insecurity, is in fact to put some *profit* in it for the moneyed interests who otherwise won't budge unless forced. Put some *value* on companies and ventures which *don't* make the problem worse or burn down vital ecosystems....

Yes, there's money in darn near anything. There's a lot more big money wanting to confuse the science with this head-in-the-sand-attack-the-truth-tellers "denial science."

Just calling it 'healthy skepticism' over and over does not make it so, nor does it fix *any* of the worsening problems we've known we'd be needing to do something about at least all *my* life, and which have been fought on all fronts by the same people whatever they were premised on.

Acting like these emails actually turned up *anything* sinister or relevant or even verifiably-'honestly'- *stolen* is only more of this obfuscation and anti-science, anti-intellectualism, and all the usual attacks. This is.. Just hate, directed at people saying things you find, dare I say, Inconvenient.

It also won't put a drop more oil back in the ground, make it any easier to breathe, or bring back one outsourced job.
11-26-2009, 09:55 AM   #41
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 659
QuoteOriginally posted by Smirf Quote
There is certainly nothing wrong with being sceptic to what science has to say since it is not uncommon that today's facts is inaccurate tomorrow. However, it is a completely different ball game to be ignorant of what the majority of the world of science agrees on, in this case mankinds alteration of the future climate of our planet.

Those who screams the loudest that global warming is a mass conspiracy are often a certain cliché of people cut from the same cloth as those who once refused to belive that the world was round.

As for Fox News being a source for Fair and balanced* news Stewart mocks Hannity for inflating Bachmann rally attendance, trying to pass 9-12 rally footage off as Bachmann rally footage | Media Matters for America

*That has to be an inside joke
Smirf, I am so disappointed with you.

You only share one link about Fox fabricating this specific kind of lie (never mind other types)? What about the Palin book signing fabrication, that was a week ago?

At best, Fox tells the whole truth only when it suits their purpose. Every other time, they tell their opinions!
11-26-2009, 10:36 AM   #42
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 659
QuoteOriginally posted by smc Quote
I agree....and I am so glad you agree that based on the fact you have indicated that "the majority of scientists" that we are responsible for climate change....(I always get a kick out of these wild statements). It would ignorant that mankind is not altering the climate of the planet. After all, the simpletons stated that the oceans are too large, "we can't devastate the fish stocks", "we can't disturb the spawning streams"....NOT. Gee.."it is too large"..."too many fish"...."too Dynamic".....for mere mortals to make an impact.....NOT Same with the air....

Life is so much easier when we can transfer our responsibility to a "supreme being"...we can continue to have a parent around when we are adults and not take responsibility of our actions. "gee....it would be silly to thing we mere mortals can impact a river or lake". People will always make excuses as to why they should not do the right thing. It is much easier to take the easier way out.

For all of the years on earth.....solar change in 40 years....not 5000 years?...give me a break


If you believe in god....you will need to answer for your actions...not use him to hide behind.

Betty Crocker is not a scientist.....
SMC.... I agree, unfortunately we stupid humans only seem to agree (more or less together) at the eleventh hour or after it is too late. With very few exceptions, those people that sound the alarm early are always branded lunatics, living on the fringe.

History repeats itself, over and over... ad nauseam! It's rather pathetic how stupid (and greedy) we are as a collective.

Again, I do not wish to debate human's effect on climate change. To me, that is secondary to humans definite and non-refutable impact on the environment. Reducing impact on the environment just happens to reduce green house gases - so it's win-win!

IMO, if you don't care about the plight of Polar Bears, Penguins, Blue Whale, Tiger, etc.... there is something seriously wrong with your brain and you don't belong.
11-26-2009, 01:54 PM   #43
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
RichardS's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nelson Bay, NSW, Australia
Posts: 2,418
The only people in denial these days are those who persist in their irrational belief in AGW in the face of the evidence. The anger and the violence are, as usual, coming from the Left. The use of the term "denier" is just one illustration of the tricks used by the cultists, given that it's supposed to link those who are sceptical to holocaust deniers. The opposite of sceptical, by the way, is gullible.

The 3rd cartoon here may explain a few things.

A look at Australia and the world through the eye of cartoonist John Spooner.

Richard.

Last edited by RichardS; 11-26-2009 at 02:01 PM.
11-26-2009, 05:06 PM   #44
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 659
QuoteOriginally posted by graphicgr8s Quote
Well it's obvious you get your news from msnbc.
Al Gore is a moron. You need to learn to follow the money. The only thing he has done is make a docucomedy full of inconvenient lies. Oh he also has made 90 million dollars off GCC.
There is nothing wrong with reducing pollution. Saying GCC is man made is at best foolish. Remember back in the 70's we were facing the next ice age.
"Well it's obvious you get your news from msnbc." Why? Did I make a factually incorrect statement? Please enlighten me.
11-26-2009, 05:59 PM   #45
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 659
QuoteOriginally posted by RichardS Quote
The only people in denial these days are those who persist in their irrational belief in AGW in the face of the evidence. The anger and the violence are, as usual, coming from the Left. The use of the term "denier" is just one illustration of the tricks used by the cultists, given that it's supposed to link those who are sceptical to holocaust deniers. The opposite of sceptical, by the way, is gullible.

The 3rd cartoon here may explain a few things.

A look at Australia and the world through the eye of cartoonist John Spooner.

Richard.
Yes, reading cartoon #3 explains a lot about the state of stupidity in those who see a cartoon as a statement of fact.

With all due respect Richard... and I state this with some hesitation this time... getting your facts from a cartoon is the epitome of low intelligence... especially if you don't fact check! Come on, let's not be this daft!

Breaking down your cartoon was easy-pie!

#1. "I deny that Australian droughts are caused by El Nino or Indian Dipole Events" - Hmm... clearly the author knows very little about climatology. There are many causalities of weather. Two being the above aforementioned and the underlying cause is GLOBAL WARMING! But most scientists have a clear understanding that weather extremes are becoming more commonplace.

Even your PM now agrees that there is truth in Global warming: Australia's epic drought: The situation is grim

So this one is partly true.

#2. "I deny that since 1998 thee has been no increase in average global temperatures despite rising levels of CO2"

Oh... this is really an idiotic statement and patent lie. Since about 1910 there has been a steady increase in average global temperature. Wikipedia is a good non-partisan place to start: Instrumental temperature record - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am suspicious as to why this moron choose "since 1998"?

#3. "I deny that medieval warming period was hotter than our warming period"

Wow... on a roll for positively idiotic statements! There is a very apt saying that comes to mind, "A little knowledge is dangerous" Even so, whether true or not is completely irrelevant! This is truly a dumb statement to make!

Anyhow, the so called medieval warm period was in fact, cooler than now, on a global scale (yes, there are records of regional warming during this period)... according to ice core sample studies. Plenty of sources but here is one: Medieval Warm Period - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

#4. "I deny that during the 1930's and 1940's Greenland was warmer than in the 1990s." So, and your point is what exactly? Is what I would ask if that were a true statement..... which it is NOT! LOL

Actually, Greenland has been on a steady increase in average temperature since about 1850. But it was also warmer than present day in around AD 700. Again, localize temperatures are mostly irrelevant. Using them to further you cause (for or against) is stupid!
Source: History of Greenland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

#5. "I deny that since 1991 the average annual sea level rise has been a mere 1.7 mm"

Wow! Just when I thought this cartoonist reached the pinnicle of stupidity... he finds another summit. Here is a stupid and grossly misleading factoid. There are a whole lot of dynamics at work here but most scientist do agree on the models that many low-lying areas will be under water in less than 100 years.

Link: Current sea level rise - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
governments
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:42 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top