Username

Password

Remember me
Forgotten your password??
No account yet? Create one
Home

Post new topic    BMW 2002 FAQ Forum Index > Off-Topic
Jump to:  
Thread Topic: Uh Oh! a crack in the Global Warming argument Threaded

   
Date: 4-15-08 11:58
From: gwb72tii in the great PNW View user's profile Send e-mail
Subject: Uh Oh! a crack in the Global Warming argument

Nobel Prize-Winning Peacekeeper Asks UN to Admit Climate Change Errors
By Noel Sheppard | April 14, 2008 - 17:14 ET

When Global Warmingest-in-Chief Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize last year, the media's prideful gushing was so obvious it was almost sick-making.

Now, six months later, a fellow Nobel Peace Prize recipient is part of a group asking the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change "admit that there is no observational evidence in measured data going back 22,000 years or even millions of years that CO2 levels (whether from man or nature) have driven or are driving world temperatures."

Since it is a metaphysical certitude media will ignore this Prize winner, the following is a complete reprint of a letter sent to the IPCC on Monday (with permission):

14 April 2008


Dear Dr. Pachauri and others associated with IPCC


We are writing to you and others associated with the IPCC position – that man’s CO2 is a driver of global warming and climate change – to ask that you now in view of the evidence retract support from the current IPCC position [as in footnote 1] and admit that there is no observational evidence in measured data going back 22,000 years or even millions of years that CO2 levels (whether from man or nature) have driven or are driving world temperatures or climate change.


If you believe there is evidence of the CO2 driver theory in the available data please present a graph of it.


We draw your attention to three observational refutations of the IPCC position (and note there are more). Ice-core data from the ACIA (Arctic Climate Impact Assessment) shows that temperatures have fallen since around 4,000 years ago (the Bronze Age Climate Optimum) while CO2 levels have risen, yet this graphical data was not included in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers (Fig. SPM1 Feb07) which graphed the CO2 rise.

More recent data shows that in the opposite sense to IPCC predictions world temperatures have not risen and indeed have fallen over the past 10 years while CO2 levels have risen dramatically.

The up-dated temperature measurements have been released by the NASA’s Microwave Sounding Unit (MSU) [1] as well as by the UK’s Hadley Climate Research Unit (Temperature v. 3, variance adjusted - Hadley CRUT3v) [2]. In parallel, readings of atmospheric concentrations of CO2 have been released by the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii [3]. They have been combined in graphical form by Joe D’Aleo [4], and are shown below.

These latest temperature readings represent averages of records obtained from standardized meteorological stations from around the planet, located in both urban as well as rural settings. They are augmented by satellite data, now generally accepted as ultimately authoritative, since they have a global footprint and are not easily vulnerable to manipulation nor observer error. What is also clear from the graphs is that average global temperatures have been in stasis for almost a decade, and may now even be falling.
A third important observation is that contrary to the CO2 driver theory, temperatures in the upper troposphere (where most jets fly) have fallen over the past two decades. [Footnote 2]

IPCC policy is already leading to economic and unintended environmental damage. Specifically the policy of burning food - maize as biofuel - has contributed to sharp rises in food prices which are causing great hardship in many countries and is also now leading to increased deforestation in Brazil, Malaysia, Indonesia, Togo, Cambodia, Nigeria, Burundi, Sri Lanka, Benin and Uganda for cultivation of crops [5].

Given the economic devastation that is already happening and which is now widely recognised will continue to flow from this policy, what possible justification can there be for its retention?

We ask you and all those whose names are associated with IPCC policy to accept the scientific observations and renounce current IPCC policy.

Yours sincerely,


Hans Schreuder, Analytical Chemist, mMensa, hans@tech-know.eu

Piers Corbyn, Astrophysicist UK, Dir. WeatherAction.com, piers@weatheraction.com

Dr Don Parkes, Prof. Em. Human Ecology, Australia, dnp@networksmm.com.au

Svend Hendriksen, Nobel Peace Prize 1988 (shared), Greenland, hendriksen@greennet.gl

Link; http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/04/14/nobel-prize-winning-peacekeeper-asks-un-admit-climate-change-errors
_________________
gwb72tii

If you don't know where you are going, you might wind up someplace else.
Yogi Berra



Date: 4-15-08 03:25
From: Richard View user's profile
Subject: Zanix--Zanix -Zolof-Ritalin

Better living and paranoid free living thru chemistry......



Date: 4-15-08 04:49
From: inkatouring in San Francisco, California View user's profile
Subject: Re: Uh Oh! a crack in the Global Warming argument

There's only one crack here and you been smoking it, my friend!

Please, next time, do me a favor: stop bogarting it. You've had more than your fair share!
_________________
“...democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.”

-Winston Churchill

[the faqer formerly known as schnell540]





Date: 4-15-08 05:30
From: gwb72tii in the great PNW View user's profile Send e-mail
Subject: Re: Uh Oh! a crack in the Global Warming argument

inkatouring wrote:
There's only one crack here and you been smoking it, my friend!

Please, next time, do me a favor: stop bogarting it. You've had more than your fair share!


that there's funny counselor

brings back long suppressed memories of growing up in Saratoga/Los Gatos in the late 60's and early 70's. flower power, peoples park, beserkly across the bay, haight-ashbury, maui wowie, ronnie ray-guns,

you see, i used to be on the side you are on, long long ago.

i also see both you and tricky dick up above have nothing to say about the core argument of the article.

ps - looks like the blush is off the bloom with obama. he's beginning to prove he's just another knee jerk politician trying to be somebody. u and i will be able to parse words about mccain's policies before too long. ugh!
_________________
gwb72tii

If you don't know where you are going, you might wind up someplace else.
Yogi Berra



Date: 4-16-08 12:41
From: Schweineback View user's profile
Subject: Re: Uh Oh! a crack in the Global Warming argument

As long as they can use global warming as a stick to beat us with, aka taxes, not much will change. If NASA had so many presumptions in stead of proof, I don't think Mr. Armstrong would've ever walked the moon. It's incredible how the whole GW debate has been ruined by the misanthrops using it for their own benefit. Let science be science and politics be politics because they do not blend.
And about that big fat Armageddon preaching fuck and Nobel prize winner; I wouldn't be surprised that in a few years time he'll be running for President again. Being almost a saint should surely get him the velvet chair in the White House. Bono and Sting will be proud.
_________________
'71 2002ti
'73 3.0CSi

Keep on rolling in the free world!



Date: 4-16-08 07:29
From: RIMSPOKE in NORTH CAROLINA View user's profile Send e-mail
Subject: Re: Uh Oh! a crack in the Global Warming argument

A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE ......
THEY ONLY WORK WHEN THEY ARE OPEN !

AN OPEN MIND IS LIKE AN OPEN PARACHUTE ........
SOONER OR LATER , YOU HAVE TO LAND ON SOMETHING .

WHY IS IT THAT THE GLOBAL-CHANGE-CLIMATE-WARMING PROPONETS
HAVE SUCH PATHETICALLY CLOSED PARACHUTES ?
FOR EXAMPLE , THE G-W CONFERENCE IN BALI WOULD ONLY ALLOW
SCIENTISTS THAT AGREE WITH ONE POINT OF VIEW ! WHY BOTHER TO MEET WHEN YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO DISCUSS ANYTHING ?
ONCE THEY EXCLUDE ANY OPPOSING POINTS OF VIEW , THEY CLAIM A SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS !

THIS IS LIKE BELIEVING IN COMPLETE FREEDOM OF SPEECH SO LONG AS YOU AGREE WITH ME .

NO CONSIDERATION IS GIVEN TO THE THOUSANDS OF SCIENTISTS THAT DON'T AGREE . NO CONSIDERATION IS GIVEN TO THE WOEFULLY
INCONSISTANT WAY THAT THE TEMPERATURE DATA HAS BEEN COLLECTED . NO CONSIDERATION IS GIVEN TO THE MORE RECIENT
DATA THAT SAYS TEMPERATURES ARE GOING THE OTHER WAY NOW .

NO CONSIDERATION IS GIVEN WHEN PEOPLE PROPOSE IDEAS THAT WILL HELP THE Co LEVELS AND SAVE MONEY .
( FOR STARTERS , STOP BUSSING MILLIONS ON KIDS ALL OVER THE MAP EVERY DAY WHEN THEY COULD BE GOING TO SCHOOLS NEAR THEIR HOMES . THIS ALONE COULD DROP THE PRICE OF DIESEL SIGNIFIGANTLY )

THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME SORT OF A HYSTERICAL DRIVE TO SPEND
TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO FIX A PROBLEM THEY CAN'T PROVE EXISTS OR IS EVEN A PROBLEM IN THE FIRST PLACE . BUT HEY , THEY ARE NOT THE ONES THAT WILL PAY FOR IT .
( YOU HAVE TO ADMIT THAT THE TED TURNER CANIBAL THING
GOES OFF THE HYSTERICAL DEEP END )

NOW AL GORE WANTS TO SPEND 300 MILLION MORE $ TO GET THE WORD OUT !?!? SERIOUSLY , WHO HAS NOT HEARD ?
HE GOT AN OSCAR AND A NOBEL PRIZE . THE ONLY PROBLEM HE HAS NOW IS THE WEATHER HAS NOT BEEN COOPERATING LATELY .
HE NEEDS 300 MILLION OF OTHER SUCKER's Er , I MEAN PEOPLE's MONEY TO CONVINCE EVERYONE ELSE THAT IT's RAINING WHEN IT's NOT .
_________________




Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic       BMW 2002 FAQ Forum Index > Off-Topic All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Threaded
Page 1 of 1

 
Forum HelpForum Help Forum SearchForum Search RegisterRegister Log inLog in