Global Warming "Scientist" put on leave for integrity issues

Word.

Anyone who thinks man made global warming is fore real and the best way to stop it is cap and trade should possibly go drown.
 
This is barely news. Stuff like this happens all the time, and the fact that whoever wrote the article doesn't actually know why he was put on leave kinda shuts the door on that. Absolutely nothing to see here.
 
god i fucking hate your posts sometimes man. if you think this one (detail-less) story means anything about the debate over global warming, youre a moron
 
i'm not gonna get into it deeper either, im over arguing with voluntarily ignorant people. the (world class scientists) at my work laugh their ass off when they see uneducated people argue this shit "oh scientists are split on it" yeah, they're split buddy, 95% to 5%. whatever
 
He's not entirely wrong. there's so much botched and biased science supporting AGW it's sickening. Go look up Climategate if you don't believe me.

Did you know that just before the ENRON scandle, Al Gore and the CEO's of ENRON had a meeting about setting up the Cap and Trade scam?

It's all about money and an excuse to take away rights/sovereignty.
 
global-warming-xx.jpg

 
You do realize the scientists involved in "Climategate" came out clean after 6 different investigations, right? Wikipedia sums it up well:

Six committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct. However, the reports criticized climate scientists for their disorganized methods, bunker mentality and lack of transparency. Climate scientists and organisations pledged to restore public confidence in the research process by improving data management and opening up access to data. The scientific consensus that global warming is occurring as a result of human activity remained unchanged by the end of the investigations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy

You are buying into a conspiracy theory if you think that scientists or anyone else are helping orchestrate a cap and trade scandal... hell I think it's a terrible system to fix the problem and believe there are much better ways to do this, but I've worked in climate related science with some experts who's years of research all support the idea that climate is changing fairly quickly. 95% of scientists believe it is occurring because there is an overwhelming amount of evidence that suggests this.

Do you honestly think polluting the earth and atmosphere on the scale humans have been for the past 100 years is in no way going to change things and/or harm us in the long run?
 
Yes, and of course they would get off clean. Have you actually read the comments these scientists made about AWG? They called people who believe in their science idiots and admitted to botching their data in their favor.

Why is it buying into a conspiracy theory to believe that Cap and Trade is a scandal? It is for a fact, a scandal just because it doesn't solve ANYTHING. Is it buying into conspiracy theories because it's not a mainstream belief or what? Because you think I'm paranoid?

One of my biggest passions in life is sustainability and environmentalism, and that's been the focus of my studies in university, where I hear nothing but constant AWG rhetoric and get ridiculed if I say anything contrary to their beliefs. It makes me laugh when scientists say climate skeptics are paranoid conspiracy theorists. AWG is a theory, and any good scientist is a skeptic by nature. The whole point of scientific theories is that they're theories and are MEANT to be challenged. IMHO, to blindly believe in a theory is being a politician, not a scientist.

I'm sure you already knew all that though............
 
Global warming may be real but if its due to the human population I haven't done much research. The global warming or so we call it could be due to the fact of natural seasons on earth. I do however believe we should cut down on the amount of fossil fuel's we burn and I'm all about clean energy. Theres nothing wrong with clean running technology and fossil fuels wont last forever.
 
what had nothing to do with the story?

you said anyone who believes man made gw is real and thinks cap and trade is a good solution...should go drown. now im not gonna sit here and defend politicians/pub policy as a whole cause that's stupid, but if you don't "believe" in what 95% of the global scientific community has to say about GW you're a voluntary idiot

so what exactly were you saying?
 
95% of what scientific community? the community of 30,000 scientists trying to sue al gore right now, including the founder of the weather channel?
 
Really? Because the entire conservative media and base wasn't out to crucify them or anything... something that has definitely taken a number of people down on it's own, regardless of the real facts.

Believe what you want, but I still think you're buying into some crazy shit.
 
I love how everyone all "OMG A SCIENTIST BOTCHED HIS FINDINGS TO SKEW THEM IN HIS FAVOUR!!"

it happens all the time, and by some of the most well known scientists ever.

Anyone ever heard of someone called Mendel?
 
like i said, im not gonna sit here and trade buzzwords, politics, PR, and news bits, cause it's all a bunch of bullshit. if you want to dispute the scientific community's huge majority that acknowledge mad made gw, then by all means, if you have the ability, post something that refutes the current discourse at the scientific level, in peer reviewed literature. but there's no fucking way im gonna sit here arguing about a lawsuit, al gore, and the founder of the weather channel. it's fucking stupid, polarizing and unproductive
 
True, but that still doesn't explain the comments, botched science, and manipulated information in the first place. If my buying into "crazy shit" is wanting unbiased and unbotched scientific data/information, then call me crazy.

PJS, John Coleman is a climatoligist and knows more about the climate than you can wrap your head around.

I know it's Faux News and the guy interviewing him is an idiot, but they're the only major news channel willing to listen to him and he lays out the idea of the fraud really well in this video:

 
and THIS is why i need to remind myself to not even bother responding to your stupid, retarded posts. you have no clue about any of the science involved, you just take 2nd, 3rd, 4th hand buzzwords, claims, and political newsflashes to toss aimlessly in these discussions. for the 3rd and final time, fuck this thread until a single one of you offers anything actually regarding the science and scientific literature that concerns itself primarily with this subject
 
I wasn't really referring to that part of the statement as I don't know much about it.... just to the first part.
 
Long story short, theres not enough information to tell us wether or not global warming is caused by man made emissions. My best guess is that it is not. The planet is just going through a natural phase. Plus the term "global warming" is completely mis leading, climate change is the acceptable term.
 
what you quoted was a single statement. you mean the global warming not being real part?

I found this on globalresearch.ca a while ago and thought it was interesting. See the bottom of the article for the guy's credentials and notice that they're much more qualified than Al Gore's:

Ten Facts & Ten Myths On Climate Change

By Prof. Robert M. Carter

James Cook University, Queensland, Australia

Global Research.ca

12-9-9

1. Climate has always changed, and it always will. The assumption that prior to the industrial revolution the Earth had a "stable" climate is simply wrong. The only sensible thing to do about climate change is to prepare for it.

2. Accurate temperature measurements made from weather balloons and satellites since the late 1950s show no atmospheric warmingsince 1958. In contrast, averaged ground-based thermometers record a warming of about 0.40 C over the same time period. Many scientists believe that the thermometer record is biased by the Urban Heat Island effect and other artefacts.

3. Despite the expenditure of more than US$50 billion dollars looking for it since 1990, no unambiguous anthropogenic (human) signal has been identified in the global temperature pattern.

4. Without the greenhouse effect, the average surface temperature on Earth would be -180 C rather than the equable +150 C that has nurtured the development of life.

Carbon dioxide is a minor greenhouse gas, responsible for ~26% (80 C) of the total greenhouse effect (330C), of which in turn at most 25% (~20C) can be attributed to carbon dioxide contributed by human activity. Water vapour, contributing at least 70% of the effect, is by far the most important atmospheric greenhouse gas.

5. On both annual (1 year) and geological (up to 100,000 year) time scales, changes in atmospheric temperature PRECEDE changes in CO2. Carbon dioxide therefore cannot be the primary forcing agent for temperature increase (though increasing CO2 does cause a diminishingly mild positive temperature feedback).

6. The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has acted as the main scaremonger for the global warming lobby that led to the Kyoto Protocol. Fatally, the IPCC is a political, not scientific, body.

Hendrik Tennekes, a retired Director of Research at the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute, says that "the IPCC review process is fatally flawed" and that "the IPCC wilfully ignores the paradigm shift created by the foremost meteorologist of the twentieth century, Edward Lorenz".

7. The Kyoto Protocol will cost many trillions of dollars and exercises a significant impost those countries that signed it, but will deliver no significant cooling (less than .020 C by 2050, assuming that all commitments are met).

The Russian Academy of Sciences says that Kyoto has no scientific basis; Andre Illarianov, senior advisor to Russian president Putin, calls Kyoto-ism "one of the most agressive, intrusive, destructive ideologies since the collapse of communism and fascism". If Kyoto was a "first step" then it was in the same wrong direction as the later "Bali roadmap".

8. Climate change is a non-linear (chaotic) process, some parts of which are only dimly or not at all understood. No deterministic computer model will ever be able to make an accurate prediction of climate 100 years into the future.

9. Not surprisingly, therefore, experts in computer modelling agree also that no current (or likely near-future) climate model is able to make accurate predictions of regional climate change.

10. The biggest untruth about human global warming is the assertion that nearly all scientists agree that it is occurring, and at a dangerous rate.

The reality is that almost every aspect of climate science is the subject of vigorous debate. Further, thousands of qualified scientists worldwide have signed declarations which (i) query the evidence for hypothetical human-caused warming and (ii) support a rational scientific (not emotional) approach to its study within the context of known natural climate change.

LAYING TEN GLOBAL WARMING MYTHS

Myth 1 Average global temperature (AGT) has increased over the last few years.

Fact 1 Within error bounds, AGT has not increased since 1995 and has declined since 2002, despite an increase in atmospheric CO2 of 8% since 1995.

Myth 2 During the late 20th Century, AGT increased at a dangerously fast rate and reached an unprecedented magnitude.

Facts 2 The late 20th Century AGT rise was at a rate of 1-20 C/century, which lies well within natural rates of climate change for the last 10,000 yr. AGT has been several degrees warmer than today many times in the recent geological past.

Myth 3 AGT was relatively unchanging in pre-industrial times, has sky-rocketed since 1900, and will increase by several degrees more over the next 100 years (the Mann, Bradley & Hughes "hockey stick" curve and its computer extrapolation).

Facts 3 The Mann et al. curve has been exposed as a statistical contrivance. There is no convincing evidence that past climate was unchanging, nor that 20th century changes in AGT were unusual, nor that dangerous human warming is underway.

Myth 4 Computer models predict that AGT will increase by up to 60 C over the next 100 years.

Facts 4 Deterministic computer models do. Other equally valid (empirical) computer models predict cooling.

Myth 5 Warming of more than 20 C will have catastrophic effects on ecosystems and mankind alike.

Facts 5 A 20 C change would be well within previous natural bounds. Ecosystems have been adapting to such changes since time immemorial. The result is the process that we call evolution. Mankind can and does adapt to all climate extremes.

Myth 6 Further human addition of CO2 to the atmosphere will cause dangerous warming, and is generally harmful.

Facts 6 No human-caused warming can yet be detected that is distinct from natural system variation and noise. Any additional human-caused warming which occurs will probably amount to less than 10 C. Atmospheric CO2 is a beneficial fertilizer for plants, including especially cereal crops, and also aids efficient evapo-transpiration.

Myth 7 Changes in solar activity cannot explain recent changes in AGT.

Facts 7 The sun's output varies in several ways on many time scales (including the 11-, 22 and 80-year solar cycles), with concomitant effects on Earth's climate. While changes in visible radiation are small, changes in particle flux and magnetic field are known to exercise a strong climatic effect. More than 50% of the 0.80 C rise in AGT observed during the 20th century can be attributed to solar change.

Myth 8 Unprecedented melting of ice is taking place in both the north and south polar regions.

Facts 8 Both the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are growing in thickness and cooling at their summit. Sea ice around Antarctica attained a record area in 2007. Temperatures in the Arctic region are just now achieving the levels of natural warmth experienced during the early 1940s, and the region was warmer still (sea-ice free) during earlier times.

Myth 9 Human-caused global warming is causing dangerous global sea-level (SL) rise.

Facts 9 SL change differs from time to time and place to place; between 1955 and 1996, for example, SL at Tuvalu fell by 105 mm (2.5 mm/yr). Global average SL is a statistical measure of no value for environmental planning purposes. A global average SL rise of 1-2 mm/yr occurred naturally over the last 150 years, and shows no sign of human-influenced increase.

Myth 10 The late 20th Century increase in AGT caused an increase in the number of severe storms (cyclones), or in storm intensity.

Facts 10 Meteorological experts are agreed that no increase in storms has occurred beyond that associated with natural variation of the climate system.

Robert M. Carter is a Research Professor at James Cook University (Queensland) and the University of Adelaide (South Australia). He is a palaeontologist, stratigrapher, marine geologist and environmental scientist with more than thirty years professional experience.

© Copyright Robert M. Carter, James Cook University, Queensland, Australia, 2009

 
This whole debate over climate change really really bugs me and people need to realize that it's purely a distraction from real environmental issues.

-climate change opponents are using the "well the Earth is naturally warming and therefore I'm not to blame" as a way to skirt around the fact that we as humans are in an accelerated pace destroying the planet. proving climate change wrong is their way of feeling good about driving an SUV and having everything individually wrapped in plastic and a way to show that they're not wrong about doing so.

-those for climate change are arguing it based on the fact that it's something that seems to have sunk in and actually made some people aware of the atrocities we've done to our home. It's only very very recently that recycling and composting are beginning to catch on and those sorts of fads are motivated by the prospect of climate change. Climate change sells, and even if not human influenced is getting people to stop drinking from that plastic water bottle.

The bottom line of the whole debate isn't and never was whether humans are changing our climate. That's just excuses and selling points. The whole point is that we are, to put simply, wrecking our world. There is no one who can argue that. The point shouldn't be to argue we can produce more emission since they aren't raising the temperature, the point should be that those emission are killing out planet and need to be curbed if we want any sort of sustainability.
 
Do you even realize how ridiculous it is to claim that "95%" of scientists are in full support of man made global warming?

I don't think you do. In terms of buzzwords, I guarantee whatever "thing" you support politically is far more into that category. It must feel good sticking it to the man by being ignorant. Go have a sweet discussion about bullshit "facts" and bitch about people actually seeking answers.

Omg omg omg that sounded harsh. But seriously, global warming had turned into a fucking religion. If you can't see that you're fucking blind, regardless of what you believe.
 
If you watched "an inconvenient truth", and believe the majority of it as truth, you're a fucking idiot.

Not a joke, not trying to be mean. Read a fucking book. Thank you.

(And I don't care about any grammar mistakes in that)
 
next thing you know, we're going to be crawling back out of oceans and learning to climb trees to escape predators...
 
I watched that "documentary" for a class ON environmental studies and the first question asked about it by the teacher was "can you see bias problems?"... My answer.

"Why when he surveyed people he only had 468 people or whatever? I mean, I thought Gallup, Rasmussen and others all say you need around 1000... does that mean of the 700 something he surveyed only 468 agreed?"

I gots me an A in that class.
 
One scientist, out of the entire scientific community's consensus that man made climate change exists, was dishonest, therefore CLIMATE CHANGE IS A HOAX end of story.
 
hahaha you actually just post the most meaningless shit you can think of don't you? thanks for the reminder to not even bother trying to make sense of your bullshit, believe whatever you want i dont care i'm done arguing with fucking idiots about this shit
 
oh and if you think my beliefs on climate change depend in any way on an inconvenient truth you're fucking retarded
 
nobody willing to touch on the article i posted? should i have posted a movie to keep your attention instead?
 
All I am gonna say is we read that article for that class I took and 85% of the class refused to believe it just like they refused to believe that the batteries in a Hybrid car are more harmful to the environment than an oil spill.
 
Yerp.

Like I get the world is getting warmer but where I disagree is on just how much human's are causing it and on the methods people deem necessary for us to fight back.

Great example is ethanol in gas. Ethanol I can't remember the exact number but let's just say it take energy to harvest the corn stalks, haul the stalks to a refinery, and even more energy in order to turn said stuff into ethanol. Let's say it takes about 50 units to do all that (it takes far more I know but just stick with me). Ethanol only produces like 50 units. For every gallon of ethanol created it only produces as much energy as was used to make it. Basically, it makes it a waste and a drag on the environment everyone is trying to save.

Unfortunately, it will stick around since corn farmers want the money. Basically, corn farmers in Iowa and such are running the biggest scam in the world with ethanol subsidies.
 
I love people dropping "consensus".

The whole approach to preaching it was shady as fuck. More of a religion than science.

There really isn't a consensus on this, but even if there was, At one time there was a consensus on the world being flat.
 
in the 70s scientists thought we were going through a cold period (i wasnt alive at the time, but i have seen literature on it), The earth has cycles of hot and cold much like the seasons except these cycles include ice ages and events like now where the temperature goes up 1 degree, so i doubt that its man made, and anyways were fucking humans on earth a hot period isnt going to kill us, like seriously adaptation and survival of the fittest mothafuckers idc if you guys die (except the hot girls on NS if they exist)
 
it snowed in africa and london, that never fucking happens. also record dumps of snow the last few seasons. if earth is getting warmer i think i'm all for it cause it apparently means more snow everywhere except europe. also the earth was warmer 30 years ago than it is now so i don't see what the big deal is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top