Global Warming farce?

[Sangetsu]

And to continue the fun, the news today on Yahoo says "Global Warming Impacts Have Worsened Since Kyoto". And then the story which follows talks about how much more severe global warming has become. Interestingly enough, the IPCC itself has had to roll back estimates of global warming (and change the name to "climate change"), and admit that the world has in fact cooled over the last decade. Of course they then go on to explain that the cooling of the last decade was actually caused by "global warming".

I guess they think that most people are stupid, which is probably true.

And, for those of you who haven't read it, the University of East Anglia has confirmed that these emails and documents are genuine.

I don't see a problem with reducing fossil fuels to reduce emissions, nor do I have any problems with clean energy. My home in America is powered by solar electricity, I doubt anyone else here has gone to the same expense to make their homes as "green" as mine is. What I don't like is being lied to by government and "scientists" who make up stories in order to scare me into giving them more money and power to fix a problem which doesn't exist.

[burkhartdesu]

Originally Posted by Sangetsu

I don't see a problem with reducing fossil fuels to reduce emissions, nor do I have any problems with clean energy. My home in America is powered by solar electricity, I doubt anyone else here has gone to the same expense to make their homes as "green" as mine is. What I don't like is being lied to by government and "scientists" who make up stories in order to scare me into giving them more money and power to fix a problem which doesn't exist.

I'm glad you mentioned this, Sangetsu, I read the article, that's why I referenced it in the "world going blazes in a handbasket" thread.

I think the Government would like you to think the world is going to "blazes in a handbasket".

The environment is extremely important, sure. But I think that the data is being exaggerated because of how successful the "green" economy has come.

Fear mongering has been around for a long time -- convince us we're going to get a disease, we buy the vaccine. Convince us the world is ending, we'll buy that new energy efficient washer and dryer.

Biofuels are the future!

Hate to beat the topic to death, but Hemp is the most efficient plant for biofuels. It grows everywhere on Earth except Antarctica and requires no pesticides, herbicides nor chemical fertilizers.

[Sangetsu]

Originally Posted by clintjm

Good stuff.
A little more detail fox news dug up..

Climate Skeptics See 'Smoking Gun' in Researchers' Leaked E-Mails - Biology | Astronomy | Chemistry | Physics - FOXNews.com

To answer your question... I don't think it will make a bit of difference.
"climate change" is so political that this information will be snuffed out or proven garbage, discredited, spun, or whatever to get Al Gore and the rest back on their gravy train.

another Climate Change issue!
Rice... its killing the planet!!!:


"At between 50 and 100 million tonnes of methane a year, rice agriculture is a big source of atmospheric methane, possibly the biggest of man-made methane sources. The warm, waterlogged soil of rice paddies provides ideal conditions for methanogenesis, and though some of the methane produced is usually oxidized by methanotrophs in the shallow overlying water, the vast majority is released into the atmosphere.

Rice is grown very widely and rates of methane emission may vary greatly between different areas. Differences in average temperature, water depth and the length of time that the rice paddy soil is waterlogged can all result in big regional variations. However, methane emission from worldwide rice agriculture has been well studied in recent years and fairly reliable estimates of global emissions now exist. Emissions from rice paddies can vary hugely during the course of a year.

On average, the rice paddy soil is only fully waterlogged for about 4 months each year. For the rest of the time methanogenesis is generally much reduced and, where the soil dries out sufficiently, rice paddy soil can become a temporary sink for atmospheric methane.
Human Impact:

Clearly, humans are directly responsible for the world's paddy fields and so also for their methane emissions. The expansion of the human population has necessitated increased rice production and so methane emission from this source. There are, though, strategies which may lessen our impact via this greenhouse gas source as outlined below."

Methane - Rice

Got to get Asia spending some green to be green.

One thing that has not been mentioned is that methane levels have been decreasing for more than a decade. No one can provide any explanation why this is so, but it is occurring.

Al Gore, who art in thy fully offset private jet; Nobel-prized be thy name; thy carbon-free kingdom come; on planet Earth (otherwise known as Gaia) as it should be after Copenhagen; give us this day our daily meat-free diet; and forgive us our emissions, though we don’t forgive any other big fat Americans who emit against us; lead us not into exotic holiday flights; and deliver us from climate denial; for the science is settled. Amen. --Dominic Lawson, The Sunday Times, 8 November 2009

[Tenchu]

Originally Posted by noodle

Really? First of all, Global Warming is a result of something. Looking at the history of the planet, you'll see that Global Warming and Global Cooling are part of the "cycle" if we can call it that. Secondly, unless you believe in the butterfly effect, we can destroy the planet in certain ways without causing a Global effect!

Horses are naturally strong, but giving them steroids will make them stronger.

[Sangetsu]

As the Copenhagen Climate Change conference nears, the gloom and doom "news" reports have begun. Daily now we are seeing stories of swarms of icebergs heading toward New Zealand, and other stories about how western countries are going to have to come up with billions of dollars in aid to help developing countries deal with the claimed results of global warming, such as droughts, floods (?), and the like. China and the US have pledged to cut carbon emissions by half (not to half their present levels, but to decrease by half the amount of increases over the next 20 years, which is negligible.

The "fear" machine is in high gear, preaching doom and gloom as priests once did in order to fill their collection plates. But now, instead of God saving us from Evil, we need the government to save us from global warming. Those who tell us how much we need to change our lives to stop global warming are as much hypocrites as the priests of old, as they do their preaching world-wide while traveling on chartered jets and armored motorcades.

And, as the priests of old did, they have their disciples and followers, who swoon at the news stories, thump their Blackberries, and curse the names of George Bush and Hummer.

New stories are stating that global warming is now occurring at a faster rate than predicted by the IPCC 2007 report's predictions, and that we are going to feel the effects "soon". Never mind that in 2009 many parts of the world experienced their coldest weather since measurements began being taken.

I wonder how it is that the "experts" have determined that global warming is occurring faster than the 2007 IPCC's models? Perhaps they got their information from the University of East Anglia's Climate Change research center. Perhaps they used the same method they came up with to show New Zealand is getting warmer, when in reality, it hasn't: Climategate: Making New Zealand warmer | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog

Evidence has always suggested that Co2 has very little, and possibly no effect whatsoever on climate change, and even Al Gore's famous "Hockey Stick' chart shows that Co2 didn't cause global warming in the past, if you look at it close enough. In the last 10 years, Co2 in the atmosphere has continued to increase, yet world temperatures have decreased.

News reports have blamed global warming for the snow disappearing from Mount Kilimanjaro, while conveniently failing to mention that the temperatures from the snow line up have never climbed above freezing. The disappearance of the snow was caused by the deforestation of the mountain itself.

Global warming has been blamed for droughts, and the drying of large lakes, and even gradual disappearance the Dead Sea. But left unmentioned is the fact that the populations around these lakes and in drought affected areas has increased by as much as 100 fold in just the last century. The water hasn't been evaporated by global warming, it has disappeared because the population has drank it, or used it for agriculture. But once again, no one wants to hear the truth, especially one so "inconvenient". Irony can't begin to describe the Climate Change/Global Warming (or lack thereof) phenomena.

Is the world getting warmer? Even according to the IPCC, the effect has been much less than they predicted in their '93 and '98 reports. They hate to admit that temperatures have decreased since 1998, and in their 2007 report, they ended up using ground data to formulate their temperature measurements because satellite data haven't shown any increases.

I'm curious to see how much "warmer" this winter will be compared to last winter, even though temperatures here in Japan fell to near record lows at the beginning of November. If it is a colder-than-normal winter, it will of course be blamed on "global warming".

[clintjm]

Originally Posted by Sangetsu

As the Copenhagen Climate Change conference nears...

Yes indeed. I can here Mr Gore now: "Damage Control to 100%!"

Even comments in fortran code also downloaded (embedded in the E-mails as well) is damaging. Debugging the fortran source code also led to false positives proving the data.

Fabulous article at CBS, here:
The comments are also worth reading:

Congress May Probe Leaked Global Warming E-Mails - Taking Liberties - CBS News

In addition the above article links to many other articles in regards to this, such as ScienceMag.org

All worth reading.

Does man really think that we have the power to really affect the climate of the magnitude of what is thought to be the result of "global warming/cooling?".

Perhaps there is more evidence besides these E-mails and computer programs to be found yet

[Gorotsuki]

I found this interesting.

He cites a 1995 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a panel formed by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme in 1988 to assess the risk of human-induced climate change. In the report, the IPCC wrote that some 90 billion tons of carbon as carbon dioxide annually circulate between the earth's ocean and the atmosphere, and another 60 billion tons exchange between the vegetation and the atmosphere.
Compared to man-made sources' emission of about 5 to 6 billion tons per year, the natural sources would then account for more than 95 percent of all atmospheric carbon dioxide, Essenhigh said.
"At 6 billion tons, humans are then responsible for a comparatively small amount - less than 5 percent - of atmospheric carbon dioxide," he said. "And if nature is the source of the rest of the carbon dioxide, then it is difficult to see that man-made carbon dioxide can be driving the rising temperatures. In fact, I don't believe it does."

Global Warming Natural, May End Within 20 Years, Says Ohio State University Researcher

[Tenchu]

Don't be a fucking idiot. No; your opinion isn't worth while.

[xyzone]

I find it hilarious that these right wing quackers so proudly announce this Foxlies story about unspecified emails as some "gotcha". They're the only ones not laughing at the whole premise.

[solemnclockwork]

Originally Posted by xyzone

I find it hilarious that these right wing quackers so proudly announce this Foxlies story about unspecified emails as some "gotcha". They're the only ones not laughing at the whole premise.

Deal with the actual content instead of trying to provide damage control.

This wasn't just a fox news issue AS many sites and such have pointed out. I do recall CBS not being Fox News.

Global warming was built upon Al Gores back (that is not to say he doesn't preach what he practices but that is another issue), when they constantly give nasty warnings that within the 15-20 year mark that the worlds going to end. That is a red flag, why simply because there is nothing that supports it.

Let's also separate the issue of taking care of the planet from Global warming (which in a way amounts to fear mongering). No one denies the planet needs to be taken care of, what is the issue is wither global warming is what is being announced here. If it is not, then it is a major lie that needs to be reeled in, and the parties involved discipline. Why simply because they are controlling the way countries work.

I remembering hearing a phrase that the green movement is the new Marxism. While somethings are good, would it be right for them to goad people into living the way THEY want, when it might even not matter at all? Something to think about.