Posted on 01/03/2008 6:07:01 AM PST by Republicanprofessor
exceptable=acceptable... Doh!
link to poorly placed USHCN temp stations:
http://www.surfacestations.org/odd_sites.htm
Well, “Auntie” does at least acknowledge that alternative opinions exist, although they do distance themselves from it in a quite cowardly way!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/climate/evidence/sceptics.shtml
Nothing like telling you to find information that supports your side and then telling you where you can look.
Seems like a scam to me.
Good luck!
To tell you the truth, I’m going to let my son do the research on this. My head is swimming between the different sides of the data, but my husband [who teaches meteorology and posts on FR more frequently than I...and not as RP’s husband....:)], assures me that variations in temperature have been occurring since the ice age and will continue to do so. I think a long term view is needed.
On a different note, I often wonder whether many liberals are inherently unhappy and seek to remedy this by controlling everyone else’s life, from higher taxes to global warming, whereby conservatives take responsibility for their own happiness and are more content to leave others alone.
this is Republicanprofessor’s son, just saying that i couldnt find a site that shows “The Great Global Warming Swindle” besides Google Video, and i cant use that, unless it is a very last resort
Uh, read the “Surface Stations” link in post 37. You may be surprised.
What did I say?
RP's son, before you knock yourself out, you may want to read this:
Pure propaganda: the Great Global Warming Swindle
An MIT professor named Carl Wunsch, an expert in global ocean circulation, appears in TGGWS. He wrote a letter after his appearance indicating (with supporting documentation) that he had been misled about the intentions of the documentary. This is what he wrote about it after seeing the completed work:
"What we now have is an out-and-out propaganda piece, in which there is not even a gesture toward balance or explanation of why many of the extended inferences drawn in the film are not widely accepted by the scientific community. There are so many examples, it's hard to know where to begin, so I will cite only one: a speaker asserts, as is true, that carbon dioxide is only a small fraction of the atmospheric mass. The viewer is left to infer that means it couldn't really matter. But even a beginning meteorology student could tell you that the relative masses of gases are irrelevant to their effects on radiative balance. A director not intending to produce pure propaganda would have tried to eliminate that piece of disinformation."
Interesting though, how the author of this article had to make a “urban-heating-correction”
When queried by a poster called “bigcitylib” about his comments on surfacestations graphs, the author says:
“I created the charts which compare Marysville and Orland on the same graph (using Excel). I don’t know what tool was used for the graphs from the surfacestations site, but just by looking at them I’d guess they were done using Excel also.]”
well what’s wrong with pictures? AGW advocates are always showing us anecdotal pictures of polar bears stranded on ice, and pictures of melting glaciers, etc! Now, all of a sudden, taking pictures of poorly placed temp stations isn’t good scientific method?”
-but a sincere question to you: Forget the differing politics of these two sites for a moment.
Do you REALLY think this (below) is “a good way” to record surface temperatures?
Minor correction; the scientists producing and analyzing the dataset are well aware of the factors that cause erroneous or anomalous data, and they add correction factors or delete bad data, as appropriate.
Do you REALLY think this (below) is “a good way” to record surface temperatures?
Of course not. But you shouldn't construe my answer to indicate that I think there are problems with the surface data that indicate the trends in the data set are substantially in error, because the data is quality-controlled, "binned" (meaning the data from stations in a region are statistically combined), and corrected for known influencing factors.
tamino's been around for quite awhile before surfacestations got started.
RE:”tamino’s been around for quite awhile before surfacestations got started.”
-well maybe so, but that doesn’t make him an un-impeachable source. Judging from this post alone (link below) , I’d say he’s a liberal, and that his pro AGW perspective skews his assesment of AGW skeptics, especially since he calls them “deniers”, just as if skeptics were denying the holocaust. Many of his posters speak of this as “a war” between them and us...
Is that how you see it?
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2007/12/10/bush-censors-climate-science/
I try as much as possible to keep the political bent of skeptics and mainstream scientists out of it, because that just confuses things. So I don’t try to determine the political tilt of the source; I use information if I find it i informative.
But I however can’t give the same credence to the people who call this debate on climate change: “a war”...Or those that call skeptics “deniers”, and bully them to the point of intimidation.
Thanks. Let me ask you this: what is your opinion, now, of a doctor (or doctors) who knowingly cast doubt on medical research that demonstrated the link between smoking and cancer (even after most of the doubt had actually been eliminated) and who was/were paid by tobacco companies to do just that?
If you had been given the chance, 20-30-40 years ago, to tell the world what this/these doctor(s) was/were doing, what would you have done? What would you have said about them? What would you have called them?
Read the following for fun and perspective:
Don't Smoke -- Unless You Like It
The tobacco industry's worldwide ETS consultants project: European and Asian components (mind-blowing)
The Tobacco Industry and Scientific Groups ILSI: A Case Study
Executive Summary: "A July 2000 report of an independent committee of experts outlined a number of ways in which the tobacco industry had attempted to undermine WHO tobacco control efforts in recent decades. One such method of subverting tobacco control involved the industry’s funding of and involvement in seemingly unbiased scientific groups to manipulate political and scientific debate concerning tobacco and health. This paper presents a brief chronology of the industry’s relations with one such group, the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), between 1983 and 1998. Findings indicate that ILSI was used by certain tobacco companies to thwart tobacco control policies. Senior office bearers in ILSI were directly involved in these actions."
-At first, I scratched my head at your analogy/comparison to the tobacco industry, but after *cogitating* ;^) about it for awhile, this thought came to mind:
*Who* really profits from the Global Warming Industry?
Here is the partial list:
* Wall Street gets to trade in profitable emissions credits
* Climate researchers get millions more in grant requests funded.
* United Nations bureaucrats get a guaranteed revenue stream
* Insurance companies get to charge higher premiums
* Oil companies get to keep prices (and profits) artificially high
* Politicians can enact new taxes, carbon credits, etc
* Public sector entities get new taxes to fund their pensions
* Environmental organizations get more funds
* Left wing activists get a new basis to attack private ownership
* Labor unions get more jobs in the public sector
* Lawyers get a new basis to file lawsuits
Prior to George Bush senior, the climate *change* industry was around $200 million per year. It has grown to over 10 times that. The climate *change* industry is now a $200 billion dollar a year (and graowing) industry. Like the tobacco industry, their lies must be promulgated, because: their livliehood depends on it.
So...What is my opinion now, of the AGW scientists who are profiteering from their lies??
About the same as the doctors who were paid to lie about the dangers of smoking.
Thanks for the great analogy
Regards
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.