Posted on 02/05/2007 12:38:25 AM PST by LibWhacker
This article is very important because it proves what sloppy scientists the top people are in the global warming movement.
Looks like an interesting series. Thanks for the post.
Thanks for the post. I've read some of the articles in the series, but not this one; I did read McIntyre and McKitrick's work when it came out. I've thought for years that the science was settled - anthropogenic global warming is BS, but these turkeys aren't going to shut up till they've sustained some post mortem cooling, or their money gets cut off.
thanks for posting this, it looks like it will be a very interesting series! :)
Excellent and valuable find for debunking the global warming mystics, errr, 'scientists'.
Wonder when the New York Times will report that all their fear mongering is based on bad scinece.
BTTT
Sounds familiar.
Good post LibWhacker
BURN THE WITCH!
/sarcasm
The left don't actually give a rat's @$$ about the planet (eg. just look at Gore's lifestyle) and don't believe in this junk science any more than we do. To them global warming, sympathy for Islamic terrorists, multiculturalism, PC, anti-globalization, anti-Christianity are all the same. They're all a means to one end -destruction of capitalism and Western culture.
Very good point. If the planet were really in imminent danger of collapse, the global elites would be willing to give up their private jets and Hummers and take the bus to save civilization for their children and grandchildren. But since it's always someone else, like average Americans, who are supposed to make all the sacrifices, I know it has to be B.S.
When Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Edward and the like start living like Ed Begley, Jr., I'll believe it's real. Until then, it's just another socialist scheme to take our freedoms away.
In other words, they'll never stop. They are too important to fly coach.
Excellent post. I've already visited the site and I'm going to print out all the articles for my own reference, but I hope you post all ten of them here. I'll be one of the people bumping them.
Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm
The computer models on which forecasts of global warming are based predict that tropospheric temperatures will rise at least as much as surface temperatures (14). Because of this, and because these temperatures can be accurately measured without confusion by complicated effects in the surface record, these are the temperatures of greatest interest. The global trend shown in figures 5, 6 and 7 provides a definitive means of testing the validity of the global warming hypothesis.
Figure 8: Tropospheric temperature measurements by satellite MSU for North America between 30º to 70º N and 75º to 125º W (dark line) (17, 18) compared with the surface record for this same region (light line) (24), both plotted with 12-month smoothing and graphed as deviations from their means for 1979 to 1996. The slope of the satellite MSU trend line is minus 0.01 ºC per decade, while that for the surface trend line is plus 0.07 ºC per decade.
Figure 9: Qualitative illustration of greenhouse warming. Present: the current greenhouse effect from all atmospheric phenomena. Radiative effect of CO2: added greenhouse radiative effect from doubling CO2 without consideration of other atmospheric components. Hypothesis 1 IPCC: hypothetical amplification effect assumed by IPCC. Hypothesis 2: hypothetical moderation effect.
Excellent. However, I would argue that while it is great that a fully qualified expert has passed judgment, i.e., a death sentence, on the fallacies of the Mann "hockey stick", his basic conclusions were reached by others primarily on the basis of gross measurement errors associated for all periods prior to satellites - namely 950 of the prior 1000 years! Everyone knew this as a piece of commonsense - except the fanatics ignored it.
I do note with interest one other neat aside in Prof. Wegman's conclusions: He argues for increased employment of PhD level Statisticians on government funded climate studies!! As I have said before, "follow the money."
I just checked out the other 9 articles. Solomon has done an excellent job putting together the basis for a more reasoned and informed debate. I particularly like the one on Mars, but I will not steal your punch line. Thanks for the great find.
The whole GW debate reminds me of what was reputed to be the world's funniest joke: The one about Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson and a camping trip - except the punchline is now - its the Sun you damned fool!
The world is flat, dammit!
If they really believe this, they have the moral duty to commit suicide. I believe Al Gore has four children. Think of the damage they're doing to the planet.
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.