[dennisw]

btttttt

[Dallas59]

Clearly, if random searches give hockey sticks, the infamous "hockey stick graph" must also be random and cannot possibly show past temperatures. Furthermore, try saying "hockey stick" twenty or thirty times. Hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick hockey stick. Notice how it starts to seem meaningless? That's exactly what it is.

So what then, is the true shape of the graph? Well, it's the "big dipper graph" shown below. Notice the mathematical simplicity of the shape, without any of those silly wiggles that the graph above has. And it's supported by numerous studies, too numerous for me to need to name any of them. We know that the big dipper graph is mathematical and logical. Finally, notice that unlike the hockey stick graph, a random search does not produce the big dipper graph. QED.

[Caipirabob]

Per the graph, might he be the new spokesperson for the fascist Global Warming cult?

[The Duke]

"The programme sparked a heated debate ..."

Well, that explains it all right there, doesn't it?

Case closed.

[BlessedBeGod]

Global Warming Ping!

[olezip]

Temperature change always precedes changes in CO2 by several hundred years. Temperature drives CO2, not the other way round. The global-warmers do not deny this. They cannot.

Good article and rationale response to the critics. The CO2 relationship to warming charts and data must be publicized to start the collapse of the global warming wall. It would be nice to get back to intelligent and even handed discourse rather than the shrill, half cooked cries of the global warming pagans.

[Lokibob]

Here is a link to the program he is talking about. It is 75 mins long:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XttV2C6B8pU

[R.W.Ratikal]

Global warmer fans, people who have too much time on their hands, find the warming "crisis" fashionable this year. A few years ago it was "Nuclear Winter" and the comming of the "Little Ice Age" they were all worked up about.

Let them go, it keeps them off the streets.

[Tai_Chung]

It reminds me of the "world is flat" debate from centuries ago.

[xcamel]

FReepmail me to get on or off

Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown

Ping me if you find one I've missed.

---

[JennysCool]

Better ping the troops to this!

[bcsco]

Bump for later read.

[YOUGOTIT]

Global Warming people who say it is the fault of man are just like the water people who say there is no new water. Both are totally WRONG.

According to data gathered from declassified satellite data and written about in several science magazines
20 to 40 tons of water arrive at the earth on a daily basis from small comets.

http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/comets/smallcomets.html

So we are not causing global warming and water is being sent from above.

[wildbill]

The scientific backlash to over-hyping begins.

[Dick Bachert]

A FRIGHTENED population is more likely to give up freedoms and rights to a government promising to “SAVE” them from even a bogus danger.

Could ALGORE’S psychosis about GLOBALONEY WARMING be yet another effort by the privileged elites to keep the great unwashed (that’d be the rest of us!) under their very well manicured – and in his case, quite fat -- thumbs?

Better think about that before you give up rights your kids may have to shed blood to recover.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_qeWnS7Eig

[Wilhelm Tell]

I am not so optimistic that the truth will win, at least in the short term. The Global Warming fanatics are part of the Environmentalist religion, and this religion owns many governments, political parties, the media and most of the education establishment. They will not stand by and permit contrary views. As good socialists, they believe in decrees and not debate. In some countries there will be "hate crime" laws against anyone who "denies" global warming. Scientists who do not parrot the official dogma will face losing their jobs at the least.

[ancient_geezer]

The ice-core data was the jewel in the global-warming crown, cited again and again as evidence that carbon dioxide 'drives' the earth's climate. In fact, as its advocates have been forced to admit, the ice-core data says the opposite.

A summary of just a few of the ice core studies demonstrating this fact:

CO2-Temperature Correlations

Summary

• "(1) correlation does not prove causation, (2) cause must precede effect, and (3) when attempting to evaluate claims of causal relationships between different parameters, it is important to have as much data as possible in order to weed out spurious correlations."

"Consider, for example, the study of Fischer et al. (1999), who examined trends of atmospheric CO2 and air temperature derived from Antarctic ice core data that extended back in time a quarter of a million years.  Over this extended period, the three most dramatic warming events experienced on earth were those associated with the terminations of the last three ice ages; and for each of these climatic transitions, earth's air temperature rose well in advance of any increase in atmospheric CO2.  In fact, the air's CO2 content did not begin to rise until 400 to 1,000 years after the planet began to warm.  Such findings have been corroborated by Mudelsee (2001), who examined the leads/lags of atmospheric CO2 concentration and air temperature over an even longer time period, finding that variations in atmospheric CO2 concentration lagged behind variations in air temperature by 1,300 to 5,000 years over the past 420,000 years.

Other studies have also documented a fundamental violation of the cause-must-precede-effect principle in the climate alarmist hypothesis of CO2-induced global warming.  From a high-resolution temperature and atmospheric CO2 record spanning the period 60 to 20 thousand years ago, Indermuhle et al. (2000) examined the CO2/temperature relationship at four distinct periods when temperatures rose by approximately 2°C and CO2 by about 20 ppm.  One type of statistical test performed on the data suggested that the shifts in the air's CO2 content during these intervals lagged those in air temperature by approximately 900 years; while a second statistical test yielded a mean lag time of 1200 years."

[ see also: Yokoyama et al. (2000), Clark and Mix (2000), Petit et al. (1999), Staufer et al. (1998)]

• "Other studies periodically demonstrate a complete uncoupling of CO2 and temperature "

[see: Cheddadi et al., (1998), Raymo et al., 1998, Pagani et al. (1999), Pearson and Palmer (1999), Pearson and Palmer, (2000) ]

• "Considered in their entirety, these several results present a truly chaotic picture with respect to any possible effect that variations in atmospheric CO2 concentration may have on global temperature.  Clearly, atmospheric CO2 is not the all-important driver of global climate change the climate alarmists make it out to be."