Move to block emissions 'swindle' DVD [Global Warming]

Guardian ^

[Omega Man II]

Move to block emissions 'swindle' DVD

· Climate scientists say film misleads public · Wag TV producers reject 'contemptible gag attempt'

David Adam, environment correspondent

Wednesday April 25, 2007

The Guardian

Dozens of climate scientists are trying to block the DVD release of a controversial Channel 4 programme that claimed global warming is nothing to do with human greenhouse gas emissions.

Sir John Houghton, former head of the Met Office, and Bob May, former president of the Royal Society, are among 37 experts who have called for the DVD to be heavily edited or removed from sale. The film, the Great Global Warming Swindle, was first shown on March 8, and was criticised by scientists as distorted and misleading.

[Zon]

Setting a "baseline" doesn't seem to be much of an issue as long as a suitably long set of data are displayed to show the cycles. There is nothing that is "normal" in weather or climate.

Exactly. To focus on the base line is an obfuscation. It is trivial compared to the climate cycles. That's why AGW parasites and their dupes don't even bother to trivialize the temperature and CO2 cycle over long time periods. Instead, they turn a blind eye and attempt to raise what is trivial to be most important.

It's like when a republican staff member found a memo on the republican/democrat shared house computer system. The memo was circulated among some democrats planning to manipulate the selection of judges to the court. The main stream media trivialized the contents of the memo and instead made, how the memo was obtained, the most important aspect of the story. The problem is, the memo was on a computer system shared by both sides of the aisle -- legal and trivial. Using deception to stack the court is important news information.

[Zon]

Thanks for posting the graph. I followed it to its source Web site and will look deeper into it. From what I briefly saw it looks to be a good source.

[Zon]

This link is not working.

The four links in post 8 work for me. Try them again.

[AndyTheBear]

and made elementary mistakes such as claiming that volcanoes produce more carbon dioxide than human activities, when in fact they produce less than 2% of that caused by the burning of fossil fuels.

Can anybody confirm this ratio one way or the other?

[WildcatClan]

If they have such a problem with the DVD they should offer up evidence to refute the information contained in the DVD and make their own. This would make sense, but when you’re in “chicken little” mode for profit and credibility, you attempt to censor and edit the opposing view. Since the Martian ice caps are melting and they haven’t yet found a way to incorporate Martian suv’s into their little theory, obfuscation, intimidation and excision will have to do.

[Bob]

Why would increasing temp cause increasing CO2 ?

One possible factor is the reduced capacity of the water in the oceans to hold CO2 as its temperature increases. A warm soda goes flat (from losing CO2) a lot quicker than a cold one does.

[WildcatClan]

I hope this helps.........http://volcano.und.edu/vwdocs/Gases/man.html

[AndyTheBear]

Suppose the ice core data is not calibrated in amplitude to direct measurement. We are talking parts per million.

I understand there have been trouble calibrating it. The late 19th century and early 20th century direct measurements tend to disagree drastically varying from 280 to 550.

So we are left with no direct verification that the amplitudes of such measurements will match.

[WildcatClan]

Correct, and the case was made for that in the program. Good explanation with the soda btw.

[Zon]

Why would increasing temp cause increasing CO2 ?

Increase in atmospheric temperature doesn't increase the amount of CO2. Increased ocean temperature causes an increase in the amount of CO2 released from oceans. Ocean temperature increases slower than atmosphere temperature. Thus the reason for the time lag.

[Zon]

If they have such a problem with the DVD they should offer up evidence to refute the information contained in the DVD and make their own. This would make sense, but when you’re in “chicken little” mode for profit and credibility, you attempt to censor and edit the opposing view.

Exactly. They supposedly have a consensus and this shows how consensus isn't predicated on facts or laws of nature. There a trial lawyer analogy that fits here...

When the facts aren't on your side argue the law. When the law isn't on your side argue the facts. When neither is on your side, pound on the table. 

The most egregious thing is the political parasites and environmental parasites at the top of the AGW swindle is their intent to undermine science by politicizing it.

If they can convince enough people that they can nail Jell-O to the wall it opens the flood gates to evermore politicizing of science. It's almost as though they took a page right out of the Dark Ages.

[mylife]

Dozens eh?

[AndyTheBear]

The Global Warming Swindle claims volcanoes emit more CO2 each year then factories and automobiles and such combined.

The volcano site in the link you provided said that man created more then 150 times what volcanoes did each year. As did another volcano site, that gave a figure of about 33 billion tons per year for the volcanoes.

However a "green" site I found was sounding an alarm about automobile emisions increasing dramatically to about 6.8 billion tons per year.

Another "green" site claimed that mankind had produced a total of 500 billion tons per the industrial revolution. Which it 25 billion a year if divide it by the last 20 years--but they were including "deforestation" in their calculations.

At this point, my guess is the "150 times" is an urban legend being passed around, and that the Great Warming Swindle was right about this.

[mylife]

Prolly because all living things and dying things emit CO2 and warm climates allow life to thrive (witness summer/vs winter)

The fact that Co2 is a function of temp is damning to the entire premise of gores theory

[mylife]

Prolly because all living things and dying things emit CO2 and warm climates allow life to thrive (witness summer/vs winter)

The fact that Co2 is a function of temp is damning to the entire premise of gores theory

[Smokin' Joe]

The oceans are the greatest dynamic CO2 sink on the planet. As they warm, the soluability of the CO2 decreases and precipitates into the atmosphere. Much like pouring a warm carbonated beverage vs a cold one--more foam, more CO2 coming out of solution from the warm beverage than the cold one.

It takes several hundred years for the water to warm up.

[Smokin' Joe]

Since the Martian ice caps are melting and they haven’t yet found a way to incorporate Martian suv’s into their little theory, obfuscation, intimidation and excision will have to do.

But...But there's TWO SUV's up there! See, JUST SEE ALL THE DAMAGE THEY HAVE DONE!!!/sarc LOL!

[WildcatClan]

And you are right, but it’s not urban legend it is scientists posing it as fact. When you said, “you guess”, you became a scientist, because that is what they were doing on the site I linked. They call it estimation, you guess, you have as good a chance at being correct as any. The estimations aren’t always forthcoming as to how the estimation is determined. Were underwater volcanic co2 emissions accounted for, I bet not, but how do we know. See we have partially bought into AGW, because we are researching the straw man they set up in the article. We get bogged down in the minutia of volcanic vs anthropogenic when co2 emmisions from our oceans dwarf both.

[WildcatClan]

WOW, I am going to walk everywhere now, use one square of toilet paper, and buy every carbon credit from the Goracle I can get my hands on! lol

[justa-hairyape]

The volcano emissions part of the video was really the only weak part of the presentation. They should have cut that short spot out on the edit table. Other then that, the video is incredibly solid. The volcano argument was not really important for the video anyway. Obviously however we do know that Volcanoes have emitted more CO2 then humans simply due to the fact that they have been around for a lot longer.