Posted on 11/21/2009 5:31:48 AM PST by PapaBear3625
Like the Telegraph’s MPs’ expenses scandal, this is the gift that goes on giving. It won’t, unfortunately, derail Copenhagen (too many vested interests involved) or cause any of our many political parties to start talking sense on “Climate change”. But what it does demonstrate is the growing level of public scepticism towards Al Gore’s Anthropogenic Global Warming theory. That’s why, for example, this story is the single most read item on today’s Telegraph website.
[...]
But in the case of “Climate Change”, the MSM has been caught with its trousers down. The reason it has been so ill-equipped to report on this scandal is because almost all of its Environmental Correspondents and Environmental Editors are parti pris members of the Climate-Fear Promotion lobby. Most of their contacts (and information sources) work for biased lobby groups like Greenpeace and the WWF, or conspicuously pro-AGW government departments and Quangos such as the Carbon Trust. How can they bring themselves to report on skullduggery at Hadley Centre when the scientists involved are the very ones whose work they have done most to champion and whose pro-AGW views they share?
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.telegraph.co.uk ...
Yep, I’ve been following that closely myself. It may be something more than a single anomalous cycle.
From another forum:
Here are a few things to keep in mind.
First, the consensus among solar astronomers is that Solar Cycle 24 (the new one) will be longer and weaker than Cycle 23, which was an extremely long and weak cycle. Long and weak cycles are generally associated with cooling trends.
Second, the solar wind remains at about half of historical levels, and no one knows exactly why. This causes cosmic rays to increase, and this year they are 20% stronger than ever observed before. There’s a hypothesis that they contribute to cloud formation, which would reflect more solar energy and cool the Earth.
Third, there’s a very interesting paper from the National Solar Observatory that predicts sunspots will vanish by around 2015, near the peak of the cycle. The reason is that, independent of the solar cycles, three measures of sunspot “quality” have been going down. In a nutshell, the core temperature is getting warmer, and if they get warm enough the sunspots will no longer be visible as dark spots. That’s a rather elegant explanation of the multi-cycle “no sunspots” periods during the Maunder Minimum.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/06/02/livingston-and-penn-paper-sunspots-may-vanish-by-2015/
The article contains a link to the peer-reviewed paper.
The Maunder Minimum produced temperatures that were so cold, they could ice skate on the Thames River in England. Cold spells like that usually result in famine as well, since crops often don’t grow where they normally would. Think Canadian wheat...
Is is just me, or does anyone else think there is something wrong with this situation?”
When someone who is brainwashed is hit head on with the truth, there is a denial phase.
“Cognitive dissonance”
Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. The “ideas” or “cognitions” in question may include attitudes and beliefs, the awareness of one's behavior, and facts. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, or by justifying or rationalizing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors.[1] Cognitive dissonance theory is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.
Dissonance normally occurs when a person perceives a logical inconsistency among his or her cognitions. This happens when one idea implies the opposite of another. For example, a belief in animal rights could be interpreted as inconsistent with eating meat or wearing fur. Noticing the contradiction would lead to dissonance, which could be experienced as anxiety, guilt, shame, anger, embarrassment, stress, and other negative emotional states. When people's ideas are consistent with each other, they are in a state of harmony, or consonance. If cognitions are unrelated, they are categorized as irrelevant to each other and do not lead to dissonance.
A powerful cause of dissonance is an idea in conflict with a fundamental element of the self-concept, such as “I am a good person” or “I made the right decision.” The anxiety that comes with the possibility of having made a bad decision can lead to rationalization, the tendency to create additional reasons or justifications to support one's choices. A person who just spent too much money on a new car might decide that the new vehicle is much less likely to break down than his or her old car. This belief may or may not be true, but it would likely reduce dissonance and make the person feel better. Dissonance can also lead to confirmation bias, the denial of disconfirming evidence, and other ego defense mechanisms.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
Either that or they just can't resist trying to continue the coverup. Either way, facts are facts and this hoax has been outed like snake oil!
You might enjoy this(especially the headline):
Global Warming’s Blue Dress Moment? The CRU EMail Hack Scandal
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2009/11/global-warmings-blue-dress-moment-the-cru-email-hack-scandal/
LOL!!
*Bump*
It would be interesting to know what percentage of people are aware of this story and where they found out about it.
Unfold ?
You’d be hard pressed to find it in today’s papers.
Hopefully someone qualified is going through the data and will write a follow-up/summary.
Sarah has never attributed temperature change to man-made. If you think otherwise then lets see a link.
“Global Warming’s Blue Dress Moment?” ROTFL! Gotta love a PhD. and former NASA scientist with that kind of sarcastic sense of humor.:)
“Climategate: how the MSM reported the greatest scandal in modern science” is nowhere on the front page of the Telegraph... except for MOST VIEWED TODAY! lol
I think IP was referring to Sarah’s skepticism regarding CAGW. :-)
It was a little confusing since the earlier post was talking about Newt and Lindsey - on the opposite side of the issue.
11/18/09
“Inhofe declares victory in speech on global warming”
WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe, perhaps Congress’ most vocal skeptic of man-made global warming, essentially declared victory Wednesday in a lengthy speech on the Senate floor.
“I proudly declare 2009 as the ‘Year of the Skeptic,’ the year in which scientists who question the so-called global warming consensus are being heard,’’ the Oklahoma Republican said.
“Until this year, any scientist, reporter or politician who dared raise even the slightest suspicion about the science behind global warming was dismissed and repeatedly mocked.’’
Inhofe recalled his own 2003 remarks in which he said much of the debate over global warming was predicated on fear rather than science.
Alarmists warned of a future plagued by catastrophic flooding, economic dislocations, droughts and mosquito-borne diseases, he said.
Inhofe also recalled his most famous comment in which he suggested that man-made global warming would turn out to be “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.”
“Today, I have been vindicated,’’ he said...”
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=298&articleid=20091118_298_0_WSIGOS499419
I just reread his post and you are right. InterceptPoint, sorry about my earlier post. Please ignore it.
You can imagine the next speech, once he’s had a chance to digest these revelations from CRU.
I’m sure he’ll change his terminology from “hoax” to “fraud” or “scam”, though. He certainly should.
He certainly has been vindicated! I hope he goes full bore with this new email information and can stop the ‘Crap and Tax’ bill!
He could just stand and read some of the emails with inflection then say, “You all have been sold a bill of goods!”
Thanks for posting this.
For decades I have been amazed at how our Fishwraps and ABCNNBCBS have spiked real news and pushed their bs like Gorebullwarmin and ignoring the Brit Papers when they break through the bs with stories like this.
That's one thing that bothers me about the whole "global warming thing. If the Earth warms up, we'll have vast areas of Canada and Siberia warm enough for agriculture. Higher temps mean more ocean evaporation which means more rain.
“That’s one thing that bothers me about the whole “global warming thing. If the Earth warms up, we’ll have vast areas of Canada and Siberia warm enough for agriculture. Higher temps mean more ocean evaporation which means more rain.”
Right, there’re several issues with the information as it’s usually presented.
First, for some reason ;-), the alarmists seem to feel the climate of the 1800’s (or so) was perfect, and must not change. They ignore the fact that historically the climate has ALWAYS been changing - with zero human intervention.
Second, they only speak of the negative effects of CO2 and global warming. In fact, the most benevolent periods during human history have been the warm periods. Further, the extra CO2 in the air right now boosts plant (and crop) production by around 30%.
Third, their computer models are written so as to predict that as temperatures warm, there’s net positive feedback, meaning temperatures rise even faster. That’s why there’s talk of “tipping points”. However, since in the past temperatures have been warmer and then cooled back down, the feedback is almost certainly negative instead.
At any rate, all of those points are most likely moot now. =:-D
Yep, they made us get rid of our hairspray and forced us to buy auto airconditioners that used us new kind of freon.
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.