No more global warming?

[Aemilius Paulus]

Come on guys, move on. Arguing with a conspiracy theorists is absolutely pointless... Fragony, calling a conspiracy theory using different names 'collective human stupidity', still makes it a conspiracy theory, if what you posted recently is your true viewpoint.

What I would not expect, however, is someone as intelligent as Fragony falling for such a cheap trick. Denialists come in all sorts, and I am fine with many, as I have a strong cynical and skeptical streak myself, but conjuring conspiracy theories of that scale seemed to me like a thing a Right-wing nut in the Southern US would do. I suppose humans are more alike than I thought .

Why can you not simply say the science is bungled and let it rest? Does this really need a conspiracy?


While I may not argue with you on this, Frags, I would like it if you explained your theory in one post, in a lengthy and descriptive manner, instead of evading questions and throwing accusations around (not that I am accusing specifically you of doing such things). I am genuinely curious - I do not want a debate - I simply want to listen to you .

[Fragony]

Sure, global warming = scam = money for scammers

[Subotan]

Do you have any explanation for that reasoning?

[Fragony]

Yes I know bull when I see it, and this is bull.

[CountArach]

Yes I know bull when I see it, and this is bull.

So you are entirely relying on intuition? Well, that's excellent...

[Fragony]

So you are entirely relying on intuition? Well, that's excellent...

Well that and common sense, mass attracts mass so I would rather blame the clockwork consistency of temperature fluctuations on planetary alignment.

[Subotan]

Planetary Alignment you say?

[Fragony]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...core-petit.png

What else

[Beskar]

the correct appellation is "skeptic" thank you very much, and; lol.

For some reason, when I read that, I read it as "The correct application is 'septic' thank you very much" and I had to double-take to make sure I read it right.

[Furunculus]

thanks for that.

[Subotan]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...core-petit.png

What else

The way you apply science so selectively is astonishing.

[Fragony]

The way you apply science so selectively is astonishing.

You are of course correct. What we can clearly see in this graph is a cycle of industrial ages leading to CO2 output, and the dust is because earth dies each and every time.

But then again maybe it doesn't. Good thing warmists like hockeysticks as there are billions of them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles

[Subotan]

Luckily, the IPCC has more backbone that Fragony gives it credit for.

In a robust defence of his position and of the science of climate change, Pachauri said:

• The mistake had seriously damaged the IPCC's credibility and boosted the efforts of climate sceptics.
• It was an isolated mistake, down to human error and "totally out of character" for the panel.
• It does not undermine the "basic truth" that human activity is causing temperatures to rise.
• That he would not resign and was #subject to lies about his personal income and lifestyle.

[Fragony]

Luckily, the IPCC has more backbone that Fragony gives it credit for.

This isn't just about the IPCC anymore mia muca

[CountArach]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...core-petit.png

What else

Note how:
1) We haven't come out of that high temperature.
2) Dust has come out of that high range.
3) CO2 has increased

You can't post graphs without explaining what you are trying to say in using them.

[PanzerJaeger]

I’m probably late to the party, but here’s my opinion re:the conspiracy discussion.

While there is no evidence (and no reason to believe) that Al Gore is sitting at the head of an evil organization using Global Warming as a front for world domination a la Dr. Evil, it is quite clear that there is a powerful group of aligned interests far too invested in the theory to allow it to be questioned. Many scientists have staked their careers on the theory panning out, while many left wing politicians have embraced it as sequitur to increased government power and regulation, especially over Leftist boogey-men such as large corporations and industry. The recent EPA ruling on co2 in the United States opens the door for unprecedented government power over virtually all aspects of American’s lives. Then you have the profiteers, such as Gore, who stoke fears of apocalyptic destruction to peddle books and “Green” technology. And of course, at this point everyone’s reputation is on the line.

What is worrying is that these varied groups are increasingly dependent on each other in a vicious cycle for support, especially now that there is a concerted movement challenging the validity of the theory. The scientist rely on government grants for their livelihoods and to continue their research, while the politicians need a steady stream of cataclysmic “projections” and “models” to stoke fears and maintain support for an expansion of government power that is only acceptable in the public’s eyes under the guise of “saving the planet”. Of course the profiteers need both of the aforementioned parties to stay in business.

None of this is to say that man-made global warming is definitively false, or even that the original fears were not completely justified given the computer models at the time. However, Global Warming… err… Climate Change is now an industry, complete with balance sheets and lobbyists. And what is clear is that despite mounting evidence the runs contrary to the theory, there is an entrenched group of powerful interests pushing wild and unjustified claims of global catastrophe on a populace with no real way to parse the science behind it; with far more at stake than an egalitarian concern for the future of the planet – as evidenced by the fact that even if the harshest legislation were passed across the globe, their own projections indicate it would have little to no actual impact on global temperatures. Even more troubling is the demonstrated willingness of this collusion to alter and even eliminate contrary data and target the careers of opposing scientists for destruction. Scary stuff, indeed.

[InsaneApache]

Wasn't Pachauris' job fixing trains or summat? Obviously well qualified to head up a global con trick organisation propagating inquiring into global warming.

[Fragony]

Welcome back PanzerJaeger.

You can't post graphs without explaining what you are trying to say in using them.

I thought I made it pretty clear. No such thing as manmade global warming. It just doesn't exist.

[CountArach]

Welcome back PanzerJaeger.

You can't post graphs without explaining what you are trying to say in using them.

I thought I made it pretty clear. No such thing as manmade global warming. It just doesn't exist.

Yes, I know that is what you think, but you have not refuted any evidence nor provided any alternative explanations.

[Fragony]

Yes, I know that is what you think, but you have not refuted any evidence nor provided any alternative explanations.

That's odd I thought I just did, planetary alignment, do you deny planetary alignments? Look at the moon and what it does to the currents every day, but sure a change in planetary alignments has no effects on oceanic currents whatsoever, no effect, it's Co22222222222 brrr

[Subotan]

The Time Cube is not a legitmate explanation.

[Fragony]

The Time Cube is not a legitmate explanation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milanko...ycles#Problems (did these idiots consider land masses moving??)

Many problems, but still that much more likely. Dunno what a time cube is by the way

[Fragony]

I am shocked, shocked I say http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/156703

edit; encore http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/201...fricagate.html

[Subotan]

The Daily Express? Why should I trust a rag owned by a pornographer over peer-reviewed scientific journals?

[Fragony]

yeahlol

[a completely inoffensive name]

yeahlol

I can't think of a rebuttal to this, so I'm declaring Fragony the winner of this thread.

[Fragony]

Isn't like the IPCC isn't discredited because of gross manipulation of data, peer review doesn't mean anything if the peer reviewers are cherry-picked and sceptics aren't invited to the party.

[Furunculus]

The Daily Express? Why should I trust a rag owned by a pornographer over peer-reviewed scientific journals?

that's right there cowboy, play the man not the ball!

[Subotan]

that's right there cowboy, play the man not the ball!

The Daily Express is not a legit source of information about climate change, or for that matter, anything.

[Furunculus]

let me put it more simply:
1) have the beeb been repeatedly accused of uncritical coverage of AGW as put forward by the IPCC?
2) does the beeb have a huge proportion of its pension fund tied in investments concentrating on AGW industries?

If yes to Q 1& 2 what is it about the article that is reprehensible?

---------------------------------------------------------------

on earths orbit and climate change:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/0...warming-signs/