another take on global warming
Just thought I’d put a few things on paper for you muthafuckers to ponder on Monday morning whilst I’m at the lake getting my tan on.
There’s a shitload of press and international and national attention being devoted to the issue of global warming. Take for instance Al Gore’s film “An Inconvenient Truth” which showcases the shit that global warming is doing to the planet. But as compelling as this muthafucker is, has anyone really stopped and asked the fuckin experts what the fuck in going on or how they see shit?
No because like in everything, every swinging dick out there in front of a camera suddenly becomes the fuckin man when it comes to knowing all about how things really are. But what I find interesting is what actual world climate experts are saying about global warming and all that. Take Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia and what he has to say.
"Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention. The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on she said, he said bullshit”.
Or take University of Winnipeg climatology professor Dr. Tim Ball who came out and stated that among all the so-called experts, many focus their studies on the impacts of climate change. While many are highly skilled researchers who know their relative shit inside and out, they generally do not have special knowledge about the causes of global climate change.
They usually can tell us only about the effects of changes in the local environment where they conduct their studies. This means if daddy makes his living by staring at bug’s cocks under a microscope, it only makes him an expert on bug cocks and how weather affects how long they might stay hard, not the fuckin climate. I mean don’t be getting a muthafucker wrong cause this is highly valuable knowledge, but doesn't make them fuckin climate change cause experts, only climate impact experts.
The above mentioned are a couple of the hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby (meaning not paid) group climate experts who openly disagree with the bullshit that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here.
Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field. Yeah, in laymen’s terms what Gore and his paid pack of eggheads is putting out is bullshit. And just for you all out there who might want to Google a muthafucker and shit, here’s a list of “climate experts” who are calling bullshit on most of the global warming harpies.
• Carleton University paleoclimatologist Professor Tim Patterson calls bullshit.
• Dr. Boris Winterhalter, former marine researcher at the Geological Survey of Finland and professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki calls bullshit
• Dr. Wibj–rn KarlÈn, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden calls bullshit
• Dr. Dick Morgan, former advisor to the World Meteorological Organization and climatology researcher at University of Exeter, U.K. calls bullshit
"and the monkey flipped the switch"
posted by Greg Beck at Sunday, July 09, 2006
18 Comments:
Since when are most of the experts Gore cites not experts?
The broadest survey of opinion among climate scientists was by Nancy Oreskes, who did a search for peer reviewed articles using the term "climate change." She took a 928 paper sample, and classified each paper as supporting the consensus position that "most of the warming of the last 50 years is a result of human activities", as taking no position on that, or as opposing that. The statement itself was from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's most recent report, written by climate scientists as a summary of the current state of the science.
She found that 75% of the papers in her sample supported the consensus position explicitly and 25% were methods papers or were purely paleoclimatological, not addressing the consensus at all.
There were 0 papers in her sample which challenged the consensus view. While research may exist challenging the consensus, the amount is tiny.
That some people have different opinions is interesting, but unless the people you cite have data, the fact that they study the matter is irrelevant. The data support the hypothesis that human activities are causing most of the recent warming.
Yes, people have "really stopped and asked the fuckin experts what the fuck in going on or how they see shit," and Gore's description of that was accurate.
Josh Rosenau,
Most of this global warming/people done it theory comes from city kids who wake up every day to an ocean of concrete and think that is the way the world is. Same kids who think man controls everything -- and destroys everything. So scary!
Out here in Indiana, where people are sane, we watch a thunderstorm and think: Man can't control shit. We think the earth gets hotter because of the sun. We don't need a scientist or elitist leftist to tell us that.
What we really need is for you to leave us the hell alone and not destroy our economy and lives over another cockamamie leftist scare story. Killer Bees! Y2K! Bird flu! AIDs! Global Ice Age! Global Famine! Population Bomb!
Shut up. I'm tired of you.
If you really want to do something for the environment, in the words of the bard, put your hand over your mouth when you cough (or talk) that'll help the solution.
In short: You don't know a g-d damn thing. See you in 10 years dumbass.
Hey Josh, Here is the data that you claim does not exist. With the links attached it proves Global Warming has been busted on every continent of our world. Make sure you apologize to Greg.
http://www.john-daly.com/hockey/hockey.htm
Walker, I'm a scientist, I trust data, not loudmouths. I grew up around Indiana, and that was also the attitude of most people I knew there.
You say "Man can't control shit." But we know for an absolute fact that we have increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere since 1959, and we have measurements extending that data backward for centuries. We also know for an absolute fact that CO2 traps heat.
And we know that temperatures have actually risen over the last century to their highest levels in the last 400 years, and probably in the last 1,000. We also know that the sun's intensity hasn't risen over the time when the temperature has risen.
We can also test where all that extra CO2 comes from, and it comes from burning fossil fuels.
It's fine to be a skeptic. That's healthy. Being blind to evidence isn't healthy.
Ah, no, Josh, you aren't a scientist, you are a leftist.
I actually doubt that it is possible to be both a leftist and a scientist. You start with conclusions and you fit the facts to them. When you don't, your leftist pals revile you ( (see Bell Curve IQ study).
And, by the way, you fit Greg's point nicely. You are a "scientist" who has not studied the climate data (but as every good leftist you've seen the movie!).
Walker: I'm a scientist who has studied the issue. What evidence do you have to the contrary? Why are you calling me a liar? What about my statements are "leftist"? They are evidence-based, which is a damn sight better than what you've offered.
Gramps, you may have missed the news, but a large panel recently validated the Hockey Stick.
The non-partisan and widely-respected National Academies of Science reported:
"There is sufficient evidence from tree rings, retreating glaciers, and other "proxies" to say with confidence that the last few decades of the 20th century were warmer than any comparable period in the last 400 years"
And the reasons behind temperatures in the Medeival Warm Period are different than those today since sunspot activity was rising then, but isn't now. Temperature rose over the last 50 years, as did CO2. Solar activity didn't rise. Therefore, solar activity doesn't explain changes in climate.
Your citation also relies on the 1995 IPCC report, which was superceded by the 2001 version which showed increased evidence of anthropogenic climate change.
Get with the times.
Oh, and you really don't want to peddle the racist ideology of the Bell Curve. Bad karma.
JOSH,
I know you are a leftist from looking at your Web site. And, of course, reading the regurgitated leftist nonsense here.
Once you are a leftist, you stop being a scientist.
Reminds me of the Soviet evolution experiments, when were they? -- no doubt you'll know as an evolutionary biologist. They faked frog data to suit their ideology. Something we've seen recently with cloning and AIDS data in Africa.
And, the Paul Ehrlich crowd was just as passionate about famine and Global cooling as you and your leftists panels are about warming. All of it is claptrap baloney and you are the peddler.
And... unlike you, I've actually READ the Bell Curve. I'm not afraid of facts. But then, oops, I'm not a leftist.
BTW, there's no such thing as "karma" -- unless, as a leftist, one of your prevailing ideologies is reincarnation. That progressive these days? Is there a panel of socialist elitists somewhere who has confirmed karma data for you?
Walker - Josh really is a scientist and you, quite obviously, are not. And yes it IS possible to be a so-called "leftist" and still be a scientist. Because scientists base their "opinions" on independently verifiable, repeatable, empirical data.
However, in my humble opinion, it is not possible to be a right wing conservative and still remain a scientist because faith (belief without evidence) plays no part in science.
As to your claim that leftists "...start with conclusions and you fit the facts to them", I believe you are watching FAR to much Fox News. You need to start diversifying your news sources.
Having said all of that, I do reserve the right to disagree somewhat with Joshua, and the other Global Warming experts.
I am NOT a scientist. I'm a Systems Analyst. I'm not an expert on Global Warming or anything else.
But, the earth is about 4 billion years old. We've only been studying the climate scientifically for, what? A few centuries? Been really good at it for a few decades?
The fact (and it is a fact, Walker) that we are in a warming trend might be a coincidence. Yes, we have increased greenhouse gasses dramatically. But I'm not entirely convinced that the two are linked. Almost, but not entirely.
Is the evidence compelling? Absolutely.
Do we know enough about every single factor that has influenced the global climate over the last 4 billion years to say with absolute certainty that the current global warming trend is caused by mankind alone?
I really don't think so.
I remain a skeptic.
Xavier,
I'd say most leftist policies and the religious zeal with which they are attended, are all about faith.
Have you ever seen the little leftist ideologues at a "globalization" march. I'm not sure why they hate globalization. But, in any case, you won't see signs just about globalization, you'll get all the leftist causes: Killing people in the womb, killing people on the death bed, not killing criminals, not killing people who are killing you. You know, the whole leftist agenda in one little frantic micro-world.
No religion has ever been so vigorously or righteously defended as leftism.
And. by the way, talk about not examining their policies in light of success and repeatable data. Look at what their ridiculous welfare policies have done (to both black and white).
Oh I'm sorry, you can't stampede me with this faith argument, Xavier. Leftists are WAY more religious than Christians.
Walker - I am saddened that you are so blinded by your beliefs and hatred toward what you consider "Leftists" that you can't see the whole picture of what is happening to our world.
I too live in Rural America and can see what we, as humans, have done to impact our earth.
Right-wing, left-wing, - conservative Christian, or "leftist nut" - Global Warming is a FACT - not a scare tactic. Wake up.
Karmyn, I'm saddened that your mother went to all the trouble to give you a pretty name and you decided to camp it up.
But, seriously, from one womyn to another womyn, if all those New York liberals REALLY think they are going to fall into the ocean, why haven't they left? Maybe they are waiting for a government program to transport them into FEMA trailers or something. Can you check with Air America and get back to me with an answer on that?
I think it's because NO ONE really believes this. Even Al "The sky is falling!" Gore doesn't believe a word of this stuff. It's all for the consumption hystrionic womyn who never stop using electricity, stop driving, stop using their computers, stop doing any of the things they think are killing The Earth.
Well, what a bunch of asses! Except for Karmyn. Can we just try to treat the earth a little better? Why does that threaten you so much?
Although not an expert myself, I work for the man as a technician, but I can read. As stated earlier, I am not totally sold, because the data (accurately recorded and properly number crunched), from what I understand can change almost daily. PLus does a few decades truly represent what happend since the Industrial Revolution?
Having said that, I do belive in a finite resource issue. We have had the ability for decades to get of of fossil fuels, and to a lower emmision of green house gas. The military has had this for years, look at what we vets fondly call the 'duece and a half'. A 2.5 ton capacity cargo truck that will burn damn near anything you can pour in the tank. And that vehicle has been around since WWII. Multi fuel engines are not new, just trendy.
If this 'hysteria/hype/fact/gospel' does anthing I hope it does this. Gets a bug in a few ears and gets this country weened of fossil fuels. Hell Brazil did it in 5 years, and wen to a sugar based fuel system. 99% of the vehicles in Brazil run off of sugar cane, and the vehicles (Ford Focus foe example, these are mainstream cars we are talking about), did not cost 1 dime more than a regular gas burner. This year Brazil announced they no longer needed to import oil. That may not cure all the issues, but would be a huge step. I am all about the electric car, but you still need fossil fuels in our current state of auto-manufacturing to make them.
Let is learn from both sides and make a rational choice on these matters.
Another scientist (BS Geology, MS Geology) jumps in...
Most of the Greenhouse Effect is due to humidity and clouds. The atmospheric CO2 content is approximately 380 ppm (0.038%).
That is not to say that anthropogenic CO2 has no effect, (nature contributes much more than humans) but when you consider the past history of climate variation, it is difficult to assess whether we are responsible for 0.01%, 0.1%, 1.0%, 10.0%, or whatever portion of climate variation.
Other human activities, such as deforestation and the growth of Urban Heat Islands may contribute to warming as much or more than CO2, in my opinion.
This paradigm that states that anthropogenic CO2 causes global warming has been a political animal since it was conceived by one of Margaret Thatcher's advisors. See: http://www.john-daly.com/history.htm
In the long run, we are rebounding from the last of the Pleistocene Ice Ages (ending about 10,000 to 12,000 years ago) and in the short run, we are rebounding from the Little Ice Age Event, that ended about 1850 to 1900 (dates vary due to different interpretations of proxy data).
Some paleoclimatologists believe that we are simply in an "Interglacial Period", i.e., between Ice Ages.
Increased atmospheric CO2 is an effect of natural global warming is also a plausible explanation for the rise in CO2.
There have been plenty of periods of natural warming and cooling before we were ever here. What we see happening may have happened anyway in our absence (perhaps with some minor variations).
Oops. Minor typo.
"Increased atmospheric CO2 is an effect of natural global warming is also a plausible explanation for the rise in CO2."
Should read "...as an effect of..."
Of course GW is a reality, but reading your post is friggin' hilarious!
Post a Comment
<< Home