So much for global warming

[bluestorm]

Acceptance of global warming is a bit like the theory of evolution, there's plenty of evidence & the overwhelming majority of scientists accept it.

There are many more scientists who believe there is no human caused global warming.
31,487 American scientists have signed this petition,
including 9,029 with PhDs

Compared to the 2000 odd IPCC. But it's pointless arguing, because then the Global Warming just say that these scientists must work for the polluters.

But believe what you will joeExpat. I'm thinking up ways I can make money from you alarmist as another income stream.

 

[mrsdawnrazor]

T
31,487 American scientists have signed this petition,
including 9,029 with PhDs

Ooooh am I supposed to be impressed

So what qualifications have the other 22,000 'scientists' got and what are the PhDs in. Does a PhD in English literature give me more of a say than a lay person?

I love these kind of stats - as meaningless as unqualified stats from the other side. If you want a debate, post links to refereed data from both sides and discuss that. Mindless posting of he said, she said, well someone with a PhD signed this, is pointless. A PhD doesnt make you unbiassed.

And before you ask, Yes I am qualified to make these statements

 

[bluestorm]

Ooooh am I supposed to be impressed
So what qualifications have the other 22,000 'scientists' got and what are the PhDs in. Does a PhD in English literature give me more of a say than a lay person?

I really don't care mrsdawnrazor. But as usually, it's the biased one eye view from a Global Warming alarmist, as I said. It's either scientists from the polluters, or "Arts" degrees, or something else.

PS: as usual, lazy analysis by the alarmist.
http://www.petitionproject.org/qualifications_of_signers.php

I've been through the same arguments with many others. I don't have the time to waste on you people.

It will be enjoyable in 10yrs (by the end of the decade) to still see the warmists pushing the "Global Warming" wheelbarrow, when undeniable cooling is then taking place.

 

[mrsdawnrazor]

I was pointing out the flaws in your argument and you automatically assume I am a global warming believer. On what basis have you made that assumption. If you read what I wrote, I asked that the discussion be based on facts , not points scoring that at a bunch of scientists, some with PhDs have signed a petition.

What were you trying to achieve by posting that link. What scientific validity did it add to the discussion.

Show me the data, from both sides, show me that you have actively considered both sides, and show me the reasoning for your standpoint. That is the way to gain respect for your argument

And this point stands for sceptics and proponents.

I have not had the argument with you before, but as you assume I think in a contrary way to you there is not much point.

 

[bluestorm]

What were you trying to achieve by posting that link. What scientific validity did it add to the discussion.

The point genius is a reply to JoeExpat and his statement that most warmists raise "there's plenty of evidence & the overwhelming majority of scientists accept it."

This statement is completely incorrect, and MOST scientists DO NOT accept it.

I really don't care. The warmists can have their doomsday predictions. However the world will start cooling this decade (it will be very evident by 2020)
I'm not going to waste time showing you evidence against the contrary of Global Warming, as most warmists just say the information is produced by polluters.

 

[joeExpat]

The point genius is a reply to JoeExpat and his statement that most warmists raise "there's plenty of evidence & the overwhelming majority of scientists accept it."

This statement is completely incorrect, and MOST scientists DO NOT accept it.

The privately funded petition you quoted has been discredited & most of the names on are not from qualified scientists. By quoting it you've further damaged your already false arguments. Of course most scientists accept it.
http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/2009/07/12/what-if-the-oregon-petition-names-were-real/
http://debunking.pbworks.com/w/page/17102969/Oregon-Petition
I like the bit how the petition has even been debunked by the skeptics society themselves.

No single scientific body of standing anywhere continues to discredit global warming anymore. None. The last was a petroleum institute.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change#Statements_by_dissenting_organizations

Normally I would't worry about various crackpots and their theories, but in the case of climate change deniers they can do some real damage with their misinformation.

 

[The Fence]

All I know is we had the hottest temp back in the 50's...it was 54deg...we have never had that since......

All I know is the last 4 Summers (incl this one) have been the coolest I have experienced in this area (temperate).

All I know is drought always follow up with floods.

All I know is wet cool times always follow up with dry hot times.

I don't need any scientist to tell me what is happening with the climate.

I must conclude with I get all my experience by my years upon this earth and collectively with old mates and relatives and what they have in their diaries and memories.

The weather changes all the time...hot to cold and in between...so temps look like we are hotting up eh....how come our last 4 summers are colder than living memory in our patch...????

 

[Sunfish]

Ooooh am I supposed to be impressed

So what qualifications have the other 22,000 'scientists' got and what are the PhDs in.

Instead of asking, why don't you have a look?

There were very few "real" scientists who approved the IPCC final draft. Mine is bigger'n yours!!!!!!

 

[landlubber]

Get off the fence...

LL, you've failed to realise that I have not stated that I believe in GW or the like.

CJ... Darn right. You got it. PERFECT. If you're a declared fence-sitter then you're part of the problem. Read books. Educate yourself.
1) "The Climate Caper" ...by a retired CSIRO scientist who tells how funding within the CSIRO is dependant on the scientist "singing the song" of AGW.
2) " The Wind Farm Scam" ... which tells the truth about wind power and how it actually makes no difference to CO2 reduction... but we're spending huge $$$ on it.
3) " Climate- The Counter Consensus" by Prof Bob Carter ... just a superbly written and referenced text.
READ. READ. READ ... then get off the bloody fence.
LL
PS There is NO proof of AGW. Not one bit of proof. NONE. ZERO.ZIP.

 

[bluestorm]

Normally I would't worry about various crackpots and their theories, but in the case of climate change deniers they can do some real damage with their misinformation.

joeExpat, I really don't care. Believe your Global Warming myth. I'm just trying to work out a way to make money off you fools.

Geez, no wonder the rich get richer, when the plebs are so silly.

Anyway, busy on the PC now JoeExpat making money from another source of stupid people. Got an Astrology website going that gets 700,000 hits/mth. Nice little Google ad-sense and affiliates earner.
Just got to work out something for the Global Warming stupidity.

The world is wonderful. So many stupid and gullible people to make money off. Retirement at 42 is nearer and nearer.

Give me a clue JoeExpat. What sort of Global Warming products or trinkets would you be prepared to pay a few dollars for? Don't know. Something like a website to donate $1 to save a "virtual" tree as symbolism for saving the planet. Could work. Get even 10000 fools world wide who won't miss $1, and that's a nice bounty.

 

[mrsdawnrazor]

Instead of asking, why don't you have a look?

There were very few "real" scientists who approved the IPCC final draft. Mine is bigger'n yours!!!!!!

I did and I was hoping that I was wrong with what I came up with. I also expected the original poster to have some idea of what he was posting - that why I asked.

I dont care how big yours is as long as you can validate it and have independent sources review your results and agree with you

 

[Sunfish]

Greens and other alarmists seem to be poor researchers. it seems good enough to find something that is, superficially, "the answer" but then not test the hypothesis in case there is a flaw.

As a share investor I would be brain dead if I was unaware of "rare earths". I'm not brain dead and have tried to get up to speed on a subject that isn't easy.

There is a big flaw in wind generation: Neodymium. It is a "heavy" rare earth, read about it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium
A modern wind generator needs 1.5 metric tons of the stuff (sorry, that's memory so can't post a link) and this is the stuff China is restricting exports of. We in the West think China is involved in a little *******ry but refining rare earths is VERY, VERY polluting and, understandably, China wants to reduce their pollution levels.

Why do you reckon Moly Corp in the US shut up shop 20 years ago? Got it in one: Too polluting.

So if refining REs is too dirty for the big players where will it happen? Another easy guess: A corrupt nation.

Lynas Corp will mine in Oz but process in Malaysia. How Green are you when your primary interest is your own back yard with SFA interest in your near north?

much of the green agenda is a zero sum game but because of intervention there are undeserving winners and losers who have been shafted.

IMHO of course.

 

[Sunfish]

I did and I was hoping that I was wrong with what I came up with.

I'm all ears, what did you come up with that showed that those thousands of scientists had no qualifications?

When I read through the list, their comments and qualifications I was VERY impressed. What did you see that I didn't?

 

[mrsdawnrazor]

Please show where I said they had no qualifications.
I merely did my due diligence
Checked out the links provided
W. Kline Bolton, M.D., is a professor of medicine and Nephrology Division Chief at the University of Virginia. Nephrology deals with the study of the function and diseases of the kidney.
Zhonggang Zeng is one of the 9,000 with a PhD. He is a professor of mathematics at Northeastern Illinois University. His most recent publication is entitled "Computing multiple roots of inexact polynomials."REF - info from greenfyre
Then did my own Due Diligence - random selection of signatories
Stephen B Affleck - Google scholar search - no academic papers - *STEPHEN B. AFFLECK, 1988, Affiliate Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering, Boise; B.S., 1960, Utah; M.S., 1973, Ph.D., 1980, Iowa State - not a climate change expert
Merlin Neff Jnr MD - Dr. Merlin Lee Neff Jr MD is a private company categorized under Doctors, Physicians and Surgeons and located in Moreno Valley, CA. Current estimates show this company has an annual revenue of $500,000 to $1 million and employs a staff of approximately 1 to 4. - Hardly an expert
H. Reginald Hardy, Jr. August 19, 1931 - January 22, 2008 H. Reginald Hardy Jr., Professor Emeritus of Mining Engineering, Department of Energy and Mineral Engineering, Penn State University, 76, of State College, died Tuesday, Jan. 22, 2008 - died before petition signed
Frederick Sietz - stood against the scientific consensus that smoking was dangerous to people's health, and helped to create confusion and doubt on this issue. Ref - Oreskes, Naomi and Conway, Erik M. (2010). Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming, Bloomsbury, pp. 25-29

Pick a name and check out google scholar - I was looking for peer reviewed publications and was struggling to find any.

If these signatories had done the research to prove global warming was a myth, where are their published papers, in peer reviewed journals. There aren't any - they sign a petition - why? Where is the professional credit in that.

That is why I was not impressed.

 

[joeExpat]

Give me a clue JoeExpat. What sort of Global Warming products or trinkets would you be prepared to pay a few dollars for? Don't know. Something like a website to donate $1 to save a "virtual" tree as symbolism for saving the planet. Could work. Get even 10000 fools world wide who won't miss $1, and that's a nice bounty.

Maybe you could set up another climate change skeptic petition on your website, sell stickers and stuff denying climate change, there seems to be enough misinformed people still around - make money from them instead, they are probably easier to fool, you could justify it to them saying you're keeping petrol cheaper or taxes lower or something. They could select their qualifications displayed on the petition from a drop down list, paying a bit more to be an accredited climatologist of course.

 

[bluestorm]

Pick a name and check out google scholar - I was looking for peer reviewed publications and was struggling to find any.

If these signatories had done the research to prove global warming was a myth, where are their published papers, in peer reviewed journals. There aren't any - they sign a petition - why? Where is the professional credit in that.

That is why I was not impressed.

Funny mrsdawnrazor and joeExpat. Have you also done the same due diligence on the IPCC members. If so, then you would know that a lot of them have no climate science background AT ALL. This makes the list of 31000 a lot more reliable even than the IPCC.

Even the IPCC Head Rajendra K. Pachauri by education is a former railway engineer and economist (with a PhD in economics), and has no scientific publications. He is not a Climate Scientist.

Also, directly from the alarmists themselves.
Global Warming alarmist William Schlesinger was asked how many members of United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) were actual climate scientists. It is well known that many, if not most, of its members are not scientists at all. Its president, for example, is an economist. This question came after Schlesinger had cited the IPCC as an authority for his position. His answer was quite telling. First he broadened it to include not just climate scientists but also those who have had “some dealing with the climate.” His complete answer was that he thought, “something on the order of 20 percent have had some dealing with climate.” In other words, even IPCC worshiper Schlesinger now acknowledges that 80 percent of the IPCC membership had absolutely no dealing with the climate as part of their academic studies."

Your authority for your Global Warming alarm gentlemen, is made up more of lawyers, economists, and other professions, then actual climate scientists. But keep believing.

How easily fooled. Your guys just don't get it. There is money in Global Warming. By the way, Pachauri joined the IPCC as head in 2002. The 3yrs prior is was a director in an Indian OIL company. You Head of IPCC is one of your bad guys
In January 1999, Dr R K Pachauri was appointed as Director, Board of Directors of the Indian Oil Corporation Limited (a Fortune 500 company) for a period of 3 years. Indian Oil Corporation Limited contributes 77% of India's crude oil production and 81% of India's natural gas production.
and
He was on the Board of Directors of the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd (June 2006 to June 2009) and also on the Board of Directors of the NTPC Limited (January 2006).
During his time with IPCC, on board of OIL company, haha, you fools. I love it. Sweet irony. The Head of IPCC more an economist and on the boards of the enemy polluters, haha.
Cheers guys. No more to say.

So maybe mrsdawnrazor and joeExpat, rather than rubbish the list of 31000 scientists, you do due dilligence on your mighty IPCC members.
http://www.teriin.org/about/cv_rkp.htm

 

[mrsdawnrazor]

I haven't posted anything about the validity of the IPCC - merely pointed out that a petition including dead people and MDs did not fill me with confidence.

Again BS - not had the debate with you, seen no validated evidence and you STILL dont know which side of the debate I sit because you have made assumption after assumption.

This is the issue with Fundamentalists of all sides - no debate just dogma

How about putting the FUN back into fundamentalism BS? Be less angry - breathe........

 

[random]

When you think about it though , really who cares either way because it is at least making the world seriously look at just how we've been doing things and cleaning up our act.
Forcing them into developing alternatives across the board and into taking a good hard look at just what we've been doing to the place at last.

So really it's all good !

 

[bluestorm]

I haven't posted anything about the validity of the IPCC - merely pointed out that a petition including dead people and MDs did not fill me with confidence..

But the greenies and alarmist often quote IPCC as the authority without understanding the links and background.

You have to admire the brilliance of it all. There is a lot of money to be made in "global Warming". Scientists get their million dollar government grants, the industries "create" the demand for "green" technology, and fund some R&D for future profits from grants from the governments. Everyone panicks the average Joe into paying double for "green" stuff.
Pure genius. The OIL companies made large profits from the Carbon Trading in the UK, etc.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for the "Global Warming" stuff, as long as you understand the links behind it all (and that it's intended to make people and bankers rich). Al Gore has made a fortune (he'l probably be the first "Green" billionaire).

The genius of it all is that you get the "Green" group and anti-capitalists supporting the movement.

 

[landlubber]

You're part of the problem too.

When you think about it though , really who cares either way because it is at least making the world seriously look at just how we've been doing things and cleaning up our act.
Forcing them into developing alternatives across the board and into taking a good hard look at just what we've been doing to the place at last.

So really it's all good !

If you think like that you're totally uninformed and part of the problem.
If it really was "all good" I wouldn't give a hoot. The trouble is, it's not good and worse "it" is making the situation worse.

Take our Vic desalinator. A "knee-jerk" decision based on the climate change delusion that "the drought will last for ever". Will cost Victorians $570 million EVERY year for the next 30 years. It won't be used for at least five years, and possibly not at all for it's whole life. But it will take money that could have been spent on hospitals, schools etc etc. Have you seen your electricity bill lately ? Wait for your new water bills.
LL