G&M: The Great Global Warming Collapse

[hokie4redskins]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-great-global-warming-collapse/article1458206/

“The global warming movement as we have known it is dead,” the brilliant analyst Walter Russell Mead says in his blog on The American Interest. It was done in by a combination of bad science and bad politics.

And now, the science scandals just keep on coming. First there was the vast cache of e-mails leaked from the University of East Anglia, home of a crucial research unit responsible for collecting temperature data. Although not fatal to the science, they revealed a snakepit of scheming to keep contradictory research from being published, make imperfect data look better, and withhold information from unfriendly third parties. If science is supposed to be open and transparent, these guys acted as if they had a lot to hide.

Despite widespread efforts to play down the Climategate e-mails, they were very damaging. An investigation by the British newspaper The Guardian – among the most aggressive advocates for action on climate change – has found that a series of measurements from Chinese weather stations were seriously flawed, and that documents relating to them could not be produced.

Meantime, the IPCC – the body widely regarded, until now, as the ultimate authority on climate science – is looking worse and worse. After it was forced to retract its claim about melting glaciers, Mr. Pachauri dismissed the error as a one-off. But other IPCC claims have turned out to be just as groundless.

For example, it warned that large tracts of the Amazon rain forest might be wiped out by global warming because they are extremely susceptible to even modest decreases in rainfall. The sole source for that claim, reports The Sunday Times of London, was a magazine article written by a pair of climate activists, one of whom worked for the WWF. One scientist contacted by the Times, a specialist in tropical forest ecology, called the article “a mess.”

Worse still, the Times has discovered that Mr. Pachauri's own Energy and Resources Unit, based in New Delhi, has collected millions in grants to study the effects of glacial melting – all on the strength of that bogus glacier claim, which happens to have been endorsed by the same scientist who now runs the unit that got the money. Even so, the IPCC chief is hanging tough. He insists the attacks on him are being orchestrated by companies facing lower profits.

Until now, anyone who questioned the credibility of the IPCC was labelled as a climate skeptic, or worse. But many climate scientists now sense a sinking ship, and they're bailing out. Among them is Andrew Weaver, a climatologist at the University of Victoria who acknowledges that the climate body has crossed the line into advocacy. Even Britain's Greenpeace has called for Mr. Pachauri's resignation. India says it will establish its own body to monitor the effects of global warming because it “cannot rely” on the IPCC.

[SkinsTerps26]

yawn

audi did more to kill this movement with that turrible commercial tonight

[btfoom]

I remember in the late 70s reading and hearing so many reports of Acid Rain falling and killing us all.

Next, it was Nuclear reactors and their by-products that would bring an end to civilization. Followed by the Aerosol cans burning a hole in the ozone layer, the Amazon forest being cut down so fast that it would be gone by the end of the 80's, and the Sahara desert would grow to envelope the entire central area of Africa and Asia.

The next scare was oil running out and the recycling debate. Better recycle now or all of our natural resources would be gone within a decade.

The biggest one was global warming. Man was emitting so many "GreenHouse Gases" that we were going to be the next Venus. Polar Ice Caps melting, mass flooding, 120+ degree temperatures, no farming, etc. Heck, governments even showed "An Inconvienient Truth" in science classes.

Amazing that many folks didn't connect the dots and see that they were being sold a great big area of swamp land in Florida, dressed up as "Near Beach Front Prime Real Estate". Even now, as the whole charade has been brought to light, they still cling to believe, because as you know, they are SOOO much smarter than the rest of us.

In the end, that is what this is all about. Folks who think they are much smarter than the rest of us want to tell us how to live. What will your next 'boogey-man' be???

[stevenaa]

yawn

audi did more to kill this movement with that turrible commercial tonight

Yup. Made me cringe. Some one watching with me stated he believes that's how some want it to be. :doh:

Totally damanging commercial IMO.

[The Brave Little Toaster Oven]

That Audi commercial made me shudder...I had no idea it was for a car until the end...it almost seemed real.

[PeterMP]

I remember in the late 70s reading and hearing so many reports of Acid Rain falling and killing us all.

Next, it was Nuclear reactors and their by-products that would bring an end to civilization. Followed by the Aerosol cans burning a hole in the ozone layer, the Amazon forest being cut down so fast that it would be gone by the end of the 80's, and the Sahara desert would grow to envelope the entire central area of Africa and Asia.

The next scare was oil running out and the recycling debate. Better recycle now or all of our natural resources would be gone within a decade.

The biggest one was global warming. Man was emitting so many "GreenHouse Gases" that we were going to be the next Venus. Polar Ice Caps melting, mass flooding, 120+ degree temperatures, no farming, etc. Heck, governments even showed "An Inconvienient Truth" in science classes.

Amazing that many folks didn't connect the dots and see that they were being sold a great big area of swamp land in Florida, dressed up as "Near Beach Front Prime Real Estate". Even now, as the whole charade has been brought to light, they still cling to believe, because as you know, they are SOOO much smarter than the rest of us.

In the end, that is what this is all about. Folks who think they are much smarter than the rest of us want to tell us how to live. What will your next 'boogey-man' be???

Well, I don't think anybody ever talked about acid rain killing all of us all.

But the reason, it isn't much of an issue is because of a little thing called the Clean Air Act.

Ozone depeletion, there is a thing called the Montreal protocol.

I don't think anybody ever said the rain forest would be cut down by the 1980's, and there hasn't been as much progress as some said BECAUSE things have been done.

If you want to point to where somebody has ever said the next Venus or 120+ degress, please point out. Some things will happen if NOTHING is done (of course if SOMETHING is done in 20 years, you'll be able to point out that the people that said certain things would happen if nothing is done were wrong).

As is, your post goes down as one of the biggest uses of misrepresenting your opponents position and ignorance I've seen in my time here.

[McD5]

What will your next 'boogey-man' be???

Bird flu was a good one.

"Global Pandemic":silly:

[Springfield]

This thread should have been about the terrible Audi commercial. I was looking for the funny but all I found was the fail. That commercial was as bad as the auto company that enabled it.

But seriously... how can global warming be dead if you never believed in it in the first place?

I've been saying this a lot lately:

Perception is reality.

[btfoom]

Well, I don't think anybody ever talked about acid rain killing all of us all.

But the reason, it isn't much of an issue is because of a little thing called the Clean Air Act.

Sure they did. The EPA even did a 'study' on the long term problem it would cause: http://www.epa.gov/acidrain/effects/index.html

That is just one study that showed up on google.

Ozone depeletion, there is a thing called the Montreal protocol.

I have no idea which issue that you are dealing with here.

I don't think anybody ever said the rain forest would be cut down by the 1980's, and there hasn't been as much progress as some said BECAUSE things have been done.

Yes, I was wrong with my 1980s. It was sometime in the 'next 40 years'.

And by the way, they hadn't been destroyed at the rate that was generally presented. The governments there decided, while working with the PEOPLE, that they should have a smart usage of that forest (would be nice here in the US, maybe the folks in Southern CA wouldn't have so many forest fires).

If you want to point to where somebody has ever said the next Venus or 120+ degress, please point out. Some things will happen if NOTHING is done (of course if SOMETHING is done in 20 years, you'll be able to point out that the people that said certain things would happen if nothing is done were wrong).

As is, your post goes down as one of the biggest uses of misrepresenting your opponents position and ignorance I've seen in my time here.

OK, here are some items to show you how your ignorance exceeds your own arrogance (not easily done):

http://suprememastertv.com/save-our-planet/Truth-of-Venus-revealed-by-Supreme-Master-Ching-Hai.html

http://www.esa.int/download/posters/VenusExpress/english/PDF/4VenusExpressGB.pdf

http://ircamera.as.arizona.edu/NatSci102/NatSci102/lectures/venus.htm

Again, emitting CO2 isn't a horriffic issue that will cause the earth to go catastrophically hot, we aren't about to be the next Venus, and Man Made Global Warming is about as scientifically provable as life in the Universe. Sure, lots of folks believe it is true, but there is NO proof.

Come back when you have more proof than a 1500's medicine man.

[skinfan133]

That Audi commercial made me shudder...I had no idea it was for a car until the end...it almost seemed real.

I thought the commercial was making fun of people who are act like the "green police"

I would have never guessed it was a "green" commercial :whoknows:

[nonniey]

I thought the commercial was making fun of people who are act like the "green police"

I would have never guessed it was a "green" commercial :whoknows:

That commercial certainly didn't help the green cause. As for the article I'd have to agree it is over for any major policy development. Many of the AGW supporters will continue to defend their position but perception is reality and the behaviour of the AGW side has wrecked their credibility (regardless of whether they were right or wrong on AGW).

[PeterMP]

Sure they did. The EPA even did a 'study' on the long term problem it would cause: http://www.epa.gov/acidrain/effects/index.html

That is just one study that showed up on google.

There is a HUGE difference between having a negative affect on human health and "killing everybody".

Yes, I was wrong with my 1980s. It was sometime in the 'next 40 years'.

And by the way, they hadn't been destroyed at the rate that was generally presented. The governments there decided, while working with the PEOPLE, that they should have a smart usage of that forest (would be nice here in the US, maybe the folks in Southern CA wouldn't have so many forest fires).

So the people that said if NOTHING was done were "wrong"?

And it isn't JUST the local governments working with the people:

http://www.ecologyfund.com/ecology/_ecology.html

There are extensive fire prevention programs in place through out this country, including Southern CA.

OK, here are some items to show you how your ignorance exceeds your own arrogance (not easily done):

http://suprememastertv.com/save-our-planet/Truth-of-Venus-revealed-by-Supreme-Master-Ching-Hai.html

http://www.esa.int/download/posters/VenusExpress/english/PDF/4VenusExpressGB.pdf

http://ircamera.as.arizona.edu/NatSci102/NatSci102/lectures/venus.htm

Again, emitting CO2 isn't a horriffic issue that will cause the earth to go catastrophically hot, we aren't about to be the next Venus, and Man Made Global Warming is about as scientifically provable as life in the Universe. Sure, lots of folks believe it is true, but there is NO proof.

So you have one by Supreme Master Ching Hai link as if he's driving the science or even government policy on climage change.

And the other two talk about the science of global warming in the context of using Venus to better understand the science, but neither makes the claim that the Earth is on its way to becoming the next Venus or that average temps will be 120 on Earth EVER.

NOBODY in the main stream science or government (which rules out people like Supreme Master Ching Hai) is talking about the Earth going to go catastrophically hot, BUT even minimal changes in global average temperature of a few degress will have significant affects.

Come back when you have more proof than a 1500's medicine man.

There is as much proof that climate change will happen as that you and I are real, or backing the technology on the computer you are using.

[PeterMP]

That commercial certainly didn't help the green cause. As for the article I'd have to agree it is over for any major policy development. Many of the AGW supporters will continue to defend their position but perception is reality and the behaviour of the AGW side has wrecked their credibility (regardless of whether they were right or wrong on AGW).

When you say the behavioru of the AGW side you are talking about 10 people total.

You don't think I can't find questionable and fradualent behaviour by 10 or so people on the anti-AGW side?

There's nothing out there that underlies the basic science undermining global warming, which goes back 100+ years.

[Larry]

deleted post.

[Veretax]

You know what, someone should take the Audi commercial and make a Parody movie based on it. Would be hilarious!

[DCBnG21]

You know what, someone should take the Audi commercial and make a Parody movie based on it. Would be hilarious!

For a commercial that was evidently trying to promote the green cause, it kind of was a parody. Man, that was an awful commercial.

[Veretax]

For a commercial that was evidently trying to promote the green cause, it kind of was a parody. Man, that was an awful commercial.

Yes it was a parody in effect, at least I thought it was. What I was suggesting was take the concept and somehow spin a comedy out of it

[AsburySkinsFan]

Yay! Let's dig it up, burn it up, drill it up, pile it up, and screw it up! Let's not give a crap that in the next century the oil will be nearly gone, our mountains will be leveled to parking lots, our streams and rivers will be more and more polluted and all so we can drive our SUV's and so corporations can get richer while holding the rest of the world hostage.

BTW, to those who love nuclear power, I guess we can store the waste in your neighborhoods right?

[alexey]

Highly recommended. Please let me know if you'd like to object to anything in these. If there are no objections, can we please use this as an unbiased, credible scientific view on this issue?

1. Climate Change -- the scientific debate

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/c/A4F0994AFB057BB8/0/52KLGqDSAjo

2. Climate Change -- the objections

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/c/A4F0994AFB057BB8/1/PoSVoxwYrKI

3 - Climate Change -- Anatomy of a myth

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/c/A4F0994AFB057BB8/2/EU_AtHkB4Ms

4 - Climate Change -- Gore vs. Durkin

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/c/A4F0994AFB057BB8/3/N2B34sO7HPM

5. Climate Change -- isn't it natural?

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/c/A4F0994AFB057BB8/4/w5hs4KVeiAU

6. Climate Change -- Those hacked e-mails

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/c/A4F0994AFB057BB8/5/7nnVQ2fROOg

7. Climate Change - "Those" e-mails and science censorship

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/c/A4F0994AFB057BB8/6/uXesBhYwdRo

[NavyDave]

Well, I don't think anybody ever talked about acid rain killing all of us all.

But the reason, it isn't much of an issue is because of a little thing called the Clean Air Act.

Ozone depeletion, there is a thing called the Montreal protocol.

I don't think anybody ever said the rain forest would be cut down by the 1980's, and there hasn't been as much progress as some said BECAUSE things have been done.

If you want to point to where somebody has ever said the next Venus or 120+ degress, please point out. Some things will happen if NOTHING is done (of course if SOMETHING is done in 20 years, you'll be able to point out that the people that said certain things would happen if nothing is done were wrong).

As is, your post goes down as one of the biggest uses of misrepresenting your opponents position and ignorance I've seen in my time here.

So the "Settled scientists" still are not going to admit being wrong about global warming??

I'm not in the mood to post the rantings and lies of the extreme tree huggers back then, but its not that hard to google rainforest could disappear in 20 years or the computer simulation of cities heating up because of less foliage.

The Eco Police commercial is funny but not that far off if liberals/ progressive had all of their agenda pass.

What probably gets on people's nerves who don't buy into the global warming scam is how all of the Earth's ills is the US's fault.

[Duncan]

There's nothing out there that underlies the basic science undermining global warming, which goes back 100+ years.

Just because you keep repeating this doesn't make it true. There have been hundreds of articles disputing AGW but the leftist environmental community (i.e all of the contributing scientists for the IPCC) dismiss them for political reasons.

[alexey]

Just because you keep repeating this doesn't make it true. There have been hundreds of articles disputing AGW but the leftist environmental community (i.e all of the contributing scientists for the IPCC) dismiss them for political reasons.

These videos explain the real reason why some of those claims get dismissed. Videos 3, 4, and 5 specifically address your point. Please let me know if you have any comments on these videos:

1. Climate Change -- the scientific debate

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer.../0/52KLGqDSAjo

2. Climate Change -- the objections

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer.../1/PoSVoxwYrKI

3 - Climate Change -- Anatomy of a myth

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer.../2/EU_AtHkB4Ms

4 - Climate Change -- Gore vs. Durkin

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer.../3/N2B34sO7HPM

5. Climate Change -- isn't it natural?

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer.../4/w5hs4KVeiAU

6. Climate Change -- Those hacked e-mails

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer.../5/7nnVQ2fROOg

7. Climate Change - "Those" e-mails and science censorship

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer.../6/uXesBhYwdRo

[NavyDave]

Yay! Let's dig it up, burn it up, drill it up, pile it up, and screw it up! Let's not give a crap that in the next century the oil will be nearly gone, our mountains will be leveled to parking lots, our streams and rivers will be more and more polluted and all so we can drive our SUV's and so corporations can get richer while holding the rest of the world hostage.

BTW, to those who love nuclear power, I guess we can store the waste in your neighborhoods right?

Now this is how the Rainforests rants and propaganda about it being gone at the end of 20th century sounded.

So American companies don't clean up their messes and the whole world suffers for it?

There is plenty of oil that isn't even tapped in the sea bed which naturally leaks out.

So France, Norway and other euro nations liberals have domestic partnership like love affair with, uses it so are you saying the greatest nation on earth can't do just as good a job if not better?

[Larry]

Just because you keep repeating this doesn't make it true. There have been hundreds of articles disputing AGW but the leftist environmental community (i.e all of the contributing scientists for the IPCC) dismiss them for political reasons.

I don't doubt it.

There are hundreds of articles disputing the unproven theory that smoking causes cancer, too.

Would you, perhaps, like to post some of these articles, and engage in a debate about the science displayed in them?

(Actually, I'll admit that what I'm really describing is "Would you like to post them and let Peter debate the science in them?". I'll freely admit that I'm really not qualified to debate anything but the most transparent of lies on the subject.)

(But I'd love to see Peter debate the science. That's the reason I tune into these threads. He's a joy to watch.)

[PeterMP]

Just because you keep repeating this doesn't make it true. There have been hundreds of articles disputing AGW but the leftist environmental community (i.e all of the contributing scientists for the IPCC) dismiss them for political reasons.

1. Please reference a paper related to climate change that is not cited in the relevant IPCC report.

2. The underlying science with respect to global warming has to due with the ability of green house gases' ability to absorb energy that is normally reflected into outer space. The idea that it would cause warming is over 100 years old:

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/images/1/18/Arrhenius.pdf

If you THINK you know a study that refutes that CO2 will absorb energy that would normally reflected into space, please post the relevant study.

3. Some people believe that energy will be countered balanced by other factors, such as an increase in clouds. This ignores that WHATEVER the opposing affect is that will affect the rest of the system. ANY changes in the system (warming, increases in coulds, etc.) that are significant deviations from the average over the last 100 years or so will likely negatively affect human civilation/society because essentially the society we live in is built upon the contructs that have been developed over the last 100 years (e.g. city locations).

Those things are essentially evolutionary in nature (e.g. some cities were more "fit" than others (partly due to things like location) and so succedded while others failed). Evolutionary systems are most likely to be negatively affected by changes in systems as compared to what they evolved under.

NOT warming because of an increase in clouds is fine, if you assume increases in clouds are neutral, which is highly unlikely.