potholer54 asked:
I had planned to put several myths in this video, but discovered such an appalling web of deceit and fabrication in this first one that I felt I had no choice but to thoroughly debunk it. Like many ingrained myths, this one is so ubiquitous that it takes an awful lot of hard evidence to convince true believers that it’s been fabricated. I’ll try to squeeze more urban myths into the next video, from both sides of the climate debate.
{ 25 comments… read them below or add one }
Right. And the effects of the “little ice age” from the 1700s needs to be taken into account (before the cold snap, temperatures in the norther hemisphere were actually WARMER than today). Plus, much of the rhetoric on “Climate Change” seems focused on removing fossil fules and replacing them with “Green” technologies. But these will catch on any way, not because they are good for the earth but because they are more efficient. Remember: No one had to make the horse illegal to bring in the car.
*Any claim about “climate change” needs to be completely researched before anyone goes crazy over it.*
Agreed
The Theory of AGW is excepted in the Armchair Cilimate Expert Community cause The corrolation of the Co2 trend at Manaloa corrolated with the Average Global Temapute trend does pan out(to them at least)
They never however
1)Included all Co2/tempature mesurements from around world
2)prove co2 on rise actually comes from us burning fossil fuels
3)prove co2 % effects tempature
**There needs to be climate modles which which can accuratly predict the climate for twenty years**
Well considering Climate in the real world is a sum of weather’s effect on a Environment
watch?v=wUiwtVSkUwQ
watch?v=95TtXYjOEv4
Meterologisgt can’t predict weather accuratley past 3 days so it is no suprise Svante was wrong, about the 3f-9f increase,and the Armchair “climate Experts goofed the 20 foot sea rise that was supposed to happen by now (20 years and ounting…no “Armeegon”)
TheRealArchAngel > “It’s the 1/2 degree polar shift in 300 years..”.
Polar shift…
Interesting.
Thanx for the comment & the links.
*longest winters, & coldest springs, in 35 years*
It’s the 1/2 degree polar shift in 300 years..
watch?v=4Lhs7VR52Bg
that is responsible for our Extreeme winters and Summers cause of the poles pointing more twoard/away from the sun
The weakinging of the Earths magnetic field from the orbit change and nearing the Gallactical equinox…
watch?v=nVqWH5Qlg8Y
watch?v=lPLjnqS8UeY
watch?v=2uIyUOAC1kU
is what causing whacky weather
Any claim about “climate change” needs to be completely researched before anyone goes crazy over it. There needs to be climate modles which which can accuratly predict the climate for twenty years before we start worrying what may happen one hundred or even one thousand years from now.
Dear soviet, you really should try to watch the actual video.
Did you not watch this video ?
Or did u not understand the content.
Who? said in 70´s that “ice age is coming”? not the science community.
and yes we were cooling in 70´s in a same manner my country “cools” in a winter time, when compared to a summer time.
sovietmarxist, at least try to pay attention to videos/data you are watching.
Look, in the 70s they thought we were cooling, now they think we’re warming? I don’t trust any of it. We’re not going through any climate change.
check out my campaign to help raise awareness…it get’s a little messy
“douchebag pie”
copy and paste this URL;
watch?v=7gPfQEnnuUk
excellent video: thank you.
PH > “You are welcome to use anything you like to make any claim you like, and lots of amateur skeptics do the same… “.
If it was *just* amateur skeptics, that would be one thing. But there’s too many highly trained scientific skeptics to ignore.
potholer > “You are welcome to use anything you like to make any claim you like, and lots of amateur skeptics do the same, as does Al Gore. But that doesnt mean the conclusions are correct.”
Absolutely.
And I am an amateur skeptic, I just started researching AGW a few months ago.
Also, you know that I appreciate the corrections you’ve given me.
However, what is happening on the ground?
Here in BC, Canada, we’ve just had one the longest winters, & coldest springs, in 35 years.
=So how come Al Gore, etc. can use graphs for illustration, but you or I can’t use similar graphs from NASA?=
You are welcome to use anything you like to make any claim you like, and lots of amateur skeptics do the same, as does Al Gore. But that doesnt mean the conclusions are correct.
iwiwla > “So I guess the take-home message is, the more you know about the field of climate science, the more you’re likely to believe “.
Right.
Or adhere to what others in the field are saying.
potholer54 > “=why would the IPCC, Michael Mann, Al Gore, etc. (people who are trying to convince the general public no less), use *graphs*? =
For the same reason they use maps and tables. They’re an illustration.”
Ok.
So how come Al Gore, etc. can use graphs for illustration, but you or I can’t use similar graphs from NASA?
Why would NASA put those graphs out?
This is a simple line graph with a description of the what info they’re conveying.
potholer > “But NASA has never said… global sea surface temperatures have been declining.”
I’ve gone back over the definition of ‘mean temperature’ >
“mean temperature -
The average atmospheric temperature in any locality for a designated period of time, as a month or a year. ”
Now, the “Monthly-Mean Global Sea Surface Temperature” graph from NASA, shows 1998 as the warmest in the past 10 years… or that the MMG Sea Surface Temperature in 2008 has declined from 1998.
Is that correct?
One thing Doran and company need to get a grip on when commenting on their poll results and that is that “deniers” such as Christy and Spencer would have answered yes to the questions because tehy were so vague. So how exactly does their poll show a consensus among climatologists?
*Belief and faith is for religon,Science is about facts *
Unless you have access to the reports where they conclusively prove
1) Burning fossil fuels carates carbon dioxide/Methane as claimed by physical measurement and is of the types on the rise as measure
2) Conclusively prove GHG are the only substance that can break the Zeroth law of physics and produce more heat then the heat source based merely on volume
3) Can conclusively prove it’s GHG’s that drive heat,wind,weater,and climate
*He was not surprised, however, by the near-unanimous agreement by climatologists*
Agreement does not equal conclusive or proven facts
*They’re the ones who study and publish on climate science*
In mostly their own journals for their like mided breathern to “pat each other on the back”
Does not actually equal Conclusive and provable facts
*more you know about the field of climate science, the more you’re likely to believe*
Belief and faith is for religon,Science is about facts
**members of the public think meteorologists know climate, but most of them actually study very short-term phenomenon**
Hey a Atmospheric Physicist,one of your “Climate Experts”, play with glorified Sim Earth programs plugining in “Known” figures to predict the future…which overall they have failed at for the last 150 years,and beliees GHG drives heat/weather
Meterologist will tell you UV rays heat earth surface and cause evaporation/precipitation and heat conduction via humidity level
**n trying to overcome criticism of earlier attempts to gauge the view of earth scientists on global warming and the human impact factor, Doran and Kendall Zimmerman sought the opinion of the most complete list of earth scientists they could find **
Define Scientist
Problem between the Theorist such as the Geophysicist,Atmospheric Physicist,Bio Physicist,and Oceanic Pphysicist and the Applied/practical Scientist such as the Geologist,Ecologist,Oceanographer and Meteorologist is Method
n trying to overcome criticism of earlier attempts to gauge the view of earth scientists on global warming and the human impact factor, Doran and Kendall Zimmerman sought the opinion of the most complete list of earth scientists they could find, contacting more than 10,200 experts around the world listed in the 2007 edition of the American Geological Institute’s Directory of Geoscience Departments.
in global warming and humankind’s contribution to it.”
Doran and Kendall Zimmerman conclude that “the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes.” The challenge now, they write, is how to effectively communicate this to policy makers and to a public that continues to mistakenly perceive debate among scientists
“The petroleum geologist response is not too surprising, but the meteorologists’ is very interesting,” he said. “Most members of the public think meteorologists know climate, but most of them actually study very short-term phenomenon.”He was not surprised, however, by the near-unanimous agreement by climatologists.”They’re the ones who study and publish on climate science. So I guess the take-home message is, the more you know about the field of climate science, the more you’re likely to believe