If you doubt climate change's manmade origins you are unpatriotic

[tangent4ronpaul]

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/12/reconciling-record-snow-storms-global-warming/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%253A+foxnews%252Fscitech+%2528Te xt+-+SciTech%2529

Bill Nye, the Science Guy, agrees, going so far as to tell MSNBC's Rachel Maddow that scientists who doubt climate change's manmade origins are unpatriotic. "If you want to get serious about it, these guys claiming that the snow in Washington disproves climate change are almost unpatriotic -- it's as if they're denying science," Nye said.

[Matthew Zak]

Wow.

[tangent4ronpaul]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7026317.ece

February 14, 2010
World may not be warming, say scientists

The United Nations climate panel faces a new challenge with scientists casting doubt on its claim that global temperatures are rising inexorably because of human pollution.

In its last assessment the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said the evidence that the world was warming was “unequivocal”.

It warned that greenhouse gases had already heated the world by 0.7C and that there could be 5C-6C more warming by 2100, with devastating impacts on humanity and wildlife. However, new research, including work by British scientists, is casting doubt on such claims. Some even suggest the world may not be warming much at all.

“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC.

The doubts of Christy and a number of other researchers focus on the thousands of weather stations around the world, which have been used to collect temperature data over the past 150 years.

These stations, they believe, have been seriously compromised by factors such as urbanisation, changes in land use and, in many cases, being moved from site to site.

Christy has published research papers looking at these effects in three different regions: east Africa, and the American states of California and Alabama.

“The story is the same for each one,” he said. “The popular data sets show a lot of warming but the apparent temperature rise was actually caused by local factors affecting the weather stations, such as land development.”

The IPCC faces similar criticisms from Ross McKitrick, professor of economics at the University of Guelph, Canada, who was invited by the panel to review its last report.

The experience turned him into a strong critic and he has since published a research paper questioning its methods.

“We concluded, with overwhelming statistical significance, that the IPCC’s climate data are contaminated with surface effects from industrialisation and data quality problems. These add up to a large warming bias,” he said.

Such warnings are supported by a study of US weather stations co-written by Anthony Watts, an American meteorologist and climate change sceptic.

His study, which has not been peer reviewed, is illustrated with photographs of weather stations in locations where their readings are distorted by heat-generating equipment.

Some are next to air- conditioning units or are on waste treatment plants. One of the most infamous shows a weather station next to a waste incinerator.

Watts has also found examples overseas, such as the weather station at Rome airport, which catches the hot exhaust fumes emitted by taxiing jets.

In Britain, a weather station at Manchester airport was built when the surrounding land was mainly fields but is now surrounded by heat-generating buildings.

Terry Mills, professor of applied statistics and econometrics at Loughborough University, looked at the same data as the IPCC. He found that the warming trend it reported over the past 30 years or so was just as likely to be due to random fluctuations as to the impacts of greenhouse gases. Mills’s findings are to be published in Climatic Change, an environmental journal.

“The earth has gone through warming spells like these at least twice before in the last 1,000 years,” he said.

Kevin Trenberth, a lead author of the chapter of the IPCC report that deals with the observed temperature changes, said he accepted there were problems with the global thermometer record but these had been accounted for in the final report.

“It’s not just temperature rises that tell us the world is warming,” he said. “We also have physical changes like the fact that sea levels have risen around five inches since 1972, the Arctic icecap has declined by 40% and snow cover in the northern hemisphere has declined.”

The European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts has recently issued a new set of global temperature readings covering the past 30 years, with thermometer readings augmented by satellite data.

Dr Vicky Pope, head of climate change advice at the Met Office, said: “This new set of data confirms the trend towards rising global temperatures and suggest that, if anything, the world is warming even more quickly than we had thought.”

Surface temperature records: policy driven deception? - a report by Joseph D’Aleo and Anthony Watts

[LittleLightShining]

Now is an excellent time to point out that the victory of the radical left was not in the ballot box. It was in the infiltration of science and the arts, the education industry...

It never ceases to amaze me-- the foolishness of the idea that the liberty "movement" will achieve any measure of success by focusing on electoral politics.

[rancher89]

Now is an excellent time to point out that the victory of the radical left was not in the ballot box. It was in the infiltration of science and the arts, the education industry...

It never ceases to amaze me-- the foolishness of the idea that the liberty "movement" will achieve any measure of success by focusing on electoral politics.

qft

[moostraks]

Now is an excellent time to point out that the victory of the radical left was not in the ballot box. It was in the infiltration of science and the arts, the education industry...

It never ceases to amaze me-- the foolishness of the idea that the liberty "movement" will achieve any measure of success by focusing on electoral politics.

How do these special interests groups get so much funding and support and ability to define us as a nation but through so many political spiders into our existence...

Chopping at the root of every federal initiative is faster than trying to independantly infiltrate these organizations or the mediums through which we are being indoctrinated.

[noxagol]

NOOOO, NOT YOU TOO BILL!!! Bill was my hero when I was a little kid. I loved watching his show.

[jmdrake]

Of course you're unpatriotic. Just like you're unpatriotic if you question 9/11. Just like you're unpatriotic if you question the role of the federal reserve in the economy. You're unpatriotic if you question Waco or OKC or whether or not Obama wants to take your guns.

[Southron]

I guess he is now Bill Nye the Alchemist guy.

[Indy Vidual]

Is it patriotic to shout "fire" in a crowded theater...if the theater is actually on fire?

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

it's getting frustrating seeing people believe there's no impact on the environment whatsoever with all the crap being ejected into the air. That's like saying there's no air pollution in China. The problem is it's being severely exaggerated for the sake of dishonest profits with the establishment trying to create a environment oligarchy with that anti-american carbon credit scam.

[jkr]

+1776


yeah, the way it is going now we will never clen up the mess we all made.

[awake]

it's getting frustrating seeing people believe there's no impact on the environment whatsoever with all the crap being ejected into the air. That's like saying there's no air pollution in China. The problem is it's being severely exaggerated for the sake of dishonest profits with the establishment trying to create a environment oligarchy with that anti-american carbon credit scam.


The science of climate change is not without merit. There are macro and micro variations in weather patterns, both short term and long term. But, there are very powerful special interests who are using the science as a indisputable argument and reason for the government to make massive interventions into the market for their own benefit. If the Science shows A causes B - then we ought to take actions C and D. The thing is - there is no scientific ought.In other words, thier goal is this: man might be having an effect on his environment by his means of sustaining life, therefore we must prevent all those means which are deemed "dirty" to stop it. Who gets the authority to deem what is dirty? It is arbitrary and unjust to say the least.

Profit by regulation and protectionism to favor the wealthy politicaly connected elite is at work here - Same old tired crony capitalism. If one gives even a little merit to this movement than you are simply negotiating away your liberty to thiefs, who are more than happy to take every bit they can get.

Yes, pollution going into the air is a bad thing, but private property rights and the courts are the proper means to deal with it. Not a global fiat market based on coercion and threat, not to mention fraud.

Instead what we have is this huge generalization that people are being harmed and a no specific individual persons who can prove that they have been hurt.

When people say they don't beleive in global warming; that's just fine with me, because they smell a rat, not that they necessarily disown science.

[foofighter20x]

February 14, 2010
World may not be warming, say scientists

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7026317.ece

[Anti Federalist]

Of course you're unpatriotic. Just like you're unpatriotic if you question 9/11. Just like you're unpatriotic if you question the role of the federal reserve in the economy. You're unpatriotic if you question Waco or OKC or whether or not Obama wants to take your guns.

That^^

ETA - Or if you question never ending wars.

[Son of Detroit]

That^^

ETA - Or if you question never ending wars.

Really off-topic, but every time I see the man on the right in your sig, I automatically think "Randy Couture".

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j104/rockintkdingrid/interviewwRandyCouture.jpg

http://www.ringsidereport.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/couture2.jpg


From what is that pic from?

[Anti Federalist]

From what is that pic from?

Tell you the truth, I'm not sure.

Some street protest, somewhere, sometime...maybe a movie?

The eternal image of one anynomous man staring down an agent of illegitimate
authority.

Who he is is not important.

He is all of us, when we find the courage to act and to say NO.

[jmdrake]

Tell you the truth, I'm not sure.

Some street protest, somewhere, sometime...maybe a movie?

The eternal image of one anynomous man staring down an agent of illegitimate
authority.

Who he is is not important.

He is all of us, when we find the courage to act and to say NO.

Amen!

YouTube - I'm Spartacus (Med. Length) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQMTmMzlrOc)