Page 3 of 37 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 547

Thread: The Great Global Warming Swindle

  1. #31
    Join Date
    26th February 2005 - 11:00
    Bike
    Bikasaurus Rex,Tricerabike
    Location
    Bugtussle
    Posts
    2,980
    Quote Originally Posted by Maki View Post
    Let's just say that we are irreversably changing our planets climate, causing mass extinctions and sea level rise. Let's also say we are already displacing millions of people because climate change is turning lands that used to support them into deserts. The evidence that this is happening is overwhelming and it stares anyone in the face if you care to look.

    Of course the other scenario, the one Exxon is currently paying millions, or is it billions of $ to perpetuate, that we are not having any effect on our planet, after all we are just small, are we not? (In spite of the fact that we are pumping the best part of CO2 stored in the earth for millions of years back into the atmosphere). http://carbonx.blogspot.com/2006/10/...ge-denial.html

    I prefer to believe the overwhelming evidence and I wish we could agree to work together to overcome this problem. The sad fact is however that most people who have a decent life today could care less about people elsewhere on the earth who's land is turning to desert or sinking into the sea. If it means a slight impact on our standard of living, like using the car or bike less, then we scream like offended two year olds and stick our fingers into our ears because we just don't want to know.

    So, go ahead and believe the Exxon version. Just remember in the coming years that you are complicit in death, suffering and destruction on a scale rarely seen in the history of this planet. At least take responsibility for your stupid, irresponsible and selfish acts. I guess you won't, will you? Did you ever see a 2 year old take responsibility for anything?
    Won't you feel like a twat,when in 20 years,the dire predictions fail to materialise.

    No one seems to remember the 1970's "coming iceage threat".
    It was even mentioned in The Clash's "London Calling"

  2. #32
    Join Date
    23rd November 2003 - 20:12
    Bike
    R80, CB400N, Cb200.
    Location
    Northcote, Auckland
    Posts
    1,398
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim2 View Post
    One graph produced by who?

    Always check the source of your data. If the research is paid for by a government or an "Institute for Researching Climate Change and Producing Data for the Highest Bidder" then it is automatically disqualified as being valid.

    The planet is either 4000 years old or 4 billion, depending on which loony you talk to. We've (the entire human race that is) been collecting very localised, piecemeal weather data reliably for about 160 years. The sample data is way too small to make any valid conclusions in either case.
    Source = the IPCC. I can't remember the report number, but I shall check.

    I think you'll find that there are some longer records than 160 years. Temperature reconstructions back to 1400 from grape harvest information (Chuine et al. 2004), number of snow days in Zurich back to 1690 (Pfister 1978 as cited in Bradley 1999), though this may well be associated with urbanisation (correlation is not causation etc etc). Not to mention the ice cores (vostok).
    Quote Originally Posted by John Banks View Post
    Yes, but bikes = cool and cars = suck. I think it's Newton's fourth law or something.
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Dover View Post
    Queer Retarded Fags I think.

    Isn't sniper one of those?

  3. #33
    Join Date
    16th November 2007 - 21:20
    Bike
    Ducati 748R
    Location
    Close to work
    Posts
    143
    Whether we choose to acknowledge it or not there is a political "war" being fought around climate change, and the first casualty of any war is truth!

    I partly blame the media. They create doco's designed to shock and scare instead of searching for the truth.

    I also think that the scientists have a long way to go to actually understand climate change, in relative terms I believe they have only just realised the earth isn't flat.
    Lead, follow or get the f*%! outa the way.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    21st August 2004 - 12:00
    Bike
    2017 Suzuki Dl1000
    Location
    Picton
    Posts
    5,162
    Quote Originally Posted by Magua View Post
    What's your basis for disputing this?
    Sorry, I can't read the detail. Please provide a link where I can see just what it is I am disputing?
    Time to ride

  5. #35
    Join Date
    8th July 2006 - 22:35
    Bike
    Now bikeless :-(
    Location
    New Plymouth
    Posts
    524
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim2 View Post
    The post doco debate was about as credible until beardy sandal man started making some good points, but then it went back to uninformed lefties and conservatives head butting.
    My concern was that the bearded guy (on the right, next to Eric Young) was full of his own opinions but continually talked over top of anybody who differed with his views, and he was/is a reviewer on the IPCC panel.

    One eyed reviews = censorship!

    And I was just waiting for the 'self-confessed confused' anti-sceptic dragon to state "can I just say this is the first time I have been on TV".

  6. #36
    Join Date
    9th October 2003 - 11:00
    Bike
    None
    Location
    yes
    Posts
    14,591
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Magua View Post
    Source = the IPCC. I can't remember the report number, but I shall check.

    I think you'll find that there are some longer records than 160 years. Temperature reconstructions back to 1400 from grape harvest information (Chuine et al. 2004), number of snow days in Zurich back to 1690 (Pfister 1978 as cited in Bradley 1999), though this may well be associated with urbanisation (correlation is not causation etc etc). Not to mention the ice cores (vostok).
    IPCC automatically invalidates the data. It has been produced to prove a point.

    Your second paragraph does not prove the point you think it does. It confirms mine. Localised unreliable climate records do not present a case for global warming.

    We've only been looking at the global macro climate since the late '70s. 30 years. Reliable weather data collection including barometric pressure, rainfall, sunlight hours, and so on has only been a feature of data collection for less than 200 years and only used for very localised weather prediction. Even then, weather prediction is still 50/50 in accuracy and you're trying to prove that we know enough and have enough data to confirm that we can absolutely predict what the global weather will look like in 100 years?

    The single biggest issue in the "Global Warming/Climate Change" argument is its lack of the consistent application of scientific method to analyse data.

    The cooler weather of the '90s can be attributed to Mt Pinatubo and extended La Nina weather patterns in the Pacific. A single eruption of a volcano like Pinatubo does more to cool the climate than anything humans have "done" since the Industrial Revolution. But as beardy sandal man tried to point out last night every time we think we've come up with a solution to a climate problem (sulphates in fuel causing acid rain in Europe) we find that we didn't know what we were talking about and we create another problem by changing fuel composition.
    If a man is alone in the woods and there isn't a woke Hollywood around to call him racist, is he still white?



  7. #37
    Join Date
    9th October 2003 - 11:00
    Bike
    None
    Location
    yes
    Posts
    14,591
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Naki Rat View Post
    My concern was that the bearded guy (on the right, next to Eric Young) was full of his own opinions but continually talked over top of anybody who differed with his views, and he was/is a reviewer on the IPCC panel.

    One eyed reviews = censorship!

    And I was just waiting for the 'self-confessed confused' anti-sceptic dragon to state "can I just say this is the first time I have been on TV".
    I was talking about the other beardy chap in the track suit pants, but they wouldn't let him talk much because he kept answering using both common sense and the scientific method as a basis for his answers.
    If a man is alone in the woods and there isn't a woke Hollywood around to call him racist, is he still white?



  8. #38
    Join Date
    17th August 2006 - 22:42
    Bike
    Triumph Thruxton
    Location
    Wellington
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim2 View Post
    The sample data is way too small to make any valid conclusions in either case.
    But didnt you see the programme. Even though there is no evidence for man made global warming in the past 4 billion years if you ignore the natural variation theres irrefutable evidence of it in the last 16 seconds

  9. #39
    Join Date
    23rd November 2003 - 20:12
    Bike
    R80, CB400N, Cb200.
    Location
    Northcote, Auckland
    Posts
    1,398
    Quote Originally Posted by Jantar View Post
    Sorry, I can't read the detail. Please provide a link where I can see just what it is I am disputing?
    IPCC fourth report, page 39.
    Quote Originally Posted by John Banks View Post
    Yes, but bikes = cool and cars = suck. I think it's Newton's fourth law or something.
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Dover View Post
    Queer Retarded Fags I think.

    Isn't sniper one of those?

  10. #40
    Join Date
    30th November 2005 - 13:00
    Bike
    2015 Triumph Bonneville
    Location
    The Glass Bunker
    Posts
    288
    Regardless of whether the science is correct or not, an interesting point made in the program is that the anti-C02 environ-mentalists are in essence "anti-human".

    Their policies will condemn the developing world (in particular Africa) to an existence without electricity and the industry that this enables.
    "No one appreciates the very special genius of your conversation as the dog does."

  11. #41
    Join Date
    24th July 2006 - 11:53
    Bike
    KTM 890 Adventure
    Location
    Wgtn
    Posts
    5,541
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim2 View Post
    I was talking about the other beardy chap in the track suit pants, but they wouldn't let him talk much because he kept answering using both common sense and the scientific method as a basis for his answers.
    Dr Willem de Lange, University of Waikato, fwfw.
    Go soothingly on the grease mud, as there lurks the skid demon

  12. #42
    Join Date
    23rd November 2003 - 20:12
    Bike
    R80, CB400N, Cb200.
    Location
    Northcote, Auckland
    Posts
    1,398
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim2 View Post
    IPCC automatically invalidates the data. It has been produced to prove a point.

    Your second paragraph does not prove the point you think it does. It confirms mine. Localised unreliable climate records do not present a case for global warming.

    We've only been looking at the global macro climate since the late '70s. 30 years. Reliable weather data collection including barometric pressure, rainfall, sunlight hours, and so on has only been a feature of data collection for less than 200 years and only used for very localised weather prediction. Even then, weather prediction is still 50/50 in accuracy and you're trying to prove that we know enough and have enough data to confirm that we can absolutely predict what the global weather will look like in 100 years?

    The single biggest issue in the "Global Warming/Climate Change" argument is its lack of the consistent application of scientific method to analyse data.

    The cooler weather of the '90s can be attributed to Mt Pinatubo and extended La Nina weather patterns in the Pacific. A single eruption of a volcano like Pinatubo does more to cool the climate than anything humans have "done" since the Industrial Revolution. But as beardy sandal man tried to point out last night every time we think we've come up with a solution to a climate problem (sulphates in fuel causing acid rain in Europe) we find that we didn't know what we were talking about and we create another problem by changing fuel composition.
    That was a poor retort by me. I'll find my information on removing inhomogeneity from the instrumental records and the blending of sea surface temperature with land temperature this evening. I've got a report to write today.
    Quote Originally Posted by John Banks View Post
    Yes, but bikes = cool and cars = suck. I think it's Newton's fourth law or something.
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Dover View Post
    Queer Retarded Fags I think.

    Isn't sniper one of those?

  13. #43
    Join Date
    5th August 2005 - 13:36
    Bike
    '69 Lambretta & SR400
    Location
    By the other harbour.
    Posts
    707
    The only thing we can conclusively say about global warming, is that it has rejuventated Al Gore's political career and bank balance.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Lobster View Post
    Only a homo puts an engine back together WITHOUT making it go faster.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    8th July 2006 - 22:35
    Bike
    Now bikeless :-(
    Location
    New Plymouth
    Posts
    524
    Quote Originally Posted by Magua View Post
    For those of us without prime, is it online?
    There are at least a dozen copies of the Global Warming Swindle (original version) available as Torrent downloads, and while you're at it download "PROOF THAT 'THE GREAT GLOBAL WARMING SWINDLE' WAS A SCAM" which is an Aussie debate regarding the doco in which the Global Warming propaganderists do a better job of shooting themselves in the foot than last night's IPCC goons.

    Another good downloadable watch is "The End Of Suburbia" which presents an unarguable and very compelling case for the 'Peak Oil' situation. The world's limited oil reserves are going to very soon reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions far faster than Kyoto, carbon credits, or any other BS climate tax measures. And yes it also explains the case against the lunacy that is bio-fuels which is just another big business feel-good campaign much like carbon footprint propaganda!

    If CO2 is such a threat why have the global warming gestapo not got on the case of brewers of wine and beer who produce sizeable quantities of CO2 in the brewing process, and then squirt the gas around with gay abandon purging vessels and carbonating beer/wine.

    And lets not forget the thousands of tonnes of urea fertilizer our pastural farmers have grown so fond of? This stuff is manufactured from hydrocarbons to start with but then when applied to farmland it does a fine job of stimulating soil bacterial activity to consume soil organic matter which in essence 'burns off/oxidizes' the carbon content of soil thus producing CO2 and reducing topsoil depth. And that is the ammonium nitrate that isn't initially flashed off as ammonia to the atmosphere. A few belching sheep and cows are a minor concern compared to this process!

    Humans are changing the Earth's climate to any degree of concern? Get real, we may be the dominant species but we are fooling ourselves if we think we really matter in the scheme of things.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    21st August 2004 - 12:00
    Bike
    2017 Suzuki Dl1000
    Location
    Picton
    Posts
    5,162
    Quote Originally Posted by Magua View Post
    IPCC fourth report, page 39.
    On page 39 of the Synthesis report (not the full report) I have found the table of radiative forcing that is included in your jpg image, but not the graph. This table gives a single value for each of the gasses, rather than the formulae from whch the forcings are calculated. However, at the levels for 2005, I have no issue with the values presented, and as far as I know, I have never disputed that radiative forcing takes place.

    That still doesn't answer what I asked though. Where is the evidence that man is causing climate change, and where is the evidence that climate change is forcing people to relocate?
    Time to ride

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •