Man-made climate change is done for. Dead.

[Badjelly]

According to the samples taken from the ice in the poles, CO2 was higher 120,000 years ago than it is today....

I'd be interesting in seeing some info to back up that statement.

To the best of my knowledge, 120,000 years ago (the peak of the interglacial before the current one) CO2 was at around 285 ppm. Today it's at 385 ppm.

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki...400kyr_Rev_png

[Ixion]

I'd have thought that CO2 would be higher a bit BEFORE the intergalcial peak. Otherwise we have a very tricky question to answer, what REVERSED the interglacial.

[Wasp27]

I just laughed so hard me tinfoil hat fell off!

Shit...was that you I could hear.... thought it was a power test at the airport

[Wasp27]

I want to see us concrete the entire fucking planet, like Coruscant in starwars :-)

They can start by burying those fucking Wire Rope Barriers in Concrete

[Jantar]

I'd have thought that CO2 would be higher a bit BEFORE the intergalcial peak. Otherwise we have a very tricky question to answer, what REVERSED the interglacial.

Right throughout all reconstructions, CO2 concentrations have lagged Global temperatures by around 800 years.

Didn't the earth experience the medievel warm period around 800 years ago?

[Badjelly]

I'd have thought that CO2 would be higher a bit BEFORE the intergalcial peak. Otherwise we have a very tricky question to answer, what REVERSED the interglacial.

Dunno. All I'm saying is that, according to the data I've seen, global CO2 120,000 years ago was not higher than it is now it was 100 ppm lower.

You're not trying to get into that whole "temperature leads CO2" thing, are you?

[Badjelly]

Right throughout all reconstructions, CO2 concentrations have lagged Global temperatures by around 800 years.

Didn't the earth experience the medievel warm period around 800 years ago?

Taking your propositions in turn: Yes (probably, determining precise timing is tricky). Yes.

And your point is?

[James Deuce]

I guess you don't know any scientists. They don't deal in conspiracies. Indeed they don't accept each others findings until it can be duplicated.

That particular model of pure scientific research is long dead in the US, the UK and Australasia and was never considered valid in most of Asia.

Scientific research is funded by corporations not Governments, and corporations are about making money. They will use and manipulate researchers with impunity.

Governments that are still paying for scientific research are either doing so under the auspices of the EU or are just looking for better ways to kill part of their population who are proving problematic.

[Badjelly]

That particular model of pure scientific research is long dead in the US, the UK and Australasia and was never considered valid in most of Asia.

Scientific research is funded by corporations not Governments, and corporations are about making money. They will use and manipulate researchers with impunity.

Governments that are still paying for scientific research are either doing so under the auspices of the EU or are just looking for better ways to kill part of their population who are proving problematic.

Have you ever talked with a scientist working on climate change?

[James Deuce]

Yes. More than one. They're either delusional and close minded or cynical and quite happy to take the cheque thanks. It doesn't help that the ones working for the deniers/sceptics are exactly the same.

[Badjelly]

Yes. More than one. They're either delusional and close midned or cynical and quite happy to take the cheque thanks. It doesn't help that the ones working for the deniers/sceptics are exactly the same.

Where "close-minded" = don't agree with you?

[mashman]

Governments that are still paying for scientific research are either doing so under the auspices of the EU or are just looking for better ways to kill part of their population who are proving problematic.

Surely not a conspiracy theory there!

[mashman]

CEI: Competitive Enterprise Institute (read funding body, constantly referred to in the emails provided by Hans)

Statement by Myron Ebell, CEI Director of Energy and Global Warming Policy

"The posting of private data files from the Climatic Research Unit in England reveals the sleazy, unseemly side of a number of the leading scientific proponents of global warming alarmism, including CRU Director Phil Jones, Michael Mann, Ben Santer, and Kevin Trenberth. It is clear that some of the “world’s leading climate scientists,” as they are always described, are more dedicated to promoting the alarmist political agenda than in scientific research. Some of the e-mails that I have read are blatant displays of personal pettiness, unethical conniving, and twisting the science to support their political position.

Anyone who assumed that these so-called scientific authorities in the debate were providing the straight scientific facts is going to have to think again. We have argued for many years that much of the scientific case for global warming alarmism was weak and some of it was phony. It now looks like a lot of it may be phony."

Oh no, who to believe it's all so confusing and yet so perfectly obvious that some scientist would try to produce their actual findings???????

[James Deuce]

Where "close-minded" = don't agree with you?

No not at all, just dismissive of anyone who doesn't think like them. You can quote other people's research until the cows come home and it's the same on both sides - "they're" wrong.

Makes for hilarious debates.

[James Deuce]

Surely not a conspiracy theory there!

No. CERN is the only organisation I can think of committed to pure research without aiming to provide a solution to the "energy crisis", "climate change", or "finding Osama bn Laden".