Speakeasy forum

General discussion

High-level inquiry "little evidence" for global warming...

by EdHannigan / August 30, 2010 10:48 PM PDT
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/196642

THE world?s leading climate change body has been accused of losing credibility after a damning report into its research practices.
....
The review by the InterAcademy Council (IAC) was launched after the IPCC?s hugely embarrassing 2007 benchmark climate change report, which contained exaggerated and false claims that Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035.

The panel was forced to admit its key claim in support of global warming was lifted from a 1999 magazine article. The report was based on an interview with a little-known Indian scientist who has since said his views were ?speculation? and not backed by research.

Independent climate scientist Peter Taylor said last night: ?The IPCC?s credibility has been deeply dented and something has to be done. It can?t just be a matter of adjusting the practices. They have got to look at what are the consequences of having got it wrong in terms of what the public think is going on. Admitting that it needs to reform means something has gone wrong and they really do need to look at the science.?
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: High-level inquiry "little evidence" for global warming...
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: High-level inquiry "little evidence" for global warming...
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Did you mean.........
by Mike_Hanks / August 30, 2010 10:52 PM PDT

"little evidence" for (man made)global warming"
Everyone knows that the planet can warm without humans

Collapse -
Heree's aquestion...
by EdHannigan / August 31, 2010 2:16 AM PDT
In reply to: Did you mean.........

What's the temperature of the earth? How can it be determined?

It's kind of hot here today, but the record for this date was set in 1953.

Observation... after years of scorning skeptics as "flat earthers" or worse, and claiming "the science is settled" some will now scorn the findings of highly respected scientist who find the warmist claims untrustworthy. One might think they have made up their minds regardless of the facts.

Collapse -
Yes,
by Mike_Hanks / August 31, 2010 2:29 AM PDT
In reply to: Heree's aquestion...

and just add in the way that the data is collected and manipulated.
Lots of problems there, but minds are made up.

Collapse -
Made up and...
by EdHannigan / August 31, 2010 3:05 AM PDT
In reply to: Yes,

unable to discern WHO is saying WHAT.

-chuckle-

Collapse -
look, I don't have a problem with your "highly respected"...
by grimgraphix / August 31, 2010 2:59 AM PDT
In reply to: Heree's aquestion...

I don't have a problem with your "highly respected scientist"... I have a problem with the faulty logic behind the "what is normal" argument. I have a problem with the "it's snowing right now outside so that categorically refutes the warmists" logic.

I have a problem with throwing out the baby with the bath water thinking which is what you are proposing here. Just because a few scientists used bad data, doesn't refute all the other science that also shows drastic changes in our weather patterns. You mention glaciers in the Himalayas, but don't mention the melting glaciers in Glacier National Park, the evaporating glaciers in Alaska, or all over the rest of the world.

The logic you are using is the logic a smoker uses when coming from a physical. The doctor said you don't have lung cancer today, so it must be OK to keep on smoking. Never mind the shortness of breath, the emphysema, the premature wrinkles, the heart disease, and the high blood pressure... the fact that you don't have lung cancer proves that smoking is A-OK.

Unreduced air pollution kills people and animals all over the world. It leads to a multitude of health and environmental problems that are well documented. You go ahead and claim a Pyrrhic victory because your "highly respected scientist" proved some other guy's "highly respected scientist" immoral and unethical. You go ahead and find satisfaction in claiming you were right all along (under the narrow conditions that you set up).

The planet will be here long after we are gone. The quality of the planet while we are on it, is what counts.

Here's a question for you. For millions of years, the Earth's atmosphere was orange before it changed to blue. So which is the natural color then? How can it be determined?

Collapse -
RE: little evidence
by JP Bill / August 30, 2010 10:58 PM PDT

BUT there IS evidence.....Learned that from your post on languages.

Collapse -
just not the "right" kind of evidence
by grimgraphix / August 31, 2010 1:15 AM PDT
In reply to: RE: little evidence

It's like the question about Obamas Birth Certificate... There is a birth certificate, just not the "right" kind of birth certificate.

Wink

Face it JP, extremes in weather are occurring all over the planet, but if it isn't all cases of consistent extreme warming, then a smug declaration that global warming doesn't exist will be shouted from the roof tops.

Collapse -
Up on MY roof top
by JP Bill / August 31, 2010 2:40 AM PDT

Yesterday and today...I could only take about 1.5 hours....and that was before 10am

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

FALL TV PREMIERES

Your favorite shows are back!

Don’t miss your dramas, sitcoms and reality shows. Find out when and where they’re airing!