Speakeasy forum

General discussion

?Nasa is out of line on global warming

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/07/27/do2708.xml


?Considering that the measures recommended by the world's politicians to combat global warming will cost tens of trillions of dollars and involve very drastic changes to our way of life, it might be thought wise to check the reliability of the evidence on which they base their belief that our planet is actually getting hotter. ?

?There are four internationally recognised sources of data on world temperatures, but the one most often cited by supporters of global warming is that run by James Hansen of Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS).?

?Hansen has been for 20 years the world's leading scientific advocate of global warming (and Al Gore's closest ally). But in the past year a number of expert US scientists have been conducting a public investigation, through scientific blogs, which raises large question marks over the methods used to arrive at his figures.?

?First they noted the increasingly glaring discrepancy between the figures given by GISS, which show temperatures continuing to race upwards, and those given by the other three main data sources, which all show temperatures having fallen since 1998, dropping dramatically in the past year to levels around the average of the past 30 years. ?
?It is still too early to suggest that the recent drop in temperatures shown by everyone but him is proof that global warming has stopped. But the fact is that not one of those vaunted computer models predicted what has happened to temperatures in recent years. Yet it is on those models (and Hansen's alarmist figures) that our politicians are basing all their proposals for irrevocably changing our lives.?

Why is it that the laypeople that are so personally invested in AGW (not professionally or financially) so absolutely unwilling to consider that at the very least, the data being used to support their claims, may not be correct? It can be documented ad nauseam to the valid doubts of the data.


Interesting bit about wind farms at the bottom too.
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: ?Nasa is out of line on 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: ?Nasa is out of line on 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 -
re: "Al Gore's closest ally"

In reply to: ?Nasa is out of line on global warming

"?Hansen has been for 20 years the world's leading scientific advocate of global warming (and Al Gore's closest ally). But in the past year a number of expert US scientists have been conducting a public investigation, through scientific blogs, which raises large question marks over the methods used to arrive at his figures.?"

Oh yeah, Al Gore is the NASA guy's friend so what he says must be wrong. Yep, that's all he had to tell me... that Al Gore is involved. That was the deciding factor right there.

Sheesh ! Utter BS. One has nothing to do with the other (if the article is really about science), but let us mention it anyway.
Collapse -
Right, Al Gore has nothing to do with the issue.

In reply to: re: "Al Gore's closest ally"

so we can use a tangential (albeit true) bit of information to totally dismiss what is said.


Oooooookay.

Collapse -
Can you dispute that there is a problem

In reply to: re: "Al Gore's closest ally"

with the data being used to claim AGW?

Strange that three seperate groups of data show one trend, and Hansen's shows the complete opposite .

SHEESH indeed

That's what the article is about.

Collapse -
Indeed... that IS what the article is about.

In reply to: Can you dispute that there is a problem

... and I respect the desire to discuss it. Consequently... why color the readers perception of the SCIENTIFIC discussions by mentioning who the guy's acquaintances are ?

Collapse -
Sorry then,

In reply to: Indeed... that IS what the article is about.

You have no understanding of this topic if you don?t know the symbiotic connection between Hansen and Gore.

Collapse -
And you display a confusion between political motivation,

In reply to: Sorry then,

... and concerns for truthful and accurate science. Don't be embarrassed. Smarter people than you have made the same mistake.

Just remember... science deals with facts. Politics deals with who the scientist knows.

Science = what you know

Politics = what you feel.

Facts versus emotion. You won;t be the first, nor the last, to get the two confused.


Learning something new every day is what life is all about. I'm glad I was able to help you on this journey.
Have a great day !

Collapse -
It is an opinion piece, dealing with a scientific topic.

In reply to: And you display a confusion between political motivation,

Bringing up Al Gore is entirely germane and relevant. Indeed, it would have been stupid NOT to.

You are merely building another straw man, and your high and mighty attempts at sarcasm are both offensive and pathetic.

Collapse -
(NT) And your attempts are better ? ROTFLMAO

In reply to: It is an opinion piece, dealing with a scientific topic.

Collapse -
But I am not attempting to lecture from on high...

In reply to: And your attempts are better ? ROTFLMAO

in the most pompous way possible. Nor am I failing miserably in making my point. See the difference?

Collapse -
Uh... yes you are... lecturing from on high that is.

In reply to: But I am not attempting to lecture from on high...

You do so, all the time.

Collapse -
Yeah, sure.

In reply to: Uh... yes you are... lecturing from on high that is.

-chuckle-

Collapse -
Oops! Almost forgot....

In reply to: Yeah, sure.

Cowboy up, Grim.

Collapse -
I'm glad you agree that Hansen/Gore

In reply to: And you display a confusion between political motivation,

are politically motivated and have completely ingnored the science.

Collapse -
The connection goes back...

In reply to: re: "Al Gore's closest ally"

Grim, the connection goes back to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources on June 23, 1988. At that time, the concern was Global Cooling. But in the statement Hansen said "Number one, the earth is warmer in 1988 than at any time in the history of instrumental measurements.". Gore became concerned now with Global Warming. However, other scientists did not agree with Hansen. One made this statement:
"I see that we are once again having to hear how NASA's James Hansen was dissuaded from talking to the press on a few of the 1,400 media
interviews he was involved in over the years.
Well, I had the same pressure as a NASA employee during the Clinton-Gore years, because NASA management and the Clinton/Gore administration knew that I was skeptical that mankind's CO2 emissions were the main cause of global warming. I was even told not to give my views during congressional testimony, and so I purposely dodged a question, under oath, when it arose.
But I didn't complain about it like Hansen has. NASA is an executive branch agency and the President was, ultimately, my boss (and is, ultimately, Hansen's boss). So, because of the restrictions on what I could and couldn't do or say, I finally just resigned from NASA and went to work for the university here in Huntsville. There were no hard feelings, and I'm still active in a NASA satellite mission and fully supportive of its Earth observation programs.
In stark contrast, Jim Hansen said whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted to the press and congress during that time. He even campaigned for John Kerry, and received a $250,000 award from Theresa Heinz-Kerry's charitable foundation -- two events he maintains are unrelated. If I had done anything like this when I worked at NASA, I would have been crucified under the Hatch Act.
Does anyone besides me see a double standard here?
-Roy W. Spencer
The University of Alabama in Huntsville"

Collapse -
It about data not opinions or politics

In reply to: The connection goes back...

If the data shows something you analysis the data and try determine the "why" of it. It's not opinion or politics involved here. The question being is the data good and what does it mean? People and personalities have little to do with it? NASA has the data and is trying to determine what it means. Once this is determined then a plan of action will be made to correct it, if possible then it becomes political. I suspect we are at the political stage with Global Warming, now it's about mobilizing people and governments to get something done. Your to late, the process is under way.

Collapse -
But sadly for you

In reply to: It about data not opinions or politics

The best data disproves what you believe in !!!!!!!!!!!!

Collapse -
Nope

In reply to: But sadly for you

at least I have data.

Collapse -
So reports of the big chill are all made up?

In reply to: ?Nasa is out of line on global warming

Collapse -
Hansen is a worthless hack.

In reply to: So reports of the big chill are all made up?

I don't know much of his history but he hasn't been an objective scientist for 20 years. It's an abomination that he still holds the position in the government that he does.

The only good thing is that with the AGW fraud/hoax quickly falling apart, Hansen will become an absurd parody of himself.

Collapse -
Even if there is global warming

In reply to: ?Nasa is out of line on global warming

And every bit of the ice melted, it wouldn't be the first time, according to this article. Somehow life on the planet managed to survive.

Collapse -
What NASA is saying

In reply to: ?Nasa is out of line on global warming

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/videos/earth/earth20071001/

NASA is far from alone in it's views about Global Warming:

Scientist that believe Global Warming is real:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

The short list of Scientist that reject Global Warming:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_global_warming_consensus

So, critic411 where are these other three sources that oppose NASA's point of view on Global Warming or is this Critic411 view? Post them, if you can't, just more hear say by Global Warming's #1 critic, critic411. At least NASA attempts to find, understand and present facts not opinions. Frankly if this fellow at NASA is speaking up he's just doing his job.

This thread untracked.
Collapse -
Are you really

In reply to: What NASA is saying

That ignorant of EVERYTHING?

If you really knew anything about this topic, you would know what the four main sources for data are. But since you only believe what Hansen/Gore spoon feed you??

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

SMART HOME

This one tip will help you sleep better tonight

A few seconds are all you need to get a better night's rest.