digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

No Smoking Hot Spot

theaustralian.news.com.au — Another scientist distances himself from global warming.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • juniperlimb, on 07/17/2008, -0/+15"If there really was any evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming, don't you think we would have heard all about it ad nauseam by now?"

    Why yes, I do think we would have heard something about it. But I guess you can't publicize that which doesn't exist. Follow the money, you'll see that it falls right back into the Goracle's account.
    • greenfyre, on 07/17/2008, -13/+1Here you go

      http://climate.jpl.nasa.gov/evidence/
      http://royalsociety.org/landing.asp?id=1278
      http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007 ...
      http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/index.htm
      http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-syr.htm
      http://www.ghgonline.org/pubarchive.htm

      "How we know we're not wrong about climate change" http://www.ametsoc.org/atmospolicy/Presentations/O ...

      Lot's more when you're done that
      • RecklessProcess, on 07/17/2008, -2/+11Ha Ha! NASA? Hansen is NOT NASA and he is also bought and paid for by G. Soros.

        Hilarious! I am sure you can find lots of people who have established quite an income on the premise of Manmade global warming.

        On the other hand the ice cap on the north pole is 30% thicker this year and has not melted hardly at all. Mode Ice cap at the North pole and Waay more ice at the Antartic.

        But you have a lot invested in your little, "The world is ending in OUR Lifetimes! The END is NIGH!" religion and you are surely embarrassed now that you are discovering your religion is becoming a laughing stock.

        So sad.

        Here is one for you! I know you cannot read it as it refutes you broken reality but here it is anyway.
        http://surfacestations.org/
        And remember... NASA doesn't use satellite data; all NASA'a data is ground based.

        Also try wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com. But I understand that you cannot bear to examine it because it shatters your worldview. How sad.
      • greenfyre, on 07/18/2008, -8/+2"Ha Ha! NASA? Hansen is NOT NASA "

        I know, that's why the link is NASA. If you think that's a problem you'd bettter contact them right away.

        ""and he is also bought and paid for by G. Soros. "

        Swiftboating Hansen debunked http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2007/09/the_exxon_ ...

        {"I am sure you can find lots of people who have established quite an income"

        Because you can't find any?

        "On the other hand the ice cap on the north pole"

        Let's see what Arctic Climate Research at the University of Illinois says " Recent observed surface air temperature changes over the Arctic region are the largest in the world. Winter (DJF) rates of warming exceed 4 degrees C. over portions of the Arctic land areas (shown left). We provide Arctic temperature trends and changes of other primary surface variables (e.g., sea level pressure, precipitation, sea ice cover) archived in this climate summary, portions of which are published each year in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society.

        Seasonal sea ice extent Sea ice extent averaged over the Northern Hemisphere has decreased correspondingly over the past 50 years (shown right). The largest change has been observed in the summer months with decreases exceeding 30%." http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/

        Cryosphere Today says " shows the dramatic loss of multiyear sea ice over the past year. Multiyear sea ice is older and generally thicker ice - sea ice that has survived at least one melt season (shown in brighter white). " http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/

        Here's the links (1289 of them) for the satellite data they don't have http://globalchange.nasa.gov/KeywordSearch/Freetex ...

        Of course I know about Pielke, what's your point?

        Ahh, the APS Hoax - from the APS home page:

        "APS Climate Change Statement

        APS Position Remains Unchanged

        The American Physical Society reaffirms the following position on climate change, adopted by its governing body, the APS Council, on November 18, 2007:

        "Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate."

        An article at odds with this statement recently appeared in an online newsletter of the APS Forum on Physics and Society, one of 39 units of APS. The header of this newsletter carries the statement that "Opinions expressed are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the APS or of the Forum." This newsletter is not a journal of the APS and it is not peer reviewed." http://www.aps.org/

        So, do you do anything besides screw up all the facts and act condescending?
    • MorganMghee, on 07/18/2008, -3/+4Where have you been? It's all we've been hearing about since the 80's, ad nauseum through the 90's and in your face do somethin' stupid through 2k.
  • gutz, on 07/17/2008, -1/+16From the article:
    "The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect.

    The last point was known and past dispute by 2003, yet Al Gore made his movie in 2005 and presented the ice cores as the sole reason for believing that carbon emissions cause global warming. In any other political context our cynical and experienced press corps would surely have called this dishonest and widely questioned the politician's assertion.

    Until now the global warming debate has merely been an academic matter of little interest. Now that it matters, we should debate the causes of global warming. "

    The doom and gloom that politicians like us to think gives them the leverage to impose their will in our daily lives. Gore recently released a report of the peril our society is in, wrapping everything up from our economic woes all the way to global warming and proposes he has the silver bullet. Anyone with ability to think critically should see through this political ploy.
  • RecklessProcess, on 07/17/2008, -3/+10And, another man down
    And, another one gone
    And, another man under the bus...

    Hmmm... can any one here tell me just which of greenfatty's famous 'links about global warming' that relies heavily on this fellow's own writing which he now refutes? Hmmm... I wonder how long it will take to identify it?
    • greenfyre, on 07/18/2008, -9/+3"greenfatty"

      Yup, nothing refutes science like name calling

      if you're 4 yrs old
  • cashman57, on 07/17/2008, -4/+14What I find most amusing in greenfyre and his claim that volcanoes do not exist. That must be his contention given the fact he believes in global warming and global warming only exists in computer models invented by the IPCC in order to fool some of the people all of the time. In order to do that they needed to leave out the data from volcanic activity.
    Not a problem for them, they just pretend volcanoes do not exist so global warming can and they sucked greenfyre in totally.
    • greenfyre, on 07/18/2008, -10/+4"his claim that volcanoes do not exist."

      Better give everyone the link to that, they might not believe it otherwise
      • cashman57, on 07/18/2008, -3/+12All one need do is look in your history and they will discover that you still cling to the computer models from the IPCC which need to omit all data from volcanic activity to work. You have yet to link me to any computer model anywhere that shows global warming and includes data from volcanic activity.
        If you have found one recently, link me to it or admit you don't believe in volcanoes.
      • greenfyre, on 07/18/2008, -11/+3But Cashman, if they follow my history they will see that vikingcoder and I debunked your point several times - you don't want them to see that, do you?

        Much better to give one link that seems to prove your point.
      • cashman57, on 07/18/2008, -0/+8Still waiting for that link to a computer model that shows global warming without omitting all data from volcanic activity.
        HINT: linking to an article about a volcano is not the same thing as including it in a computer model that shows global warming.
      • greenfyre, on 07/19/2008, -7/+1 The Volcano and the Climate Model

        When it comes to predicting climate change, this team is hot! See how computer models allow NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies to understand—and predict—how volcanoes affect Earth's climate.
        http://earthbulletin.amnh.org/D/3/index.html
      • ChronicColonic, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2That link
        http://earthbulletin.amnh.org/D/3/index.html sure has some neat pictures of volcanoes. But it seems that they have taking that model down. Probably because it does not fit within their 'global warming is causing the world to end and if we don't get our federal funding to exist we cannot warn the world' template.
  • greenfyre, on 07/18/2008, -14/+2"There has not been a public debate about the causes of global warming..:"

    If it's a question of science what would a public debate do???

    "The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it. "

    We're supposed to take his word for it? Excuse me if I prefer the piece at http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008 ... since it offers the references and links and walks us through the actual reasoning.

    See especially the discussion following the piece as it is where people challenge the arguement and bring in a lot of other relevant science.

    Point 2 is disingeuous. What does he consider "evidence" He is in disagreement with pretty much the whole scientific community, so just what does he mean by evidence?

    3) "The satellites that measure the world's temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001"

    By the same logic it also stopped in 1973, 1983, and 1990 http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/nhsh ... Each peak year has been followed by a slightly cooler period (look at the data).
    "Top 11 Warmest Years On Record Have All Been In Last 13 Years"
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/07121 ...
    And the first six months of 2008 were the ninth warmest since record keeping began in 1880, NOAA's National Climatic Data Center reported. http://green.yahoo.com/news/ap/20080716/ap_on_sc/s ... http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/ap/ap_on_sc/story ...

    4) "yet Al Gore made his movie in"

    I thought this was supposed to be about the science? wtf cares what Al Gore said ... is the science right or not?

    It all boils down to his claim that CO2 is not the cause. He is out of synch with the rest of science http://gristmill.grist.org/skeptics How to talk to Global Warming Skeptic
    http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/ ... Climate Change: A guide for the perplexed
    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004 ... Response to common contrarian arguments
    http://www.nerc.ac.uk/about/consult/debate/climate ... Climate change debate summary
    http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/ ... Climate Change Myths
    http://scholarsandrogues.wordpress.com/2007/07/23/ ... A Thorough Debunking
    http://www.skepticalscience.com/ Skeptical Science
    http://www.logicalscience.com/skeptic_arguments/sk ...
    http://environment.newscientist.com/climatemyths
    http://www.sierraclub.ca/national/programs/atmosph ...
    http://www.desmogblog.com/slamming-the-climate-ske ...
    http://royalsociety.org/page.asp?id=6229


    So he is going to have to give me more than his say so.

    • cashman57, on 07/18/2008, -1/+7In reality the 1930's were the hottest years of the last century but you can go on with your delusion if you want to.
      • greenfyre, on 07/18/2008, -6/+1Hottest in the US only http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007 ...

        Ever wonder why it is called __Global__ Warming, not _US_ Warming?

        Take your time, think about it ... read the question again, come on, you can do it. Think (hint 'global' vs 'US' ...__global__) no rush ...

        Ok, get back to us when you think you have an answer.
    • cashman57, on 07/18/2008, -0/+5Since you are so into putting up links, link me to the computer model that shows global warming without omitting all data from volcanic activity.
      • greenfyre, on 07/18/2008, -6/+1Like I said before, you're brilliant, you're a genius - you have unmasked the whole glabal wamring plot. Stop wasting time on Digg, go straight to AP and tell the world. No wait, contact the White House, the President must hear of this immediately!

        And then maybe you'll believe them when they show you the same links you have been given before.
      • greenfyre, on 07/19/2008, -4/+1 The Volcano and the Climate Model

        When it comes to predicting climate change, this team is hot! See how computer models allow NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies to understand—and predict—how volcanoes affect Earth's climate.
        http://earthbulletin.amnh.org/D/3/index.html
  • cashman57, on 07/18/2008, -2/+15The cause of global warming is simple. A flawed computer model is all you need.
    In order for the IPCC computer model to show global warming they needed to omit all data from volcanic activity.
    They have sucked in greenfyre and now he is desperate to show that a computer model that omits data to work is real.
    Oh sure, he can link to "realclimate" which is almost as real as the IPCC computer models they rely on but he can't show a computer model that has all of the data in it from volcanic activity. He does not know how many volcanoes there are on the Antarctic or in the oceans so he pretends they do not exist.
    So, my challenge to greenfyre and "realclimate", show me a compuiter model that both shows global warming and includes data from volcanic activity or quit pretending global warming is real.
    • greenfyre, on 07/18/2008, -11/+2You've been shown over and over, stop spamming
      • cashman57, on 07/18/2008, -0/+7You have never linked me to a computer model which shows global warmimg without pretending volcanoes don't exist. If you have proven one exists post a link.
        NOTE: linking to articles about volcanoes is not the same thing as the inclusion of them. Claiming you have shown one is not the same thing as showing one.
      • greenfyre, on 07/19/2008, -7/+1 The Volcano and the Climate Model

        When it comes to predicting climate change, this team is hot! See how computer models allow NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies to understand—and predict—how volcanoes affect Earth's climate.
        http://earthbulletin.amnh.org/D/3/index.html
      • greenfyre, on 07/19/2008, -7/+1 The Volcano and the Climate Model

        When it comes to predicting climate change, this team is hot! See how computer models allow NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies to understand—and predict—how volcanoes affect Earth's climate.
        http://earthbulletin.amnh.org/D/3/index.html
  • cashman57, on 07/18/2008, -1/+15This is getting pretty funny. So far greenfyre pretends that linking to an article about volcanoes is the same thing as including them in the computer models that show global warming and still cannot tell me how many volcanoes there are in the ocean or on Antarctica but is sure that man caused global warming is the reason. He bases this opinion solely on writings based on a computer model which does not come even close to depicting reality.
    Reality is volcanoes do exist, they do erupt and they make a difference in the climate for years.
    That is why the onle way the computer models CAN show global warming is by omitting all data regarding volcanic activity.
    It is quite amusing that greenfyre et. al., can't come up with a response to that fact.
    • greenfyre, on 07/19/2008, -9/+1 The Volcano and the Climate Model

      When it comes to predicting climate change, this team is hot! See how computer models allow NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies to understand—and predict—how volcanoes affect Earth's climate.
      http://earthbulletin.amnh.org/D/3/index.html
  • TruthExposed, on 07/18/2008, -0/+11Global warming will make housing more affordable by effectively increasing the supply of real estate. It will also bring food prices down for the same reason.
    It will make places like Russia, northern Canada, and Alaska much more habitable. Those 3 alone would greatly increase the available farmland and food production, not to mention the increased rainfall in vast arid areas like north Africa and inland Australia.
    It will also lead to Greenland once again living up to it's name - it was named as such by Eric the Red in the 900s because the earth was at the peak of a warming period when Greenland was colonized. The poor Vikings had to abandon their colonies due to global cooling a few hundred years later.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Greenland
  • Cryptocracy, on 08/17/2008, -4/+7Scientists who disagree with the GW NWO propaganda (and the State Science Institute) are treated like architects and engineers who disagree with the "official" 9/11 fairy tale.

    I don't buy global warming by CO@ for a second.The sun and natural cycles of the earth are the cause. And soon we will have global cooling....

    Also look up the UN "agenda 21" for info on how Global Warming is a vehicle for giving the UN global taxing POWER. (Al Gore wants this)

    This is all a replacement for the soon to fail global "war on terror", a new fear to keep us sheep all scared enough to give power to Tyranny.

    There, that wasn't so offensive, was it?
  • cashman57, on 07/18/2008, -0/+12Still waiting for greenfyre et. al., to link to a computer model that shows global warming without omitting all data from volcanic activity.
    Remember that greenfyre et. al., have written that man caused global warming is causing the ice in Antarctica to melt, even though the truth is volcanic activity there is the true cause.
    Aren't these volcano deniers fun?
    • greenfyre, on 07/19/2008, -8/+1 The Volcano and the Climate Model

      When it comes to predicting climate change, this team is hot! See how computer models allow NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies to understand—and predict—how volcanoes affect Earth's climate.
      http://earthbulletin.amnh.org/D/3/index.html
      • ChronicColonic, on 07/24/2008, -0/+3Have you even clicked on that link? It leads not to anything you are trying to share with us. No model exist at that link. It might be your homepage and it has some great pictures, but pictures of volcanoes do not automatically include themselves in a data model.
  • DudeInAustin, on 07/20/2008, -0/+14The central premise is flawed anyway. People speak of a need to address "climate change" based upon the assumption that the climate is stable. It is not so. It has not been so. I grew up in a state (Michigan) that was under ice multiple times in relatively recent geologic history. Ice went all the way to the Ohio River valley! The Great Lakes were scooped out by the ice and the fresh water in them was left when it melted.

    The climate of the Earth changes! It gets warmer and colder. It did so before we all got here. It will continue to do so even if we all leave. Why does it change? Who knows! Might have something to do with that big hot yellow dot in the sky.

    Bottom line: We can spend trillions and reduce humanity to dirt-eating penury and still not change this fact of life regarding planet Earth.
    • stealthc, on 07/23/2008, -0/+6Wonderfully worded comment.

      I wonder why more people don't recognize the environmental movement as a campaign to reduce us all to a state of total poverty.
      • LadyAmerica, on 07/23/2008, -0/+5Not just total poverty... SLAVERY too, to the global elites!
    • rukbat, on 07/24/2008, -0/+3Problem is we have been haveing climate change for over 4.5 BILLION years:

      Temperature Timeline
      So let's start with the current temperatures and work backwards. Temperatures have risen by 0.6 to 1.0°C since 1850, which was then end of the Little Ice Age. The Little Ice Age, which started around 1300, had temperatures up to half a degree Celsius cooler than the Medieval Warm Period before that (AD 1000). It was a minor fluctuation, really. Several similar variations occurred throughout the Holocene epoch. The rest of this Holocene period, from 1000 to 11,000 years before present, seemed rather uneventful, climatologically speaking. Paleoclimatology research shows only minor random changes in these ancient climates, except for a sharp cold snap known as the 6200 BC event (which lasted 50 to 100 years).
      The Holocene began at the end of the Younger Dryas stadial 12,900 – 11,500 years before present (ybp). This was the mini ice age Al Gore talks about; it took place after the Vlad Glacier melted and the fresh water diluted the salt water in the Atlantic, causing the ocean current to stop and Europe to freeze. The Younger Dryas lasted over a thousand years, but not long enough to create a new ice age.

      Prior to those ancient climates, we had the Pleistocene epoch. A period marked by many ice ages and ending with the so-called Late Glacial Interstadial melting period from 14,700 to 12,900 ybp. This 1800-year period of warmer ancient climates caused those giant pools of melt-water to form in North America, leading to the flooding that caused the Younger Dryas. The coldest weather of the Cenzoic Era occurred about 22,000 years ago, and that defined the Last Glacial Maximum.

      What is an Ice Age?
      A period of time with ice sheets and ice caps. We are in one now, and have been for a few million years. Up until about 10,000 years before now, it was colder than it is now and those ice sheets covered great expanses of the planet which are now populated temperate zones.
      All of Canada, Greenland, New York, Chicago and areas in between had solid ice cover, hundreds of metres thick. The ice caps and sheets become smaller during the interglacial periods, and we are now in an interglacial period of the current ice age.
      Several ancient climates of severe glaciation happened over the last 700,000 years. The most recent one went from 110,000 to 12,000 years ago, and before that came one lasting from 200,000 to 130,000 years before present. Progressing backwards in time, the third glacial period, ran from 455,000 to 300,000 years ago, and the first in this stretch started 680,000 years ago and lasted about 60,000 years. The interglacial periods fell between these time slots.

      The Pliocene epoch, 5.3 to 1.8 million years ago, showed signs of the coming ice ages. Antarctica became totally ice covered around 5 million years ago and the Arctic got its ice cap a couple million years later. These ancient climates were definitely colder than before. Possibly the coldest it has been in hundreds of millions of years.

      Greenland acquired its first glaciers during the later part of the Miocene epoch, which went from 23 to 5 million years ago. The place had lush forest cover before then. Miocene ancient climates were quite warm compared to now, especially during the mid-Miocene Climatic Optimum 18 million years ago.

      Overall, it was about 50 million ybp when the whole world began slowly cooling down. It reached its first minimum in the Oligocene epoch ancient climates and eventually lead to the ice ages of the Pleistocene. The Oligocene epoch, 34 to 23 million years ago, was not as warm as the Miocene which followed, but still warmer than present.

      Before the Oligocene was the Eocene epoch, from 56 to 34 million years before present. It was the warmest we've seen in the last 56 million years. But the epochs before that, Paleocene and those of the Cretaceous period (146 to 65 million before present), were almost as warm.

      Most of ancient climates of the Mesozoic Era, 251 to 65 million years ago, were considerably warmer than today and the dinosaurs thrived. That era included the Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous periods. Long before the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change could do anything about it.

      These geologists call the first half of the Phanerozoic Eon the Paleozoic Era. It saw dramatic swings between very warm and cold paleoclimate extremes, ending with an ice age that gripped the Carboniferous and Permian periods. These periods collectively spanned 360 to 251 million years ago. Before that time the earth was warmer again, with average temperatures that were warmer than today. We call these times the Silurian and Devonian periods and they went from 444 to 360 million years before today.

      Where are we going with all this?
      Finally, the first two parts of the Phanerozoic eon are called the Cambrian and Ordovician periods. They started 542 million years ago, lasted a total of nearly 100 million years and ended with an ice age which led to the Silurian Period.
      Little is known about the ancient climates in the periods before the Phanerozoic eon, however the strong snowball earth ice age is believed to have had ice covering the entire planet. That was over 800 million years ago.

      Climate change will continue weather man is here or not. All the money Al gore want us to spend to stop something that cannont be stopped is ridiculous...it would be better spent on adaption! we are a very adapable people!
  • bmcelrath, on 07/21/2008, -0/+15Algore is going to have to find a new scam.
  • mustangmike53, on 07/21/2008, -0/+12Can this be true? A scientist involved in Global Warming research changes his mind about CO2 causing the warming? Not possible! They told me that the Science was settled, and that there was no debate among scientists.

    I'm so disillusioned. I can't believe that they lied to me!
  • govsucks, on 07/24/2008, -0/+8This will never make it to the front page of digg. Collectivists are as bad about denial as the hard core religious.
  • Beerformyhorses, on 07/31/2008, -0/+0Concerning Point 4, that CO2 rise seems to lag temperature changes by hundreds of years. If you look at the gas laws we all learned in beginning chemistry class, this makes perfect sense. The partial pressure of a gas over a liquid is proportional to the temperature of the liquid. The seas are the great repositories of CO2 gas. When an external factor, say solar output, changes, this would over time change the temperature of the sea. As the sea warms, it looses CO2 to the atmosphere. As it cools, it re-absorbs CO2. The one flaw with this hypothesis is that nobody is going to make $ off it.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.