Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Lakota Freedom? | Main | Hugh Hewitt takes up for Mark Steyn: Buy Maclean's, Boycott Canada? »

Friday, December 21, 2007

Scientists Dispute Man-Made Global Warming Claims

The new report by the US Senate on Global Warming is getting zero coverage in big dinosaur media:

Read for yourself

Posted by Winston on December 21, 2007 in Current Affairs, Science | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e54fbfe44e8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Scientists Dispute Man-Made Global Warming Claims:

Comments

but. . . but. . . but our trolls still claim that 99.9% of scientists agree with Gore & Suzuki.

Is this further proof that Leftoids lie in order to get what they want? OF COURSE IT IS!

SO MUCH FOR SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS!

Posted by: obc | 2007-12-21 9:00:50 AM


Don't these scientists know that the earth is round? Big oil must be paying them lots of money to say this...(SARCASM OFF)

Posted by: Markalta | 2007-12-21 9:15:28 AM


obc: they tried to use the myth of scientific consensus to put Kyoto fast and hard so no one could seriously object to it. The real motive behind Kyoto was not fighting climate change but the transfer of wealth from the rich countries to the poor countries. Fortunately, simple basic common sense won out.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-12-21 9:16:25 AM


It is frightening how the MSM tries to supres news. There was a recent announcement by hundreds of scientists that evolution was a crock and that we all sprang from Adam and Eve. Yet another group of scientists released a report years ago that cigarette smoking is not harmful to your health and that all that talk about cancer was just a socialist plot. Finally, a few years ago, 500 of the most esteemed scientists from the middle east signed a report that proclaimed "Mohamed was the one true profit of God and that all other religions, including Christianity, where abominations onto God".

We must stop the socialist, liberal, islamic, (insert name of group you hate in here), and left-wing media from contaminating our minds. That's why I never leave home without my Western Standard approved Tin Foil Hat.

Merry X-mas everyone...whoops...I mean, may the blessings our our lord (Steven Harper), be upon you all.

Posted by: Pat_Pending | 2007-12-21 9:17:16 AM


Leftoids can't even say something nice without their theology contaminating the message.

Posted by: obc | 2007-12-21 9:26:19 AM


Sky is NOT falling stories are boring.

Posted by: philanthropist | 2007-12-21 9:29:49 AM


I'd be cautious about waving this around. For starters the link points to a senate minority members personal blog, hosted under the department's blog aggregator. Worse, you have to really extrapolate a cosmic ray/sunspot message from the official report if that's what you're looking for. All they dispute are the severity of the claims made by the broader—and it's still the broader—scientific community.

If you're looking for better posts thumping the climate change crowd they're out there. This one's just too easy to poke holes in, and they're already poking holes in it over at RealClimate and DeSmogBlog to name a few.

Posted by: Pattern Recognition | 2007-12-21 9:36:28 AM


400? That sounds like ... about less than 1% of all scientists! Wow!

Also, on the site linked is the comment: "scientific skeptics of man-made catastrophic global warming 'are bought and paid for by the fossil fuel industry, usually.'" Just as tobacco companies had lots of scientists who assured us that smoking is not connected to cancer.

Furthermore, one of the so-called skeptics is quoted as saying: "Even if the concentration of 'greenhouse gases' double man would not perceive the temperature impact". This is true and also beside the point. The issue is not that we will all burn to death, but that the paltry few degrees increase will melt the polar ice, an effect we surely would notice.

Ok. Back to the truth-bashing.

Posted by: Fact Check | 2007-12-21 9:43:25 AM


Being that today is the shortest day of the year, it is worthwhile pointing out that the earth's axis has a wobble to it. That means that the angle at which the poles lean towards the sun changes over time. THe time it takes to make a complete wobble is about 25,000 years. So 12,000 years ago, the polar icecap was a little more vertical so the angle of "insolation", that is the angle at which the pole receives radiation is low and so it remains cold. Today, the angle is at its most extreme. And so it should be no surprise that it is melting faster. This will change over time as the wobble returns to its more upright form.

This is partly why the glaciers started melting down about 10,000 years ago as more radiation reaches the surface until today where it is at its maximum and we have more rapid melting as we should expect.

That and the fact that the sun is emitting more radiation since the moon, mars, pluto and saturns moons have all been showing higher surface temperatures.

Leftoids talk a lot about science. But they do not examine the details and realize that there are much, much more powerful forces at work than a few ppm change in CO2 levels.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2007-12-21 9:44:32 AM


"Back to the truth-bashing."

From the poster who uses others' nics to get his message across.

Posted by: obc | 2007-12-21 9:45:54 AM


epsi ~

"That means that the angle at which the poles lean towards the sun changes over time."

Stop maligning natives of Warsaw! :)

Posted by: obc | 2007-12-21 9:47:55 AM


Fortunately for all of us, most poles now lean towards the right!

Posted by: Epsilon | 2007-12-21 9:50:00 AM


By the way, scientific consensus is almost never unanimous. In the context of science they mean 'majority opinion'. Being a dissenter in science means having a reason to publish, and publishing means funding, so there'll always be dissenters. Just this week the MSM picked up a news release about a hollow earth theorist who—you guessed it—published a report suggesting he ought to be funded $2 million to continue his research because thank to him there's no consensus on the composition of the planet.

Posted by: Pattern Recognition | 2007-12-21 9:50:34 AM


And to add to my techie comments. The fact that it is warmer causes vegetation and soils to rot faster, releasing CO2. THis means that elevated levels of CO2 are a result of, not a cause of global warming. I do not deny that elevated CO2 levels may cause some warming effect, but they pale in comparison to the enormous forces of the sun and the earth.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2007-12-21 9:54:00 AM


Epsi, if you're referring to Milankovitch cycles they're addressed in the book "The Weather Makers" by Tim Flannery. Specifically how we're creating new patterns that will throw the climate out of equilibrium with it's natural cycles. In other words they've been using that one against you for at least three years now.

Posted by: Pattern Recognition | 2007-12-21 9:55:58 AM


Wealth distribution by Leftoid watermelons is the agenda.

Watermelons - green on the outside & Red on the inside.

Posted by: obc | 2007-12-21 9:58:02 AM


Seeing how most scientists spend most of their critical attitude forming years in leftoid universities, I would expect the vast majority of them to be incapable of understanding global social and economic realities and lacking common sense. Good grief, so many of them cannot even dress themselves properly! That should tell you something!

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2007-12-21 9:58:37 AM


Sorry, one more thing. Epsi, you're referring to a scenario the climate change crowd calls runaway global warming and it's precisely the sort of thing they're saying we need to try to minimize. The worst being a change in ocean temperatures leading to runaway clathrate release. Emphasis on 'minimize'. They've given up on 'prevent' because 'prevent' means more action than they expect from you and me.

You'd probably find Flannery's book an interesting read. I have it in Paperback and Audible MP4 formats.

Posted by: Pattern Recognition | 2007-12-21 10:00:10 AM


Another inflammatory book spewing nonsense and scare tactics that is designed to make the author rich. Typical hypocritical leftoid author.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2007-12-21 10:00:23 AM


So that's a "no"?
You know Patton read Rommel's book right?

Posted by: Pattern Recognition | 2007-12-21 10:03:10 AM


Scientists get grant money from the public purse. Our tax dollars. If they can scare the public and create a political issue out of something, then they can scare more money into their pockets and carry out even more research that is politically geared to creating even more fear to drive their money spinning machine onwards.

This is how hypocritical leftoid academics are. They are evil and need to be called to account.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2007-12-21 10:04:21 AM


I always found train wrecks to be morbidly fascinating, and the GW Express is about to crash and burn. Just like..
Y2K
Population explosion
Global famine
Flu pandemics
Global cooling
AIDS pandemic
As the farmer said when Chicken Little told him the sky was falling- "Holy shit,it's a talking chicken!"

A VERY MERRY AND BLESSED CHRISTMAS TO ALL

Gerry Atric

Posted by: atric | 2007-12-21 10:07:41 AM


Pattern, don't be silly. Rommel was a brilliant leader. Of course he would read his book. Do you think Patton bothered to read a leftoid version of tank combat?

It is too funny to even contemplate what the rules of engagement would be in a leftoid war! Oh wait, our troops would receive "sensitivity training" prior to shooting some terrorist fanatic. Omigod!

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2007-12-21 10:09:29 AM


First, Patton never read Rommel's book until after he beat him in North Africa. The US Army published Rommel's "Infantry Attacks" in 1943, with a foreward by Patton himself - I have a copy!

Second, Rommel lost - how can he be any good? Patton, on the other hand, was a genius. He kicked serious Nazi ass and the world is better for it. The only other Western Allied general equal to Patton was Slim, who did the same to the Japanese in Burma.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-12-21 10:15:24 AM


Epislon: the troops have a special use for any leftoid rules of engagement: toilet paper.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-12-21 10:16:19 AM


Among the biggest fakes of our time we will be listing Gore and Suzuki near the top.
They and their fellow opportunists in the Global Warming Swindle Cabal, composed of Lefty Doomsday Charlatans are making a living on junk science, it's a freaking industry.

To quote the old Ivory ad, they're spewing 99 and 44 one hundred percent pure crap and polluting the world to do it.

Thousands flying off to Bali to talk about warming made sense because they're so damned brain dead they wouldn't be able to grasp the concept from the snowy winter weather in the Northern climates.

Posted by: Liz J | 2007-12-21 11:11:27 AM


All we're doing is putting the CO2 back into the atmosphere where it belongs. The dinosaurs and tropical plants trapped it all up, and stored it underground for us. That was something we had to remedy. Does anyone really believe things can stay the same forever?

It would be better for mankind to warm things up while we can still afford to adapt to it. We still have plenty of cheap fuel to run the equipment we'll need to build nuclear reactors, windmills, and solar reactors. Yes folks, we can't build this stuff with goodwill. Once we've priced energy out of reach for third world countries, they are less likely to develop any alternate energy technology.

Gore Inc. wants nothing more than to have their investments become the only technology out there. Even the lefties understand supply and demand.

Posted by: dp | 2007-12-21 11:21:57 AM


We can convert to a renewable energy economy if we want to. But the reason to convert will be driven by economics not environomics. The day is coming where it will be just cheaper to use renewable fuels to augment fossil fuels and in many circumstances, that point has already been reached.

As fossil fuels decline and increase in price and demand for energy grows, this rate of renewable versus fossil substitution will continue.

This may take a hundred years or more but so what. We have hundreds of years to make this change based on these economic drivers. Unlike the envirowhackers who say if you do not start turning off your car in a Tim Horton's lineup today then we are all going to die.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 2007-12-21 11:34:55 AM


epsi-

Absolutely correct. We have time. Nothing ever gets done right when you hurry. Trying to scare us into the Kyoto trap almost worked, but enough people stood still to quiet the herd.

Anyone who's worked near a construction site can relate to how efficient construction equipment has become. For under $200 an hour, a D8 Caterpillar can move mountains of dirt in a day. They only burn around 20 liters of fuel an hour. When you see work starting on a new commercial building, or a subdivision, it's unbelievable how fast it gets finished.

Now picture the same project with electric equipment. Not pretty is it? Southern Alberta has become literally covered with windmills over the past couple of years. So has Saskatchewan. These things cost a couple of million dollars each, and haven't made a dent in the demand for fossil fuels. Our future is oil, then coal, then nuclear, then poverty, in that order. Lets hope it takes 1000 years.

Posted by: dp | 2007-12-21 11:50:09 AM


The person who would have discovered an alternative energy source was aborted some time since the 1960's.

As was the one who would have discovered a cure for cancer and AIDS.

Posted by: obc | 2007-12-21 2:28:20 PM


D'ya think a woman who could abort a fetus is the type who could have created the type of nurturing environment that would produce that kind of individual to discover anything? I wonder.

Posted by: dp | 2007-12-21 2:34:23 PM


dp ~

Many children in this world excel DESPITE their parents.

And many of these children could have been placed for adoption. There is NO SHORTAGE of willing adopted parents, as witness the thousands that adopt from China, Romania, Russia, Guatemala, Mexico, etc.

Posted by: obc | 2007-12-21 2:38:11 PM


That's true obc. I thought of that after I posted. A lot of exceptional people did come from difficult beginnings.

Posted by: dp | 2007-12-21 2:42:03 PM


dp ~

Your last post proves you're a good person.

Can you imagine any of our trolls responding in this manner? Neither can I.

Posted by: obc | 2007-12-21 2:44:23 PM


Anybody here use Google Earth? There's a new feature I just noticed called the "Atlas of our Changing Environment". It's a layer that has flags on a bunch of locations that have been targeted by the United Nations, no less.

The first one I noticed was over Fort McMurray, but there are a half dozen more in Canada. When you click on it you get a little story that seems to be a short clip from a Nature of Things show, or something similar. There are also a few WWF (the Panda guys) flags over Northern Canada.

So now everybody gets to see how badly we're abusing the environment. Maybe Dick Cheney was right to keep his place off this website.

Posted by: dp | 2007-12-21 5:06:40 PM


After taking another look I found out that China is actually more environmentally responsible than Canada. According to Google Earth there are only a few environmental impact sites in China, and all of them are well intentioned projects that benefit Chinese society.

I wonder where their energy comes from? It surprises me that they don't have any large coal mining operations. I guess they really put some serious thought into their energy needs, and came up with an Earth pleasing solution.

Posted by: dp | 2007-12-21 5:17:23 PM


dp ~

You must be employing sarcasm. China has been opening a coal-fired energy plant at the rate of one every five days for two years now - and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

Posted by: obc | 2007-12-21 5:22:53 PM


Why do you suppose they're picking on us then?

There are plenty of problems in Fort McMurray alright. Not enough water, destruction of habitat, etc., etc. All these things are public knowledge, and there are people working on solutions.

You'd think that a country that was a pioneer in the environmental movement would get a little more respect.

Posted by: dp | 2007-12-21 5:35:14 PM


dp ~

. . . because Google is owned & operated by rich Leftoids who support Al Gore. China is innocent - the West is guilty.

That is the watermelon credo.

Posted by: obc | 2007-12-21 5:46:23 PM


"Fact check"

You should "Fact Check your own info! Only 52 actual scientists were involved in the IPPC report, and they were on government payrolls. In the 400 are some of the IPCC "Expert reviewers" who state that their input was dismissed because they pointed out errors, mis-interpretations, falsification of data and creating bizarre extrapolations of said data.

The whole IPCC "summary" report is full of inconsistencies, false information and downright lies. The scientific data they are using does not jive with the Summary at all. Most of the summary goes against the scientific information contained in the actual scientific review.

Posted by: cdn.infidel | 2007-12-21 6:50:20 PM



The comments to this entry are closed.