Another Set-Back for the Global Warming Religion

[muman613]

It seems that the facts don't necessarily jive with the reports which predict massive upheaval due to temperature increases.

Once again a study shows that the computer model which is being used to 'predict' the increase in temperature does not fit with 'reality'. I suggest that the Global Warming conspiracy backers know what they are doing and are trying to use Global Warming as a means to force socialism and communism on the masses. I call it the Global Warming conspiracy because the entire 'science' is one big conspiracy against reason and logic.

Whenever a 'scientist' makes discoveries which don't jibe with the computer model they are lambasted and insulted. But there are many researchers who have stood up and proclaimed that the Global Warming conspiracy is just that, a made up threat being used to pummel free-markets and capitalism.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304636404577291352882984274.html

Global Warming Models Are Wrong Again
The observed response of the climate to more CO2 is not in good agreement with predictions.
By WILLIAM HAPPER

During a fundraiser in Atlanta earlier this month, President Obama is reported to have said: "It gets you a little nervous about what is happening to global temperatures. When it is 75 degrees in Chicago in the beginning of March, you start thinking. On the other hand, I really have enjoyed nice weather."

What is happening to global temperatures in reality? The answer is: almost nothing for more than 10 years. Monthly values of the global temperature anomaly of the lower atmosphere, compiled at the University of Alabama from NASA satellite data, can be found at the website http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/. The latest (February 2012) monthly global temperature anomaly for the lower atmosphere was minus 0.12 degrees Celsius, slightly less than the average since the satellite record of temperatures began in 1979.

The lack of any statistically significant warming for over a decade has made it more difficult for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and its supporters to demonize the atmospheric gas CO2 which is released when fossil fuels are burned. The burning of fossil fuels has been one reason for an increase of CO2 levels in the atmosphere to around 395 ppm (or parts per million), up from preindustrial levels of about 280 ppm.

CO2 is not a pollutant. Life on earth flourished for hundreds of millions of years at much higher CO2 levels than we see today. Increasing CO2 levels will be a net benefit because cultivated plants grow better and are more resistant to drought at higher CO2 levels, and because warming and other supposedly harmful effects of CO2 have been greatly exaggerated. Nations with affordable energy from fossil fuels are more prosperous and healthy than those without.

The direct warming due to doubling CO2 levels in the atmosphere can be calculated to cause a warming of about one degree Celsius. The IPCC computer models predict a much larger warming, three degrees Celsius or even more, because they assume changes in water vapor or clouds that supposedly amplify the direct warming from CO2. Many lines of observational evidence suggest that this "positive feedback" also has been greatly exaggerated.

There has indeed been some warming, perhaps about 0.8 degrees Celsius, since the end of the so-called Little Ice Age in the early 1800s. Some of that warming has probably come from increased amounts of CO2, but the timing of the warming—much of it before CO2 levels had increased appreciably—suggests that a substantial fraction of the warming is from natural causes that have nothing to do with mankind.

Frustrated by the lack of computer-predicted warming over the past decade, some IPCC supporters have been claiming that "extreme weather" has become more common because of more CO2. But there is no hard evidence this is true. After an unusually cold winter in 2011 (December 2010-February 2011) the winter of 2012 was unusually warm in the continental United States. But the winter of 2012 was bitter in Europe, Asia and Alaska.

Weather conditions similar to 2012 occurred in the winter of 1942, when the U.S. Midwest was unusually warm, and when the Wehrmacht encountered the formidable forces of "General Frost" in a Russian winter not unlike the one Russians just had.
.
.
.

[Meerkat]

Same thing they do with evolution which is designed to shove atheism down people's throats despite that there are always revisions in the official "science" when facts disprove the old assumptions.  Also the dissenters are purged--another commie tactic.

That's the whole point actually. You compile a theory consisting of what you know so far. As more evidence comes along, you modify the theory to match the new data.

[muman613]

That's the whole point actually. You compile a theory consisting of what you know so far. As more evidence comes along, you modify the theory to match the new data.

Several times these so-called scientists announce their theories which the world takes at face value, and then they are completely wrong. Ethically they should not make pronouncements as if they are truth. I was going to post about last week concerning the let-down that particles don't actually travel faster than light. For several weeks all the publications were announcing that Einstein was proven wrong because of these so-called faster than light particles... BUT when they tried to reproduce the experiment they realized that they had made incorrect measurements. OOPS... They look like fools to me...

So too with the Global Warming conspiracy. They announce as if it is fact, that warming is due to human causes, ignoring the fact that the climate record has periods of increase temperature and periods of decreases. So how can they suggest that man is responsible? It is irresponsible for them to make these pronouncements without clear evidence especially considering how this so-called 'science' is being used as a sledgehammer against American capitalism.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2401728,00.asp

Scientists Retest Faster-Than-Light Neutrino Claims, Find Otherwise
In what's hopefully the final page to the story that wouldn't die – at least, not until someone takes a cue from Star Trek and invents a warp drive – scientists have gone and performed a retest of last year's experiment that suggested some subatomic particles were travelling faster than the speed of light.

The result? Hold onto your hats: Einstein's special theory of relativity remains in effect. The measured neutrinos do not, in fact, cross the speed limit of 186,282 miles per second.

The crux of the entire controversy centered on results published by an international team of physicists last year. As part of an experiment dubbed OPERA, or Oscillation Project with Emulsion-Tracking

Apparatus, researchers found that neutrinos travelling 453 miles between Switzerland and Italy were reaching their destination 60 nanoseconds faster than the Einstein's speed limit should allow.

The scientific community had a minor freak-out at the thought and skeptics quickly hit the press to suggest that OPERA's measurements were somehow flawed. Nobody, after all, has ever seen a subatomic particle breach the speed of light – not in any experiment run since the dawn of time. Seems odd, then, that OPERA would suddenly be able to record a theory-shattering result seemingly out of thin air.

...

[muman613]

That's the whole point actually. You compile a theory consisting of what you know so far. As more evidence comes along, you modify the theory to match the new data.

Or, as the climate scientists have done, modify the data to fit the theory...

[Meerkat]

Several times these so-called scientists announce their theories which the world takes at face value, and then they are completely wrong. Ethically they should not make pronouncements as if they are truth. I was going to post about last week concerning the let-down that particles don't actually travel faster than light. For several weeks all the publications were announcing that Einstein was proven wrong because of these so-called faster than light particles... BUT when they tried to reproduce the experiment they realized that they had made incorrect measurements. OOPS... They look like fools to me...

That is trouble with the media. If you prove Einstein wrong, everyone will want yo hear about it, that story will be very profitable for the newspapers to push. If Einstein is proven right in the end, no one will give a crap because, well, hes Einstein. Science functioned properly when this happened, it's the media's interests that failed us.

So too with the Global Warming conspiracy. They announce as if it is fact, that warming is due to human causes, ignoring the fact that the climate record has periods of increase temperature and periods of decreases. So how can they suggest that man is responsible? It is irresponsible for them to make these pronouncements without clear evidence especially considering how this so-called 'science' is being used as a sledgehammer against American capitalism.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2401728,00.asp

That's only the most popular theory, there are alternatives though. One thing you must notice is that economics and natural science will not always fit together smoothly and there is nothing making them fit together smoothly. If all environmental regulations were repealed, we would see a burst in economic activity, but then all of America would look like Beijing, where living is the equivalent of smoking a pack of cigs a day. On the other hand, if you dump millions of really tough environmental regulations, you will knock out the economy.

[Dr. Dan]

Everything in science is revised due to new discoveries.  So what?  That doesn't make science bad.  It's the fault of people making science absolute truth.  The only thing that is absolute truth is Gd.  And He created science which we should never ignore if it happens to not go in tandem with the Bible as far as evolution is concerned.  The bible is not a science book.  It's a book on how to live morally.

[HiWarp]

Everything in science is revised due to new discoveries.  So what?  That doesn't make science bad.  It's the fault of people making science absolute truth.  The only thing that is absolute truth is Gd.  And He created science which we should never ignore if it happens to not go in tandem with the Bible as far as evolution is concerned.  The bible is not a science book.  It's a book on how to live morally.

That is correct. It's an integral part of the scientific method to constantly change scientific theories based on results of tests. Thinking that we know enough about science to definitively state something as fact and be closed to changing our opinion based on new information is arrogant. So announcing publicly that the results of an experiment seem to indicate that there are particles that travel faster than light isn't wrong. Jumping to the conclusion that Einstein was wrong and we need to rethink physics as we know it after one experiment is wrong. But it usually isn't the scientific community doing that but the media looking to sensationalize the story.

The problem with the global warming crowd was not that they announced there was some empirical data to suggest that the Earth's temperature was increasing. It was that they took the opportunity to definitively announce that they knew this for a fact, that it was being caused by human activity, and that we needed to pass legislation and change our lifestyles to prevent it from occurring. Another words, like the leftists do with so many other things, they tried to politicize science in order to implement their political agenda.

[briann]

The reason that global warming has stopped in the last 10 years is the impending Ice age.... no wait.... its the fact that clouds are LOWER in the atmosphere.... no wait... its because developing countries are producing more CO2 which act as shade... no wait...

[HiWarp]

The reason that global warming has stopped in the last 10 years is the impending Ice age.... no wait.... its the fact that clouds are LOWER in the atmosphere.... no wait... its because developing countries are producing more CO2 which act as shade... no wait...

...it's because the ice melted and the oceans cooled down... no wait... it's because of the banning of fluorocarbons in aerosol cans... no wait... it's because of a decrease in methane due to less cows farting... no wait...

[Dr. Dan]

...it's because the ice melted and the oceans cooled down... no wait... it's because of the banning of fluorocarbons in aerosol cans... no wait... it's because of a decrease in methane due to less cows farting... no wait...

No wait, our solar calander is inaccurate and autumn falls in winter and winter into spring and spring into summer.

[Rubystars]

Yet this what many scientists do in the areas of evolution and global warming in order to shove atheism and communism down people's throats.

I agree that both are used by leftists in very bad ways.

Global warming as a concept is being used to control people and advance a communist agenda, and there is evidence that it is either very much overstated or that it's not caused by human activity to the degree the leftists claim that it is.

Evolution, while I think that it is valid science, is also misused very much politically.

Atheists such as Dawkins use it to justify their atheism, and not only that, but to try to tell other people that atheism is the only right way, when it is not.  One shouldn't logically lead to the other, but they go around pretending that it does and then try to make anyone who believes in G-d feel stupid or uneducated.

If that wasn't bad enough, evolution is also used as an excuse to morally equate humans and animals. Again, this should not be a direct logical conclusion, but people misuse it in this way.

One of the pro-abortion arguments I've heard is that a human fetus may have the same or less awareness as an animal like a cow, and we don't have qualms about slaughtering a cow for their meat, so abortion should be ok. To me this sounds like complete insanity and very demonic. Even if I didn't believe in G-d, I would think that humans MUST take top priority over animals morally, at all stages of development.

They are also using this same evil line of thought to justify killing disabled people or ill people through euthanasia programs or committing infanticide.

The science itself never justifies any of those demonic things but it is misused in an illogical attempt to justify those things by communists and atheists.