• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Climate change ?

Top scientists start to examine fiddled global warming figures

But only when the full picture is in will it be possible to see just how far the scare over global warming has been driven by manipulation of figures accepted as reliable by the politicians who shape our energy policy, and much else besides. If the panel’s findings eventually confirm what we have seen so far, this really will be the “smoking gun”, in a scandal the scale and significance of which for all of us can scarcely be exaggerated.
 
The 'Top Scientists' in the story above are hand picked by The Global Warming Policy Foundation.

Which is a London based Think Tank' headed by the following people (according to its own website (http://www.thegwpf.org/who-we-are/board-of-trustees/)
The Global Warming Policy Forum Team

Board Members

Lord Lawson (Chairman)
Edward Atkin CBE
Neil Record

Director
Dr Benny Peiser

Science Editor
Dr David Whitehouse

Senior Researcher
Daniel Mahoney

-------------------------
The Chairman of the board Lord Lawson (aka Nigel Lawson, aka Nigela Lawson's Dad) has been know for a very sceptical position on climate change,

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/oct/21/lord-lawson-global-warming-errors?intcmp=239



Anyone interested about who funds the thinktank, may be interested in this piece from 2014
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/02/nigel-lawson-climate-sceptic-organisation-funders


One of their 'member of the scientific advisory council' is

Adrian Berry
From 1977 until 1996 Adrian Berry was science correspondent of the Daily Telegraph. On stepping down from that position after almost 20 years he was appointed the paper’s consulting editor (science).


And which newspaper is it that's leading the coverage? The Daily Telegraph.... hmm :rolleyes:
 
Things change, that's how it works. Things changed before humans ever existed. Things will change as long as humans do exist. And I'll let you in on a little secret. Things will continue change, long after humans no longer exist.
 
True. But large scale industrial activity can produce changes which wouldn't otherwise happen.

The problem is very simple: the laws of physics don't give a damn about your economic or political preferences. You may think that human societies should work a particular way, but if you ignore either the finiteness of physical resources or the finite ability of the environment you absorb your activities your theories, or the eloquence of your arguments, are of no relevance at all. Hence, as with tobacco and cancer, a lot of commercial interest is devoted to funding campaigns to obfuscate the data, and media who feel that "both sides must get a hearing" give the impression that there is actually a debate, whereas amongst actual scientists, rather than shills funded through fronts for vested interests, there is no debate at all. And I am not exaggerating: this is no more a matter of scientific debate than that smoking causes cancer. If anyone tells you otherwise, they are either ignorant or a liar.

The result: same as tobacco - delay in action, and a vast number of deaths but preserving profits for a few. Except that smoking only affects those who do it or those who spend time with others who do it, whereas climate change affects everybody but disproportionately affects those least responsible.

Sorry, I normally stay away from this place because it's somewhat against the normal spirit of AF, and as a former staff member I'm inclined to maintain a degree of neutrality. But I am a professional physicist, someone who understands science and understands this science, and who knows personally people who specialise in climate science, and I can assure you that the deniers/sceptics have no credibility amongst scientists, and the fact that the media present this as any type of controversy at all is entirely due to distortion of the facts by vested commercial interests and the sort of lunatics who will ignore facts and evidence if they are inconvenient for their political preferences.

I'm not joking: this stuff is serious, and if you want to pretend otherwise you are no different from a smoker who decides it's just fine to make their family breath their smoke. And the people who are telling you otherwise are exactly the same people who spent decades telling you that smoking doesn't affect health (literally: they use the same PR companies in many cases).

As I say, sorry: it's election night here in the UK, so I'm a bit more worked-up about these things than I usually am (and slightly drunk, as is not unusual on election night). But I have kids, and a conscience, and so cannot let this stuff pass unchallenged. So just this one time I'm going to pop up here and say that if you regard the future of the human race (and other species) as more important than some ideology you need to start taking this seriously, because ignoring it will have exactly the same consequence as stepping off a roof and ignoring gravity - it takes longer for the effects to become unmissable, but they will be equally unavoidable.

Seriously, this is not some debate about political philosophies. Politics and economics are choices you can make, but the universe does not care. The "laws" of economics are things you can choose (as a society, not an individual) not to obey. Even the most fundamental, such as "supply and demand", are not immutable - you don't have to charge more for a scarce commodity, it's just more profitable to do so, and the "law" assumes you will therefore do so. The laws of physics are different: they cannot be avoided or abated at all, no matter how eloquent your arguments, how fervent your beliefs, or how much effort you expend to impose your views.

The real chutzpah is from the people who claim that climate science is a politically-motivated conspiracy. Believe me, nobody wants to believe that the technologies which provide a simple route to a more comfortable lifestyle are a threat to us all, and that includes the scientists who study this. I know no climate scientist who would not be happy to be proven wrong, but like any sane person they cannot ignore reality. The only vested interest here is in denial.
 
Last edited:
http://m.spokesman.com/stories/2015/may/07/carbon-dioxide-levels-in-atmosphere-reach-2/

Seth Borenstein Associated Press
May 7, 2015
WASHINGTON – Global levels of carbon dioxide, the most prevalent heat-
trapping gas, have passed a daunting milestone, federal scientists report.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said that in March, the
global monthly average for carbon dioxide hit 400.83 parts per million. That is
the first month in modern records that the entire globe broke 400 ppm,
reaching levels that haven’t been seen in about 2 million years.
“It’s both disturbing and daunting,” said NOAA chief greenhouse gas scientist
Pieter Tans. “Daunting from the standpoint on how hard it is to slow
this down.”
He said it is disturbing because it is happening at a pace so fast that it seems
like an explosion compared to Earth’s slow-moving natural changes.
Carbon dioxide isn’t just higher, it is increasing at a record pace, 100 times
faster than natural rises in the past, Tans said.
Pushed by the burning of coal, oil and gas, global carbon dioxide is 18 percent
higher than it was in 1980, when NOAA first calculated a worldwide average. In
35 years, carbon dioxide levels rose 61 parts per million. In pre-human times, it
took about 6,000 years for carbon dioxide to rise about 80 parts per million,
Tans said.
Monthly levels fluctuate with the season, peaking in May and then decreasing
as plants absorb carbon dioxide. But they are increasing on a year-to-
year basis.
Levels are also higher in the Northern Hemisphere because that’s where carbon
dioxide is being spewed by power plants and vehicles, Tans said.
The first time levels passed the 400 ppm milestone was for just a few weeks in
the Arctic in 2012. Last year the monthly Northern Hemisphere average
measured in Hawaii exceeded 400 and now the global average has as well, said
James Butler, head of NOAA’s global monitoring division.
Fast facts
• Pushed by the burning of coal, oil and gas, global carbon dioxide levels aren’t
just higher, they are increasing at a record pace – 100 times faster than natural
rises in the past.
• Monthly levels fluctuate with the season, peaking in May and then decreasing
as plants absorb carbon dioxide. But they are increasing on a year-to-
year basis.
Click to expand...
 
Omg politics...and fukushima's still leaking and we hear nothing about it...I just came here to take a look...
 
California is going through a major drought

Texas has had mild summers the last couple of years.. fewer days above 100degrees.. NONE this summer yet.
and this year .. major rains and floods. most lakes are at full or above water levels.
 
 
No, We Aren’t Heading Into a "Mini Ice Age"
http://io9.com/no-we-aren-t-heading-into-a-mini-ice-age-1717779657

But the real issue is just how strong this influence is compared to other factors. The total solar irradiance, a measure of the power produced by the sun in the form of electromagnetic radiation, varies by only about 0.1% over the course of the 11-year solar cycle. Climate scientists have understood this effect for some time and it is already built into the computer models that are used to try and forecast our climate
Click to expand...

Jim Wild is Professor of Space Physics at Lancaster University.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
 
Gosh, if even Google believes it...

Google thinks Los Angeles is underwater

A glitch, or climate change commentary?

Twitter users here and there who have picked up on the weirdness think Google could be making a statement on climate change, indicating sea level changes and the swallowing of the California coast.​
 

Update, September 12th, 2:15PM ET: A Google spokesperson says the incorrect map display was due to an error from one of the service's many mapping partners. It has since been fixed.
 
Now it might get ugly...

Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics

The science on global warming is settled, so settled that 20 climate scientists are asking President Barack Obama to prosecute people who disagree with them on the science behind man-made global warming.

Scientists from several universities and research centers even asked Obama to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to prosecute groups that “have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change.”​
 
jefboyardee said:
Now it might get ugly...

Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics

The science on global warming is settled, so settled that 20 climate scientists are asking President Barack Obama to prosecute people who disagree with them on the science behind man-made global warming.

Scientists from several universities and research centers even asked Obama to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to prosecute groups that “have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change.”​
Click to expand...

I for one.. believe that there is a growing trend towards warming.. and there is a lot of evidence that man is one of the leading cause.

we need to be actively careful of it...

and there are those that also know it.. and because of greed / power / money...
they are trying their best to confuse the general public to stay blind to it.
for their own self gains.

like smoking... the gov needs to step in.. and inform the public!!!!
and punish/fine/imprison those that are blocking public health.
 
there is a group.. that believe that the moon landings are all faked....
... aliens are living on earth
... elvis is alive and well and dating Marilyn
... oil will last for ever
... tin foil hats help protect you
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom