The Great Global Warming "hack"

[zeolite]

As I am a quiet night shift job for the moment I spent a few hours reading the blogs. Whewwww!

Firstly, understanding the data is fiendishly complicated. Even something as gathering temperature data is fraught with problems and the programmers scratchpad tells you the problems he has trying to prepare the data in a meaningful and accurate way. The various organisations have gathered data from different sources and different types and of course there are problems with accuracy inherent there never mind the issues of instrument calibration. Proxy sources as far as I can gather are inferred data sources rather than direct temperature measurements Tree rings seem to be a major bone of contention although I have no idea how or why.

Even with modern accurate data the devil is in the detail. I haven't seen the Gore movie but apparantly the "hockey stick" diagram is a central issue in it and it now seems to be recognised as b******s. mmmm

So the hottest year on record is 1998 is it? Well no it is 2005 say others but no again say NASA it is 1934. They can't even agree on when the data maxes. TBH that doesn't surprise me as natural data is never clear cut. Any scientist knows that data is what it is and trying to force it into boxes is bad science. it is journalists and politicians who want it laid out for easy reading. Damn the accuracy, give me sound-bites.

So the reasons why it wa hottests in 1998/2005 or even the last decade? Solar activity, El Nino or carbon dioxide accumulation? I have no idea and neither, it seems does anyone else. lots of argument and some seemingly well informed posters but as usual on the internet you can't believe everything so I can't make any conclusions.

Another thing that is evident is the polarisation of the issues. if you don't "believe" in global warming caused by man then you are a "denier". it has become black and white and I really don't like that at all. there has to be room for those who remain unconvinced. science is all about skepticism and disproving. Close scrutiny and questioning should be encouraged. In fact the debates actually remind me of evolution/creationism discussions with there religion/science, belief/logic tensions.

So in summary errrrrr f*** knows!

However I shouldn't really expect to get any meaningful insight into a subject as vast as this with some 2 hours of reading on the internet and neither should anyone else frankly. I may not be the most intelligent but I have a fair background in science and should be able to understand the issues. To have any real understanding I reckon an undergraduate degree at least before you have to take the word of others at some stage and even then there are some hints that any "negative" conclusions about man-made global warming is being marked down. If that is true then we are in a really bad way.

[4Hero]

This is getting ridiculous now, google starting to fiddle the figures for the word "climategate"? What the ****? Up until a few days ago, typing in the word "climategate" in their search, the dropdown (or let me guess what you are looking for) showed climategate as the first word when you typed in "climateg". Now, it doesn't show at all! The cheeky *******s.

It seems that Al Gore is a Senior Advisor to Google!!

Also, googles results for the word has dropped a few million, wierd

Back to our lovely BBC. I sent them an email to complain about their lack of coverage of this whole issue.

Email from me to them:

I've been waiting patiently since last Friday (20th November) for the BBC to start covering (without bias) the unearthing of the CRU emails? When exactly are the BBC going to admit that the whole Man Made Global Warming issue is now under scrutiny?

My opinion of you guys, being the best news/media provider there is, has changed over the last 6 days.

Extremely disappointed.

Neil

Their reply:

Dear Neil

Thanks for your e-mail.

I understand you believe that we haven't sufficiently reported on the unearthing of the CRU emails.

The choice of stories to report in our news programmes can be difficult as editorial staff always have more reports than can be fitted into the time available. Their choice has to be selective and no matter how carefully such decisions are made, they're always aware that some people may disagree with them.

I'd like to take a moment to assure you that your comments have been registered on our audience log. This is a daily report of audience feedback that's circulated to many BBC staff, including members of the BBC Executive Board, channel controllers and other senior managers. It's also published on our intranet site, so it's available for all staff to view. In addition to this, we regularly compile tailored audience feedback reports for specific programmes so they can have an overview of all contacts received about their series. If a report's compiled relating to this issue, then your comments will also appear here.

Thanks for taking the time to contact us with your concerns.

Regards

Rick Miles

BBC Complaints

The day I posted that email to them (and coming days), the stories were of very little importance, for example, "Fishermen say Man Made Global Warming is real because they saw a weird fish" (or words to that extent).

I give up, off to book my tickets to a desert island somewhere.

Goodbye

Edited November 30, 2009 by 4hero

[bmwhere?]

I give up, off to book my tickets to a desert island somewhere.

Make sure you find a desert island with a big enough hill to avoid the sea level rises

[4Hero]

Make sure you find a desert island with a big enough hill to avoid the sea level rises

A "little" update,

"Professor Phil Jones has today announced that he will stand aside as Director of the Climatic Research Unit until the completion of an independent Review resulting from allegations following the hacking and publication of emails from the Unit."

God bless the internet, who needs mainstream media

[4Hero]

Tomorrow's Daily Express

^ only two weeks behind, but at least it's being talked about now!!

[soundie]

front page too, should help kick things off..

is that the only paper covering the story?

[stum450n]

front page too, should help kick things off..

is that the only paper covering the story?

The guardian have been covering it for a week or two - not a huge amount in there though.

Not see today's yet but will look later. Guess it'll be covered - even the bbc are back on the subject now: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/8389727.stm

[stinger]

I thought I would add a few thoughts of my own to the debate. Having a degree in climatology perhaps gives me an insight into the way these things are researched and put together but being a couple of decades old gives me no more factual information than anyone else.

25 years ago the real buzzwords were acid rain, deforestation and ecology. I remember reading research paper after research paper on the great sulfurous clouds that were going to envelope the world and kill every living thing if action wasn't taken on pollution.

In the general populace/government it has ever been thus... the perceived wisdom is right and anybody who dares question it is a fool. If not actually worse, the current blanket coverage of climate change has more than a hint of appointing "witch finder generals" about it. Any self respecting scientist will have more than a healthy scepticism about this. If you even accept that collected data is consistent, accurate and comparable, it is of such a small quantity in the wider scheme of things that it cannot be statistically significant.

Finally I know full well that any weather forecaster will tell you that meteorology and climatology are two different things but ....... computer models that cannot tell you precise weather more than half a day ahead and other computer models predicting the cause of the end of the world and when it is liable to happen ......... it does not compute!

[thewelsho]

My book Heaven and Earth by Professor Ian Plimer arrived today! Only read about 6 pages. So far it's very readable and some very interesting information. The IPCC have a LOT to answer for!

Great front page newspaper report posted above... The consensus among commentators is that AGW is on its way out, I really hope so!

[scoobnoob]

To 'TheWelsho'

Just before you go on reading that book and accepting everything he says as fact, you should read the following

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/04/th...ing_from_ia.php

[thewelsho]

To 'TheWelsho'

Just before you go on reading that book and accepting everything he says as fact, you should read the following

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/04/th...ing_from_ia.php

Well, much of the I'm reading in his book at the moment, is brain damage. Chapter 1, Introduction, was pretty good and would have been sufficient for my purpose. Much of the material that he mentions, I have heard from other sources, so it cements some of the things I have already read. The next chapter on History is murder. He gives a very detailed and complex account of historical climate-change from millions of years ago to present times. However, how can anyone, who wasn't there all those millions of years ago (I'm not convinced we have been here that long anyway) possibly recount these changes with such accuracy? Reading it, is like wading through porridge, but the gist of the chapter is worthwhile. Anyway, I'll pursue it for another bit longer...

[4Hero]

It's all going a bit pear-shaped this week. The BBC are "reporting" the story, albeit in an biased way (as per usual). Newsnight was interesting last night, I wanted to watch it again so popped over to iPlayer later on (only to discover that the version there had been edited!). They really are a bunch of cheeky barstewards, who do they think they are? Do they not realise it's us that pay to keep them going? The original newsnight is on youtube though, worth a look Part 1 and Part 2.

• Gordon Brown said: "climate-change sceptics are 'flat-earthers' People who doubt that human activity contributes to global warming are “flat-earthers” and “anti-science”. The w***er.
  
• Al Gore has pulled out of Copenhagen
  
• News is all over the worlds press about the emails, and the shambles that is "Global Warming"
  
• Yet still, we are being suppressed by the UK's tv and newspapers
  

Wake up people, pay f**king attention, we are being screwed here. If the Copenhagen treaty is signed, we truly are fecked.

Edited December 6, 2009 by 4hero

[StrikE]

It's all horse poo, you think about the amount of gas passed over the Christmas period caused by brussels sprouts! All that methane must have a large effect on the ozone hole above the artic, i tell you it affected my hole this morning after eating that plate full last night

When i was a kid at this time of year we were up to our horlicks in snow so keep up the global warming, it's saving a fortune in money as no gritters & snow ploughs are on the roads 24/7

And i didnt even read this thread either ............whats it about lol

[RA Dunk]

whats it about lol

Money

[scoobnoob]

'we are being screwed here. If the Copenhagen treaty is signed, we truly are fecked'

Explain to me exactly, in what way will I be 'fecked' ?

[4Hero]

'we are being screwed here. If the Copenhagen treaty is signed, we truly are fecked'

Explain to me exactly, in what way will I be 'fecked' ?

Basically (the way I see it),

A new "world government" will be created to manage the "co2 trading process"

We are more polluting than underdeveloped countries, and will trade (or give them money) to use their co2 quota (or part of). Who'll pay for this I wonder?

Companies are going to be taxed to the hilt for the emissions they pump out, which will have a knock on effect to our pockets. Do you think these companies may just pop out of the UK and move into some "greener", less wealthy countries?

I'm no scientist, but after reading up on the whole shambles that is "Man made global warming", I'm pretty worried about this.

If the whole global warming is made up (as it seems to be) then why should we put up with this?

Edited December 7, 2009 by 4hero

[billyboy]

The latest thing to contribute to global warming is christmas puddings.I heard this on the bbc radio2 news last week.I nearly crashed my car laughing.

Whatever next??

[thewelsho]

The latest thing to contribute to global warming is christmas puddings.I heard this on the bbc radio2 news last week.I nearly crashed my car laughing.

Whatever next??

Also heard on Radio 5 Live some commentaror (woman) stating that reproduction (having kids) is enviromentally irresponsible. On the same station (going back a bit) was another stupid cow going on about how we should use only ONE sheet of lavvy role per visit. No wonder Neil is getting frustrated and worried. Why are these people even allowed to breathe let alone be allowed onto a reputable mainstream news station in order to promote this tripe! As per usual, the thick-as-s**** British public support all this PC crap by turning up to mass demonstrations demanding that world-powers do something about it at Copenhagen. If they actually put together their individual brain cell the might actually see that they are the ones who will have to pay the price and are thus, metaphorically, being screwed over a barrell. Makes me very angry indeed!

[thewelsho]

[*]Gordon Brown said: "climate-change sceptics are 'flat-earthers' People who doubt that human activity contributes to global warming are “flat-earthers” and “anti-science”. The w***er.

Precisely. You'd think that he'd come up with is own assessment of the dissesnters instead of recycling the tacky insults from the AGW camp.

Doesn't he realise, that among the voices of the dissenters, are people who are as highly, if not, more highly qualified that those who profess AGW? What an absolute tw@t tw@at and double tw@t.

Strange thing: Bearing in mind, we have fools speaking through the (even more foolish) media, telling us that we should be using only one sheet of lavvy roll etc., YET, no one, not a single one, has spoken out against the increasingly popular use of Christmas lights. With every passing year, we get more and more like the States, where people completely cover their homes in lights. Take that, agasint the backdrop of the banning of standard light bulbs becasue they use too much energy, and you wouldn't be surprised if the death penatly were re-introduced for such a henious crime! Do you think, that such goes unmentioned becasue the backlash from the public would be so great as to threaten the AGW religion?

[thefastone]

Chist, I know that the Beeb are biased over the matter, but it would have been nice to actually let the other side speak... you could see the american guy was trying to put his point accross, was clearly getting interupted every 2 seconds, and then when he tried to finish what he was saying, he was being told let the other guy (Who spoke at length) speak...

And the thing that really got me there, is that they he said that people couldn't attack the science, even though thats what's being attacked, and that he said that he cant speak for the IPCC yet he said definitly, that under no circumstances did they do anything wrong, and the science is sound, so em, he IS speaking for them...?

Absolutly agree with you there John!

[thefastone]

Strange thing: Bearing in mind, we have fools speaking through the (even more foolish) media, telling us that we should be using only one sheet of lavvy roll etc., YET, no one, not a single one, has spoken out against the increasingly popular use of Christmas lights.

Yeeeesssss!!!!! Ban Christmas!!!!!

Its gotten very overly commertial now anyway, its not about joy and goodwill anymore anyway, only money...

[weedman]

HUMANITY SAVED BY GLOBAL WARMING - SHOCK HORROR!!!

Anyone see "Man on earth" last night? Apparently a global temperature rise of 5 degrees C in 100 years saved Homo Sapiens from extinction.

OK, so it was around 150,000 years ago, but still...

Be grateful for climate change.

[thewelsho]

HUMANITY SAVED BY GLOBAL WARMING - SHOCK HORROR!!!

Anyone see "Man on earth" last night? Apparently a global temperature rise of 5 degrees C in 100 years saved Homo Sapiens from extinction.

OK, so it was around 150,000 years ago, but still...

Be grateful for climate change.

Ian Plimer in his book, Heaven and Earth, goes to great lengths to show that humans actually prosper in periods of global warming.

The latest thing being touted by Radio 5 Live: short haul flights are to become a thing of the past because of CO2 Emissions. In future trips to the south of France etc. will be managed by fast speed rail links (dream on). Fast link or otherwise, a trip on the train is a journey back to the Dark Ages.

[bmwhere?]

The latest thing being touted by Radio 5 Live: short haul flights are to become a thing of the past because of CO2 Emissions. In future trips to the south of France etc. will be managed by fast speed rail links (dream on). Fast link or otherwise, a trip on the train is a journey back to the Dark Ages.

Why take a train or plane when you can drive there

[cullenmin]

GMTV weather bitch was feeding the public drivvel this morning too.

"The Noughties are warmest in decades, global warming appears to be real" then she says how its about to get cold over the next few days HA

The way I see it is were still getting frosty in the morning, and our summers are crap so wheres the warming???

Edited December 8, 2009 by Cullenmin