This is not helping your cause...

Go back and check out the scandal that erupted when those "scientists" emails were hacked. They were passing info on how to alter and hide data that showed their work to be a charade. The problem is that every one of those scientists are in jobs or working with grants that would evaporate if man made global warming were disproved. The email scandal showed that they were passing tips and tricks back and forth on how to alter the data to get the results they needed.

 

The media and individual perception has succeeded in making the terms Republican, Democrat, Liberal, Conservative into terms that are more of a stereotype and less a valid description of what they stand for. I for one cannot find a place in either of these definitions or stereotypes so I am registered independent and even that is becoming a part of the stereotype as each side thinks this or that will easily manipulate and attract this group.....usually not but they try that. A stereotype connotes something negative about the opponent instead of just giving a description of the opposition. Don't mistake an independent as part of the Independent Party as I am not that either as frequently they are led by people not at all like myself. I value my second amendment rights, I value a lady's right to make her own decisions so there are many like me.....forced to join one stereotype or another to have a better voice. Some states allow independents to vote in primaries others don't which is a great drawback to being so oriented but I will remain as such rather then commit to a set of conflicting views for myself. Just a comment from the middle as you guys duke it out........ So, enjoy your freedoms to choose, one of our freedoms, often little appreciated.............but be respectful because without the opposition you become an autocratic party. They, may be all that stands between you and autocracy. I would like to see more parties in our system.

 

I didn't see that. I saw some excuses made but nothing that really debunked it. Do you have a link?

 

I read through hundreds of those emails. There was nothing to debunk. They said what they said.

 

I didn't read them but what I heard reported was rather disturbing. The initial damage control was not very credible either. Now if there was something after that that truly debunked the accusations I'd like to know. One problem with this issue is the extremes on both sides have claimed a lot more support than really exists. For instance those who believe that human produced CO2 is the main cause of global warming often report the majority and some times as much as 90% or more of climate scientist back their position. When I've researched it what I've found is that the majority (but unless the sample criteria are very carfully chosen no where hear 90%) believe that human activity has had some impact on global warming. Not quite the same thing. Now the other side has made similar claims so it pays on this issued to take a close look at what has actually been said and what the evidence is.

 

One of the interesting aspects of the CO2 question is that the official UN report is based on a study showing that volcanic action in the past increased CO2 levels, followed by a period of global warming. Since that report it has been shown time and time again, that the study was flawed (or they simply lied) and that the global warming period happened prior to the increase in CO2 levels. In other words, any ethical look at the data would have to conclude that these past global warming episodes were caused by activity on the sun, not by CO2. Yet, the report remains uncorrected and is still used as evidence...

Another thing that is consistently ignored is that "ice" caps of mars have been shrinking over the last 200 years. It's hard to blame that on human fossil fuel usage!

 

It's pretty simple stuff and quite understandable. They openly discuss manipulating data, hiding their raw data so that the manipulation can not be proved and ways to keep studies that threaten their conclusions from being peer reviewed. Much of this is discussed in terms of protecting their grants.

 

They don't? If they were manipulating data and preventing opposing research from being published then it can't help but damage their overall findings.

And other conspiracy theorist make all sorts of unwarrented claimes about the effects of CO2 and the support for them. Either way it's certainly not helpful.

 

Well if the data is all manipulated, and the hacked emails confirm that, then how can the findings not suffer? There's no doubt we've been in a warm period for a couple hundred years. The lie is that we've seen a dramatic rise in temps over the last 25 or 50 years. The increases and decreases of average temps happen over spans of hundreds of years and are caused by solar fluctuations. Within those longer spans we have warm years and cold years, droughts, floods, storms and everything else nature can throw at us. This is the way it has always been.

And again, should we see a great increase in temps we will again see something like the medieval optimum; another golden age where arid zones will see increased moisture, agriculture will spread north and so on. Nothing to fear...

 

Have you considered electric collars?

 

When I was a kid, the snow reached my butt. Now though, it's only up to my knee's....Why has the world changed soo much, soo fast?....( because was only 3 ft tall when a kid, and our lives are a blink on earths timeline ).....Folks use data collected relatively recently in order to judge earths weather history-future, without knowledge of Earth's real weather history of last 500 million years. Some folk won't even allow the Earth is as old as it is....How Old Is Grand Canyon? New Study Puts Age At 70 Million Years

 

Nice exchange of thoughts...Have learned plenty here. Smarter than 1 year ago. ...Know that data is extruded from those processes. And data can be turned upside down...Wonder if pole reversals had anything to do with climate change....How do we know about PR?...They say that by looking at old lava, they can see which way the ions were pointing at the time it solidified. They would have pointed to magnetic north, and compared to current samples- the poles have changed....What shall we do, and who should we tax in order to prevent the next Pole Reversal?....( take it easy on me, just tryin' to get a conversation going ).

 

Here's a ten thousand year graph based on data obtained from Greenland ice cores.

And after that, a comparison of arctic air temps vs solar activity over the last 230 years - note how closely the two lines match.