• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

'Climategate' probe mostly vindicates scientists

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
JSt0rm01 said:
You don't need any of that education stuff... you have your gut. You just know deep down that its all fake and that's all there is to it. I admire you in some ways.
Click to expand...

No that's not what I'm getting at all. I've seen the charts that go way back and all I see is great variations in our climate with tons of changes before humans existed and after we existed. I see scientists claiming one thing, but not only unwilling to give up the raw data the gathered to come up with their theory/projection/etc they've completely destroyed it. I see projections that leave millions of variables out or they hard code certain variables that should and do change. I see people who are pushing this "agenda" getting richer and richer every year while ignoring the words they preach. That's what I see. So I'm asking you too JSt0rm01, do the scientists who make these projections, ie Hansen, take into account every possible thing that can have an effect and every possible variation of that?


I'll make it easy for you, the answer is no.
 
Craig234 said:
I'd like to make a rule that when discussing climate change, "the temperature out my door right now" cannot be used as 'evidence' to try to say how real climate change is.
Click to expand...

Permission to create rule denied. We're constantly inundated with anecdotal proof of hot weather being caused by climate change - or as close to a A -> B proof as they dare to imply - so turnabout is fair play.

CTV.ca - Extreme heat wave example of climate change: expert

Canadians should expect more extreme weather like the current heat wave baking southern Ontario and Quebec in the future because of climate change, a leading climatology professor says.

"My strong opinion is that these kinds of extremes are something you would expect in a warming world, and expect to happen more frequently," Harry McCaughey, a professor of climatology at Queen's University, told CTV.ca.
Click to expand...

Atlanta Journal Constitution - The scorching heat is not just summer. It’s more evidence of global warming

No one who takes science seriously would suggest that a summer heat wave is evidence of global warming. But a trend, noted by scientists, is something everyone should take seriously, and this heat wave is part of a trend, according to Andrew Freeman, climate blogger for the WaPo.
Click to expand...

Heat Waves: More Frequent, More Deadly

The intense heat wave that is gripping the crowded metropolitan corridor and toppling records from Washington, DC to Boston, with temperatures hovering near or just above 100 degrees Fahrenheit during the first full week of July, is raising questions about whether events like this are likely to become more common and/or severe as the climate warms in response to greenhouse gas emissions.

The short answer: yes and yes, but with an important caveat. No individual extreme weather event — including this heat wave — can be caused by climate change. Rather, what climate change does is shift the odds in favor of certain events.
Click to expand...
 
JSt0rm01 said:
It must be a global conspiracy huh? 😀😀😀
Click to expand...

Nobody said anything about a global conspiracy... However, there are a lot of groups who saw in global warming a perfect opportunity to push their agenda under the guise of something else. That's how this issue moved away from a scientific discussion to a political one. I'm much more inclined to listen to science and logic than to political ideology, but it would appear that at least some of the 'evidence' presented by both sides is actually political ideology masquerading as science.

Regardless, assuming MMGW is a fact, I still don't buy into the mindset of "give the government your money and all will be well" mentality, and every proposed "solution" I've seen involves more power and more money to the government.
 
bfdd said:
No that's not what I'm getting at all. I've seen the charts that go way back and all I see is great variations in our climate with tons of changes before humans existed and after we existed. I see scientists claiming one thing, but not only unwilling to give up the raw data the gathered to come up with their theory/projection/etc they've completely destroyed it. I see projections that leave millions of variables out or they hard code certain variables that should and do change. I see people who are pushing this "agenda" getting richer and richer every year while ignoring the words they preach. That's what I see. So I'm asking you too JSt0rm01, do the scientists who make these projections, ie Hansen, take into account every possible thing that can have an effect and every possible variation of that?


I'll make it easy for you, the answer is no.
Click to expand...

oh really...millions of variables??? care to list even 1k of them?
 
LumbergTech said:
oh really...millions of variables??? care to list even 1k of them?
Click to expand...

Yes, I'd bet that there are indeed millions of variables that play into the earth's climate. Some of them are very small in influence, some of them large, but there is absolutely no way they're all accounted for in any model. The models have to ignore or make assumptions about many variables to make predictions, which is why to my knowledge not a single model thus far has been able to successfully predict temperature patterns over a 10 or 20 year span, let alone 50 or 100 years out.
 
oh really...millions of variables??? care to list even 1k of them?
Click to expand...
Millions is probably an understatement. We probably don't have a word for the number of variables that play a role in the Earth's weather and climate. Every single molecule of oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, neon, argon, etc. in the atmosphere, every centimeter separating us from the sun, every gram of mass on the moon, every person yawning, or talking, or bitching about a stupid conspiracy, every leaf, every twig, every dead or dying organism on the planet, every rock, every bacterium, everything.
 
Double Trouble said:
Yes, I'd bet that there are indeed millions of variables that play into the earth's climate. Some of them are very small in influence, some of them large, but there is absolutely no way they're all accounted for in any model. The models have to ignore or make assumptions about many variables to make predictions, which is why to my knowledge not a single model thus far has been able to successfully predict temperature patterns over a 10 or 20 year span, let alone 50 or 100 years out.
Click to expand...

I don't understand how people can think we can project 10 years of climate when no meteorologist would back a 30 day weather forecast. Don't give me this shit on "meteorology and climatology are different idiot!" because there's only a few differences like time span looked at and taking into account past weather measurements.
 
Mr. Pedantic said:
Millions is probably an understatement. We probably don't have a word for the number of variables that play a role in the Earth's weather and climate. Every single molecule of oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, neon, argon, etc. in the atmosphere, every centimeter separating us from the sun, every gram of mass on the moon, every person yawning, or talking, or bitching about a stupid conspiracy, every leaf, every twig, every dead or dying organism on the planet, every rock, every bacterium, everything.
Click to expand...

And this is my point. How can you say with certainty that something is happening because of ONE(or even a few things) when you aren't taking everything into consideration? Not to be cliche, but I find it hard to believe they account for a butterfly in Brasil flapping its wings and changing local climate in Texas.
 
My God!! All I hear in response to the OP's topic is " My mind is made up, the scientists lied (made snarky emails about MMGW detractors),made up Man Made Global Warming and nothing (inquest into the matter coming up different conclusions)will change my mind!
 
Last edited:
I didn't read this thread but I bet that all the idiots who were wound up by the e-mail revelations are no less wound up now on hearing they've been had. Fools don't much like having it shoved in their face.
 
PokerGuy said:
Dur, cut him some slack. Reading and writing are not top priority anymore at public schools, making the students feel good and increasing their self esteem through meaningless praise is.
Click to expand...

Those who live in profound ignorance due to a lack of emotional battery and the resulting self hate are first in line to condemn any attempt at a cure. They shit their pants at the fear of awakening those deeply repressed memories, but the price, is that they live lives that are without love and meaning. It's so sad when one is so blind to the truth as to be ones own worst enemy. You have built a deep prison for your soul, you poor poor sad man.
 
piasabird said:
When you are paying scientists to prove global warming, that is just what they will do.
Click to expand...

Precisely. They had a conclusion and just needed to find or doctor up some supporting material to go with the conclusion. Now we just need to hand over our wallet to the gorons and they'll fix it.
 
piasabird said:
When you are paying scientists to prove global warming, that is just what they will do.
Click to expand...

Don't forget that once they've doctored the records to prove global warming that they'll destroy all the raw data in order to "save space," thus preventing anyone from being able to disprove their ascertations.

I don't care whether there's global warming, global cooling, or both. I just don't want laws/regulations to be made and my tax dollars to go towards preventing it because it's "man made" (which I don't think there's enough evidence to prove).

Basically it should stay with science and not enter politics. Unfortunately I think it began with politics, which has been the problem all along.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top