"Global Warming: Scientists' Best Predictions May Be Wrong"

I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you. As if any sane person still believes AlGore's shlock dressed up as science.

Comments

[IslamoLlama]

"--
The conclusion, Dickens said, is that something other than carbon dioxide caused much of the heating during the PETM. "Some feedback loop or other processes that aren't accounted for in these models -- the same ones used by the IPCC for current best estimates of 21st Century warming -- caused a substantial portion of the warming that occurred during the PETM."
--"

High atmospheric carbon only accounts directly for 45% of the increased heating, according to a cherry picked study. With the rest suggestively linked to feedback.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#Feedback
So everything is fine. Feedback can't hurt us now. Drill baby drill.

That said, I do like how Al Gore has become the whipping boy for science academies stretching globe. The National Academy of Sciences, The International Journal of Climatology, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change... whateva! Al Gore did it!

But I'm sure when the feces do impact the rotary air propeller, everyone can just pray it away.
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/nov/14/nation/na-rain14

"-- "Oh father, we acknowledge our wastefulness," Perdue said. "But we're doing better. And I thought it was time to acknowledge that to the creator, the provider of water and land, and to tell him that we will do better."

Hundreds of Georgians -- ministers and lawmakers, landscapers and office workers -- gathered in downtown Atlanta for the prayer vigil. Some held bibles and crucifixes. Many swayed and linked arms as a choir sang "What a Mighty God We Serve" and "Amazing Grace." --"

I'm sure that'll work.

In 50 years, we're going to look back at the Global Warming Denialists with the same affection and fondness as the Tobacco Companies that went down insisting that smoking didn't cause lung cancer.

[PA]

"In 50 years, we're going to look back at the Global Warming Denialists with the same affection and fondness as the Tobacco Companies that went down insisting that smoking didn't cause lung cancer."

So what is it caused those earlier warming trends again? You know, like the one just to the left of they hockey stick.

Dinosaur and Buffalo farts will only take you so far.

If your models can't predict the past accurately, why should we believe they can predict the future?

[dansyellowbelly]

So Dan Riehl has taken to personally deleting my posts and then replacing them with these vulgar ones basically calling me gay? What a pathetic and cowardly maneuver.

And the irony of a 50 year old unmarried man calling anyone gay is amazing.

[Rich K]

That sound you here in the learned halls of congress and the IPCC is crickets chirping. I think we are all pretty much used to that sound by now but it is fun to actually read counter viewpoints made by actual research folk.
I see the trolls got here early.
Dan, I told you to set out milk and cookies for these guys so they keep coming back but I guess you proved thats not really necessary as you seem to be honey to the flies.

[Foobarista]

The irony is there's vast numbers of reasons for us to get past hydrocarbons as our main source of power generation that have nothing to do with AGW. But the same outfits that beat the gong for global warming fight hard against nuke plants, new power lines, changes to regs that let utilities use cleaner plants, etc. Even sea-based wind power is Evil if it interferes with Ted Kennedy's favorite sailing spots.

All they do is point to goofy studies that argue that because Cuba uses less oil than the US, it's somehow "happier". Maybe we should send them there.

[Ran]

Two problems with the "hockey stick curve."

First, it's a second-rate attempt at demonstrating an associative relationship. It doesn't prove causality in either direction.

Second, it's a first-rate fraud... the model's software is so wonkey, it matters not what data one uses. It always generates a second-rate hokey-stick association. Yeah, hokey-stick, as in cheesy-stick as in while you're looking at this "global warming" cr^p, would you like to buy a bridge?

Heh. I'd bet Cuba is happier only because pathetic, gloomy CNN doesn't have a license to operate on the island. Just saying.

[Troll Hunter]

Someone tell the llama that the LA Times and Wiki are not credible references. Not even at the undergrad level. H^ll, even my eighth-grade daughter can't use Wiki as a credible reference.

I think rather 50 years from now Gore and a few of his spawn will be released on good behavior. That Gore blatantly lied to Congress is becoming more and more obvious.

[Slide]

Riehl is a "confirmed bachelor" ? hmmmm... didn't know that. Interesting.

[mark l.]

"In 50 years, we're going to look back at the Global Warming Denialists with the same affection and fondness as the Tobacco Companies that went down insisting that smoking didn't cause lung cancer."

rather poorly chosen there...

the implication is that there are only a few people who don't believe global warming, making them out to be a regular John Birch Society.

aside from an increase in co2, without an equivalent response in global temperature, over the past 10 years, it is a nice theory.

bottom line?
global warming nuts are the john bircher's, not the other way around.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/issues2/articles/44_say_global_warming_due_to_planetary_trends_not_people

I love the hundred year predictions...
I'll make one that is even more accurate. We will run out of money and our entire govt will collapse waaay before we see the outcome of the hundred year doomsday. Thirty, forty years and america, as we know it, is dead.

[Bob]

What's funny is that no matter how much the wing nuts try to obfuscate and demagogue the climate change issue, they're losing on every front. Go ahead and give us another link to junkscience.com and some pompous diatribe where you pretend to know diddly about climatology. Your bickering is irrelevant. Waxman-Markey passed. Al Gore kicked your ass. LOL.

[mark l.]

it kinda works in the grand scheme of helping america hate democrats...
waxman-markey is just the type of legistlation I want the dems hanging on americans' necks.
I really hope it passes.

please bob, keep giving gore 'credit' for this one.

"Fifty-six percent (56%) of Americans say they are not willing to pay more in taxes and utility costs to generate cleaner energy and fight global warming.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, taken since the climate change bill was passed on Friday, finds that 21% of Americans are willing to pay $100 more per year for cleaner energy and to counter global warming. Only 14% are willing to pay more than that amount."

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/56_don_t_want_to_pay_more_to_fight_global_warming

what are you going to tell people when their bills go up?

this undercuts every promise obama made about NOT taxing people who make less than 250k.

this is a regressive tax and I wish you godspeed with it.

[North Dallas Thirty]

Who wants to be the one to explain the concept of the Senate to Bob?

[Bob]

Bicker away, wing nuts. You've made yourselves irrelevant. Please, can I have another know-it-all explanation of why the "hockey stick" is all wrong, just for old times sake? LOL.

[North Dallas Thirty]

To you, perhaps, Bob. But in your little world, facts are denied, science is ignored, and everything is subsumed to the worship of Barack Obama, so why should we care?

[ET]

For almost 10 years Al Gore has been a full time promoter of the junk science that is "global warming." In that time, here is a progress report:

-- Effectiveness of the kyoto protocols = negligible

-- Success in curbing carbon emissions = zero

-- Success convincing the world's biggest polluters to change their policies/behaviors = none

-- Increase in Al Gore's financial worth = $100 million +

-- Assets gathered by Gore's "green" investment firm = $2 billion

-- Mainline injections into Gore's ego = Nobel Prize

Keep snorting the koolaid, slide and bob. Al Gore doesn't care about you, the country, the planet or anything else...except Al Gore. Never has.

Why do liberals need heroes to worship? Some kind of inadequacy, I guess.

[Bob]

"Keep snorting the koolaid, slide and bob. Al Gore doesn't care about you, the country, the planet or anything else...except Al Gore. Never has."

Another useless piece of propaganda to be trampled over on the long path towards re-shaping the nation's energy policy. It must be so infuriating to see Gore winning on this issue after trying to bring him down for so many years.

[ET]

--It must be so infuriating to see Gore winning on this issue after trying to bring him down for so many years.

hahaha! Proves my point on the hero worship thing. Keep sucking Gore's tailpipe, bob...it's high test!

[mark l.]

bob-
if you are concerned with carbon emissions, then the area where you stop carbon emissions, on the planet, shouldn't matter.

it would be far easier and cheaper, and more productive, if we paid for the pollution control of china and india.

if you want to fight pollution, go after the real polluters. otherwise you are bailing a boat with a one gallon bucket, which takes on four gallons in the time it takes you to dump one gallon.

save the planet? please. you have no clue.

[Bob]

"if you want to fight pollution, go after the real polluters. otherwise you are bailing a boat with a one gallon bucket, which takes on four gallons in the time it takes you to dump one gallon."

You've got to start somewhere, mark. As usual, conservatives want to use the status quo as an excuse to do nothing. Just deny the problem and do nothing (except if it involves blowing up foreigners, then it's OK to do something). "Can we solve global warming by bombing Iran? No? Ok, never mind."

[Rich K]

Seems Maximum Bob had ODed on his Starbucks tonight.So in the spirit of helping the infirmed I Suggest we all give him a
'Job Well Done" dose of Prozac.

[ET]

--As usual, conservatives want to use the status quo as an excuse to do nothing.

Typical lefty strawman...if I am against fixing "everything," I am for "doing nothing." What are you, 14?

How is Al Gore's status quo doing? Is he doing EVERYTHING he can to reduce his carbon footprint? Or "doing nothing?" hmmnnn...Ask your friends after school.

Seriously, son, go to bed.

[jr565]

Hey Bob, if the dems are so much for reducing carbon footprints why are they so admant against using nuclear power. Funny, but France has been using it for ages now and they haven't had a Chernobyl as of yet. Perhaps you libs just doin't really care for the environment. This is evident for example whenever an actual program of an alternative sort is about to get off the ground and then we usually hear libs and environmentalists griping the loudest about how it will harm the environment.

And seriously Bob, you seem to think that the hockey stick hasn't been debunked. And you accuse conservatives of being anti science?

[xerocky]

"Bicker away, wing nuts. You've made yourselves irrelevant. Please, can I have another know-it-all explanation of why the "hockey stick" is all wrong, just for old times’ sake? LOL."

Who’s bickering? Some of us don't think that the subject is closed, and infact Al Gore et al. may in fact be wrong. Why are you afraid of debate?

And what makes your "science" so infallible, and everyone else’s so completely wrong that you won't even open your ears to debate?

And yes Waxman passed...the house.

The thing that I think if funny is that the D’s always accuse conservatives of “fear mongering”. Well, see 9/11 happened. Global warming is at best a theory, with many many possible explanations. Who knows chicken little, perhaps it’s not the end of the world? But PLANES WERE IN FACT CRASHED INTO THE WORLD TRADE CENTERS. That happened. I saw it with my own 2 eyes. Go ask your friends, they’ll tell you that it really happened too.

So who’s “fear mongering”?

[Bob]

"Hey Bob, if the dems are so much for reducing carbon footprints why are they so admant against using nuclear power."

I can't speak for all democrats, jr565, but I think it would be a good idea to revisit the question of nuclear power. One of the sticking points still seems to be the relatively high cost of building nuclear plants. I'm definitely no expert on the subject, but it may be as much of an economic issue as an environmental one. But I still think it's worth looking into. I'm still dubious that alternative energy like wind and solar is going to be enough to significantly offset our current carbon-based energy systems, and we probably need nuclear to have any hope of switching to a non-carbon energy economy.

[anony mouse]

Bob, You might want to mention that to Obama and nearly every other democrat who are espousing the exact opposite of what you're suggesting. Obama will "necessarily" cause energy prices to skyrocket as part of his plan. And yes, it is dubious that wind and solar are going to be enough to offset our current carbon based energy systems. But thanks to dems while we move ever so slowly to the alternatives we can be assured they will sock it to the middle class and make it difficult to conduct businesss ship goods and services, buy food etc etc etc etc etc. And the one energy source that is completely carbon neutral is the one (among others) they refuse to adopt.

[SacTownMan]

What is it about Bi-polar Bob that he resorts to several petty "neanner, neanner you're a weinner" posts followed by an almost rational discussion of nuclear energy?

Dude you need to up the meds! Lithium is supposed to be effective for your condition!

[Bob]

"But thanks to dems while we move ever so slowly to the alternatives we can be assured they will sock it to the middle class and make it difficult to conduct businesss ship goods and services, buy food etc etc etc etc etc. And the one energy source that is completely carbon neutral is the one (among others) they refuse to adopt."

The requisite predictions of doom from Republicans that we can't possibly take any action to address the problem at all without (a) opening ourselves up to nuclear attack from the terrorists, (b) becoming a communist dictatorship, or (c) ruining our economy forever. Just admit that (d) you don't really care, and (e) you don't have any ideas to solve any problems anyway, so all you can do is (f) complain about it. It's always the same story with the wing nuts anymore.

Because, SacTown, witless posts like yours are best dealt with through the "Neanner, neanner" approach. Trying to think of an intelligent reply to inane comments is a waste of time. What about you? Do you ever try to write intelligent comments or is it mostly just throwing your own poo?

[North Dallas Thirty]

"The requisite predictions of doom from Republicans that we can't possibly take any action to address the problem at all"

And again, the leftist Bob tries the strawman.

Want to know how we know you're being a lying hypocrite, Bob?

Because you aren't saying anything about this.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/05/07/kennedy_doesnt_play_by_the_rules/

Or this:

http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/06/24/transmission-politics-hold-up-utility-scale-solar/

Funny how leftists like you whine and scream about the need for renewable power, but then throw a fit and block it when it would ruin your view while sailing.

Or the classic: Obama whining and lecturing people about excess energy use, then jacking up the thermostat in the White House.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/29/obama-cranks-up-white-hou_n_162127.html

[SacTownMan]

"Trying to think of an intelligent reply to inane comments is a waste of time."

"Just admit that (d) you don't really care, and (e) you don't have any ideas to solve any problems anyway, so all you can do is (f) complain about it. It's always the same story with the wing nuts anymore."

I feel your pain Bro!!!

It's hard to have a battle of wits when your opponent is unarmed!!

[Bob]

"It's hard to have a battle of wits when your opponent is unarmed!!"

I appreciate your self-deprecating honesty. And I'm sure it takes a certain kind of guts to go into such a battle knowing that you're at a disadvantage. But then again, it might more likely be a case of "SacTownMan rushes in where wise men fear to tread." Anyway, keep on trying. It's not like anyone really cares, anyway.