Major scandal; Now proven that the entire global warming threat is based on fabricated data

[vz71]

Originally Posted by CJFrancis

The difference between the scientists who are studying climate change and those who deny climate change is that the scientists are doing measurements and collecting data. Those who deny climate change are not collecting any data.

Quite true, those that are advocating mand-made global warming are collecting data.
They are also manipulating it, and distorting it, and outright lying about it.

Many that remain skeptical do so using the raw data that has been collected.
And an understanding of the manipulations, and a clear insight into the lies.

[vz71]

Originally Posted by StAnastasia

CJFrancis, I find that global warming deniers are frequently also evolution deniers. The Internet is their best forum, as here they can rant unencumbered by the work of actual evolutionary biologists or climate scientists.

StAnastasia

I've seen this before.
If Caught in lie or proven false or embarrassed or losing footing in sand of your own false data; then ad hominem attack.

Cute, but no longer effective. There is simply too much truth out there for that base tactic to have any real affect anymore.

[Don L]

Originally Posted by vz71

Actually, let's step back even more.
Prove this rise in sea level will happen as a result of anything man is doing.

They don't need proof. This is a religious site and they have their religion of AGW and seek to spread its gospel. It's sad that we have shifted our concerns from the salvation of souls to the "salvation of the planet." The joy in Hades over this change of the Church's mission to faux stewardship must be great.

Those empty churches of Europe are now ringing their bells 350 times to represent the max CO2 levels. The call of the bells to worship, but not God, just Ghia.

[fultonfish]

Originally Posted by CJFrancis

Ender said "One of the things this episode points out is the speed with which the global warming position is unraveling. Given that over 230 APS members have already signed the petition, the myth of scientific consensus will surely be one of the first dominoes to fall.

Ender"

It seems impressive that 230 members of the American Physical Society have signed a petition written in 2007, until you find out the Society has 46,000 members.

Here is the APS statement on climate change. I copied the second paragraph in here:
http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/07_1.cfm
"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now."

It appears that Ender is deliberately trying to mislead, or he is for some reason impressed that less than 1% of APS members are questioning the APS statement on climate change.

It seems impressive that Catholics for a Free Choice has three members until you find out that the Catholic Church has a billion members.

[Don L]

Originally Posted by fultonfish

It seems impressive that Catholics for a Free Choice has three members until you find out that the Catholic Church has a billion members.

It's just the silly game of assuming that larger numbers are synonymus with truth.
(Yet God brought his faith to the world with only 12 men)

The other silly game is to assume white lab coats make for fact. (They also kill living human embryos in Petrie dishes.)

Another is getting a celebrities to manipulate your purchases (go Tiger)

And I'll bet you thought deceit was just done with apples.

[Ender]

Originally Posted by CJFrancis

It seems impressive that 230 members of the American Physical Society have signed a petition written in 2007, until you find out the Society has 46,000 members.

It also seems impressive that an organization as prestigious as the APS would make such a firm statement about global warming, unless you realize that the statement was not written and endorsed by its 46,000 members but was independently composed by the executive board and proclaimed without input from the members themselves.

It appears that Ender is deliberately trying to mislead, or he is for some reason impressed that less than 1% of APS members are questioning the APS statement on climate change.

Yes, clearly I am working for an oil company. The statement by the APS board that "the evidence is incontrovertible" is scientific nonsense. Before climategate the arguments were that the warming could not be attributed to increased CO2; now the argument is that warming itself cannot be shown. The only incontrovertible evidence here is the gross - and probably criminal - misbehavior at CRU. The petition itself is so reasonable it is hard to understand why any scientist would reject it: how can a theory be incontestable when the very data on which it is based is not only suspect but strongly believed to have been falsified? People have certainly been mislead here, but it hasn't been by me.

Ender

[4elise]

Originally Posted by StAnastasia

4elise, nice reflection. But the US will be impacted. An eighteen inch sea level rise would put two of the SF Bay Area's airports under water during storms, ramshackling the economy. Every major seaport would be faced with costly infrastructure changes; New Orleans might be very soggy again, Holland would have to pay enormous amounts to raise and shore up its dikes, and we could probably kiss most of Florida goodbye. Even Republicans should be worried about that last prosect!

StAnastasia

Of course you are right there will be impacts with rising coastlines in the US - and some might say they would welcome these losses thinking the entire thing is one big joke - but we do have the resources to mitigate many of these loses - whereas the poor do not...

[4elise]

Originally Posted by CJFrancis

See the following APS web-site for the official position of that organization, which is that global warming is occurring and that "We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now."
http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/07_1.cfm

Climate change deniers ignore the official position of the APS and instead want you to read an open letter that was written in 2007 and signed by some physicists. This is their evidence "proving" that global warming is not scientifically correct.

This example shows the low quality of the climate change deniers' arguments.

Your previous post I do think hit the nail on the head - if individuals are required to make changes they are reluctant to do so - many because, IMHO, they do not see or believe that the actions of ONE person can or does make any difference - when in fact it is the only thing we are personally responsible for - our own actions - what we are doing as individuals to make a change. So when something like these e-mails come to the fore they feel confirmed - 'see I don't need to do anything' I think it is very sad.

[4elise]

FROM THE VATICAN:

http://zenit.org/article-27758?l=english

ZE09120605 - 2009-12-06
Permalink: http://zenit.org/article-27758?l=english
Aide: Climate Change Talks Must Affect Our Lives

Spokesman Notes Ethical Implications of Copenhagen Conference

VATICAN CITY, DEC. 6, 2009 (Zenit.org).- The elements that have led to this week's U.N. climate change conference in Copenhagen must also be a call to lifestyle conversion, according to a Vatican spokesman.

On the most recent edition of Vatican Television's "Octava Dies," Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, director of the Vatican press office, analyzed the ethical implications of the Dec. 7-18 U.N. conference.

The priest proposed that "some time ago environmental and climate concerns seemed to many to be a luxury -- worries for the rich. The concerns of the poor, who had to survive and meet basic needs, were different."

But then, he said, "We understood that things were not quite that way.

"When there is drought or when there are environmental catastrophes, the poor are the first to suffer and die. Those who are in safer places or who have more resources for food or protection can better survive the worst environmental conditions."

Thus, the spokesman asserted, caring for the health of the planet is something that must be done for everyone, and first of all, for the poor.

"The planet is like an organism in which imbalances reflect on each other," Father Lombardi illustrated. "The alteration of the atmosphere's composition, the increase of sea levels, the reduction of unpolluted fresh water reserves, the change in precipitation and hurricanes, soil erosion and desertification, damage to agriculture and human health. … And all of this fundamentally largely depends on human behavior and decisions."

Our problem too

The Vatican spokesman observed that "the Copenhagen conference on climate will be considered a success or a failure according to the commitments that the governments will take on, above all those of the most powerful and largest countries. The 'magic' numbers on the reductions of harmful gas emissions and the funding to be procured will be pronounced."

"But," the Jesuit affirmed, "in the end everything will depend on the sum of each of our actions, [we] inhabitants of the earth, too used to thinking ourselves clever in shifting the responsibility on others."

Referencing Benedict XVI's "Caritas in Veritate," Father Lombardi proposed "new lifestyles" and noted that "the ecological system depends on a good relationship between man and nature but also on his relationship with other men."

"So," he concluded, "Copenhagen's problem is our problem too."


And I add

[4elise]

A wonderful resource for Catholics concerned about how the WORLD is impacted by climate change

http://www.caritas.org/activities/cl...balEthics.html

As a confederation of Catholic organisations representing both the richest and the poorest countries on Earth, Caritas Internationalis embodies the solidarity the world needs if it is to find sustainable solutions to the effects of climate change. .

[Callin]

Originally Posted by 4elise

Your previous post I do think hit the nail on the head - if individuals are required to make changes they are reluctant to do so - many because, IMHO, they do not see or believe that the actions of ONE person can or does make any difference - when in fact it is the only thing we are personally responsible for - our own actions - what we are doing as individuals to make a change. So when something like these e-mails come to the fore they feel confirmed - 'see I don't need to do anything' I think it is very sad.

Al Gore's house outputs 12 times the amount of CO2 of an average person. And did you see the news about how any limousines there were at Copenhagen, compared to the number of hybrids?

If even those who promote AGW so fiercely and claim it will doom the planet don't feel a need to change their lives, why should we be expected to do so?

Their actions do not match their words. Do as they say, but not as they do?

[StAnastasia]

Originally Posted by Don L

They don't need proof. This is a religious site and they have their religion of AGW and seek to spread its gospel. It's sad that we have shifted our concerns from the salvation of souls to the "salvation of the planet." The joy in Hades over this change of the Church's mission to faux stewardship must be great. Those empty churches of Europe are now ringing their bells 350 times to represent the max CO2 levels. The call of the bells to worship, but not God, just Ghia.

How can there be joy in Hades?

And what is "Ghia"?

[4elise]

Originally Posted by Callin

Al Gore's house outputs 12 times the amount of CO2 of an average person. And did you see the news about how any limousines there were at Copenhagen, compared to the number of hybrids?

If even those who promote AGW so fiercely and claim it will doom the planet don't feel a need to change their lives, why should we be expected to do so?

Their actions do not match their words. Do as they say, but not as they do?

But ours should. Our actions should match our faith!
So if we don't value their example - should that keep us from doing right in this or any other case? IMHO pointing to their errors is just another way to make an excuse not to make changes in our lives.

[StAnastasia]

Originally Posted by 4elise

Of course you are right there will be impacts with rising coastlines in the US - and some might say they would welcome these losses thinking the entire thing is one big joke - but we do have the resources to mitigate many of these loses - whereas the poor do not...

4elise, I'm not sure we do have the resources. With the peak in oil production in the next decade, by mid-century liquid fuels will be considerably more expensive for everyone. The human population will be much larger at the current rate of growth, and more people will be at risk in low-lying areas, like Bangladesh. 100 million Bangladeshis will have no place to migrate but into already heavily settled and agriculturally exploited portions of Southeast Asia.

I suspect that much will simply have to be abandoned, such as vast stretches around the SF Bay Area, Florida, Louisiana and the Gulf Coast, Southern California, Puget Sound, and the East Coast. It will be a safer bet to have property in the Inter-mountain West and the Midwest.

StAnastasia

[StAnastasia]

Originally Posted by 4elise

FROM THE VATICAN: VATICAN CITY, DEC. 6, 2009 (Zenit.org).- The elements that have led to this week's U.N. climate change conference in Copenhagen must also be a call to lifestyle conversion, according to a Vatican spokesman.:

Nice to see the Vatican directly involved at Copenhagen. Catholics need to take a leadership role in confronting AGW.