Scientists Call AP Report on Global Warming 'Hysteria'

Scientists Call AP Report on Global Warming 'Hysteria’
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,468084,00.html

Part of the story

The mean global temperature, at least as measured by satellite, is now the same as it was in the year 1980. In the last couple of years sea level has stopped rising. Hurricane and cyclone activity in the northern hemisphere is at a 24-year low and sea ice globally is also the same as it was in 1980."

I’ve been saying this for years-Stan.

Due to the extremism of many of the MMGW advocates, it is getting to the point where climate change should be moved to a certain Sub-Forum here. :cool:

Careful, if you do not agree with global warming as a professor or someone within the media you will find yourself blacklisted. Al Gore said it, we must accept it. Period!

Well it must be true then.:stuck_out_tongue:

BTW it’s AlGore not Al Gore.:smiley:

The mean global temperature, at least as measured by satellite, is now the same as it was in the year 1980.

The actual measured temperature, as in “atmospheric temperature at ground level”, is sharply up since 1980.
data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts.txt

I’d be interested in looking at your data, and the source for it.

In the last couple of years sea level has stopped rising.

http://i37.tinypic.com/hteidv.jpg
bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2008/12/sea-level-data-global-and-indian.html

Notice the rate of rise continues upward, albeit more slowly than in the last decade.

Hurricane and cyclone activity in the northern hemisphere is at a 24-year low

But, (as the warming model predicts) there is a sharp increase in the number of severe hurricanes. The model does not predict more hurricanes, just more severe ones.

and sea ice globally is also the same as it was in 1980."

In 1980, there was sea ice at the North Pole even in summer. Now, it’s gone in summer. How do you figure that’s the “same?”

Maybe, you’d be smart to get your facts from the source, instead of the stories they’re telling you.

I guess I’m supposed to be impressed you posted a chart—NOT.

I didn’t know the University of Colorado at Boulder is the global warming experts of the world.

No I’m not going to be an AlGore sheep and believe everything these so-called experts say.

I remember in the 1970’s they were saying we’re going to be in an ice age by the year 2000.

Globe Warming = Follow The Money.

Hmm…so would Al Gore consider this “an inconvenient truth”?

Now that’s funny.:smiley:

I can’t take credit for this some other guy posted this on another board I hangout but this is the truth:

Create an artificial crisis. Scare the sheeple into panic. Propose an expensive solution without regard to the unintended consequences. Pass a cap and trade law that says all people have the right to pollute “x” amount. Allow some to sell their unused pollution “rights.” Rake in billions of dollars by trading in carbon credits. Gain untold power by controlling all types of activities in the name of protecting the environment from harmful global warming.
What a crock! Take away the ability to sell carbon credits and the whole global warming scare will go away. It is junk science.

I guess I’m supposed to be impressed you posted a chart—NOT.

Deniers regard data the way a vampire regards a crucifix.

I remember in the 1970’s they were saying we’re going to be in an ice age by the year 2000.

Old memories are not always accurate:

**The supposed “global cooling” consensus among scientists in the 1970s — frequently offered by global-warming skeptics as proof that climatologists can’t make up their minds — is a myth, according to a survey of the scientific literature of the era.

Study Debunks ‘Global Cooling’ Concern of 70s
The '70s was an unusually cold decade. Newsweek, Time, The New York Times and National Geographic published articles at the time speculating on the causes of the unusual cold and about the possibility of a new ice age.

But Thomas Peterson of the National Climatic Data Center surveyed dozens of peer-reviewed scientific articles from 1965 to 1979 and found that only seven supported global cooling, while 44 predicted warming. Peterson says 20 others were neutral in their assessments of climate trends.**
usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2008-02-20-global-cooling_N.htm

I was in university at the time, and there was no consensus for cooling. Indeed, most people were talking about a long-term warming trend, even then.

The difference being that vampires are imaginary characters and those of us who doubt Man Made Global Warming are QUITE REAL and have the basis of our doubts rooted FIRMLY in science.

Here’s the old memories…just as today, back in the 70s it was the media creating the hype…

FOLLOW THE MONEY. IF PUBLIC funds dried up for trying to prove MMGW and it was left to pure science, most of this nonsense would go away. In 30 years when the sea level is the same as today and the temps the same…wil AlGore apologize? Will you?

(Barbarian demonstrates that the “scientists touted global cooling in the 70s” story is false)

The difference being that vampires are imaginary characters and those of us who doubt Man Made Global Warming are QUITE REAL and have the basis of our doubts rooted FIRMLY in science.

I have noted that most of you aren’t scientists, and don’t have a very good grasp of the science involved. And that won’t get changed, even if you use the CAPS LOCK button.

Here’s the old memories…just as today, back in the 70s it was the media creating the hype…

As you learned, scientists were even then, worrying about the warming trend.

FOLLOW THE MONEY. IF PUBLIC funds dried up for trying to prove MMGW and it was left to pure science, most of this nonsense would go away.

Caps lock, remember? In fact, as you learned, the scientists are the ones pointing out the evidence for global warming. The big money from lobbyists and industry groups was mobilized to somehow shut them up. Would you like to see the evidence for that?

In 30 years when the sea level is the same as today and the temps the same…wil AlGore apologize? Will you?

Since the average temperature continues to rise, that seems unlikely. If you plan to be around here for a while you could accept my five-year wager. In five years, the five-year mean will be higher than it is now. If it’s not, I’ll say I was wrong. If it is, will you admit you are wrong? Say yes, and I’ll write it down for then.

And Al Gore is just a politician, who may or may not be knowledgeable. Pretty much like you. Obsessing on him is probably not going to teach you anything about the subject.

there you go. follow the money like you said earlier.

(Barbarian demonstrates that the “scientists touted global cooling in the 70s” story is false)

Scientists did tout global warming…

Of course they did. Because even then, the evidence was sufficient to convince the great majority of them that warming was the concern. The consensus was that warming was coming.

there was no consensus

Consensus:
**1. majority of opinion: The consensus of the group was that they should meet twice a month.
2. general agreement or concord; harmony. **

Barbarian observes:
I have noted that most of you aren’t scientists, and don’t have a very good grasp of the science involved. And that won’t get changed, even if you use the CAPS LOCK button.

And you are a scientist?

Yes.

I’m not,

Guess how I knew.

but I am an educated man that understands SOMETHING about science, like the fact that it doesn’t work by “consensus”

That’s the only way it does work. There is no official “decider” in science, no authority other than the consensus of people working in the discipline. This probably seems chaotic and unorganized to you, but that’s how it works.

and that there is valid scientific dissent to the idea of man made global warming of such a nature as to say it’s still WIDE OPEN FOR DEBATE…and it wasn’t the “Caps Lock” it was the shift button held down.

Caps Lock still won’t make it the way you want. There is a lot of political dissent, but very few scientists doubt the facts now.

Barbarian observes:
As you learned, scientists were even then, worrying about the warming trend

Caps lock, remember? In fact, as you learned, the scientists are the ones pointing out the evidence for global warming. The big money from lobbyists and industry groups was mobilized to somehow shut them up. Would you like to see the evidence for that?

And there are scientists pointing out reasonable rational doubt to either global warming or a human cause behind it.

So far, no one’s been able to show us any. Most of the “doubt” comes from doctoring the data or presenting it as something it isn’t.

No, the big money in “climate change” research comes from GOVERNMENTS, not corporations.

But, as you learned earlier, most of the money involved was from lobbyists, trying to get the government to somehow suppress the research.

Barbarian observes:
Since the average temperature continues to rise, that seems unlikely. If you plan to be around here for a while you could accept my five-year wager. In five years, the five-year mean will be higher than it is now. If it’s not, I’ll say I was wrong. If it is, will you admit you are wrong? Say yes, and I’ll write it down for then.

(declines)

No surprise there.

The “average temperature” doesn’t continue to rise

The trend line is about +2 hundredths of a degree Celsiums per year, and has trended more sharply upward in the last two decades. Would you like to see the data again?

And Al Gore is just a politician, who may or may not be knowledgeable. Pretty much like you. Obsessing on him is probably not going to teach you anything about the subject.

Because he knows nothing about the subject

O.K. then, a lot like you.

I trust the opinion of scientists who are not anonymous over supposed scientists who post on a forum.

That said, there are differing opinions among scientists with regards to global warming. Everyone agrees that there is climate change, of course…on a daily basis. :wink:

As a non-scientist who is able to read and comprehend, I am not particularly swayed by the “scientists” who claim that we are causing “climate change” that will bring ruin to the earth. On the other hand, I do believe we should be good stewards of the planet by doing sensible things to minimize any impact we may have. Unfortunately, many of the “climate change” scientists and their buddies in the press and governments are advocating things that are not sensible.

I trust the opinion of scientists who are not anonymous over supposed scientists who post on a forum.

Glad to hear that. So the report by a (not-anonymous) scientist showing that the “scientists touted cooling” story was a myth convinces you. And the overwhelming consensus for warming by climatogists also convinces you, then.

That said, there are differing opinions among scientists with regards to global warming.

Last denier list had less then 3% of climatologists doubting it.

As a non-scientist who is able to read and comprehend, I am not particularly swayed by the “scientists” who claim that we are causing “climate change” that will bring ruin to the earth.

“Ruin to the Earth” might be a bit of a hysterical exaggeration of what climatologists have found. Some places might even benefit, although the United States won’t be one of those places.

It might be good to separate in your mind, the difference between the fact of human-induced warming, and the various things we might do about it.

Barbarian,
Despite your claim you’ve not impressed me as much of a “scientist.” I’m college educated, I know how science works and I know there is still a lot of debate out there as to global warming, if it’s really happening, and if it is, why…that you question this makes me question your claim to be a “scientist.” However, even if that claim is true, which I will concede in the name of charity, that doesn’t mean you have the last word in all this. Thirty years from now…let’s see what happens.

I always find it interesting when a self-described “scientist” tries to support his position by stating the percentage of scientists in favor of one view over another. First, the percentage is not weighted - some scientists are more knowledgable about the subject. Second, scientific truth is not based on consensus. Our scientific beliefs and world views are certainly based on majority opinions, but truth is not. To call scientists who disagree and have data to back up their assertions “deniers” is, well, unscientific.

Barbarian,
Despite your claim you’ve not impressed me as much of a “scientist.” I’m college educated, I know how science works and I know there is still a lot of debate out there as to global warming, if it’s really happening, and if it is, why…that you question this makes me question your claim to be a “scientist.”

As I said, your comments demonstrated that you don’t have a degree in science. It was particularly odd that you didn’t know consensus is the way science is done.

However, even if that claim is true, which I will concede in the name of charity, that doesn’t mean you have the last word in all this.

As usual, in science, the evidence does.

Thirty years from now…let’s see what happens.

As always. Notice, that thirty years ago, the consensus was that global warming was likely. And that’s been confirmed. But if you want, you could take my five-year wager. Are you interested?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.