Weather Channel Founder: Sue Al Gore For Fraud

I’ve been saying this for years

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,337710,00.html

If anything, the hot air coming from Al Gore is causing global warming.

Can we make it a class action suit. We can sue him for his carbon credits :cool:

Carbon credits? those are worthless.

Sue him for his SUV’s and his private jets.
:thumbsup:

And book royalties

Global warming ended ten years ago:

theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23411799-7583,00.html

Six of the top ten hottest years for the Earth have occured since 2000. All of the top ten warmest years have been since 1990.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

If warming ended ten years ago, someone forgot to inform Mother Nature. (WFTH-I)

And they are finding out a lot of the data for the past 10 years was inaccurate to the high side due to faulty calibration/equipment.

Absolutely right.

Here’s the Web site with the details of this scientific scandal:

surfacestations.org/

And they are finding out a lot of the data for the past 10 years was inaccurate to the high side due to faulty calibration/equipment.

And, (of course) it was inaccurate earlier on the low side, due to “faulty calibration/equipment.”

And then, (of course) it slowly went out of calibration the other way, just in time to mimic an actual increase in temperature.

And it happened worldwide, at exactly the same time, in all nations reporting.

Ummm… I think the “all scientists are engaged in a conspiracy” story is more believeable.

But not by much.

I am suprised that myth is still around. NASA was forced to admit that their data was flawed. Here the revised list:

Top 10 GISS U.S. Temperature deviation (deg C) in New Order 8/7/2007

1934
1998
1921
2006
1931
1999
1953
1990
1838
1939

Threre is still another problem that makes modern statistics suspect. The area around measuring stations has become incresingly developed. Heres the graph of temperatures taken from a Detroit area station. Guess what year AC units were installed by the station:

http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/images/Detroit_lakes_GISSplot.jpg

Note that

Ah, you’re confusing US temperature with global averages. Including the whole world produces a more accurate number for global temperatures.

I’m finding it very hard to believe that all the weather stations, all over the world, put in air conditioning at the same time, and then gradually turned every unit up in perfect timing with the amount of atmospheric CO2. :eek:

Global temperatures show no warming since 1998.

Global temperatures show no warming since 1998.

Well, let’s take a look at the corrected NASA figures…

98 .71 .46
99 .46 .49
00 .42 .48
01 .57 .51
02 .69 .57
03 .67 .56
04 .60 .59
05 .76 .66
06 .65 .67
07 . 73 .69

First column is the year.
Second column is the change in degrees Celsius
Third column is the five-year moving average change in degrees Celsius.

As you can see, warming continues.

These numbers make no snese. There is no third clumn and they dont in any way prove what you said.

You need to look at the locations of the “world stations”.

A lot of station WERE formerly located in the Soviet Union. However, when the Soviet Union went bankrupt, those stations were abandoned.

So, you have a lot of older data that shows cold temps. And after those stations were discontinued, the remaining stations were located in warmer locations.

Sooooo … all of the more recent data shows warmer temps.

You need to look at the locations of the “world stations”.

A lot of station WERE formerly located in the Soviet Union. However, when the Soviet Union went bankrupt, those stations were abandoned.

So, you have a lot of older data that shows cold temps.

And hot temps; the Soviet Union also had stations in warm areas. But I’d be open to your evidence that there were significant changes, and no one bothered to adjust for those. What have you got?

And after those stations were discontinued, the remaining stations were located in warmer locations.

I’m sure you’re going to give us a checkable source for that one, um?

Sooooo … all of the more recent data shows warmer temps.

When you get checkable data, we’ll take a look. Until then, it’s just another rationalization.

Well, let’s take a look at the corrected NASA figures…

1998 - .71 - .46
1999 - .46 - .49
2000 - .42 - .48
2001 - .57 - .51
2002 - .69 - .57
2003 - .67 - .56
2004 - .60 - .59
2005 - .76 - .66
2006 - .65 - .67
2007 - . 73 - .69

First column is the year.
Second column is the change in degrees Celsius
Third column is the five-year moving average change in degrees Celsius.

As you can see, warming continues.

These numbers make no snese.

That’s the data. Notice that the third column, which is the average temperature over five years for each succeeding year, continues to steadily rise.

There is no third clumn

I’ve separated them by dashes to make it easier for you.

and they dont in any way prove what you said.

Take another look. From top to bottom, they track it from 1998 to the current year. It’s continuing to rise.

Take a look at the map of the Soviet Union … it’s mostly Siberia. When they discontinued their measuring stations, that’s the data that went away.

There are discussions on this topic.

climateaudit.org/?p=1208

And at other locations on that web site. Visit www.climateaudit.org and type “Russia” into the search box.

Global warming according to the bogus computer models is about 1-2 degrees (Celsius) per CENTURY.

Am I reading your graph right … about a half degree per year???

That’s more than 50 degrees per century.

Am I reading that right???

Doesn’t look right.

If I’m not reading that right, please provide explanation of where I’m not getting it.


I got timed out whilst editing the post below.

Here’s another climate discussion link.

norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/08/1998_no_longer_the_hottest_yea.html

He changed his blog Web address to this one, but you might need both:

wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/

This stuff is pretty easy to research on the Web using Google.

If you get stuck, there is also Google Scholar, Clusty and Dogpile. Those other three search engines often pull up other, better or additional info.

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.