Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (22474)	7/25/2008 7:19:11 AM
From: maceng2	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 36917

You want to call it the "Cooling Delay Effect"? OK, but I can't understand how that makes an equilibrium condition any easier to conceptualise. What is the time constant? Is the delay microseconds, minutes or days?? Regarding CO2. Common sense makes your post believable, however Einstein was NOT a great believer in common sense. My view is up till recently you didn't get to be a teenager unless you had some. Nature found a way of knocking you off the pro creation list thus ensuring a good pool of common sense was always retained. Common sense also tells me no unusual idea would get accepted in mainstream scientific thought unless some convincing data had been presented. I do not assume any of our scientific predecessors were complete idiots either, thus I would deem it sensible to research their work (and of their opponents) before announcing to the world they are all wrong.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (22474)	7/25/2008 1:19:55 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Respond to of 36917

A very good summary of the current state of facts and measurements was reported by melanie phillips, it is the spectator.co.uk but the facts reported are an accurate summary of what is known. spectator.co.uk an-inconvenient-ruling. An inconvenient ruling Tuesday, 22nd July 2008 The ever wise (and droll) Philip Stott says it all here about the eye-opening media spinning of the Ofcom ruling on the Channel Four documentary, The Great Global Warming Swindle. As Philip notes, the only thing that matters is that Ofcom ruled the programme did ‘not materially mislead viewers so as to cause harm or offence’ in claiming that man-made global warming was the biggest scam of modern times. And haven’t the truth-deniers gone just nuts over this, complaining that the programme got off on a ‘technicality’ – some technicality! – inflating the relatively minor issues on which Ofcom did find against it out of all proportion (given the huge number of heavy-weight complaints it received which it rejected), and claiming that Ofcom’s criteria were inadequate (not a complaint one would have heard from them had the ruling gone the other way). Desperate stuff from desperate people – because the game is up for them, and they know it. The fabled ‘scientific consensus’ (not) is melting faster than Arctic ice. The latest scientist to acknowledge his error in having previously swallowed the scam is Dr David Evans, a former consultant to the Australian Greenhouse Office, who says he wrote the carbon accounting model that helps measure Australia’s compliance with the Kyoto Protocol. Now, however, he has written in The Australian: But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming...There has not been a public debate about the causes of global warming and most of the public and our decision makers are not aware of the most basic salient facts: 1) The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it... 2) There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None... 3) The satellites that measure the world's temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year (to the temperature of 1980)... 4) The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect... Until now the global warming debate has merely been an academic matter of little interest. Now that it matters, we should debate the causes of global warming. So far that debate has just consisted of a simple sleight of hand: show evidence of global warming, and while the audience is stunned at the implications, simply assert that it is due to carbon emissions. In the minds of the audience, the evidence that global warming has occurred becomes conflated with the alleged cause, and the audience hasn't noticed that the cause was merely asserted, not proved. There is now overwhelming evidence that the claim of man-made global warming is indeed a swindle – not least the fact that, despite the continuing rise in carbon dioxide, the climate has not warmed for the past ten years and indeed has even cooled for the past five. This is an inconvenient truth which was never forseen by those latter-day seers, the computer modellers who gave us Kyoto on the basis that they could predict the climate’s future; and it also suggests that even if the world’s ice is melting year by year at an unprecedented and otherwise inexplicable rate (in itself untrue) a warming climate demonstrably cannot be the cause. Numerous reputations – of those indeed who still cling to that infamous ‘consensus’ – are now set to go down the pan. No wonder the stakes were so high for them over the Channel Four programme. But it’s all too late. The carbon cat is out of the bag. The economy of the developed world has been distorted with food prices going through the roof, while good people have been vilified, their professional reputations trashed and their careers jeopardised -- all in the cause of a quasi-religious inquisition which it becomes ever clearer has as much basis in actual science as the drowning of witches in the Middle Ages. These people should never be trusted on anything ever again. We must not let them get away with it. The Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP. All Articles and Content Copyright ©2007 by The Spectator (1828) Ltd. All Rights Reserved