Climate Change and Global Warming

W&G, I will apologize for comparing you to fools and conspiracy nuts if you apologize for insulting our intelligence by suggesting that scientists and researchers could or should be indicted for statements made in private to each other (that might or might not mean what you think they mean).

Quoting statements out of context is dishonest and the sort of derisive language displayed here is not very different from name-calling:

ROFL just isn't adequate, I mean you can't make this stuff up!

At least now I can understand how atheists can believe in evolution.

Another excellent article here, try to keep up guys...

Nobody was crying over your implications that we are 'hoodwinked' or lying but you shouldn't be surprised that you get compared to a conspiracy nut when you act like a conspiracy nut. If you want to proclaim your hero-worship for vandals who break the law to invade people's privacy and harass researchers then you may get accused of being unreasonable.

Go or don't go. I won't be doing a victory dance either way.

Originally Posted by Blondin

W&G, I will apologize for comparing you to fools and conspiracy nuts if you apologize for insulting our intelligence by suggesting that scientists and researchers could or should be indicted for statements made in private to each other (that might or might not mean what you think they mean).

Quoting statements out of context is dishonest and the sort of derisive language displayed here is not very different from name-calling:


Nobody was crying over your implications that we are 'hoodwinked' or lying but you shouldn't be surprised that you get compared to a conspiracy nut when you act like a conspiracy nut. If you want to proclaim your hero-worship for vandals who break the law to invade people's privacy and harass researchers then you may get accused of being unreasonable.

Go or don't go. I won't be doing a victory dance either way.

Point taken apology accepted and made in return. As for supporting Hackers, I can't help it. There have been 60 requests over many years through the access to information channels that have been stonewalled by this group in particular. That implies automatically that their is something to hide which in turn implies a conspiracy to cover something up which in turn puts them on the defensive. Once it is discovered there was something to hide (where the Hacker comes in) we get to where we are today.
With something as extraordinarily important as environmental research and its implications for government policy OPEN research is imperative and reasonable to expect.

We now know that the Hacker was in fact an employee there who is taking a whistle-blower stance, that this is in fact a six week old leak and the leak was directly, originally to the BBC. This adds some credibility to the process in my opinion. Whistle-blowers need to be protected and encouraged when obfuscation and other implied illegal activities occur. Just my opinion.

I'm sorry I let my snark hang out. I wish I had more time to respond right now but I don't. I just want to say that I feel much better that we've "made up".

some current headlines:

Winter Could Be Worst in 25 Years for USA...
3 Deaths Due To Cold in Memphis...
PAPER: GAS SUPPLIES RUNNING OUT IN UK...
Elderly burn books for warmth?
Vermont sets 'all-time record for one snowstorm'...
Iowa temps 'a solid 30 degrees below normal'...
Seoul buried in heaviest snowfall in 70 years...
Historic ice build-up shuts down NJ nuclear power plant...
Midwest Sees Near-Record Lows, Snow By The Foot...
Miami shivers from coldest weather in decade...

Anthropic Global Warming does seem to be more and more like poo....

A few instances of intense and odd cold do not outweigh cumulative overall average temperature rise.

If you lived in a glass of water on an aquatic city that steadily got higher and higher as an eyedropper dripped two drops of water in every month, then suddenly drained five drops of water (while continuing the drips) would you stop and say "look, the water has gone down five drops! The eyedropper is a lie!" Of course not! A short moment of irregularity does not negate a larger trend.

Weather != Climate

Originally Posted by Blondin

Weather != Climate

Absolutely I certainly believe in climate change, happens at least four times annually.
It's nice to see that some of the newspapers out there are starting to get it.
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/ourpaper/view/2010-01-06

In the news today:

They found that, on average, sea ice has started melting 2.5 days earlier every decade and begun to refreeze 3.7 days later. That means the average melt season is just under 20 days longer than it was 30 years ago.
.
.
.
Stroeve said her team's findings are consistent with a larger pattern occurring everywhere in the Arctic.

"There's great evidence that there's something happening on the planet. All the changes that we're seeing, whether it's on the sea ice or the Greenland Ice Sheet or overland, it's consistent with this big warming trend."

-- Source

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/0...t-record-rate/

Lot's of data and people to interpret it.

This has been around for a while but since Chris is on a video-posting kick I feel like this should be posted here:

YouTube - wonderingmind42's Channel