Global Warming: The BIGGEST LIE Exposed

Wow Gee MY answer was referenced - AND based on research whereas - near as anyone else can tell - yours is from the back of a Cornflakes packet

 

LOL, your reference is a cartoonist's website. Go figure.

 

From doing a quick Google search I see "the headless chicken brigade" (Prince Charles' name for the deniers; very apropos) are creating a fall back phrase for when AGW can no longer be denied.

 

You act like life is guaranteed. enjoy your kids and their kids and when you leave this world you leave knowing you loved and took care of your kids. That, you can control!

 

Once the origin of data to support the theory are found out to be made up, then the theory is no longer valid. And I may add, the scientific group that manufactured that data admitted it! Most probable cause eliminated! dead, retry with correct data.

 

Evidently the fact that many of the deniers do not deny that man contributes to warming, the real question is how much and if the warming alarmists are right. There is no agreement there at all among scientists but that doesn't matter since the CAGWers have reduced the arguments down to black and white so they can label anyone that is not a true believer. The only science involved for CAGWers is the science of propaganda techniques.

 

IF you had ever opened a link there you would have noted that the graph was referenced to multiple research papers - more than I have seen from denialists on this thread

And Cook is NOT a cartoonist that is merely ONE of the things he has done in his life - others include a degree in physics. You see, attacking the source is futile if you cannot prove bias in the outcomes. If I check a website and find ties to big oil money then there has been some clear profit motive and therefor the outcomes posted on that site are suspect. The BEST you can do to try and slur Cook is to call him a cartoonist

 

Oh! Wow - conspiracy - so, tell me…..

How many scientists are in on this and "making it up"?

One, ten. fifty, 1,000?

You would be bowled over by the numbers of scientists world wide who have participated in assessing the data and testing the theories underpinning global warming

 

I am coming to the concluding it is a Troll Trick. They keep referring to CAGW and keep the same old same old arguments. When backed into a corner about the undeniable evidence of AGW they can say "Yes but our objections are to CAGW"

Very pathetic and transparent attempt to win something in an issue where there is not just one elephant in the room but a whole bloody herd of the things

 

Here, go read: http://www.themeshreport.com/2012/0...detracts-statements-that-humans-are-to-blame/

 

And: http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/...ccused-of-fudging-data-to-show-global-warming

 

And: http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.c...-energy-balance-by-spencer-and-braswell-2011/

 

And: http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=16344

 

and: http://climatism.wordpress.com/2014...sed-of-fudging-data-to-show-global-warming-2/

 

And: http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013...dly-overestimated-global-warming-study-finds/

 

This Fox spinner says climate modelers need to 'go back to the drawing board.'

So, what else is new? Carbon credit scams, neat of CO2 recycling, to make methanol and nitro-methanol, and to grow algae, near any furnace?

When Fox News gets past some agenda, we'll all know. At least, when one of their derps blurts out a Ron Burgundy-ism, FN producers goof, hard.

That won't change how most media simply needs to admit how ALL CLIMATE AFFECTED MASSES ARE WARMING, before surface warming jumps.

Leaving this critical fact untouched lets the incompetent ramble around all media, while the fossil fuel-brokers keep polluting, and all humanity keeps despoiling, without proper committee processes, toward some survivable alternatives.

 

Dude, did you look at all of the other links I posted? Until then, I won't reply to your post. Take your hate at Fox out on Fox. Not me. I researched many more sites which agree.

 

The usual blather. He is still a cartoonist and also a communications fellow. His forte is providing a platform for warming alarmists and it is hardly an unbiased site. You should stick to actual papers themselves instead of a filtered propaganda site.

 

It's the same tactic that was used when the increase in temps became indisputable. The "earth is not warming" became the "the earth is warming, but humans are responsible". The new message, (read Hoosier's post) is "humans are somewhat responsible, but the warming is not catastrophic". Too funny!

 

First off, your argument doesn't contradict the argument of the poster. The poster's argument stated that increased CO2 will cause increased heat. Whereas your counter-argument only makes a statement about when CO2 itself rises, and as such it provides no details on the contribution of warming attributed to CO2.

To put this into an analogy, a car engine needs to be able to generate heat via spark in order to ignite gasoline. The spark doesn't power the car; however, it is the first to occur. As such, gasoline ignition follows a spark. In climate, small orbital changes often provide the spark where as greenhouse gasses bring about a great deal of the warming.

And on a side note, the heat absorption properties of CO2 are well known in chemistry. One could even do a small experiment using jars and a heat source.

 

You had several links to Spencer & Braswell, who use the same data as many other climate researchers. If "the origin of data to support the theory are found out to be made up", doesn't that disqualify their conclusions?

 

that was my point, thanks!

 

The data is wrong and incorrect. Dunk! BTW, as I already posted admitted by the scientists.

 

Wrong again. Of course that is not what I said but that won't stop people like you characterizing what people say to suit your agenda. The Earth right now is not warming but most understand that man can contribute to warming. The question is how much and that is far from answered. The failure of the warming alarmists lack of warming the last 17 years focuses on the warming alarmists failed prediction and sent them scrambling to explain the failure.

 

Just to REALLY annoy - that is the EASIER way of doing it

Now I will start with the last first and - you know- you just have to LOVE the sheer incompetence of Fox Journalists. Throughout that article they talk of a "study" and what is the first thing I see when I click on the link - "Opinion and Comments" section of the journal - so no, not a "study" but let us really LOOK at what they are saying

Ooooh! and look what I found - the Fox "Journalists" missed a bit

http://www.see.ed.ac.uk/~shs/Climate change/Climate model results/over estimate.pdf

So the "paper", instead of "showing" that the scientists are "wrong" is actually looking at how to make things more accurate - something scientists DO

Now your original post said

Once the origin of data to support the theory are found out to be made up, then the theory is no longer valid. And I may add, the scientific group that manufactured that data admitted it! Most probable cause eliminated! dead, retry with correct data.

To which I asked the question - how many scientists are "making it up" and THAT none of your links answers