Scary? Should I scream?
Yep, Al Gore got his facts wrong on one point during an address in Copenhagen (neocons will SWEAR it was on purpose). But what's interesting to me is that the author who called him on it points out that his findings are just as dramatic without the exaggeration.
http://www.sphere.com/world/article/...19281919%0D%0A
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
Scary? Should I scream?
"It [the draft] is duty rather than slavery. I part with the author on the caviler idea that individual freedom (whatever that may be to the person) leads to nirvana, anyone older that 12 knows that is BS."
-(Midcan5)
"Allow me to masturbate my patriotism furiously and publicly at this opportunity."
-(Ib1yysguy)
"There is no 'equal opportunity' today unless the government makes it so."
-(apple0154 )
"abortion is not killing Its birth control"
-(Desh)
Yes. You should. Because we are all going to die. Every one of us. So speaketh the Goreacle.
Excellence is an art won by training and habituation. We do not act rightly because we have virtue or excellence, but rather we have those because we have acted rightly. We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.
- -- Aristotle
Believe nothing on the faith of traditions, even though they have been held in honor for many generations and in diverse places. Do not believe a thing because many people speak of it. Do not believe on the faith of the sages of the past. Do not believe what you yourself have imagined, persuading yourself that a God inspires you. Believe nothing on the sole authority of your masters and priests. After examination, believe what you yourself have tested and found to be reasonable, and conform your conduct thereto.
- -- The Buddha
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
- -- Aristotle
Interesting....you automatically assumed the guy purposely lied, yet you are in complete denial when your same thought process is applied to the last 8 years regarding this subject.Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Yep, Al Gore got his facts wrong on one point during an address in Copenhagen (neocons will SWEAR it was on purpose). But what's interesting to me is that the author who called him on it points out that his findings are just as dramatic without the exaggeration.
http://www.sphere.com/world/article/...19281919%0D%0A
That being said, I assume you're in denial or you have contrary information about the correct information that Gore got wrong?
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
My understanding is the north was quite warm at one time. They have found dinosaur bones in Alberta, Canada and this week Edmonton was -45 C! Maybe the earth is going to be one big greenhouse.
How big is Antarctica? Would the available land, if defrosted, compensate for the present land that will be flooded?
Sorry for asking but it's barely +5 F here today. :-(
"May your reality be as pleasant as mine."
There was an interesting show on History last night about the Sahara Desert and how it changes every 10,000 years, with a geologic record of these changes going back millions of years. The cycle coincides exactly with the wobble of the Earth on its axis. 10,000 year cycles are what I remember from college as ice age cycles as well.
it's obvious he lied. The scientist in question said their conversation was several years ago, but Al repeatedly says it's fresh.
And Yes, I listened to the interview with the scientist.
He doesn't say what Gore says, but the interviewer says it in prefacing the interview. The scientist does not correct the interviewer. So, I can see why gore would latch onto this info, but he still lied about it being fresh science.
As you recall from several years ago, the argument has always been that the warming right now is unprecedented. The evidence was reconstructed temps deduced from treering proxies. Or so we thought. But it turns out if the scientists used the same method (calculated by treering width/density) on the recent growth of trees, the temp reading they get doesn't match the high temp reading of actual temps that we have actual data for. This is the problem they had to solve. All they had to do was misrepresent the graph. And as we see now, it doesn't matter to people like ching chang here one little bit. They are perfectly happy to call it science if it meets their goals.
Even with the knowledge of the deception, warmers remain faithful.
The facts about the adjustments are not in dispute. They mated real temps onto estimated temps derived by theories about temps and tree ring size.
One part of the temp graph has error margins, the other does not. We know the real temps. The recent temps should have beeen calculated using the treering method. Hoe else can we know how to determine the temps from treering data? Cart before the horse? WTF?
Clearly, the actual temps not matching the temps derived by treering method SHOULD have called the treering method into question.
Not our heros!. Just use the real temps when the treerings stop making their case
It's obvious to me that the posters here who still defend this science, really don't understand it.
I recall having a debate over a similar issue, not tree rings but actual weather station data. My point was that many of these sites have become urbanized over time, and in fact some are moved several miles. Urbanization is an obvious effect on temperatures at that discreet location. Intuition and facts back this up. My opponent stated that the "scientists" know all this so use "adjustment factors" to counter the urbanization effects. That's bullshit, of course, because these "scientists" don't know the details of what happened at or around a site over 110 years of data, and if they did could play with the adjustment constants to get any end result that they wanted.
See, the bottom line is that no one is denying natural climate change....it's the drastic urbanization, deforestation along with increasing levels of atmospheric pollution that has affected this natural change...and it's not for the better.
We can adapt as a species...but competing against each other for the illusion of economic superiority is not going to bode well for anyone.
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
Please provide a link to that interview, if possible. What you are saying here that based on the interviewer, you cand see how Gore might have gotten the wrong idea...yet you INSIST he's still a liar. Weird, you're a liar because you believe in the misleading info from the source. Seems you've just got it in for Gore.
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
You keep trying to look at trends that took thousands of years to normally occur while leaving out the FACTS that the previously recorded trends were done WITHOUT global increase of the last 200 years in industrial air pollution, global deforestation and urbanization of land and water that is crucial in the CO2/oxygen exchange.
See, the bottom line is that no one is denying natural climate change....
We can adapt as a species...but denial of what man has added to the mix in the last 200 years while competing against each other for the illusion of economic superiority is not going to bode well for anyone.
Last edited by Taichiliberal; 12-16-2009 at 10:45 PM.
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
Bookmarks