More evidence that man-made global warming is a crock...

Besoeker · 07-12-2006, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

Here are the multiple layers that all have to be broken down by the voodoo hysteria cult of gw, before I will accept higher taxation and loss of liberties on the back of it.

1. Is the planet changing temperature beyond what has happened before?
No.
2. Why do you think co2 is the cause?
See answer 1.
3. Why do you think man made co2 is the cause, when nature produces the vast bulk of it every year?
See answer 1.
4. Why don't you think the sun, that is warming planets where we don't live up more, couldn't be the driving factor here?
It could be.
5. Who says this warming is actualy bad for the planet? It might be good overall.
Possibly. Might not be so good for humans.
6. Why do you think the climate should stabalise just beacause we now live here?
I don't.
7. Why are the people trying to scare me into surrending my money and freedom, not surrendering their money and freedom even more as an example?
Que?
8. What difference will Britain turning into an unihabited country have on the effect of the whole world? I see roughly nil effect. So what is the point in us tinkering anyway?
Probably not a lot on the planet. Quite a lot on the current 60,000,000 inhabitants.
9. If this co2 is supposed to be soaring right now and co2 is supposed to be the cause of warming, why isn't the temperature followin co2 in soaring, just like all your crappy greaphs are supposed to show in the past?
Currently temperature rate of rise is faster than at any time in the known records.
10. How come co2 has followed warming in the main in the past not the other way around?
Not sure that your graph shows that.
11. How come co2 has spiked massivley in the past, without our intervention.
Again, it is not the change, but the rate of change that seems to be of concern.
12. Why are you worried when the planet has been MUCH warmer and had more co2 than before now.
I'm not.
13. Aren't there much more pressing REAL issues facing mankind, than this voodoo?
More pressing, for sure.
14. Why is it only now that any kind of debate is being allowed, with the normal biased mongers of propaganda like the BBC, still stick to the one sided line?
Debate has always been allowed.

All of them need to be answered for me and so far no one has come close.

mkpdavies · 07-12-2006, 09:25 PM

Quote:

7. Why are the people trying to scare me into surrending my money and freedom, not surrendering their money and freedom even more as an example?
Que?

E.G. Blair and Brown fly all over the place, live in luxury and burn a whole lot more energy that me, yet I have to pay more tax (they just put it all on expenses).

Quote:

10. How come co2 has followed warming in the main in the past not the other way around?
Not sure that your graph shows that.

It does, but there are better ones that show it. It has been accepted by most of the voodoo preachers also.

Quote:

14. Why is it only now that any kind of debate is being allowed, with the normal biased mongers of propaganda like the BBC, still stick to the one sided line?
Debate has always been allowed.

Not on the BBC it hasn't, or most of the mainstream press. It is true we are beginning to see a bit of a fight back now, but again the BBC is as biased as hell.

Besoeker · 07-12-2006, 10:37 PM

Mikey

Thanks for your reply.
So we are now down to three points.

On point 7
I also fly all over the world. I do so on business. I don't consider it a privilage. Or a luxury. It's just what I need to do to get and retain buisness for my company. It certainly isn't a jolly. Unless you have experienced the stress it is probably difficult to have an appreciation of it.
Getting repaid expenses is the least one should expect.

On 10.
If you want to present a better graph, then do so.

On 14
Debate here all you want. If it's with me all I can promise is that I will try to be fair, factual, and objective.

mkpdavies · 07-12-2006, 10:52 PM

This one shows the lag better.

Besoeker · 08-12-2006, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

This one shows the lag better.

Yes, I can see that someone has attempted to demonstrate that by selecting a few points.
But the resolution is such that the lag can be shown to be the other way round if that was the point one wished to make.

mkpdavies · 08-12-2006, 02:48 PM

Well it's pretty clear to me and I have seen it a few times on various time frames.

You can discount it if you want.

Besoeker · 08-12-2006, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

Well it's pretty clear to me and I have seen it a few times on various time frames.

You can discount it if you want.

I'm not discounting it at all. I'm questioning the conclusions being drawn from it.
I dropped it into Acad so that I could put some markers in and get measured values.
For sure, there are periods where one could construe that CO2 levels lagged behind Antarctic temperature. There are also periods where one could construe the reverse.
However, I'd doubt the validity of either conclusion based on those graphs. Since the temperature has many more data points than the CO2, they are not directly comparable data sets.

Hartlepool · 08-12-2006, 04:21 PM

Surely,the very fact that everyone agrees that swings go in both/all directions indicates that the whole thing is a natural one,nature tends to change the way it presents itself ALL THE TIME.

From a Mini Ice Age,to Global Warming within a couple of decades or so should tell us something about natural occurences and tendencies.

Besoeker · 08-12-2006, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hartlepool

From a Mini Ice Age,to Global Warming within a couple of decades or so should tell us something about natural occurences and tendencies.

I think it tells us something about human perception of the reversal of the predictions.

06-01-2007, 09:11 PM

check this too

http://nencyalba.info/blog/vids/224103
regards, Anedtardderup33

07-12-2006, 10:52 PM	#44 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	This one shows the lag better. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

08-12-2006, 02:48 PM	#46 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	Well it's pretty clear to me and I have seen it a few times on various time frames. You can discount it if you want. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

07-12-2006, 10:37 PM	#43 (permalink)
Besoeker Uber Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 4,933	Mikey Thanks for your reply. So we are now down to three points. On point 7 I also fly all over the world. I do so on business. I don't consider it a privilage. Or a luxury. It's just what I need to do to get and retain buisness for my company. It certainly isn't a jolly. Unless you have experienced the stress it is probably difficult to have an appreciation of it. Getting repaid expenses is the least one should expect. On 10. If you want to present a better graph, then do so. On 14 Debate here all you want. If it's with me all I can promise is that I will try to be fair, factual, and objective.

08-12-2006, 04:21 PM	#48 (permalink)
Hartlepool Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: North East England Posts: 6,660 Party: Free England Party	Surely,the very fact that everyone agrees that swings go in both/all directions indicates that the whole thing is a natural one,nature tends to change the way it presents itself ALL THE TIME. From a Mini Ice Age,to Global Warming within a couple of decades or so should tell us something about natural occurences and tendencies.

06-01-2007, 09:11 PM	#50 (permalink)
Guest Posts: n/a	check this too http://nencyalba.info/blog/vids/224103 regards, Anedtardderup33