The REAL global warming

[maiden22]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/j...anipulated-data-to-exaggerate-global-warming/

Interesting link above that casts further doubt on the global temperature record. A quote from it for the idle:

"On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.

The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory. Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country’s territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports. Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.

The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.

The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations.

On the whole, climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations.

IEA analysts say climatologists use the data of stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.

The scale of global warming was exaggerated due to temperature distortions for Russia accounting for 12.5% of the world’s land mass. The IEA said it was necessary to recalculate all global-temperature data in order to assess the scale of such exaggeration."

Another allegation further down the page:

"One the final page, there is a chart that shows that CRU’s selective use of 25% of the data created 0.64C more warming than simply using all of the raw data would have done. The complete set of data show 1.4C rise since 1860, the CRU set shows 2.06C rise over the same period."

 

[maiden22]

Re: Georgie Porgie Monbotty goes into super psuedo mode

well he's tried everything else, once your credibilty has been smashed why not....

This is the moment at which we turn and face ourselves. Here, in the plastic corridors and crowded stalls, among impenetrable texts and withering procedures, humankind decides what it is and what it will become. It chooses whether to continue living as it has done, until it must make a wasteland of its home, or to stop and redefine itself. This is about much more than climate change. This is about us....

The meeting at Copenhagen confronts us with our primal tragedy. We are the universal ape, equipped with the ingenuity and aggression to bring down prey much larger than itself, break into new lands, roar its defiance of natural constraints. Now we find ourselves hedged in by the consequences of our nature, living meekly on this crowded planet for fear of provoking or damaging others. We have the hearts of lions and live the lives of clerks.

The summit's premise is that the age of heroism is over. We have entered the age of accommodation. No longer may we live without restraint. No longer may we swing our fists regardless of whose nose might be in the way. In everything we do we must now be mindful of the lives of others, cautious, constrained, meticulous. We may no longer live in the moment, as if there were no tomorrow

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentis...ec/14/climate-change-battle-redefine-humanity

Good God, Moonbat is on form. Side-splittingly hilarious though that piece was, it still cannot compare with the comment below it that stated "excellent analysis". Yes, that's right - somewhere there is a literate human being who read Mobatty's ravings and thought "hmm, what an excellent analysis". This unfortunate person then felt compelled to record evidence of his mental deficiency for posterity.

 

[Black Swan]

Re: Georgie Porgie Monbotty goes into super psuedo mode

Good God, Moonbat is on form. Side-splittingly hilarious though that piece was, it still cannot compare with the comment below it that stated "excellent analysis". Yes, that's right - somewhere there is a literate human being who read Mobatty's ravings and thought "hmm, what an excellent analysis". This unfortunate person then felt compelled to record evidence of his mental deficiency for posterity.

Monbiot is correct when he says this...

No longer may we live without restraint. No longer may we swing our fists regardless of whose nose might be in the way. In everything we do we must now be mindful of the lives of others, cautious, constrained, meticulous. We may no longer live in the moment, as if there were no tomorrow

Might be in 50 years, might be in 100... BUT IT'LL ONLY HAPPEN WHEN THE FOOKIN OIL RUNS OUT. AND WHEN THE OIL RUNS OUT THE PLANET WILL MEND THE 0.00000000000000001% DAMAGE DONE BY MAN....:whistling

 

[maiden22]

I think that you're right about the tiny damage done by man - the whole "destroying the planet" bit seems like little more than completely deranged arrogance. We are thoroughly insignificant.

I do wonder though about the devastating effect of no more oil, or indeed any other commodity. Man's ingenuity is quite simply staggering. I would predict that we will have ceased to care about oil long before scarcity becomes a real problem.

Especially if someone is allowed to make a lot of money out of the alternative, whatever that may be. There's very little that can't be solved with a profit motive.

 

[maiden22]

On the subject of oil and other FF reserves, there was a largely overlooked story a month or so back. The source of the estimates is a Congressional Research Service report.

Links:

http://newsrealblog.com/2009/12/13/what-energy-crisis-the-truth-about-our-oil-reserves/

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=511487&Ntt=Power+to+spare

A few quotes for the main thrust:

According to our government’s Energy Information Agency’s (EIA) latest report (March 2009) the total known oil reserves of the world amounted to roughly 1.3 trillion barrels of which the USA had only 21 billion.

the Congressional Research Service (CRS) in now reporting that the total known energy reserves of the world amounts to roughly 5.58 trillion barrels which is 4.3 times greater than what we had previously been told by the EIA.

Also have a look at this regarding the Bakken discovery:

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911

Pace the doom-sluts and apoco-tarts, we may well have a great deal more oil sloshing about than most people realise.

 

[Gumping]

On the subject of oil and other FF reserves, there was a largely overlooked story a month or so back. The source of the estimates is a Congressional Research Service report.

Links:

http://newsrealblog.com/2009/12/13/what-energy-crisis-the-truth-about-our-oil-reserves/

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=511487&Ntt=Power+to+spare

A few quotes for the main thrust:

According to our government’s Energy Information Agency’s (EIA) latest report (March 2009) the total known oil reserves of the world amounted to roughly 1.3 trillion barrels of which the USA had only 21 billion.

the Congressional Research Service (CRS) in now reporting that the total known energy reserves of the world amounts to roughly 5.58 trillion barrels which is 4.3 times greater than what we had previously been told by the EIA.

Also have a look at this regarding the Bakken discovery:

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911

Pace the doom-sluts and apoco-tarts, we may well have a great deal more oil sloshing about than most people realise.

Agreed - I believe the issue is how easy the oil is to extract, and what cost per barrel. If you count up how much confirmed oil there is, I'm sure it is aLOT.

 

[Black Swan]

Uh oh...good job we've got the memories of goldfish eh? Sure I've heard this story somewhere before.. Sanctions on their way, keeps them impoverished so they can't spend the world's (our) oil...then the US of A moves into take it off them...well what the hell else you gonna do with 400K troops parked there for the next 2 decades...?

Crude oil rose, heading for the biggest weekly gain in two months, after reports that Iranian forces entered Iraqi territory heightened geopolitical tensions.

Oil eased off the highest prices since Dec. 7 as the dollar gained for a fourth day against a basket of six major currencies. Crude climbed as much as 2.8 percent after an Iraqi general said Iranian forces occupied the area around an oil well 280 miles (450 kilometers) south of Baghdad.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601082&sid=aGLN5XoCnMRU

 

[Atilla]

Copenhagen: A summit like no other


This totally sounds like politicians putting spin on two weeks of bickering with no outcome. De nada.

Is this the End?

 

[Black Swan]

Nohopenhagen...A complete and utter waste of fookin time with no concrete agreement is described as having a meaningful outcome and to a man the 5hit house mainstream media press doesn't contest it, but why would they given they've all had an expenses paid jolly, mixing it with the great and good for a couple of weeks, waiting for black jesus to finally turn up, give a couple of hours and sprinkle some pixie dust/glamour on proceedings...

If the countries had waited to reach a full, binding agreement, "then we wouldn't make any progress," Obama said.

Best part for me was Brown. Now China, the worlds biggest 'polluter' fooks it all off as a bad joke/waste of time, and he reckons it's no problem, they should revert to plan B..PLAN FOOKING B!! hahahaha you couldn't make this 5hite up if you tried your best whilst on double tabs of lsd and crystal meth chasers...

"The tentative agreement came just a short while after Gordon Brown disclosed that world leaders in Copenhagen were drawing up a “Plan B” for an international agreement on climate change that excludes China."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/co...t-meaningful-agreement-hailed-by-leaders.html

 

[sahajtrader]

Biggest polluters - per capita emmission (tonnage):
Source: Union of Concerned Scientists

1. Australia [20.58]
2. USA [19.78]
3. Canada [18.81]
4. Saudi Arabia [15.70]
5. Russia [12]
6. Germany [10.40]
7. Japan [9.78]
8. UK [9.66]

Compared to:

1. India [1.16]
2. China [4.58]

and the biggest polluters want India and China to increase
emmission cut targets? while they themselves don't want to
increase their own?! and while they are at it, also rubbish the
Kyoto treaty. :clap::clap:

They want the developing nations, which already are the lowest
emmitters per capita, to reduce further while the biggest
polluters just "buy" carbon emmission rights using the new scam
of "carbon trading" (equivalent of the "derivative" instrument
of mass economic destruction, in the environment world).

Nice!!

Very rightly, India and China said - P1ss off!!!

 

[dcraig1]

Biggest polluters - per capita emmission (tonnage):
Source: Union of Concerned Scientists

1. Australia [20.58]
2. USA [19.78]
3. Canada [18.81]
4. Saudi Arabia [15.70]
5. Russia [12]
6. Germany [10.40]
7. Japan [9.78]
8. UK [9.66]

Compared to:

1. India [1.16]
2. China [4.58]

and the biggest polluters want India and China to increase
emmission cut targets? while they themselves don't want to
increase their own?! and while they are at it, also rubbish the
Kyoto treaty. :clap::clap:

They want the developing nations, which already are the lowest
emmitters per capita, to reduce further while the biggest
polluters just "buy" carbon emmission rights using the new scam
of "carbon trading" (equivalent of the "derivative" instrument
of mass economic destruction, in the environment world).

Nice!!

Very rightly, India and China said - P1ss off!!!

Indeed, it was horrible spectacle. Much more about who is going to control the air and the sky than anything else.

The amount offered to developing countries to aid in mitigation - initially 10 bil/year upped to 30bil/year was laughable. The latter is around 3% of the cost to the US of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. No shortage of money for war, but not even enough for a reasonable gesture of goodwill let alone something substantive.

The problem is not going to go away. It will have to be addressed eventually. Unfortunately while CO2 may not be "forever" - it at least persists for decades and probably centuries - it is only a question of how much damage happens in the interim that in practical terms cannot be undone. Just turning off the tap sometime in the future is no fix at all.

 

[zambuck]

Biggest polluters - per capita emmission (tonnage):
Source: Union of Concerned Scientists

1. Australia [20.58]
2. USA [19.78]
3. Canada [18.81]
4. Saudi Arabia [15.70]
5. Russia [12]
6. Germany [10.40]
7. Japan [9.78]
8. UK [9.66]

Compared to:

1. India [1.16]
2. China [4.58]

and the biggest polluters want India and China to increase
emmission cut targets? while they themselves don't want to
increase their own?! and while they are at it, also rubbish the
Kyoto treaty. :clap::clap:

They want the developing nations, which already are the lowest
emmitters per capita, to reduce further while the biggest
polluters just "buy" carbon emmission rights using the new scam
of "carbon trading" (equivalent of the "derivative" instrument
of mass economic destruction, in the environment world).

Nice!!

Very rightly, India and China said - P1ss off!!!

...Good post.....Yeas they were polite when they said **** off.....They should have raised a finger at all these laughable treaties, which are designed not to save mankind at all but control of world economy - led by US and Europe...

Chinese and Indians are on roll....it is time to take heed and start learning Hindi and Chinese....!!

 

[maiden22]

Is this the End?

Depends on how how you look at it. For us in the West, maybe. Personally, I can see few drawbacks, at least in terms of human civilisation.

But overall, of course not. It just moves somewhere else - east, most likely, although it doesn't really matter where.

As St Benedict said, "succisa virescit" ( roughly put - "pruned, it grows again"). Climate Change is like communism, social (as opposed to actual) justice, political correctness which elevates ideology over truth - just another part of the West's suicide note.

America looks increasingly willing to sign. When it does, it really will be over.

Not that it matters really. The truth is that it never really did in most places - ask a Portuguese about habeas corpus for example, and see how far you get. Collectively, we have very little to offer the world now, so philanthropes might as well relax and enjoy the sunset.

Civilisations, by and large, expire through suicide rather than murder - certainly most of the great ones. I think that we're ready, and climate change is as good an excuse as any other I suppose.

But mankind continues. Truth always triumphs over bull**** - communism was always going to lose the Cold War, no matter what. Of course, bull**** can endure for a very long time, and cause untold misery while it does - it is better if good men do what they can to hasten its defeat. In terms of the species though, it's not terribly important.

 

[Trader333]

China did not disagree with reduction targets at all and even agreed to committing to them. The issue was about independent verification of reductions which China would not agree to and you cannot blame them as it has echoes of the Weapons Inspectors in Iraq.


Paul

 

[Atilla]

China did not disagree with reduction targets at all and even agreed to committing to them. The issue was about independent verification of reductions which China would not agree to and you cannot blame them as it has echoes of the Weapons Inspectors in Iraq.


Paul

I didn't understand what the US gripe was about here. However, did the US concede similar examination and inspection of their reductions? I guess if they are buying right to emit their fare share none would be required.

Don't know, don't understand what the technicalities are but it seems like a standard blurb that means not much at all to me.

What are the control or monitoring mechanism in place. If they have all the stats about emissions now what extra do they need.

Where do they get all their current readings from?


Fish or flower? It doesn't smelll right... :cheesy:

 

[Splitlink]

But mankind continues. Truth always triumphs over bull**** - communism was always going to lose the Cold War, no matter what. Of course, bull**** can endure for a very long time, and cause untold misery while it does - it is better if good men do what they can to hasten its defeat. In terms of the species though, it's not terribly important.

That, always, has been the case until now. However, the planet has never had to deal with so many people before. 9 billion by 2050, having doubled since 2000 is, IMO, the basic problem with everything. Climatic change we can do nothing about. Living with it with such a population explosion is going to be a challenge that will, eventually lead to a war, unless we can stop polluting everything. As the liveable regions diminish, so will the populations congregate into those regions.

Copenhagen was never going to work. Too many arguing the toss and each minister wondering how each plan could be explained to his countrymen, when he returns home.

A politicians nightmare. Once again, we come back to too many people trying to agree.

 

[maiden22]

A politicians nightmare. Once again, we come back to too many people trying to agree.

It's true that committees rarely achieve much.

 

[dcraig1]

Climate Change is like communism, social (as opposed to actual) justice, political correctness which elevates ideology over truth - just another part of the West's suicide note.

You surely are an expert in elevating ideology over truth. "Climate Change is like communism". How can you write this stuff with a straight face?

 

[zambuck]

China did not disagree with reduction targets at all and even agreed to committing to them. The issue was about independent verification of reductions which China would not agree to and you cannot blame them as it has echoes of the Weapons Inspectors in Iraq.


Paul

...And what did US do with the weapons inspector's reports..?...They were binned and 'US' did what it wanted to anyway....charge into Iraq...!

....US has never allowed any 'inspection' on their territory...All requests by independent bodies to inspect Guantanamo Bay has been rejected.....So Chinese are right to not agree to anything else....

...I am not taking any sides, but it does appear that US and Europe has a sinister agenda, and Indians and Chinese will be stupid to agree to that...!

US and Europe's 'chimneys' are full of 'shoot'...No point asking Chinese and Indians and Rest to be 'chimney sweeps...!

 

[zambuck]

You surely are an expert in elevating ideology over truth. "Climate Change is like communism". How can you write this stuff with a straight face?

...But he is right in the sense that everyone is asked to follow the climate change routine and any dissenting or questioning voice is called as 'not serious'..and dilly dallying..!