• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Bush shifts on climate change

hopalong

Well-known member
Kolouraven and OT will never admit they are wrong, they just move on to another bash Bush post!!

The two of them average over 16 posts a day between the two of them and over half will bash Bush and use the word neocon! This is just in this forum, who knows how many more they whine on!
Who has too much time on their hands?????
 

PrairieQueen

Well-known member
Global Warming Claims Unsupported by Facts

Friday, March 14, 2008 11:40 AM

By: Philip V. Brennan Article Font Size

Reports by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that the earth is experiencing unprecedented global warming are flawed and cannot be supported, investigators now report.

In a study reported in the Washington Times, a panel of statisticians, chaired by Edward J. Wegman of George Mason University, found significant problems with the methods of analysis used by the researchers and with the IPCC's peer review process.

According to the Times, "IPCC reports have predicted average world temperatures will increase dramatically, leading to the spread of tropical diseases, severe drought, the rapid melting of the world's glaciers and ice caps, and rising sea levels." The Times notes, however that "several assessments of the IPCC's work have shown the techniques and methods used to derive its climate predictions are fundamentally flawed."

In a 2001 report, the IPCC published an image commonly referred to as the "hockey stick," the Times explained, adding that it showed relatively stable temperatures from A.D. 1000 to 1900, with temperatures rising steeply from 1900 to 2000. "The IPCC and public figures, such as former Vice President Al Gore, have used the hockey stick to support the conclusion that human energy use over the last 100 years has caused an unprecedented rise in global warming," according to the Times.

Since those claims have been discounted by several studies which the newspaper notes cast doubt on the accuracy of the hockey stick, Congress in 2006 requested an independent analysis by Wegman and his panel.

The Times reports that the researchers who created the hockey stick used the wrong time scale to establish the mean temperature to compare with recorded temperatures of the last century. Because the mean temperature was low, the recent temperature rise seemed unusual and dramatic. This error, the Times explained, was not discovered in part because statisticians were never consulted.

Moreover, the community of specialists in ancient climates from which the peer reviewers were drawn was small and many of them had ties to the original authors — no less than 43 paleoclimatologists had previously co-authored papers with the lead researcher who constructed the hockey stick.

Even using accurate temperature data, sound forecasting methods are required to predict climate change. Over time, forecasting researchers have compiled 140 principles that can be applied to a broad range of disciplines, including science, sociology, economics, and politics.

The Times recalled that in a recent National Center for Policy Analysis study, Kesten Green and J. Scott Armstrong used these principles to audit the climate forecasts in the Fourth Assessment Report. Green and Armstrong found that the IPCC clearly violated 60 of the 127 principles relevant in assessing the IPCC predictions.

Indeed, it could only be clearly established that the IPCC followed 17 of the more than 127 forecasting principles critical to making sound predictions.

Writes H. Sterling Burnett the author of the Times story, "A good example of a principle clearly violated is 'Make sure forecasts are independent of politics.' Politics shapes the IPCC from beginning to end. Legislators, policy-makers and/or diplomatic appointees select (or approve) the scientists — at least the lead scientists — who make up the IPCC. In addition, the summary and the final draft of the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report was written in collaboration with political appointees and subject to their approval."

Burnett writes, "Sadly, Mr. Green and Mr. Armstrong found no evidence that the IPCC was even aware of the vast literature on scientific forecasting methods, much less applied the principles."

As a result of such problems Mr. Wegman's team concluded that the idea that the planet is experiencing unprecedented global warming "cannot be supported."

According to the author of the Times story, H. Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis, a nonpartisan, nonprofit research institute in Dallas, says the IPCC's policy recommendations are based on flawed statistical analyses and procedures that violate general forecasting principles.

He warned that policy-makers should take this into account before enacting laws to counter global warming — which economists point out would have severe economic consequences.

© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/global_warming/2008/03/14/80438.html

The IPCC is the group that publish "Livestocks Long Shadow" - the attack on livestock production.
 

PrairieQueen

Well-known member
hopalong said:
Kolouraven and OT will never admit they are wrong, they just move on to another bash Bush post!!

The two of them average over 16 posts a day between the two of them and over half will bash Bush and use the word neocon! This is just in this forum, who knows how many more they whine on!
Who has too much time on their hands?????

LOL! I just want whoever ends up in the White House not to cost this country a lot of industry b/c of stupid global warming policies.

I have more, but need to get to work :D
 

quickdraw

Well-known member
:agree:

The bashing folks need to realize that sometimes the mere fact they are cutting someone down, will turn people to go against them because after a while it becomes so evident their hate clouds true judgment that others naturally look past the hate mongering and mud slinging, half truths media mis truths only to take a stance against the mud slingers and hate bashers because it becomes redundtant and people begin to look towards those that sling etc as just plain false even if it has any speck of truth to it!

SAD SAD
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
quickdraw said:
:agree:

The bashing folks need to realize that sometimes the mere fact they are cutting someone down, will turn people to go against them because after a while it becomes so evident their hate clouds true judgment that others naturally look past the hate mongering and mud slinging, half truths media mis truths only to take a stance against the mud slingers and hate bashers because it becomes redundtant and people begin to look towards those that sling etc as just plain false even if it has any speck of truth to it!

SAD SAD

So you are saying that Kolan may have been right before, but I did not recognize it :shock: :lol:
 

hopalong

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
hopalong said:
Who has too much time on their hands?????


Apparently you do as you keep following us around all the time and doing the ' math' on what and how much we post.

No math involved!
Just click on profile and it will tell anyone how many posts per day is being made!!
DUHHHHH!
:roll: :roll: :roll:
 

CattleArmy

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
hopalong said:
Who has too much time on their hands?????


Apparently you do as you keep following us around all the time and doing the ' math' on what and how much we post.

I'd say hopalong proved how much time it has on it's hands being able to tell how many average posts you two make in a day. Some need to just step away from the computer. :roll:

hopalong said:
No math involved!
Just click on profile and it will tell anyone how many posts per day is being made!!
DUHHHHH!
:roll: :roll: :roll:

Creepy. Isn't this how stalking people begins?
stalk 2 Audio Help (stôk) Pronunciation Key
v. stalked, stalk·ing, stalks

v. intr.

To walk with a stiff, haughty, or angry gait: stalked off in a huff.
To move threateningly or menacingly.
To track prey or quarry. **********
 

hopalong

Well-known member
CattleArmy said:
kolanuraven said:
hopalong said:
Who has too much time on their hands?????


Apparently you do as you keep following us around all the time and doing the ' math' on what and how much we post.

I'd say hopalong proved how much time it has on it's hands being able to tell how many average posts you two make in a day. Some need to just step away from the computer. :roll:

hopalong said:
No math involved!
Just click on profile and it will tell anyone how many posts per day is being made!!
DUHHHHH!
:roll: :roll: :roll:

Creepy. Isn't this how stalking people begins?
stalk 2 Audio Help (stôk) Pronunciation Key
v. stalked, stalk·ing, stalks

v. intr.

To walk with a stiff, haughty, or angry gait: stalked off in a huff.
To move threateningly or menacingly.
To track prey or quarry. **********

Took 3 whole seconds when I hit your profile till I had your numbers!! :roll:
Yep a real lot of time :roll: :roll:
 

CattleArmy

Well-known member
hopalong said:
CattleArmy said:
kolanuraven said:
Apparently you do as you keep following us around all the time and doing the ' math' on what and how much we post.

I'd say hopalong proved how much time it has on it's hands being able to tell how many average posts you two make in a day. Some need to just step away from the computer. :roll:

hopalong said:
No math involved!
Just click on profile and it will tell anyone how many posts per day is being made!!
DUHHHHH!
:roll: :roll: :roll:

Creepy. Isn't this how stalking people begins?
stalk 2 Audio Help (stôk) Pronunciation Key
v. stalked, stalk·ing, stalks

v. intr.

To walk with a stiff, haughty, or angry gait: stalked off in a huff.
To move threateningly or menacingly.
To track prey or quarry. **********

Took 3 whole seconds when I hit your profile till I had your numbers!! :roll:
Yep a real lot of time :roll: :roll:


Trying to decide if I should be flattered or creeped out. :?
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
CattleArmy said:
hopalong said:
CattleArmy said:
I'd say hopalong proved how much time it has on it's hands being able to tell how many average posts you two make in a day. Some need to just step away from the computer. :roll:



Creepy. Isn't this how stalking people begins?
stalk 2 Audio Help (stôk) Pronunciation Key
v. stalked, stalk·ing, stalks

v. intr.

To walk with a stiff, haughty, or angry gait: stalked off in a huff.
To move threateningly or menacingly.
To track prey or quarry. **********

Took 3 whole seconds when I hit your profile till I had your numbers!! :roll:
Yep a real lot of time :roll: :roll:


Trying to decide if I should be flattered or creeped out. :?



:lol: :lol: :lol: Welcome to the Club ,CattleArmy!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Texan

Well-known member
CattleArmy said:
Texan said:
I expect that what you really want is a chance to suck up to kola - hoping you might get a chance to sniff her panties (if any). No? :lol:

Suggesting others take up your hobbies now Texan? :p
Actually, I don't have to sniff kola's panties. All it takes is a little east wind and I can smell 'em from here. Unless...

...maybe that's the paper mill? :lol:
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Texan said:
CattleArmy said:
Texan said:
I expect that what you really want is a chance to suck up to kola - hoping you might get a chance to sniff her panties (if any). No? :lol:

Suggesting others take up your hobbies now Texan? :p
Actually, I don't have to sniff kola's panties. All it takes is a little east wind and I can smell 'em from here. Unless...

...maybe that's the paper mill? :lol:


Typical Rep. , you just know you got all the answers!!!
:roll: :roll:
You're under the idea that I even wear panties!!!! :wink: :wink: :wink:
 

Latest posts

Top