New study says threat of man-made global warming greatly exaggerated

Big ChiefBig Chief Senior MemberPosts: 32,995 Senior Member
DUH! :conehead: LIke Al Gore may have to find a new schtick:rotflmao::rotflmao:


In part:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/19/new-study-says-threat-global-warming-greatly-exaggerated/


"The Heartland Institute’s president, Joseph Bast, said of the study, "The big issue in the global warming debate is how large is the human impact on climate. And this report shows that it is very small, that natural variability, the variability that's caused by natural cycles of the sun and other factors, way outweigh anything the human impact could have."

The report comes in advance of the expected release later this month of a new U.N. report on climate change. Leaked drafts of that report show surface temperature increases have been statistically insignificant for the last 15 years, and that Antarctic sea ice is increasing, not decreasing."

"The Heartland Institute's Bast told Fox News that there are no climate models used by proponents of global warming that predict a lull in warming.

"Point to the model that predicted this hiatus," he said. "No increase in violent weather , no increase in hurricanes. All of this and we're still supposed to believe the models... models they picked because they supported their political interests, not because they represented good science."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/19/new-study-says-threat-global-warming-greatly-exaggerated/#ixzz2fKeGeyC8


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/19/new-study-says-threat-global-warming-greatly-exaggerated/#ixzz2fKdbE7Xm


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/19/new-study-says-threat-global-warming-greatly-exaggerated/
It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!

Replies

  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,651 Senior Member
    Michael Creighton went over this same subject matter twenty years or so ago, in a foreword for one of his very fine novels. It was one of the most sensible analyses I had ever seen on the subject, at the time. Good to see others speaking out, though the voice won't be heard by anyone who doesn't read/watch Fox News.
  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 7,147 Senior Member
    Pretty much confirms what the rest of us have suspected all along.
    JOE MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT:
    THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW COMMUNISTS!
  • PFDPFD Senior Member Posts: 1,202 Senior Member
    What gripes me is all of the taxpayer money spent on trying to decide if my SUV melted glaciers millions of years ago. :angry:
    That's all I got.

    Paul
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,743 Senior Member
    The Heartland Institute is one of the leading climate skeptic organizations in the world. I'm not saying there isn't a place for them, but them funding a study that says climate change is exaggerated is about as credible as PETA coming out with a study that says eating meat is unhealthy. I also find it interesting that I couldn't find a link to the actual study anywhere within any of the links on Fox Propaganda's website. While I'm absolutely skeptical of anything coming out of Heartland, I would be interested in actually looking at the study and understanding how they make their case. There is a place for legitimate climate skepticism in the scientific community and am interested in what evidence they present to support their claims.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,743 Senior Member
    For those interested here is the link to the summary of the study refereed to in the article. It's actually not a terrible scientific critique of the models and methodologies used by the IPCC, but it it not itself science. The authors do not attempt to use their suggestions or critiques to attempt to make better calculations of the impact of greenhouse gas emissions on global climate. This last missing step is the important one that significantly limits their ability to draw any substantiated conclusions other than that the IPCC could/should do a better job of modeling the climate.

    http://heartland.org/media-library/pdfs/CCR-II/Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 26,106 Senior Member
    Well, Alpha, wrap your head around these two sources of solar output variability.

    Take note of the Maunder Minimum and what happened during that span of time.
    http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/08jan_sunclimate/

    One from UCLA.
    http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/43/
    If the U.S. Congress was put in charge of the Sahara Desert, there would be a shortage of sand in under six months.



  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,743 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    Well, Alpha, wrap your head around these two sources of solar output variability.

    Take note of the Maunder Minimum and what happened during that span of time.
    http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/08jan_sunclimate/

    One from UCLA.
    http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/43/

    Mike, no one is disputing that there are climate cycles that are driven by the sun. That fact however is not alone sufficient evidence that human activity, specifically the large scale emission of greenhouse gases can't ALSO influence the climate. There are quite a few natural cycles of different amplitudes and wavelengths that are all going on at the same time and they should all be incorporated into the models to the extent possible. While I grant the hypothesis that GHG driven portion of climate change may be overestimated, the problem I have with the skeptic community is that it points to these natural cycles as definitive proof that GHGs don't matter and doesn't take the more important step of trying to prove that they don't matter or don't matter much. Both mechanisms have been proven to exist (I've yet to see a single skeptic even attempt to prove that the greenhouse effect does not exist). The important remaining question is the relative importance of each (GHGs vs. natural cycles). Then again in my experience the skeptic community isn't all that interested in science or answering these questions as they exist primarily to spread doubt and uncertainty, not eliminate it.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,626 Senior Member
    I'll take Climate Change seriously when Al Gore does - when Gore sells his mansions, jet planes and cars, moves into a small trailer, eats raw food in the dark, and gets around by bicycle.
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 23,967 Senior Member
    I still believe that having big forests wherever possible in the world is important.
    A Veteran is someone that served in the Military, it does not matter where they served.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    NN wrote: »
    I still believe that having big forests wherever possible in the world is important.

    Of course you do. Forest have trees and squirrels live in tress so Ned can't find them! :tooth:
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • the independentthe independent Member Posts: 52 Member
    Its back. In the 70's the farm magazines ask the question can you farm like you do 100 miles north of where you live? Global cooling was the trend. We actually did the analysis even though the time was 50-100 years away. So I alway had an issue with where did global warming come from after so many years of global cooling.

    So now what is the Pius group going to do? To many of them look at every one else with a go shoot your self you worthless!Q
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.