Did I miss the thread about the CRU Fraud?

[notyoueither]

You assume a lot, ****trumpet.

Let me know when you actually have something to say.

[KrazyHorse]

Do I really have to drag up the thread where you spend dozens of posts arguing that it really matters which of the two participants in a transaction the government collects a tax from?

[Drake Tungsten]

Please don't...

[notyoueither]

Do I really have to drag up the thread where you spend dozens of posts arguing that it really matters which of the two participants in a transaction the government collects a tax from?

Yes, I will be fascinated by your explanation of how increasing costs of industry would not impact exports.

[notyoueither]

Is there any real chance of averting the climate crisis?

Absolutely. It is possible – if we give politicians a cold, hard slap in the face. The fraudulence of the Copenhagen approach – "goals" for emission reductions, "offsets" that render ironclad goals almost meaningless, the ineffectual "cap-and-trade" mechanism – must be exposed. We must rebel against such politics as usual.

Science reveals that climate is close to tipping points. It is a dead certainty that continued high emissions will create a chaotic dynamic situation for young people, with deteriorating climate conditions out of their control.

Science also reveals what is needed to stabilise atmospheric composition and climate. Geophysical data on the carbon amounts in oil, gas and coal show that the problem is solvable, if we phase out global coal emissions within 20 years and prohibit emissions from unconventional fossil fuels such as tar sands and oil shale.

Such constraints on fossil fuels would cause carbon dioxide emissions to decline 60% by mid-century or even more if policies make it uneconomic to go after every last drop of oil.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/29/copenhagen-summit-climate-change

Luddites. This one works at NASA.

But then people like General Ludd are nothing to be concerned about...

[DinoDoc]

Is there any real chance of averting the climate crisis?

Absolutely. It is possible – if we give politicians a cold, hard slap in the face.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/29/copenhagen-summit-climate-change

What happened to global warming?

....
But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8299079.stm

[Drake Tungsten]

A minority of scientists question whether this means global warming has peaked and argue the Earth has proved more resilient to greenhouse gases than predicted.

But Mr Jarraud insisted this was not the case and noted that 2008 temperatures would still be well above average for the last 100 years.

"When you look at climate change you should not look at any particular year," he said. "You should look at trends over a pretty long period and the trend of temperature globally is still very much indicative of warming.

"La Nina is part of what we call 'variability'. There has always been and there will always be cooler and warmer years, but what is important for climate change is that the trend is up; the climate on average is warming even if there is a temporary cooling because of La Nina."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7329799.stm

[Elok]

Well, if the solution involves banning tar sands and thereby hosing the hosers, there might be something to this after all.

[notyoueither]

I am under the impression the Chinese do not care too much.

[DinoDoc]

A minority of scientists question whether this means global warming has peaked and argue the Earth has proved more resilient to greenhouse gases than predicted.

But Mr Jarraud insisted this was not the case and noted that 2008 temperatures would still be well above average for the last 100 years.

"When you look at climate change you should not look at any particular year," he said. "You should look at trends over a pretty long period and the trend of temperature globally is still very much indicative of warming.

"La Nina is part of what we call 'variability'. There has always been and there will always be cooler and warmer years, but what is important for climate change is that the trend is up; the climate on average is warming even if there is a temporary cooling because of La Nina."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7329799.stm

I expect a little more accuracy than has been demonstrated thus far from models predicting scenarios people are expecting billions to be spent to prevent.

[notyoueither]

Do I really have to drag up the thread where you spend dozens of posts arguing that it really matters which of the two participants in a transaction the government collects a tax from?

Continued here, about post 73

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?t=189273

[Drake Tungsten]

I expect a little more accuracy than has been demonstrated thus far from models predicting scenarios people are expecting billions to be spent to prevent.

Given that the article I linked to predicted the La Nina-caused cooling before it happened, I don't really understand what you're *****ing about.

[DinoDoc]

La Nina is an 11 year phenomona? We're not simply picking out a single year out of thin air and making conclusions from it here.

[Drake Tungsten]

La Nina is an 11 year phenomona?

No. You're thinking of solar cycles, and 11 years is only an average for those.

We're not simply picking out a single year out of thin air and making conclusions from it here.

You are picking an abnormally hot year (1998) and then pointing to the regression to the (upward-sloping) trend line that followed it as "proof" of global cooling.

[Felch]

The panic-mongers pointed to an abnormally hot year (1998), and declared that it was the end of the world. Both sides are full of ****. But at least the skeptics aren't calling for trillion dollar schemes to help avert a hypothetical catastrophe.