Global Warming Study Flawed

[Dubh Aingeal]

According to an article at DailyTech, a blogger has discovered a Y2K bug in a NASA climate study by the same writer who accused the Bush administration of trying to censor him on the issue of global warming. The authors have acknowledged the problem and released corrected data. Now the study shows the warmest year on record for the contiguous 48 states as being 1934, not 1998 as previously reported in the media. In fact, the corrected study shows that half of the 10 warmest years on record occurred before World War II.

[crunchy_pickle (5)]

According to an article at DailyTech, a blogger has discovered a Y2K bug in a NASA climate study by the same writer who accused the Bush administration of trying to censor him on the issue of global warming. The authors have acknowledged the problem and released corrected data. Now the study shows the warmest year on record for the contiguous 48 states as being 1934, not 1998 as previously reported in the media. In fact, the corrected study shows that half of the 10 warmest years on record occurred before World War II.

I don't buy it. Sounds like another angry kid to me. I looked into it, but I highly doubt any Y2K bug is responsible for this for one. Furthermore, the year he referenced in his article holds the record for the highest anomaly, between that time and previously. That says nothing for temperature....

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Excuse me while i fall out of my chair laughing.

[n0Mad]

I like all of the facts that the research team for Penn & Teller's "Bullshit" tv show dug up. Using documented factual scientific evidence, they pretty much prove that global warming is bullshit.

[Medea]

Global Warming is something seems to cloud the other issue.

That is that pollution is bad. Depleting our ozone layer is bad.

We are increasing chances of emphysema, asthma, lung cancer, skin cancer and many other diseases, as well as destroying the natural resources at our disposal.

Whether global warming is real or not, the things that are suggested to do to avoid it are good ideas anyway

[function13]

I like all of the facts that the research team for Penn & Teller's "Bullshit" tv show dug up. Using documented factual scientific evidence, they pretty much prove that global warming is bullshit.

Before I get into it, I want to say first: "I'm a huge fan of Bullshit!"

However, I feel they sometimes misrepresent the truth in SOME episodes. For example, they "debunked" second hand smoke as something that isn't really a problem. Time and again, study after study, second hand smoke IS a problem.

I think they get it right 75% of the time. My opinion is, at least they get people thinking!

[crunchy_pickle (5)]

Dude anyone who thinks global warming is bullshit, should look at a few basic facts.

The earth has "warming" and "cooling" periods. While, I can't see a justification for the expense of prolonging the inevitable, perhaps in another 30-50 years, we'll be prepared? Our ozone no matter how strong just cannot stop the sun from melting the caps. That's not even a possibility. The Chinese once sailed across the Arctic Circle, I believe in the 1400s. Whatever the period, there was a minor ice age, that actually did kill a lot of people. The only way the Irish and the English survived was by eating potatoes, which previously they would not eat, because they feared that it was the devil's food. I think it had something to do with the way in which it's grown. This guy trying to prove shit with temperature variances, and no basis or starting point for these anomalies is just a bonehead. There already is some serious melting going on, and an expedition was recently led to "swim" at the north pole.

The point I'm trying to make is that no, I do not agree with people trying to increase our spending budget by using scare tactics and not informing people of the "real" issues. Aside from that, there was a 70's scare with global cooling, and these "puppets" in office have gone on way too long pushing the agendas of the very people that destroyed a once multi party and democratic nation. Everyday things are pushed just a little bit further, and I am sick and tired of sitting on my ass and not doing anything about it.

United we stand, divided and scared, we sit and do nothing as our leaders put us further in debt, and ensure that the "quality of life" as measured by our gross domestic product is frowned upon by the rest of the world. How many people are foreclosing on their homes right now in this country? The adjustable rate wench just came out of the closet with an ax. Our very gross domestic product isn't even accurate anyways, to the point that in all fairness our dollar bill should be worth a lot less than it is. We factor in money spent on crime, and I can only assume since I don't know the facts on this one for sure, but I would say we spend more money on crime, than any other country in the world.

This is why our budget is not balanced. There is only a small percentage of people in this country that are willing to make the extra effort to discover these facts. That percentage needs to get together for the purposes of problem solving, or things will get much worse. Crime will go up dramatically. Bad economics is not good for crime at all. If gas goes up to $10/gallon, we'll be looking at civil war and anarchy. This might seem a bit extreme, but these are realistic scare tactics, and I'll say that I fear for our children. If we do not take action and do so soon, we'll have a lot more to worry about than global warming and senseless wars.

I had to edit this and add one more point about GDP. It also factors in government spending, and well when you're writing checks from an overdrawn account this does not make you rich. It makes you a thief and a criminal. So in essence, we the people, are being ripped off.

[function13]

There is a HUGE problem with this story. The problem is that Al Gore has been campaigning for a solution for global warming since the 80's... well before the Y2K problem existed.

[crunchy_pickle (5)]

There is a HUGE problem with this story. The problem is that Al Gore has been campaigning for a solution for global warming since the 80's... well before the Y2K problem existed.

That's because there has been a 0.5 anomaly going on almost annually since then, and it's mostly been on the positive side. If you look at these NASA figures, you can clearly see that this kids facts speak against his entire argument.

1986 .73 .29

1987 .83 .25

1988 .32 .51

1989 -.19 .50

1990 .87 .40

1991 .69 .25

1992 .30 .38

1993 -.44 .27

1994 .46 .10

1995 .34 .05

1996 -.17 .38

1997 .03 .47

1998 1.23 .51

1999 .93 .69

2000 .52 .79

2001 .76 .65

2002 .53 .55

2003 .50 .58

2004 .44 .66

2005 .69 *

2006 1.13 *

If you look in the left column, you will notice very few negative numbers. These are annual changes in degree temperature. 1998 has been the highest recent change. Of course this kid obviously does not know how to read this, or he would not assume that this has anything to do with how warm it is currently. You can see a -.17 and a .3 change prior to 98, so a 1.23 degree change would kind of be expected anyways, but unless he can provide us with the temperatures in 1934 versus the temperatures in 1998, his whole argument is flawed. For the record 1934 had a 1.25 degree temperature change. That is 0.2 higher than 1998 in "temperature change", but says nothing of the temperature itself..

[function13]

That's because there has been a 0.5 anomaly going on almost annually since then.

Please site your references. I don't think you're being disingenuous, I just don't quite follow.

[crunchy_pickle (5)]

Please site your references. I don't think you're being disingenuous, I just don't quite follow.

These figures are from the NASA website, and listed here.

[function13]

These figures are from the NASA website, and listed here.

Agreed.

[crunchy_pickle (5)]

Agreed.

I made one more point in a previous post, and I'm not sure if you got it or not. It was another point on GDP, that I felt necessary to add a short paragraph on.

[Head Wreck]

i'm going to sit on the fence over the whole is and isn't happening issue on global warming.

but it cant hurt to start looking into clean energy sources. after all were going to run out of fossil fuels soon and i'm sure the environment cant hurt by being treated a little better

[BrassFusion]

i'm going to sit on the fence over the whole is and isn't happening issue on global warming.

but it cant hurt to start looking into clean energy sources. after all were going to run out of fossil fuels soon and i'm sure the environment cant hurt by being treated a little better

THANK YOU.

Just like Medea said, as well... there's no reason to scurry around trying to figure out exactly how bad we're fucking our environs if we already know we're doing it and it's possible to do less damage. Hell, if I stand behind my car while it's running, it smells fucking awful. It's carbon monoxide and I can't breathe that shit. The MORE of that in the environment vs. oxygen from plants and other sources, the shittier the air is gonna be. FUCKIN' DUH.

That's part of the reason I've been riding my bike when possible. It's not much, and I COULD do more to keep the air clean, but I'm taking it one step at a time, I guess.

[crunchy_pickle (5)]

THANK YOU.

Just like Medea said, as well... there's no reason to scurry around trying to figure out exactly how bad we're fucking our environs if we already know we're doing it and it's possible to do less damage. Hell, if I stand behind my car while it's running, it smells fucking awful. It's carbon monoxide and I can't breathe that shit. The MORE of that in the environment vs. oxygen from plants and other sources, the shittier the air is gonna be. FUCKIN' DUH.

That's part of the reason I've been riding my bike when possible. It's not much, and I COULD do more to keep the air clean, but I'm taking it one step at a time, I guess.

Carbon monoxide is actually a tasteless and odorless gas. Of course the exhaust fumes well they aren't very tasty lol. Also carbon monoxide has very little to do with ozone depletion. Ozone is a triatomic oxygen molecule that can react with carbon to form carbon dioxide at room temperature. Where Ozone depletion is concerned, it's mostly freons and halons that are responsible. I do agree though, that it is a very good thing to keep our air clean. Triatomic Oxygen is actually used by some people as an alternative medical treatment. It is however toxic in large doses, and not approved by the FDA.

[Head Wreck]

i darent stand behind mine.

its an old school diesel. i want one of the new peugeot diesels as the emissions testing kit they use often fail to notice that the car is actually running (once a year us brits put ourselves through roadworthyness tests, i dont know if mine will pass next time so theres my excuse to buy one)

[crunchy_pickle (5)]

Well, despite diesel fuel being a little bit less refined than gasoline, I do believe that diesel combustion in many cases is a lot cleaner than gasoline. I'll have to do my research on that one, but I do know I've read about this before.

[Head Wreck]

i've seen diesel cars modified to the point where getting into the high performance petrol units you think "jeez this is slow". the car in question, peugeot 205 gti's

[ttogreh]

Well, it isn't really the diesel engine, as it is the diesel fuel. Did you know you can make your own diesel fuel, or modify your car to run on used fryer oil? First off, it's more efficient, you are using the same carbon twice, once for food, twice for fuel.

Secondly, it's a lot cleaner.

Thirdly, it lubes the engine better, and extends the life of your vehicle.

You can also buy 20 per cent Bio diesel at Meijer Gas Stations. It's a start....

[Head Wreck]

the smell from it is quite sweet smelling.

just need to filter out the crap from the oil (dont want clogged jinjectors do we? )

and then own up[ to doing it to HM revenue and customs and pay whopping tax fees for doing so. otherwise they crush your vehicle, and fine you

[Troy Spiral (13)]

There is no serious scientific controversy within the scientific community about the fact of global warming. Global warming is only politically controversial. The random scientists that big business pulls out of their pocket ( but we usually see via backing from their political puppets) are in the extreme, nearly non-existent minority of scientists who study such things by comparison.

There is no serious scientific controversy about the fact of global warming. Controversy about some of the nitty-gritty details? Yeah sure. But not about the subject as a whole. Pointing out random problems with random points here and there is an error in logic to extrapolate it to mean the whole subject is in error.

The scientific evidence against global warming as a man-influenced phenomenon is very weak. The arguments heavily rely on people "believing what they want to believe" rather than actually basing it on widespread, tested again and again research.

You can always find some random factoids or studies that will follow along with what you already prefer to believe. Basically the exact same deal as evolution just with a different (although related) set of pundits. Until i started doing some hardcore research about such things i was easily confused by the political/media show business. A handful of articles can always be found in one direction or the other, which should not sway anyone. The entire body of evidence needs to be looked at.

[ttogreh]

the smell from it is quite sweet smelling.

just need to filter out the crap from the oil (dont want clogged jinjectors do we? )

and then own up[ to doing it to HM revenue and customs and pay whopping tax fees for doing so. otherwise they crush your vehicle, and fine you

Well, yes, you should get the bits of food out of the used fryer oil, and be prepared to change fuel filters a few times, as the gunk on the sides of the fuel tank might get knocked off due to the solvent nature of biodiesel or used fryer oil.

You definitely want to measure how much fuel you use, and pay the tax on it. However, it isn't any where near as much as you would pay for straight fuel.

[Head Wreck]

nope.

allready know.

have done it myself before

[Daniel]

There is no serious scientific controversy within the scientific community about the fact of global warming. Global warming is only politically controversial. The random scientists that big business pulls out of their pocket ( but we usually see via backing from their political puppets) are in the extreme, nearly non-existent minority of scientists who study such things by comparison.

There is no serious scientific controversy about the fact of global warming. Controversy about some of the nitty-gritty details? Yeah sure. But not about the subject as a whole. Pointing out random problems with random points here and there is an error in logic to extrapolate it to mean the whole subject is in error.

The scientific evidence against global warming as a man-influenced phenomenon is very weak. The arguments heavily rely on people "believing what they want to believe" rather than actually basing it on widespread, tested again and again research.

You can always find some random factoids or studies that will follow along with what you already prefer to believe. Basically the exact same deal as evolution just with a different (although related) set of pundits. Until i started doing some hardcore research about such things i was easily confused by the political/media show business. A handful of articles can always be found in one direction or the other, which should not sway anyone. The entire body of evidence needs to be looked at.

Seconded. This said basically what I was going to say.