Alt dette tyder på enten enorm inkompetanse eller så stor uærlighet innenfor klimaforskningen. Det er allerede kommet frem flere tilfeller hvor klimaforskere som ikke publiserer forskning som støtter IPCC vil miste sin støtte. Så alle som er uenige blir presset til å holde kjeft, ellers mister de sin støtte fra staten, og hvis dette ikke er ett problem vil det foregå en sverte kampanje for å diskreditere disse forskerne, denne kampanjen satser da på å gå på person og ikke forskning selvfølgelig. Å si at denne forskningen idag ikke er blitt politisert og korumpert er ufattelig naivt, med mindre man er en av de onde som ønsker å få gjennom kravene sine, eller hvis man rett og slett bare er en menneskehater.
Men på tross av alt dette presset for å føye seg etter IPCC, politikerne og byråkratene (makthaverne), så er det stadig flere og flere som bryter ut, og forteller sannheten om hva som foregår i miljøet.
Her er noen linker.
http://ncwatch.typepad.com/media/2010/09/global-warming-update-utahs-climate-variability.htmlMålestasjonenes plasseringer.
http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/weather_stations/Målestasjonenes plasseringer.
http://www.surfacestations.org/Målestasjonenes plasseringer.
http://www.surfacestations.org/odd_sites.htmMålestasjonenes plasseringer.
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/13830/I talked about this at length in my December 2003 column. Unfortunately, discussion of this plot has been so polluted by political and activist frenzy that it is hard to dig into it to reach the science. My earlier column was largely a plea to let science proceed unmolested. Unfortunately, the very importance of the issue has made careful science difficult to pursue.
http://www.john-daly.com/hockey/hockey.htmConclusion
The evidence from the `exhibits' is overwhelming. From all corners of the world, the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age clearly shows up in a variety of proxy indicators, proxies more representative of temperature than the inadequate tree rings used by Michael Mann.
What is disquieting about the `Hockey Stick' is not Mann's presentation of it originally. As with any paper, it would sink into oblivion if found to be flawed in any way. Rather it was the reaction of the greenhouse industry to it - the chorus of approval, the complete lack of critical evaluation of the theory, the blind acceptance of evidence which was so flimsy. The industry embraced the theory for one reason and one reason only - it told them exactly what they wanted to hear.(Min utheving)
Proponents of the `Hockey Stick' should recall George Orwell's `Nineteen Eighty-Four', a black SF drama in which his fictional totalitarian regime used `memory holes' to re-invent past history [22]. In this age of instant communication, there is no `memory hole' big enough to overturn the historical truth about the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age.
http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?catid=14:text&id=232:rossmckitrick-02-10-09&option=com_content&view=article"Then along came Canadian researchers Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick. After some hen’s-teeth pulling to get Prof. Mann to release his raw data, Messrs. McIntyre and McKitrick found that 105 of 112 data sets he had used were incomplete, flawed or incorrect."
http://www.grist.org/article/series/skeptics/Denne kan være interessant for Onar og andre som diskuterer med klimahysterikere.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/01/022642.phpThe "hockey stick" graph had the virtue, from the alarmists' perspective, of "getting rid of" the Medieval Warm Period, which had always been acknowledged as the predecessor to the Little Ice Age and our own era, in which temperatures have recovered from the Little Ice Age:
http://theliesabout.com/climate-change/more-lies-about-global-warming-debunked/428“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
- Joseph Goebbels (Propaganda Minister)
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/globalwarming.html?q=globalwarming.htmlGlobal warming has finally been explained: the Earth is getting hotter because the Sun is burning more brightly than at any time during the past 1,000 years, according to new research. A study by Swiss and German scientists suggests that increasing radiation from the sun is responsible for recent global climate changes. Dr Sami Solanki, the director of the renowned Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Gottingen, Germany, who led the research, said: "The Sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures. [Telegraph 18/7/04]
They say that over the last century the number of sunspots rose at the same time that the Earth's climate became steadily warmer. [BBC 7/6/04]
Global warming and melting polar ice caps are not just problems here on Earth. Mars is facing similar global changes, researchers say, with temperatures across the red planet rising by around 0.65 degrees over the last few decades. [Register]
Sunspots - 9/27/2001
Click for full size
For about 300 years Jupiter's banded atmosphere has shown a remarkable feature to telescopic viewers, a large swirling storm system known as The Great Red Spot. In 2006, another red storm system appeared, actually seen to form as smaller whitish oval-shaped storms merged and then developed the curious reddish hue.
Now, Jupiter has a third red spot, again produced from a smaller whitish storm. ... Jupiter's recent outbreak of red spots is likely related to large scale climate change as the gas giant planet is getting warmer near the equator. [NASA]
Neptune has been getting brighter since around 1980; furthermore, infrared measurements of the planet since 1980 show that the planet has been warming steadily from 1980 to 2004. As they say on Neptune, global warming has become an inconvenient truth. [World Climate Report]
http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/When Professor Hal Lewis wrote his now-famous letter of resignation to the American Physical Society earlier this week, climate change alarmists were quick to respond with their usual wit, aplomb and generosity. Here were some of the excuses they offered as to why this terrible man must at all costs not be taken seriously.
http://news.oneindia.in/2010/10/12/globalwarming-the-most-successful-pseudoscientific-fraude.htmlWashington, Oct 12(ANI): An American professor has branded global warming as "the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud" he has ever seen.
Buzz up!
Professor Harold Lewis claimed that man-made climate change
has become a "scam" driven by "trillions of dollars" which has "corrupted" scientists.
Lewis made the remarks after formally resigning from the American Physical Society (APS).
He compared the APS now to the organization he joined 67 years ago which he said was "much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood".
"How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth and the money flood has become the raison d'etre of much physics research," the Daily Express quoted Lewis, as saying.
"It is of course, the global warming
scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist," he added.
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/No Consensus Among Climate Scientists After All
THE Royal Society’s report coincides with dissidence at the American Physical Society
By Des Moore
THE Royal Society’s September report, Climate Change: A Summary of the Science, has brought into the open the widening difference of views about how the science of climate change should be assessed. It comes after a prominent resignation from the American Physical Society (the top body of US physicists) for the refusal of the society’s executive to undertake a similar review despite requests from a large number of members.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37402When hackers released thousands of documents generated by climate scientists at the highly influential Climatic Research Unit at Britain’s University of East Anglia last year, much evidence of fraud, dishonesty and mistakes in support of the theory of man-made global warming came to public light.
Some of the e-mails that climate scientists sent to one another were breathtaking in their contempt for science and their slavish devotion to the climate-change political agenda pushed by the politicians and government bureaucrats funding their research.
Now, new Virginia Atty. Gen. Ken Cuccinelli (R.) could unearth a similar bonanza of evidence of scientific global-warming fraud here in the United States using the Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act (FATA).
http://www.capitalismmagazine.com/science/environment/global-warming/5164-Climate-Change-101-Key-Global-Warming-Facts.htmlClimate Change 101: Key Global Warming Facts
20 April 2008 Dennis Avery
The Earth has had eight warming cycles since the last Ice Age. Several of these were apparently warmer than today, based on the evidence of fossils and isotopes.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka CRU) and released 61 megabytes of confidential files onto the internet. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That)
When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6679082/Climate-change-this-is-the-worst-scientific-scandal-of-our-generation.html
Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation
Our hopelessly compromised scientific establishment cannot be allowed to get away with the Climategate whitewash, says Christopher Booker.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/categories/C19Climate Science Corruption: Practiced And Perpetuated By Scientific Societies
By Dr. Tim Ball Thursday, October 14, 2010
A recent Pew Center poll shows public concern about global warming continues very low and even declining slightly. They’ve been there for a year now as comparison of their 2009/2010 results show. The most significant shift is in Energy, which dropped from 60 to 49 percent. Partly due to the declining gas prices, but also lower concern about failure of the basic energy sources and reduced threat of carbon taxes.
Menneskeskapt global oppvarming av solsystemet vårt????
Her foregår en diskusjon om oppvarming av diverse planeter i solsystemet vårt.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-other-planets-solar-system.htmOther planets are warming
"Evidence that CO2 is not the principle driver of warming on this planet is provided by the simultaneous warming of other planets and moons in our solar system, despite the fact that they obviously have no anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases. Mars, Triton, Pluto and Jupiter all show global warming, pointing to the Sun as the dominating influence in determining climate throughout the solar system." (Ian McClintock)
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread221608/pg1This is a fact that not many people know about, and quite a few people, would like that there was no evidence to back this fact, because some people would like the world to believe that human activity is the cause for global warming on Earth. I am not advocating that releasing harmful gases, and chemicals in the oceans and atmosphere are good, but after a few years of research, I have come to understand that global warming is happening in the Solar System, not just on Earth.
Some people just want to listen to what some environmentalists are claiming, that global warming is happening because of human activity, and we are the cause for the extreme changes in climate we have been seeing lately getting worse and worse.
I will let now the facts speak for themselves as to what is really happening.
Her med argumenter fra begge sider.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.htmlHabibullo Abdussamatov, head of space research at St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data is evidence that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun.
"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars," he said.
Men jeg antar at Vanndrikker vil avfeie alt som ikke allerede er i overenstemmelse med hans forutinntatte syn. Han har bestemt seg for at slik er det og uansett hva man sier og hvilke beviser for at det er feil eller iallefall stor usikkerhet rundt saken, så vil ikke dette forandre det syn han allerede har bestemt seg for å ha uavhengig av bevis for det motsatte.
Slike mennesker baserer seg kun på hva de føler er riktig eller galt, og uansett hvor vitenskapelig han prøver å utgi seg for å være, så er dette kun følelsesmessige utbrudd uten noe hold i virkeligheten. Og så lenge han kun kommer med argumenter basert på flertallsavgjørelser (og selv det er tvilsomt), og ikke fakta, så ser jeg ikke hvordan det er noe å hente på å diskutere med han. Annet enn å vise folk som leser hvordan disse miljøhysterikerne faktisk tenker og handler, selv om det å si tenker er å ta litt hardt i da dette kun ser ut som en følelses orgie, uten en eneste selvstendig tanke. Dette er kun en miljø-bot.
Noen mennesker tror det får troverdighet bare fordi de bruker ord som vitenskapelig, konsensus og fakta. Men når man bruker disse ordene uten å ha den minste anelse hva disse ordene betyr, så er det heller det motsatte som skjer, medmindre man diskuterer med folk som er like irrasjonelle.
Og hvis noen synes jeg kanskje bruker litt sterke ord her, så kan jeg ikke se at dette på noe punkt har vært noen saklig, ordentlig eller høflig debatt til å begynne med. Og personlig så har jeg ikke en tendens til å behandle bøllespirer, usaklige og ufine debatanter med noe særlig respekt hvis noen overhodet, og jeg har for det meste holdt meg igjen her og nå.
Og jeg har nevnt tidligere i dette forumet hva jeg mener om folk som setter ord og meninger i andres munn. Og når man ikke kan oppføre seg så bør man heller ikke kunne forvente noen form for respekt.
Ken-G. Johansen.
