MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34242705/
    Is MSNBC referring to their new Comcast owners icing their lefty loon rating-losers Olberman and Maddow? 
    Actually, this is too silly to be satire, this is real grant-begging, er, science.

    "This kind of scenario would not discount evidence pointing toward global warming — after all, it leans on the Greenland ice sheet melting. "
    "We could say that global warming could lead to a dramatic cooling," Patterson told LiveScience. "This should serve as a further warning rather than a pass."
    Yes, sure...did you scientists make sure and delete the emails with your research methodology, before you sell this new load of BS?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from easydoesit2. Show easydoesit2's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    Oh, brother.  Scientists can't accurately predict the temperature of a given location next week, but they have a "sudden Ice Age" affecting the entire planet all figured out?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    This "cycle" of hysteria must stop.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    So, the Greenland ice shelf isn't melting...?

    The oceans aren't rising or becoming more acidic??

    The atmosphere isn't recording steadily higher levels of CO2...???


    The issue with the emails changes none of these readily available facts and represents, perhaps at the most, 4% of the data - data which was arbitrarily manipulated by the programmers who changed the software code keeping track of said data.

    As someone who works in software develpoment for a living, I assure you this type of thing happens all the time though admittedly on not such controversial issues.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ohhhhh-Bammy. Show Ohhhhh-Bammy's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    You are a trusting soul or.....
    If they went to extremes to hide this 'insignificant data'.. we should still trust?

    Seems vested interests weight heavily.

    I also work with data.. I haven't been asked to trim the fat serving a predefined solution. And these are "scientists" ??
     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    In Response to Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age":
    So, the Greenland ice shelf isn't melting...? The oceans aren't rising or becoming more acidic?? The atmosphere isn't recording steadily higher levels of CO2...??? The issue with the emails changes none of these readily available facts and represents, perhaps at the most, 4% of the data - data which was arbitrarily manipulated by the programmers who changed the software code keeping track of said data. As someone who works in software develpoment for a living, I assure you this type of thing happens all the time though admittedly on not such controversial issues.
    Posted by Mattyhorn


    Matty.  The world has experiencing climate change since it's creation.  We need to be more energy efficient because we need to have clean water to drink, healthy fish to eat and clean air to breath.  We need clean energy because we need to be independent of the middle east and acknowledge the fact that oil is a finite resource.  We DON'T need to be forced into expensive new laws and government regulation because Al Gore and a few scientists say so.  When a global warming scientist throws out fake information and the world treats it as gospel and that same scientist suddenly gets millions of dollars as a result, I'm rightfully skeptical.



     
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    by the way..did you see that it's going to snow in Houston today???  That's not Houston, Missouri either.  It's the one in Texas, earliest snow ever recorded there.

    The planet has a fever.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from brat13. Show brat13's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    In Response to Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age":
    So, the Greenland ice shelf isn't melting...? The oceans aren't rising or becoming more acidic?? The atmosphere isn't recording steadily higher levels of CO2...??? The issue with the emails changes none of these readily available facts and represents, perhaps at the most, 4% of the data - data which was arbitrarily manipulated by the programmers who changed the software code keeping track of said data. As someone who works in software develpoment for a living, I assure you this type of thing happens all the time though admittedly on not such controversial issues.
    Posted by Mattyhorn


    Matty, that data that was destroyed is 100% the basis for all the GW findings. They fudged temps by up to 5 DEGREES!! That is HUGE! Think about the FACT they are saying the temp has risen @1 degree C as their basis for GW. You can dismiss and carry on as if nothing happened BUT true thinkers (i.e. non-lemmings) will look and investigate and these "scientists" will be shown the door.
     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    While it it highly likely that one or even a few scientists could have individually shown bias while analyzing data, it is that much more UNlikely - given its rarity - of a worldwide conspiracy to do the same.  Part of the allure of being a scientist in the first place is the desire to disprove the consensus; indeed it's one of the surefire ways for a scientist to get recognition.


    The "basis" for globalwarmingclimatechange is decades and decades of recorded climate data in addition to thousands of reams of natural history information - itself its own form of speculation.  We can disagree all the live long day about what to do about the problem, but the idea that a VERY limited amount of fudged data immediately discredits the well-documented global phenomenon is absurd.

    Scientists are not robots; they are human and prone to mistakes.  Further, software is created by people equally prone to mistakes and cutting corners where they should not be cut.  As I understand this issue, there were gaps in the data already collected which were subsequently filled by erroneous data meant to bridge thost gaps.  I'm not saying it's right, but I'm also not calling it  - reflexively or out of pure ideology - something it's not: a global scientific conspiracy.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    Hmmm...kind of like the GOPs' "purity test"...right, Greg...?  Why can't scientists disagree and call each other a**holes if they feel so inclined??  I know I can barely go through a week without wondering how some people got their positions, but there they are.

    Here is the best explanation I've read, from a climatologist, and it addresses what I'm talking about in terms of the data itself.

    The data in question is actually two sets of data. One being the data from 1BCE to now using tree rings and coral. Tree rings are larger when it is wet or hot and smaller when it is cold and dry. Because wet/hot and cold/dry aren't correlated, there are uncertainties with the data. But, the data from tree rings from 1BCE to now does show temperatures similar with other temperature markers. That is, until the middle of this century.


    The other set of data comes from real thermometers, from the mid-19th century to now. The data becomes more reliable as data gathering methods become more precise. What the scientists at CRU did was splice and combine the two data sets. The tree rings data shows cooling that is in opposition to actual measured temperatures. So the CRU scientists combined the two data sets to make it look like one data set that shows more continuous warming.

    What the CRU scientists did may not have been ethically pure, but warming is happening. They probably should have made clear the "trick" they used was actually two different data sets. The information that has become known through this "scandal" may call into question historical climate data, but not current climate data. The world is still warming now, and "climategate" doesn't change the need for significant carbon cuts in Copenhagen.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from brat13. Show brat13's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    In Response to Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age":
    Hmmm...kind of like the GOPs' "purity test"...right, Greg...?  Why can't scientists disagree and call each other a**holes if they feel so inclined??  I know I can barely go through a week without wondering how some people got their positions, but there they are. Here is the best explanation I've read, from a climatologist, and it addresses what I'm talking about in terms of the data itself. The data in question is actually two sets of data. One being the data from 1BCE to now using tree rings and coral. Tree rings are larger when it is wet or hot and smaller when it is cold and dry. Because wet/hot and cold/dry aren't correlated, there are uncertainties with the data. But, the data from tree rings from 1BCE to now does show temperatures similar with other temperature markers. That is, until the middle of this century. The other set of data comes from real thermometers, from the mid-19th century to now. The data becomes more reliable as data gathering methods become more precise. What the scientists at CRU did was splice and combine the two data sets. The tree rings data shows cooling that is in opposition to actual measured temperatures. So the CRU scientists combined the two data sets to make it look like one data set that shows more continuous warming. What the CRU scientists did may not have been ethically pure, but warming is happening. They probably should have made clear the "trick" they used was actually two different data sets. The information that has become known through this "scandal" may call into question historical climate data, but not current climate data. The world is still warming now, and "climategate" doesn't change the need for significant carbon cuts in Copenhagen.
    Posted by Mattyhorn


    Matty, we will never know the truth because they DESTROYED THE DATA! No
    scientist can EVER recreate their tests because the data is gone.

    You STILL want to have a world body control our economy? You are crazy! BTW, why not India and China too?

    BTW, I have heard the scientists are only in it for the science BS. look no further than the Marlboro Man, pharma side affects and this instance to see scientists are in it for the $$$ PERIOD.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    My, but the free market principles go out the window relative to environmental concerns, don't they...?  Many scientific innovations have originated precisely from the pursuit of the almight dollar (or yuan, or euro, et al...)


    Again, only a fraction of the data is gone; the rest is still there, and it's still relevant in light of the understandably serious ethical infractions of a few.  And it still doesn't change the fact that carbon emissions are increasing un-characteristically and must be contained.

    Nobody is suggesting a "takeover of the economy" by a world body or anyone else.  That's as rhetorically hysterical as "save the planet".  Both are non-sequiturs that ignore the true debate.  (Personally, I would prefer a reasonable carbon/gas tax to cap-and-trade, but that's another debate about policy, not climate science or scientific integrity.)

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ohhhhh-Bammy. Show Ohhhhh-Bammy's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    Don't know of ANY organized system that isn't supported with rotated backups. It casts even more doubt if these professional scientists either didn't have data backups or.. they got destroyed also. Haven't heard this brought up.. but I don't suppose they will be offering anything voluntarily. Overall.. this appears soooo self serving.

    Everything is political. The bigger it gets....

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from brat13. Show brat13's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    In Response to Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age":
    My, but the free market principles go out the window relative to environmental concerns, don't they...?  Many scientific innovations have originated precisely from the pursuit of the almight dollar (or yuan, or euro, et al...) Again, only a fraction of the data is gone; the rest is still there, and it's still relevant in light of the understandably serious ethical infractions of a few.  And it still doesn't change the fact that carbon emissions are increasing un-characteristically and must be contained. Nobody is suggesting a "takeover of the economy" by a world body or anyone else.  That's as rhetorically hysterical as "save the planet".  Both are non-sequiturs that ignore the true debate.  (Personally, I would prefer a reasonable carbon/gas tax to cap-and-trade, but that's another debate about policy, not climate science or scientific integrity.)
    Posted by Mattyhorn


    The scientific community has always claimed they have no skin in the game. They look at raw data and extrapolate a theory from that data then go about proving it right or wrong. We have always been lead to believe that it didn't matter who was paying for the research, they had "scientific integrity". Now we know better. They fudge the data and make it say what their masters want it to say.

    It is not "just a fraction of the data", it was the very basis of where all the other data came from. When the base data is gone it is impossible to recreate and find the truth. Coincidence? I doubt it.

    The Copenhagen accord will impose a world governing body on our economy and those of all who sign it. The biggest polluters (Australia, China and India) will not be signing it. What will it accomplish?
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    In Response to Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age":
    In Response to Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age" : The scientific community has always claimed they have no skin in the game. They look at raw data and extrapolate a theory from that data then go about proving it right or wrong. We have always been lead to believe that it didn't matter who was paying for the research, they had "scientific integrity". Now we know better. They fudge the data and make it say what their masters want it to say. It is not "just a fraction of the data", it was the very basis of where all the other data came from. When the base data is gone it is impossible to recreate and find the truth. Coincidence? I doubt it. The Copenhagen accord will impose a world governing body on our economy and those of all who sign it. The biggest polluters (Australia, China and India) will not be signing it. What will it accomplish?
    Posted by brat13



    I'm not sure what the point is of accusing all climate scientists the world over of acting in bad faith, but if that's your position, then not much I say will convince you otherwise.  I simply refuse to believe that these incidents amount to a blanket condemnation of all the climate science data.  This is not an all-or-nothing proposition; there are too many levels of scrutiny to just throw it all out.

    But what does it say about the efforts to publicly expose the indiscretions?  Aren't they also acting upon a bias, perceived or real?  Why should their intentions be labeled so pure?
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from brat13. Show brat13's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    In Response to Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age" : I'm not sure what the point is of accusing all climate scientists the world over of acting in bad faith, but if that's your position, then not much I say will convince you otherwise.  I simply refuse to believe that these incidents amount to a blanket condemnation of all the climate science data.  This is not an all-or-nothing proposition; there are too many levels of scrutiny to just throw it all out. But what does it say about the efforts to publicly expose the indiscretions?  Aren't they also acting upon a bias, perceived or real?  Why should their intentions be labeled so pure?
    Posted by Mattyhorn[/QUOTE]

    I am not saying "they all" are acting in bad faith. As a matter of fact I am saying there are many who have been fighting this march to MMGW that are acting responsibly. Not because I agree with them but because they are doing what scientists are supposed to do, QUESTION.

    The CRU is the data house for GW data. Many climatologist have said so. That puts all data in this debate up for sever scrutiny.

    Pure? Maybe not. I am not taking a side per se. I am saying, as I have been for years now, that we don't know IF there is GW and we have no clue IF we do, that it is caused by man/CO2. I want all the data from all sides out in the open and an open and honest debate.

    This is one email that really bothers me...

    From Phil Jones (witholding of data):

    The skeptics seem to be building up a head of steam here! …  The IPCC comes in for a lot of stick. Leave it to you to delete as appropriate! Cheers Phil
    PS I’m getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don’t any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act ! 

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    In Response to Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age" : I am not saying "they all" are acting in bad faith. As a matter of fact I am saying there are many who have been fighting this march to MMGW that are acting responsibly. Not because I agree with them but because they are doing what scientists are supposed to do, QUESTION. The CRU is the data house for GW data. Many climatologist have said so. That puts all data in this debate up for sever scrutiny. Pure? Maybe not. I am not taking a side per se. I am saying, as I have been for years now, that we don't know IF there is GW and we have no clue IF we do, that it is caused by man/CO2. I want all the data from all sides out in the open and an open and honest debate. This is one email that really bothers me... From Phil Jones (witholding of data): The skeptics seem to be building up a head of steam here! …  The IPCC comes in for a lot of stick. Leave it to you to delete as appropriate! Cheers Phil PS I’m getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don’t any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act ! 
    Posted by brat13[/QUOTE]

    Emails are not scientific data.  There were thousands of emails spanning over 13 years that were stolen.  It's impossible to imply the context of all based on a few, much less suggest that those who hacked the emails may have had a vested interest in editing them to suit their goal (whatever that goal may be).

    I have to run, but I'll leave you with this question: what is NOT contained within those emails?  Is there any reference to international conspiracies via the IPCC, any mention of George Soros secretly funding research, no evidence of falsifying of data, no admissions that global warming is a hoax, etc.  Given the usually-private nature of emails, wouldn't there be just a little more to it than this??

    The body of scientific work supporting MMGW theory encompasses hundreds of thousands of papers written by tens of thousands of scientists from dozens of different disciplines (not just climate change) and is far too vast to be adequately judged by this 'scandal'.  This "moon landing faked" type of stuff...totally out there.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    "The body of scientific work supporting MMGW theory encompasses hundreds of thousands of papers written by tens of thousands of scientists from dozens of different disciplines (not just climate change) and is far too vast to be adequately judged by this 'scandal'.  This "moon landing faked" type of stuff...totally out there"

    Not correct. There doesnt have to be a moon landing type conspiracy. First of all, there are not "hundreds of thousands of papers" written by "tens of thousands" of scientists and other disciplines. The issue is not "Climate Change" , but whether recent changes are caused by man. History and science shows the climate is always changing.  
    Remember, as recently as the 1980s the same scientific community warned of an imminent Ice Age. Scientists exaggerated and hyped man-made global warming, based on flawed data of merely a few years changes. They acted as advocates rather than pure scientists.   
    The mainstream media ignores the Climategate scandal at its own peril. 
     
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: MSNBC: "Earth could plunge into sudden ice age"

    This is so funny.  Toss out all of the GW claims because someone wrote an email saying that the fduged something.  There is no context for which the email was written but some want to see it as a global conspiracy.

    Usually what happens is an audit is undertaken to review the research and the integrity of the research.  Of course, if it doesn't come out the way some people want it to come out, they'll scream that the audit was performed by biased scientists. 

    I'm not saying that the research is good or bad.  It would take a scholar months to go over the emails and the research to understand what was being talked about and the impact of the any "fudging".  I had thought the debate about climate change was over and the debate had moved on to the causes of the climate change.  But on this blog the message seems to be that there is no climate change and the planet's climate is constantly changing.

    The haters crack me up.  They are either screaming that the sky is falling or that other people's claims that the sky is falling are preposterous.   There is no global warming and Obama wasn't born in the USA.  Doesn't that pretty much sum it up?

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share