Then why post it off track in a ice caps melting thread while it has nothing to do whatsoever with melting ice caps. And we were just trying to expose the agenda of the BBC and the very clever use of fallacies and misleading statement. But then compare it to Scientific American, Here is a messenger to shoot. (Misleading if not a lie: trend of the surface stations is insignificant, some cooling some warming, the stratosphere is cooling. What are they talking about?) Misleading/lie. Some air has cooled There is data about the lower troposphere as well as "surface air" around the thermometers. Blatant unashamed lie. If there was a law enforcing correctness of information somebody would have got convicted here. The pensinsula statement is about the only thing that's correct. The rest is yet another lie, there is no enhanced warming anywhere else on the surface of Antarctica except the tip of the western Peninsula. That's not what he says in his own study that merely states that the tropospheric has not been explained. Could be GHG; could be something else. Complete and utter BS. If the continent warms the temps are getting in the snow fall range causing a potential ice sheet growth. Right now it's too cold to snow. See how an innocent and objective article can be used for unashamed propaganda.
Hope they did not collect from Tom for me. - I am in the "no body knows" camp, but willing to admit increasing CO2 tends to warm Earth and this plus its extra carbon in the air helps plants grow, especially the extra CO2 in air. I thank Andre also as there are many more ignorant green soldiers than his type, but since i am posting want to note that the BBC uses Pounds, not dollars. If they get a Pound for each "CO2 is evil" recruit, your $1.30 is a little low. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You're welcome Billy although it's getting really tough nowadays, apparantly playing mankind enemy #1 and staying deliberate main target of the fallacy firing army instead of jumping on the bandwagon. Sceptism has been a intrinsic part of the scientific method ever since Phyrro and more defined by Karl von Popper. But with the war of global warming going on skeptism is now equivalent to the enemy, carefully cultivated by a deluge of ad hominems (oil companies et al). Anyway, I was supposed to be sitting in a boat somewhere, according to a dissapeared post, I presume, to be fishing for red herrings?
While this has nothing to do with the subject of melting ice caps, it gives a great impression of how human conductors of science and applied as in global warming react on stone solid anomalies: http://www.disputatio.com/articles/006-1.pdf Check out IV conclusions but better enjoy the whole article. It's worthwhile.
The article by UNScientific America says: As André correctly states, this is just plain shameless lying. These people at the British Antarctic Survey are well know liars and have a long standing fame for doing it since 1985 when they said they had “discovered the Ozone Hole in Antarctica”. This subject has been discussed here at length, and we have provided ample and overwhelming proof that the Southern Anomaly (as G. Dobson called it, and described the phenomenon in his 1968 Oxford University Press book “Exploring the Atmosphere”.) was already known in 1957, during the International Geophysical Year, when Dobson’s team discovered the anomaly simultaneously with French scientists Rigaud and Leroy, at Dumont D’Urville Antarctic Base, on the other side of Antarctica. Here are some examples of temperature records from Antarctica taken from NASA’s website at: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data/ where you can check it for yourself: <img src=http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/chart/Antartida/Vostok.jpg width=400> <img src=http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/chart/Antartida/AmundsenScott.jpg width=400> Not much warming here - in fact, we see cooling n Amundsen-Scott base. Wait for more stations in Antarctica.
More sations from Antarctica: <img src=http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/chart/Antartida/Dome-c.jpg width=400> <img src=http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/chart/Antartida/LarsenIceShelf.jpg width=400> More cooling here.
Just two more stations for showing that Antarctcia has not warmed by 2.5º C in the last 50 years. <img src=http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/chart/Antartida/Henry.jpg width=400> <img src=http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/chart/Antartida/Halley.jpg width=400> Antarctica is cooling, gentlemen, and I guess the evidence provided here will be enough to prove that those people at the British Antarctic Survey, that call themselves “scientists” are nothing else than cheap liars.
don't trust ANYthing with 'american' attached to it...fool! i have seen wit my own eyes on several documentaries that ice caps HAVE MELTED!
It it those suffering poor vision who are in danger of tripping up. And bringing the rest of us down with them. I have rarely heard a view consistent with a global majority of experts and backed up by a plethora of research described as fanatacism. Perhaps the mote in your eye is what is causing your optical difficulties. Do keep supporting the status quo, head in the sand, brain in neutral, everything will work out fine, approach. Go ahead and condemn my children and my grandchildren to a world of chaos and dissolution almost beyond imagination. Just don't expect me to thank you for it.
Well, Harry Potter took off his mask! He should be posting in the Sorcerers & Witches forum somewhere else... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! And all just becasue I posted temperature graphs (real, hard data) taken from a pro Warming site as NASA/GISS! Talk about intolerance...
If you errrrr 'heretics' issaying: listen. warming of Earth is a natrual phenomenon tyhat goes in cycles like everything els. agreed but very recently saw a bbc docu. a very earthy down to earth scienist went a searchin to get to the bottom of tis shit. he met a woman from Oxford uni who sowhed a graph OF how climate change does vary.....true BUT, the graph went rigt up at the point of OUR relatively recent part to play with our emissions so as i am currently understanding it. YESwe are in A crisis!
Perhaps it would have helped to show the source: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data/ http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=700890090008&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1 http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=700896060008&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1 etc. This: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! is from the June Jule August (JJA) column of the data like this: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/work/gistemp/STATIONS//tmp.700890090008.1.1/station.txt Very simple to reproduce and after this it is scientifically safe to say that this: is the dangerous fanatism that we face today.
Thanks for the most excellent response I could hope for in the discussion about global warming and fallacies. An ad hominem and a strawman in one sentence. Very well done. This is the very main core of the global warming, lacking evidence there is only one way, fallacies and red herrings. Are you sure he isn't paid by the oil companies?
Are climate specialists qualified to solve the equations of fluid dynamics and describing fluid motions in various basins? Are physicians like Dyson qualified to do so? Are climate scientists qualified to select statictic methods and make non standards decision that yield a certain result? (MBH and the Hockeystick) and are staticians (Steve McIntyre) qualified to judge about the correct or incorrect use of statictistical techniques? Isn't any scientist qualified to judge whether or not climate scientist use the correct scientific method. I'm not a scientist but I can tell you that the role of models is extremely exagarated and the assessment of Dyson is absolutely correct. And he is not the only one. And even if the models were perfect then it all depends on the parametrization of climate of the past and I can tell after studying a few hundred scientific papers that this is even a bigger problem.
