Here is a thought for you campers


There are some people who live in a dream world,

And there are some who face reality; and then

There are those who turn one into the other.

Douglas Everett

I cannot help but notice as we come into the second week of Copenhagen talks on climate change that the newspapers have fallen silent on the subject. Excepting for a small article on release of several hundred protesters the fickle press have taken the most important conference since time began off the list.

My question is therefore have the delegates living large in CopenhagenLuxury digs at climate talkfest | The Courier-Mail turned the dream into reality or has reality taken on a dream quality. I think we must all realise that in the face of reality the dream of a world cooperating to solve a mutual problem has evaporated into water vapor, hot CO2 and much methane.

We can only hope the effort has fallen apart.

Quote:

---

I think we must all realise that in the face of reality the dream of a world cooperating to solve a mutual problem has evaporated into water vapor, hot CO2 and much methane.

---

They are all waiting for the chosen one to make his appearance . The interesting things that have come out of Copenhagen so far is the clear chasm in positions between developed and developing nations and a leaked secret draft agreement prepared by the Danish government... by a group of individuals known as the 'circle of commitment'.

According to ABC :
The document abandons the Kyoto Protocol, sidelines the United Nations in future climate change negotiations, and hands most of the power to rich countries.
Leaked agreement rocks Copenhagen - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Environmental groups are fuming ,claiming that the deal is a “behind the scenes negotiations...focussing on pleasing the rich and powerful countries rather than serving the majority of states who are demanding a fair and ambitious solution”.

Bolivia's delegate Angelica Navarro meanwhile has been ranting about 'carbon colonialism' and is demanding “reparations" from industrial nations.She called for a 'Universal Declaration of Mother Earth Rights' which Bolivian President Evo Morales says "supersede the rights of human beings". VII ALBA-TCP Summit: Special Declaration for a Universal Declaration of Mother Earth Rights Mother Earth

There was this Canadian reporter with 2 children of her own who called for a Malthusian restriction of 1 child per couple to reduce humans carbon footprint. International Planned Parenthood is putting on a show about how to increase contraception use in the third world to stop them from making carbon producing babies.

There is a women's rights group calling for more female environmental scientists .
And of course reporters asking scientists about Climategate are being suppressed at gunpoint
http://www.examiner.com/x-3704-Colum...gate-questions... and... there are plenty of protesters dressed like polar bears.

Suppressing questions at gunpoint, nice. I guess they feel justified since al-AP has determined the science was not faked. I guess it's settled.

Yes check out the way it is spinned .

The scientists were keenly aware of how their work would be viewed and used, and, just like politicians, went to great pains to shape their message. Sometimes, they sounded more like schoolyard taunts than scientific tenets.
The scientists were so convinced by their own science and so driven by a cause "that unless you're with them, you're against them," said Mark Frankel, director of scientific freedom, responsibility and law at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He also reviewed the communications.
Frankel saw "no evidence of falsification or fabrication of data, although concerns could be raised about some instances of very 'generous interpretations.'

This is the best defense they have. It was faked but it's accurate .

And the rift is growing at Copenhagen.

Developing countries boycott UN climate talks - Yahoo! News

Quote:

---

in the face of reality the dream of a world cooperating to solve a mutual problem has evaporated...

---

Yes reality is frequently is the stumbling block to utopianism .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

called for a 'Universal Declaration of Mother Earth Rights' which Bolivian President Evo Morales says "supersede the rights of human beings". VII ALBA-TCP Summit: Special Declaration for a Universal Declaration of Mother Earth Rights Mother Earth
.

---

Now we have come full circle and religion has been exposed. This is the Earth Mother religion, the notion that the Earth is a living being to be worshiped and all of this fanaticism associated with climate change is exposed for what it is pagan religion, they will be bowing down before rocks next

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

yes reality is frequently is the stumbling block to utopianism .

---

"Greenpeace added that the negotiations had five days "to avert climate chaos"."

No alarmism there. And in a surprising discovery, scientists have discovered that a surge in sunshine helped Swiss glaciers melt faster in the 1940's than today. These scientists are really smart people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

"Greenpeace added that the negotiations had five days "to avert climate chaos"."

No alarmism there. And in a surprising discovery, scientists have discovered that a surge in sunshine helped Swiss glaciers melt faster in the 1940's than today. These scientists are really smart people.

---

Not only was a surge in sunshine responsible but

Quote:

---

A phase of less sunshine -- global dimming -- from the 1950s to 1980s also corresponded with the advance in the snout of glaciers.

---

Could it be we have entered a new phase of global dimming?

Quote:

---

could it be we have entered a new phase of global dimming?

---

One environmental subject that is going relatively unnoticed is the deepening Solar Minimum. The number of sunspotless days has continued to expand over the past three years despite the solar cycle 24 to have been expected to have revved up by now. In 2008 73% of days featured o sunspots. 2009 stands at 76% and still growing. This makes 2009 second only to 1913 in terms of spotless days. The trough of Solar Cycle 23 and 24 has reached 768 days which is 58% longer than the average of 485 long term average.
Deep Solar Minimum: Not getting enough attention?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

One environmental subject that is going relatively unnoticed is the deepening Solar Minimum. The number of sunspotless days has continued to expand over the past three years despite the solar cycle 24 to have been expected to have revved up by now. In 2008 73% of days featured o sunspots. 2009 stands at 76% and still growing. This makes 2009 second only to 1913 in terms of spotless days. The trough of Solar Cycle 23 and 24 has reached 768 days which is 58% longer than the average of 485 long term average.
Deep Solar Minimum: Not getting enough attention?

---

Hi Tom whilst you are spot on, this isn't exactly what I was meaning. I think you have to be particularly dim to miss all the peripheral evidence that what is happening isn't necessarily attributable to CO2. There are no straight line correlations over anything like reasonable statistical periods but there is tremendous variability in the observations. You and I both know that someone tried to cover this up because it didn't fit the story. To use political parlance; they put spin on it.

Rather than putting our efforts into half-hearted CO2 abatement we should be putting our efforts into preparing for coastal inundation, drought, water shortages, food shortages and mass relocation

Quote:

---

Now we have come full circle and religion has been exposed. This is the Earth Mother religion, the notion that the Earth is a living being to be worshiped and all of this fanaticism associated with climate change is exposed for what it is pagan religion, they will be bowing down before rocks next

---

http://image.patriotpost.us.s3.amazo...ef-cartoon.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

http://image.patriotpost.us.s3.amazo...ef-cartoon.jpg

---

Brilliant:D

Quote:

---

You and I both know that someone tried to cover this up because it didn't fit the story.

---

It is deeper than that . There is another smoking gun in your part of the world at a station called 'Darwin One ' in Darwin Airport. The data from the Global Historical Climate Network dataset (GHCN) was clearly and intentionally misrepresented .The raw data when graphed shows a decline in temperatures of 0.7 Celsius per century .But the "scientists" there massaged the data to show an increase in temperatures of 1.2 Celsius per century.

With the CRU ,NASA ,the phony Mann hockey stick graph ,the New Zealand NIWA ,and now this revelation at GHCN we are clearly looking at systemic fraud .

I posted the scoop on Darwin earlier but of course it was dismissed because of the source.

Also, there is a ‘ClimateGate: California Edition’ which is apparently based on a study by Stefan Rahmstorf of the CRU email gang. You can actually watch the bay area submerging thanks to the state of California and Google.

Hello:

I don't want to break up the pity party, but the reason the Copenhagen conference is in trouble has NOTHING to do with climate change, or even "climategate". It has to do with the inability of the world to organize anything.

Please don't confuse politics with science... But, of course, you will.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

I don't want to break up the pity party, but the reason the Copenhagen conference is in trouble has NOTHING to do with climate change, or even "climategate". It has to do with the inability of the world to organize anything.

---

Perhaps if everyone didn't have their own agenda they could, but that's what makes the world a great place, we're not all alike.

Quote:

---

Please don't confuse politics with science... But, of course, you will.

---

It's not the confusion between the two, it's the mixing...

And by the way tom, best cartoon of the year.

Quote:

---

Please don't confuse politics with science... But, of course, you will.

---

Here is the politics behind Copenhagen.Poor countries have gone from defending their right to economic development as a reason for exemptions to emissions cuts to claiming a ”legitimate” right to vast wealth transfers from the West to prevent emissions. They call it ”climate justice.”

It started with the proposal from Bolivia and will end with Robert Mugabe,Hugo Chavez and the Mahdi-hatter lecturing the West and demanding a shakedown.
U.N. to give Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Mugabe podium at Copenhagen – osmoothie

George Soros wants the IMF to shell out billions in cash to third world countries for climate control... a pool of cash for kleptocrats to dip into without accountability .
Use IMF money to fight climate change - Soros, International News - By Indiaedunews.net

The World Bank plans to syphon development and disease prevention funds for this fraud.

Meanwhile the phoney's at the UN IPCC ;who were doing the chicken-little act about the urgency now say they will suspend a review of goals for emission reduction until the middle of the next decade .
Copenhagen stalls decision on catastrophic climate change for six years - Times Online

Quote:

---

A draft text published by the UN says that there should be a review in 2016, which could result in an “update of the long-term global goal for emissions reductions as well as of the adequacy of commitments and actions”.

---

Maybe they see the new "truths" based on an honest plotting of the data and realize there isn't the urgency they predicted ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Maybe they see the new "truths" based on an honest plotting of the data and realize there isn't the urgency they predicted ?

---

Hello again, tom:

I don't know. Steve posted something from the AP. I suppose you think THEY have an agenda too, huh? Here's part of what the AP said:
------------------

(AP) – 2 days ago
LONDON — E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don't support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.

The 1,073 e-mails examined by the AP show that scientists harbored private doubts, however slight and fleeting, even as they told the world they were certain about climate change. However, the exchanges don't undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions.
------------------------

Don't look like THEY think there are any new "truths", and they actually read every single email.

excon

Greenpeace said we only had 5 days to save the world, now we're pushing it back 5 or 6 years? Must not be quite as urgent as thought.

I read the same AP article and posted it on the other OP .

Here is what an article sympathetic to the scientists had to say (emphasis and underlines added for illustration)

The scientists were keenly aware of how their work would be viewed and used, and, just like politicians, went to great pains to shape their message. Sometimes, they sounded more like schoolyard taunts than scientific tenets.
The scientists were so convinced by their own science and so driven by a cause "that unless you're with them, you're against them," said Mark Frankel, director of scientific freedom, responsibility and law at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He also reviewed the communications.
Frankel saw "no evidence of falsification or fabrication of data, although concerns could be raised about some instances of very 'generous interpretations.'

You can off the cuff dismiss this all you want ;but unless there is a lot more outrage from scientists against this there will be a loss of the legitimacy that science has been establishing for 500 years.

Science without the full integrity of the scientific method is nothing more than huckester magic and shamanism .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

there will be a loss of the legitimacy that science has been establishing for 500 years.

---

Hello again, tom:

You are the one, I believe, who brought up Piltdown Man. That WAS made up science - not too long ago either. Science survived. Global warming ISN'T made up.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Don't look like THEY think there are any new "truths", and they actually read every single email.

---

They also assigned more than twice as many hacks to fact-check Sarah Palin's book. The authors also failed to note that one of them doing the fact checking is a little too cozy with the Climategate group.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_cHhMa7ARDD...reHypnosis.jpg

Hello climate change deniers:

Here's ANOTHER reason why you righty's should embrace the fix. You're not liking illegal aliens too much, are you? So, when the lower lands around the world begin to flood, where to you think those people are going to go?

excon

I posted earlier on how one of the AP hacks fact checking the CRU emails is a little too cozy with the Climategate gang, now they're covering for The Goracle's claim that the polar ice may vanish in 5-7 years.

Quote:

---

New computer modeling suggests the Arctic Ocean may be nearly ice-free in the summertime as early as 2014, Al Gore said Monday at the U.N. climate conference. This new projection, following several years of dramatic retreat by polar sea ice, suggests that the ice cap may nearly vanish in the summer much sooner than the year 2030, as was forecast by a U.S. government agency eight months ago.

One U.S. government scientist Monday questioned the new prediction as too severe, but other researchers previously have projected a quicker end than 2030 to the Arctic summer ice cap.

"It is hard to capture the astonishment that the experts in the science of ice felt when they saw this," said former U.S. Vice President Gore, who joined Scandinavian officials and scientists to brief journalists and delegates. It was Gore's first appearance at the two-week conference...

"Some of the models suggest that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months will be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years," Gore said. His office later said he meant nearly ice-free, because ice would be expected to survive in island channels and other locations.

Asked for comment, one U.S. government scientist questioned what he called this "aggressive" projection.

"It's possible but not likely," said Mark Serreze of the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado. "We're sticking with 2030."

On the other hand, a leading NASA ice scientist, Jay Zwally, said last year that the Arctic could be essentially ice-free within "five to less than 10 years."

---

The AP failed to mention that the actual scientist Gore used as the source for his proclamation threw him under the bus.

Quote:

---

In his speech, Mr Gore told the conference: “These figures are fresh. Some of the models suggest to Dr [Wieslav] Maslowski that there is a 75 per cent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years.”

However, the climatologist whose work Mr Gore was relying upon dropped the former Vice-President in the water with an icy blast.

“It's unclear to me how this figure was arrived at,” Dr Maslowski said. “I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this.”

Mr Gore's office later admitted that the 75 per cent figure was one used by Dr Maslowksi as a “ballpark figure” several years ago in a conversation with Mr Gore.

The embarrassing error cast another shadow over the conference after the controversy over the hacked e-mails from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit, which appeared to suggest that scientists had manipulated data to strengthen their argument that human activities were causing global warming.

---

At least the AP furnished an appropriate image of the clueless Mr. Gore...

http://images.worldnow.com/AP/images/11674992_BG1.jpg

And in a delicious bit of irony, reporters covering Copenhagen, including AP hysteria writer and mouthpiece for Gore and CRU Seth Borenstein, had to wait in line outside for hours in near-freezing temperatures to get in. Borenstein had "never been so grateful " to get a little warmth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello climate change deniers:

Here's ANOTHER reason why you righty's should embrace the fix. You're not liking illegal aliens too much, are you? So, when the lower lands around the world begin to flood, where to you think those people are gonna go?

excon

---

I expect, ex, they are going to climb that hill you live on and camp next to your place and you, out of the goodness of your heart, are going to feed them. Bless your little cotton sox!

Now let's get real. No amount of stuffing about with the environment and industry is going to fix the problem. If the system is broke, the problem is going to persist for long time, CO2 has a life of thousands of years and the biggest polluters, US, China, India, etc, etc have no intention of changing the way they do business. If, on the other hand, this is a natural process, see what I said above. One interesting little statistic, so you can see how ridiculous this really is. Mankind emits 130% of the Carbon Dioxide emitted by the worlds volcanoes. We are not the only emitter of CO2. We have done a good job of riding the planet of those other emitters of CO2 , trees, but the volcanoes remain. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO TURN THEM OFF?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

I expect, ex, they are going to climb that hill you live on and camp next to your place and you, out of the goodness of your heart, are going to feed them. Bless your little cotton sox!

Now let's get real. No amount of of stuffing about with the environment and industry is going to fix the problem. If the system is broke, the problem is going to persist for long time, CO2 has a life of thousands of years and the biggest polluters, US, China, India, etc, etc have no intention of changing the way they do business. If, on the other hand, this is a natural process, see what I said above. One interesting little statistic, so you can see how rediculous this really is. Mankind emits 130% of the Carbon Dioxide emitted by the worlds volcanoes. We are not the only emitter of CO2. We have done a good job of riding the planet of those other emitters of CO2 , trees, but the volcanoes remain. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO TURN THEM OFF?

---

Did you just say that trees emit CO2?

Where did you learn that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galveston

Did you just say that trees emit CO2?

Where did you learn that?

---

I think it is known that trees both emit oxygen and CO2, They take in CO2 in daylight and emit oxygen and reverse the process at night. They are a balanced system, it is a great shame that humans don't display similar balance

Trees need energy to grow. This energy is released from the food made by photosynthesis in a process of respiration. This process occurs in the mitochondria of the tree's cells 24 hours a day. Some of the food is combined with oxygen and the reaction releases stored energy for growth. Respiration uses between a quarter and a half of the food produced in photosynthesis. Respiration uses oxygen and releases energy, carbon dioxide and water. This is the reverse of the photosynthesis which collects the sun's energy, combines it with carbon dioxide and water and releases oxygen.
Forestry Insights

The last gasp and it is so momentous that we are not even allowed to know what was agreed.'Meaningful' climate deal reached | News.com.auCould Obama be looking for another Nobel Prize. I'll give him one for BS

That's amazing. Last headline I read was the UN officials were asking delegates to stay over time because nothing was reached . Is there any other world leader making such a proclamation ?

Big headline here is

global warming agreement .Obama races home ahead of blizzard.

Hello again, Righty's

You know, every time you allude to the cold weather as evidence that global warming isn't real, all you do is solidify in my mind, your total lack of understanding of the science involved.

But it DOES entertain me.

excon

http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/4...8_snow4_ap.jpg

OK then some real science or shall we say more science fraud.
The Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA)in Moscow accused the Hadley Center of deliberately relied on a carefully selected 25% of Russia's weather stations that fit its theory of global warming and ignoring the rest.The Russians say that it overestimated the Russian temperatures by over 1/2 degree C.The conveniently ignored weather stations that account for over 40% of the Russian land surface.

Russia has 12.5% of the worlds land mass so that is a significant swath of the earth to ignore. And which part of Russian was ignored? You guessed it ;Siberia.
You will recall that Siberia was also the place where that smoking trees were found. In 1995, a paper by the CRU asserted the medieval warm period was actually really cold, and recent warming is unusually warm. It relied on tree ring data from 12 carefully selected trees of 252 cores sampled in Siberia's Yamal Peninsula.A larger sample of 34 tree cores showed no recent warming, and warmer temperatures in the Middle Ages. They weren't used. This coolaborates the larger sample from the Russian weather stations that shows no significant increases in temperatures .
You also recall that a single tree ring (known as YAD061) was used to justify the phony Michael Mann hockey stick graph. Mann's graph made the Medieval Warm Period (A.D. 800 to 1400) and the Little Ice Age (A.D. 1600 to 1850) statistically disappear.

It was the phoney Mann graph in the IFCC reports that led to first Kyoto and now the Copenhagen charade.

I keep on citing scientific evidence and you keep repeating the charge that I don't understand the science without citing evidence that I am wrong. I think your understanding is the political talking point you keep going back to ;which can be summed up this way "common sense tells you that we can't keep throwing garbage in the air". That may or may not be true but that is not really a scientific argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I keep on citing scientific evidence and you keep repeating the charge that I don't understand the science without citing evidence that I am wrong. I think your understanding is the political talking point you keep going back to ;which can be summed up this way "common sense tells you that we can't keep throwing garbage in the air". That may or may not be true but that is not really a scientific argument.

---

Hello again, tom:

I don't argue the science with you because I'm not a scientist. The only thing I DO argue about, is whether the science is believable... You're no different, only you supply some stats you found to bolster your argument. That has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with politics.

And, THAT'S what we argue about here - politics...

Because, it's POLITICS that has you believing in ID - not the science... And, as long as you believe ID is science, you have NO credibility with me in these conversations. So, cite all the stats you want. Ain't going to change nothing.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, tom:

I don't argue the science with you because I'm not a scientist. The only thing I DO argue about, is whether the science is believable... You're no different, only you supply some stats you found to bolster your argument. That has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with politics.

And, THAT'S what we argue about here - politics....

Because, it's POLITICS that has you believing in ID - not the science... And, as long as you believe ID is science, you have NO credibility with me in these conversations. So, site all the stats you want. Ain't gonna change nothing.

excon

---

Time to stop arguing ex. The conference in Copenhagen vanished in a puff of politicians hot air. We will have to call Obama puff the magic dragon from now on. What a crock, "we will try to limit warming to 2 degrees". That's essentially what he said, "but don't hold us to it". I'm wondering how do you measure this? Where will you take the readings? What hallowed institutions is appointed to harvest the statistics? I expect it will be the UN.they should have at least agreed on that, perhaps they will take their readings on their highest mountains

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

Time to stop arguing ex.

---

Hello again, clete:

As long as YOU confuse politics with science, you give me ample reason to go on.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, clete:

As long as YOU confuse politics with science, you give me ample reason to go on.

excon

---

Ex there was not a vestige of science in Obama's announcement, it was pure politics so the one confused is you.

Climate Change is peusdo science, an if here, a what if there, feed some more statistics into my model and I'll tell you the future. After two weeks talking we are no further ahead. I actually think that the only thing predictable was the outcome

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

Ex there was not a vestige of science in Obama's announcement, it was pure politics so the one confused is you.

---

Hello again, clete:

Copenhagen is politics. Global warming is science. Because the politics is a failure changes NOTHING about the science.

Do I think you're going to misunderstand that too? Yup.

excon