|
|  |
|
|
|
| |
| Feb 17, 2010 6:55 pm |
|
re: re: re: re: re: re: re: The Death of Global Warming |
Thomas Holford
| |
John Stephen Veitch sayeth:
> It appears that rising sea level is the best evidence of global warming.
One more time:
Twenty thousand years ago, most of the North American continent was covered with a mammoth ice sheet. Between twenty thousand years ago and eight thousand years ago, that ice sheet melted as a consequence of . . . GLOBAL WARMING . . . and the world's sea levels rose about 160 meters.
About eight thousand years ago, the level of the Black Sea was 160 meters LOWER than it is today. Water spillage from the Mediterranean Sea eroded through the Bosporus and resulted in a cataclysmic flood which brought the Black Sea up to it's current level.
The issue is NOT whether there is global warming or whether sea levels have risen or are rising.
The issue is whether or not human activity is a SIGNIFICANT CAUSE of global warming.
The anthropogenic global warming advocates need to prove their case, WHICH THEY HAVE NOT DONE.
They have spent MORE THAN A HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS of taxpayer money trying to prove it, all they have to show for it is Phil Jones' retractions, Michael Mann's bogus and discredited "hockey stick", Hadley CRU missing data, CRIMINAL obstruction of Freedom of Information Requests, undocumented and unexplained modifications of computer algorithms, and conspiracies to frustrate peer review and discredit and silence critics.
> The idea that any group of scientists might be able to falsify the record is rendered totally foolish when one understands how many different sets of expertise are needed to prove global warming.
All of the "many different sets of expertise" were assembled in the Hadley CRU and under it's control. The Hadley CRU was, apparently, the headquarters of the conspiracy. Dr. Timothy Ball recently reported an analysis of the global warming advocates' activities and identified a core group of 42 "scientists" who routinely peer reviewed and approved each others papers. It was a closed cabal.
Hadley CRU controlled the UN IPCC.
> That's one reason why there can be legitimate debate about the evidence. That's good and completely valid.
I question whether you really believe this. There HAS BEEN NO DEBATE on human caused global warming. Al Gore, the worlds most strident global warming promoter, has declined to participate in an debates, and routinely refuses to appear on the same forum with global warming skeptics.
The global warming establishment declared that human caused global warming was "settled science" and that there was a broad "consensus" of scientists, that it was "real" and that "something has to be done." So arrogant and insulated was the global warming crowd, that they even promoted a slur term for those who did not submit to the "scientific consensus": global warming deniers.
> Moreover, there is research in the pipeline that fully confirms not only global warming, . . .
You mean that after spending a hundred billion dollars on research, it STILL hasn't been confirmed, but there is research "just around the corner" that WILL prove it?
Well, then, why don't we wait until that research is completed, peer reviewed, published, disseminated to the world scientific community, critiqued, debated, and confirmed by mulitple independent and repeatable scientific EXPERIMENTS?
That's the way REAL science works.
> Dr Phil Jones, is a case in point. He's one of the leading experts, but when he was asked some pretty simple looking questions by a reporter, Jones was unable to answer very clearly. The reason was simple enough, Jones's own research doesn't answer that question, AND Jones is not familiar with all the literature.
That says it all.
T. Holford
Private Reply to Thomas Holford (new win) |
|
| |
|
