Quantcast

Hey OldManGFunk..

N8 v2.0

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Here's your chance to be heard!!!! I guess global warming stories are so hard to find that YOU can be the reporter.
:rofl:



Global Warming Affecting Your Life?
E-Mail UsSend Us Your Stories and Video...Extend the Reach of ABC News' Reporting by Sharing Your Observations
www.abcnews.com

Witnessing the impact of global warming in your life?

ABC News wants to hear from you. We're currently producing a report on the increasing changes in our physical environment, and are looking for interesting examples of people coping with the differences in their daily lives. Has your life been directly affected by global warming?

We want to hear and see your stories. Have you noticed changes in your own backyard or hometown? The differences can be large or small — altered blooming schedules, unusual animals that have arrived in your community, higher water levels encroaching on your property.

Show us what you've seen. You can include video material of the environmental change, or simply tell your story via webcam. Please fill out the form below, and be sure to include captions or other descriptive information if you're sending video. We hope to hear from you.

Thank you.
 
Secret Squirrel

Secret Squirrel

There is no Justice!
Dec 21, 2004
8,150
1
Up sh*t creek, without a paddle
I can see a bunch of videos from Daryl, Daryl, & Daryl about how the gators are encroaching on Zeb, the dog's house and how it's vitally important to the nation to solve the eatin' problem that Edith has been strikken wit......The possibilities for the hilarity is endless....:nopity:
 
Old Man G Funk

Old Man G Funk

Choir Boy
Nov 21, 2005
2,864
0
In a handbasket
It's not that stories are hard to find N8, it's that most stories are scientific in nature and don't make for good copy. If they can print stories about how people are having to use their AC more, then they can put a face on it, which is the "human interest" that many media outlets want in their stories.

Unfortunately, that is probably exactly what they will get. Most people, too ignorant to actually know how global climate change works (including you N8), will write in with stories about how it was warmer last winter than they remember or how it's been unusually hot this summer. This is a retarded idea.
 
N8 v2.0

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
I filled up my hot tub last week and this morning I noticed there was not as much water in it as there was before!

I blame 1) GWB and 2) Global Warming which is really GWB's fault!
 
Secret Squirrel

Secret Squirrel

There is no Justice!
Dec 21, 2004
8,150
1
Up sh*t creek, without a paddle
Old Man G Funk said:
It's not that stories are hard to find N8, it's that most stories are scientific in nature and don't make for good copy. If they can print stories about how people are having to use their AC more, then they can put a face on it, which is the "human interest" that many media outlets want in their stories.

Unfortunately, that is probably exactly what they will get. Most people, too ignorant to actually know how global climate change works (including you N8), will write in with stories about how it was warmer last winter than they remember or how it's been unusually hot this summer. This is a retarded idea.
Click to expand...
Yep... I have a great title for the 20/20 article

World Psuedo-Climatoligist Idol - Season 1: The dance of.......DEATH!
 
Secret Squirrel

Secret Squirrel

There is no Justice!
Dec 21, 2004
8,150
1
Up sh*t creek, without a paddle
N8 said:
I filled up my hot tub last week and this morning I noticed there was not as much water in it as there was before!

I blame 1) GWB and 2) Global Warming which is really GWB's fault!
Click to expand...
Blame the fact nothing in this world is fair....obviously someone hates you and has been taking your hot water one spoon full at a time....

Edit: OMFG!!!! I just noticed your (n8) custom title.....I think I just wet myself....:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
 
N8 v2.0

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Oh that... yeah, I think that's custom title #4 for me...

1. Extra Extra
2. Tool
3. Hillary for Pres in 2008
4. this new one...


:)
 
bjanga

bjanga

Turbo Monkey
Dec 25, 2004
1,356
0
San Diego
Lately, the sun has been out more. It stopped raining last month. It is getting hotter each day. This affects me because I have to wait until later in the afternoon to ride my bike, because it it so hot!


:rofl:
 
N8 v2.0

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
bjanga said:
Lately, the sun has been out more. It stopped raining last month. It is getting hotter each day. This affects me because I have to wait until later in the afternoon to ride my bike, because it it so hot!


:rofl:
Click to expand...

You are a victim! GWB and corporate America are keeping you repressed!

Be outraged!
 
binary visions

binary visions

The voice of reason
Jun 13, 2002
22,204
1,393
NC
N8 said:
Oh that... yeah, I think that's custom title #4 for me...

1. Extra Extra
2. Tool
3. Hillary for Pres in 2008
4. this new one...


:)
Click to expand...
You had "Fair and balanced" for a while, as well as "Troll".
 
N8 v2.0

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Old Man G Funk said:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/06/22/global.warming.ap/index.html
Click to expand...
which is it???

The earth is the the hottest it has been in 2000 years or 400 years??

Study Says Earth's Temp at 400-Year High
Jun 22 11:10 AM US/Eastern
By JOHN HEILPRIN
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON

The Earth is the hottest it has been in at least 400 years, probably even longer. The National Academy of Sciences, reaching that conclusion in a broad review of scientific work requested by Congress, reported Thursday that the "recent warmth is unprecedented for at least the last 400 years and potentially the last several millennia."

A panel of top climate scientists told lawmakers that the Earth is running a fever and that "human activities are responsible for much of the recent warming." Their 155-page report said average global surface temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere rose about 1 degree during the 20th century.

The report was requested in November by the chairman of the House Science Committee, Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y., to address naysayers who question whether global warming is a major threat.

Last year, when the House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman, Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, launched an investigation of three climate scientists, Boehlert said Barton should try to learn from scientists, not intimidate them.

The Bush administration also has maintained that the threat is not severe enough to warrant new pollution controls that the White House says would have cost 5 million Americans their jobs.

Climate scientists Michael Mann, Raymond Bradley and Malcolm Hughes had concluded the Northern Hemisphere was the warmest it has been in 2,000 years. Their research was known as the "hockey-stick" graphic because it compared the sharp curve of the hockey blade to the recent uptick in temperatures and the stick's long shaft to centuries of previous climate stability.

The National Academy scientists concluded that the Mann-Bradley-Hughes research from the late 1990s was "likely" to be true, said John "Mike" Wallace, an atmospheric sciences professor at the University of Washington and a panel member. The conclusions from the '90s research "are very close to being right" and are supported by even more recent data, Wallace said.

The panel looked at how other scientists reconstructed the Earth's temperatures going back thousands of years, before there was data from modern scientific instruments.

For all but the most recent 150 years, the academy scientists relied on "proxy" evidence from tree rings, corals, glaciers and ice cores, cave deposits, ocean and lake sediments, boreholes and other sources. They also examined indirect records such as paintings of glaciers in the Alps.

Combining that information gave the panel "a high level of confidence that the last few decades of the 20th century were warmer than any comparable period in the last 400 years," the academy said.

Overall, the panel agreed that the warming in the last few decades of the 20th century was unprecedented over the last 1,000 years, though relatively warm conditions persisted around the year 1000, followed by a "Little Ice Age" from about 1500 to 1850.

The scientists said they had less confidence in the evidence of temperatures before 1600. But they considered it reliable enough to conclude there were sharp spikes in carbon dioxide and methane, the two major "greenhouse" gases blamed for trapping heat in the atmosphere, beginning in the 20th century, after remaining fairly level for 12,000 years.

Between 1 A.D. and 1850, volcanic eruptions and solar fluctuations were the main causes of changes in greenhouse gas levels. But those temperature changes "were much less pronounced than the warming due to greenhouse gas" levels by pollution since the mid-19th century, it said.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private organization chartered by Congress to advise the government of scientific matters.
 
Old Man G Funk

Old Man G Funk

Choir Boy
Nov 21, 2005
2,864
0
In a handbasket
N8 said:
it's been shown that the 'hocky stick' doesn't really mean anything since the data that supports it is screwy.
Click to expand...
No, actually it hasn't.

I presume you are referring to McIntyre and McKitrick's criticisms, but those criticisms have been answered many times over. I suggest you look at the websites that I have already cited for you in the "Flaky Flick" thread. Of course, I know you won't. In fact, I'll give you a couple right here which I know you'll ignore.

http://info-pollution.com/mandm.htm
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=11
False claims of the existence of errors in the Mann et al (1998) reconstruction can also be traced to spurious allegations made by two individuals, McIntyre and McKitrick (McIntyre works in the mining industry, while McKitrick is an economist). The false claims were first made in an article (McIntyre and McKitrick, 2003) published in a non-scientific (social science) journal "Energy and Environment" and later, in a separate "Communications Arising" comment that was rejected by Nature based on negative appraisals by reviewers and editor [as a side note, we find it peculiar that the authors have argued elsewhere that their submission was rejected due to 'lack of space'. Nature makes their policy on such submissions quite clear: "The Brief Communications editor will decide how to proceed on the basis of whether the central conclusion of the earlier paper is brought into question; of the length of time since the original publication; and of whether a comment or exchange of views is likely to seem of interest to nonspecialist readers. Because Nature receives so many comments, those that do not meet these criteria are referred to the specialist literature." Since Nature chose to send the comment out for review in the first place, the "time since the original publication" was clearly not deemed a problematic factor. One is logically left to conclude that the grounds for rejection were the deficiencies in the authors' arguments explicitly noted by the reviewers]. The rejected criticism has nonetheless been posted on the internet by the authors, and promoted in certain other non-peer-reviewed venues (see this nice discussion by science journalist David Appell of a scurrilous parroting of their claims by Richard Muller in an on-line opinion piece).

The claims of McIntyre and McKitrick, which hold that the "Hockey-Stick" shape of the MBH98 reconstruction is an artifact of the use of series with infilled data and the convention by which certain networks of proxy data were represented in a Principal Components Analysis ("PCA"), are readily seen to be false , as detailed in a response by Mann and colleagues to their rejected Nature criticism demonstrating that (1) the Mann et al (1998) reconstruction is robust with respect to the elimination of any data that were infilled in the original analysis, (2) the main features of the Mann et al (1998) reconstruction are entirely insensitive to whether or not proxy data networks are represented by PCA, (3) the putative ‘correction’ by McIntyre and McKitrick, which argues for anomalous 15th century warmth (in contradiction to all other known reconstructions), is an artifact of the censoring by the authors of key proxy data in the original Mann et al (1998) dataset, and finally, (4) Unlike the original Mann et al (1998) reconstruction, the so-called ‘correction’ by McIntyre and McKitrick fails statistical verification exercises, rendering it statistically meaningless and unworthy of discussion in the legitimate scientific literature.

The claims of McIntyre and McKitrick have now been further discredited in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, in a paper to appear in the American Meteorological Society journal, "Journal of Climate" by Rutherford and colleagues (2004) [and by yet another paper by an independent set of authors that is currently "under review" and thus cannot yet be cited--more on this soon!]. Rutherford et al (2004) demonstrate nearly identical results to those of MBH98, using the same proxy dataset as Mann et al (1998) but addressing the issues of infilled/missing data raised by Mcintyre and McKitrick, and using an alternative climate field reconstruction (CFR) methodology that does not represent any proxy data networks by PCA at all.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom