Naked Science Forum

General Discussion & Feedback => Just Chat! => Topic started by: Jolly on 08/02/2017 21:49:19

Title: Was faking of temperature data about global warming a Malthusian project?
Post by: Jolly on 08/02/2017 21:49:19
So we have seen in the news recently that scientist have been faking the tempreture data make it look like the planet was getting hotter.

Yet it is possible that actually the planet is about to or has started to under go a long period of global cooling.

If all true- could this have been an Malthusian agenda to prevent the populations of the earth from preparing?

NASA Scientist John L. Casey Warns of the Coming Cold Crisis 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQanWtkSDHEhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html "The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever"


Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: RD on 09/02/2017 15:53:27
...Yet it is possible that actually the planet is about to or has started to under go a long period of global cooling.
Try telling that to the Aussies ...
Quote
"It's so hot in Australia that they've had to use purple on their weather maps" (https://www.indy100.com/article/australia-heatwave-boiling-colour-change-temperature-scale-7571241?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100)
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Bored chemist on 09/02/2017 19:45:31
So we have seen in the news recently that scientist have been faking the tempreture data make it look like the planet was getting hotter.

Yet it is possible that actually the planet is about to or has started to under go a long period of global cooling.

If all true- could this have been an Malthusian agenda to prevent the populations of the earth from preparing?

NASA Scientist John L. Casey Warns of the Coming Cold Crisis 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQanWtkSDHEhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html "The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever"




It doesn't make any sense to assume that one bloke (especially writing to the Torygraph) is right and all the other scientists are wrong.
So why are you even asking the question?
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: alancalverd on 09/02/2017 22:50:12
Science advances by scepticism and revolution, not  consensus. When people "adjust" other people's data to fit their hypotheses, it may be called fraud, deception, politics, propaganda....anything except science. One day, anthropogenic global warming may be cast onto the same intellectual midden as caloric, aether and phlogiston.  Meanwhile, if it is going to survive even the teensiest test of scientific plausibility, it will have to start making some accurate predictions and stop fiddling with the facts. But even before that, someone is going to have to define global mean temperature and explain how it is and will be measured, by an absolutely consistent method. 

Failing that, I will have to publish my groundbreaking and politically convenient hypothesis. Hair loss causes ageing.  There is a clear correlation between male pattern baldness and age. This has been demonstrated with masses of (adjusted) historic data and the consensus is 110%. Cutting hair reduces the amount on your head. This is known as anthropogenic hair loss and is clearly responsible for premature death.  We must take action now.  I propose a barber tax.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Jolly on 09/02/2017 23:59:21
Science advances by scepticism and revolution, not  consensus.

Yeah I have seen this repeatdly stated by scientists that do not agree with the claims made about Global warming, Ofcourse by making those Claims the scientific consensus community attack them.

When people "adjust" other people's data to fit their hypotheses, it may be called fraud, deception, politics, propaganda....anything except science. One day, anthropogenic global warming may be cast onto the same intellectual midden as caloric, aether and phlogiston.  Meanwhile, if it is going to survive even the teensiest test of scientific plausibility, it will have to start making some accurate predictions and stop fiddling with the facts.

Well apparently they have not simply been fiddling with the tempreture data, they have also been fiddling with the models to garentee they project highier tempretures.  Discussed here ans stated by Lord Monckton:-
But even before that, someone is going to have to define global mean temperature and explain how it is and will be measured, by an absolutely consistent method. 

Is that even possible?

Failing that, I will have to publish my groundbreaking and politically convenient hypothesis. Hair loss causes ageing.  There is a clear correlation between male pattern baldness and age. This has been demonstrated with masses of (adjusted) historic data and the consensus is 110%. Cutting hair reduces the amount on your head. This is known as anthropogenic hair loss and is clearly responsible for premature death.  We must take action now.  I propose a barber tax.

Thatīs an interesting theory. How are the Barder tax monies to be spent? And could the whole idea just cause a hairy population explosion.   
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Jolly on 10/02/2017 00:09:55
So we have seen in the news recently that scientist have been faking the tempreture data make it look like the planet was getting hotter.

Yet it is possible that actually the planet is about to or has started to under go a long period of global cooling.

If all true- could this have been an Malthusian agenda to prevent the populations of the earth from preparing?

NASA Scientist John L. Casey Warns of the Coming Cold Crisis 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQanWtkSDHEhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html "The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever"



It doesn't make any sense to assume that one bloke (especially writing to the Torygraph) is right and all the other scientists are wrong.

Well itīs not one bloke writing for a news paper against every other scientist thats a consenus lie- there are Scientists that do not agree.

Nobel Laureate Smashes the Global Warming Hoax


Global Warming Debunked | William Happer and Stefan Molyneux

Maunder Minimum:Earth heading for 'mini ice age' in 2030, scientists warns

So why are you even asking the question?

I am asking the question becuase if Global warming is a farse and scientists have been faking the data- yet a mini Ice age is on the way, surely we have been acting incorrectly in preporation for that, circumstance.

So its a question about wether that has been done on purpose, if we come into a mini Ice age crops are going to fail. Currently the main stream are panicing about Warming, when its possible the planet is going in the other direction- So I ponder and ask if people think that might be a conspiracy- there has clearly been an conspiracy about Warming, I just ponder if itīs a bigger conspiracy then simply people looking for funds.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Jolly on 10/02/2017 00:11:39
...Yet it is possible that actually the planet is about to or has started to under go a long period of global cooling.
Try telling that to the Aussies ...
Quote
"It's so hot in Australia that they've had to use purple on their weather maps" (https://www.indy100.com/article/australia-heatwave-boiling-colour-change-temperature-scale-7571241?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100)

The independent- really? Itīs like the most Fake news newspaper I know of.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Bored chemist on 10/02/2017 18:46:31

The independent- really? Itīs like the most Fake news newspaper I know of.
No it isn't- because you clearly know of the Telegraph- you cited it earlier- and that's much more fake than the independent.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Bored chemist on 10/02/2017 18:52:11

Well itīs not one bloke writing for a news paper against every other scientist thats a consenus lie- there are Scientists that do not agree.

Nobel Laureate Smashes the Global Warming Hoax


Global Warming Debunked | William Happer and Stefan Molyneux

Maunder Minimum:Earth heading for 'mini ice age' in 2030, scientists warns

So why are you even asking the question?

I am asking the question becuase if Global warming is a farse and scientists have been faking the data- yet a mini Ice age is on the way, surely we have been acting incorrectly in preporation for that, circumstance.

So its a question about wether that has been done on purpose, if we come into a mini Ice age crops are going to fail. Currently the main stream are panicing about Warming, when its possible the planet is going in the other direction- So I ponder and ask if people think that might be a conspiracy- there has clearly been an conspiracy about Warming, I just ponder if itīs a bigger conspiracy then simply people looking for funds.

"Well itīs not one bloke writing for a news paper against every other scientist thats a consenus lie- there are Scientists that do not agree."
No, it seems that it's 3 blokes
On the other hand, something like 97 %  of scientists are on the other side
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/jun/23/97-global-warming-consensus-paper-surpasses-half-a-million-downloads

"I am asking the question becuase if Global warming is a farse"
There's no evidence for that.
 "and scientists have been faking the data-"
There's no evidence for that.
" yet a mini Ice age is on the way, surely we have been acting incorrectly in preporation for that, circumstance. "

http://greenmonk.net/2010/01/07/what-if-we-create-a-better-world-for-nothing/
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: alancalverd on 11/02/2017 00:36:41
Time was that 100% of scientists believed in a geocentric universe, and you could be burned at the stake for thinking otherwise. Within my lifetime the consensus has swung from an impending ice age to an impending thermal runaway. Beware of consensus: it is at best naive and frequently shortsighted.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Jolly on 11/02/2017 00:42:52

Well itīs not one bloke writing for a news paper against every other scientist thats a consenus lie- there are Scientists that do not agree.

Nobel Laureate Smashes the Global Warming Hoax
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCy_UOjEir0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCy_UOjEir0)

Global Warming Debunked | William Happer and Stefan Molyneux
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCU6bzRypZ4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCU6bzRypZ4)

Maunder Minimum:Earth heading for 'mini ice age' in 2030, scientists warns
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMuvaEpdaqQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMuvaEpdaqQ)

So why are you even asking the question?

I am asking the question becuase if Global warming is a farse and scientists have been faking the data- yet a mini Ice age is on the way, surely we have been acting incorrectly in preporation for that, circumstance.

So its a question about wether that has been done on purpose, if we come into a mini Ice age crops are going to fail. Currently the main stream are panicing about Warming, when its possible the planet is going in the other direction- So I ponder and ask if people think that might be a conspiracy- there has clearly been an conspiracy about Warming, I just ponder if itīs a bigger conspiracy then simply people looking for funds.

"Well itīs not one bloke writing for a news paper against every other scientist thats a consenus lie- there are Scientists that do not agree."
No, it seems that it's 3 blokes
On the other hand, something like 97 %  of scientists are on the other side

O.K Chemists, ecologists if you wanna call them scientists, Botantists, Just becuase lots of Scientists say they believe in the theory. I mean William Happer makes the point that most scientists he knows Quote:- "most of my academic Colleagues do not know that much(about Global warming theory)"

So wow 97% of scientist apparetly believe in global warming- I debate if that is a true statement- sounds more like consenus propoganda to me- too little skepticism- For science.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/jun/23/97-global-warming-consensus-paper-surpasses-half-a-million-downloads (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/jun/23/97-global-warming-consensus-paper-surpasses-half-a-million-downloads)

The guardian really?
https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/24942-biggest-fake-news-story-global-warming-and-phony-consensus (https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/24942-biggest-fake-news-story-global-warming-and-phony-consensus)
"The New American has repeatedly reported on the fraudulent methodology used by Oreskes and Cook to arrive at their ludicrous near-unanimous consensus claims. Prof. Richard S. J. Tol and Dr. Benny Peiser are but two of the experts who have called out Oreskes and Cook, showing that only one percent of climate research papers — not 97 percent — support the “consensus” view claimed by the AGW alarmists."
 
"I am asking the question becuase if Global warming is a farse"
There's no evidence for that.
 "and scientists have been faking the data-"
There's no evidence for that.

Yes there is some evidence for that you just choose to ignore it.

" yet a mini Ice age is on the way, surely we have been acting incorrectly in preporation for that, circumstance. "

http://greenmonk.net/2010/01/07/what-if-we-create-a-better-world-for-nothing/ (http://greenmonk.net/2010/01/07/what-if-we-create-a-better-world-for-nothing/)

Sound more like a utopian dream, then a science project. You wanna better enviroment, fight for the rain forest to not get cut down by farmers who want to grow soya and graze cattle so we can eat beef and drink milk- Habitat distruction, and water use and pollution from farming is a far bigger problem then CO2. 
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: alancalverd on 11/02/2017 10:26:27
Nobody has any idea what 97% of scientists believe. Quite a few are regular churchgoers and the like, so their beliefs are not necessarily based on evidence anyway. But it is clear that over 90% of "climate scientsts" need you to believe in AGW, or their funding will cease.

Nothing new here. A previous Archbishop of York said he didn't necessarily believe in god, at least not in the same way as his flock. Now there's an appropriate word.

In fact it was a previous co-chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change who made me a skeptic by opening his lecture on the first IPCC report with "I am a committed christian..." Anyone who says he knows the answer before studying the question is not to be trusted, and that is exactly what CO2-based climate change modellers do. Later in  the same lecture he admitted "we know that water is the most important parameter, but as we can't measure it, we have ignored it - see the footnote on page 21"  so I'll give him a point for honesty.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Bored chemist on 11/02/2017 11:29:35
Time was that 100% of scientists believed in a geocentric universe, and you could be burned at the stake for thinking otherwise. Within my lifetime the consensus has swung from an impending ice age to an impending thermal runaway. Beware of consensus: it is at best naive and frequently shortsighted.
No that's simply not true.
At the time when geocentrism was in fashion , science- the idea of testing theories to see if they worked properly- hadn't been invented.

Why did you say something that's clearly not true?
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Bored chemist on 11/02/2017 11:35:53


So wow 97% of scientist apparetly believe in global warming- I debate if that is a true statement- sounds more like consenus propoganda to me- too little skepticism- For science.




You doubt it- in spite of the fact that it is well documentedly supported by evidence.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm


OK
So you are not dong science.
If you are not doing science you are on the wrong web page- we can simply ignore everything you say.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: PhysBang on 11/02/2017 16:26:16
Look, global warming deniers are either cuddling  idiots or cuddling  liars or both. If it weren't such an important issue, and if the lies and idiocy weren't so transparent, I wouldn't swear.

They say, "it's not about consensus," as a means to ignore the actual science. They say, "correlation isn't causation," to distract from the arguments in favor of causation.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Jolly on 11/02/2017 22:52:28
Nobody has any idea what 97% of scientists believe.

Isnt that the point the 97% stat is comming from those scientist invloved in a survey- and not all scientists.

Quite a few are regular churchgoers and the like, so their beliefs are not necessarily based on evidence anyway. But it is clear that over 90% of "climate scientsts" need you to believe in AGW, or their funding will cease.

Nothing new here. A previous Archbishop of York said he didn't necessarily believe in god, at least not in the same way as his flock. Now there's an appropriate word.

In fact it was a previous co-chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change who made me a skeptic by opening his lecture on the first IPCC report with "I am a committed christian..." Anyone who says he knows the answer before studying the question is not to be trusted, and that is exactly what CO2-based climate change modellers do. Later in  the same lecture he admitted "we know that water is the most important parameter, but as we can't measure it, we have ignored it - see the footnote on page 21"  so I'll give him a point for honesty.

Yeah its clear some have an interest in maintaining certain ideas fro grants and funding.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Jolly on 11/02/2017 23:01:13


So wow 97% of scientist apparetly believe in global warming- I debate if that is a true statement- sounds more like consenus propoganda to me- too little skepticism- For science.




You doubt it- in spite of the fact that it is well documentedly supported by evidence.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm (https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm)


OK
So you are not dong science.
If you are not doing science you are on the wrong web page- we can simply ignore everything you say.

Bored- "Science achieves a consensus when scientists stop arguing."

So then there is no Consensus William Happer disagrees, as does Ivar Giaever. And Tol

https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/15624-cooking-climate-consensus-data-97-of-scientists-affirm-agw-debunked (https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/15624-cooking-climate-consensus-data-97-of-scientists-affirm-agw-debunked)
"Tol lists around 50 of those researchers who were “dropped.” These, of course, represent only a small sampling of the thousands of scientists who have expressed various levels of disagreement with the hysterical climate pronouncements of the IPCC, Al Gore, and John Cook."

1000s- if Thousand of Scientists are disagreeing then there is definately no consenus.

What do you say to Ivar Giaever statement 8,45 to 10.22
  "for the last 19 years the tempreture has not gone up.... So what did the people that measure temp do with that? Well here is the latest temp they have now measured- it goes up.  How can that be? When I have just showed you that there has not been a rise in tempreture?.... Well the reason for that, is that they now include the Ocean, but for a hundread years the ocean has not been included"


Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: alancalverd on 12/02/2017 02:18:56
https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm
Quote
Authors of seven climate consensus studies — including Naomi Oreskes, Peter Doran, William Anderegg, Bart Verheggen, Ed Maibach, J. Stuart Carlton, and John Cook — co-authored a paper that should settle this question once and for all. The two key conclusions from the paper are:

    1) Depending on exactly how you measure the expert consensus, it’s somewhere between 90% and 100% that agree humans are responsible for climate change, with most of our studies finding 97% consensus among publishing climate scientists.

    2) The greater the climate expertise among those surveyed, the higher the consensus on human-caused global warming.

No surprise there then. I think you will find that there is a 97% consensus among published writers on Jesus that Jesus was the son of god, and the greater the doctrinal expertise among those surveyed, the stronger the consensus. But I'm not sure how you measure expertise, or how the authors  distinguished it from compliance with a consensus.

To my simple mind an expert is someone who can look at the data and make a prediction that turns out to be more accurate than a guess. So far, none seem to have published in this field.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: PhysBang on 12/02/2017 15:56:21
[MOD EDIT]
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Bored chemist on 12/02/2017 19:38:08
To my simple mind an expert is someone who can look at the data and make a prediction that turns out to be more accurate than a guess. So far, none seem to have published in this field.
There's a very simple prediction.
Because we have added more CO2 to the air, it will get warmer.
And there's a fairly simple measurement:
It has got warmer.

Which aspect were you unaware of?
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: alancalverd on 12/02/2017 20:12:01
A fair guess. Where's the accuracy? And can you justify "because" with some actual physics?
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Jolly on 14/02/2017 21:01:02
I think we are getting slightly off topic,

Lets say that we do stop human releases of CO2 to a degree the scientists are arguing for and we go far more into Solar technology.

What is that going to mean if we hit a Solar minium in 2030 and go into a mini-ice age? Solar Cells will only be producing about 40% of the electricity compared to what they currently do and Crops will be failing everywhere.

Do you not think it would be prudent to take sets to prepare for that just incase?
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Jolly on 15/02/2017 00:04:16
MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen Mocks 97% Consensus: ‘It is propaganda’

http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/02/15/mit-climate-scientist-dr-richard-lindzen-mocks-97-consensus-it-is-propaganda/ (http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/02/15/mit-climate-scientist-dr-richard-lindzen-mocks-97-consensus-it-is-propaganda/)
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Bored chemist on 15/02/2017 20:51:03
MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen Mocks 97% Consensus: ‘It is propaganda’

http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/02/15/mit-climate-scientist-dr-richard-lindzen-mocks-97-consensus-it-is-propaganda/ (http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/02/15/mit-climate-scientist-dr-richard-lindzen-mocks-97-consensus-it-is-propaganda/)

Or not

https://skepticalscience.com/skeptic_Richard_Lindzen.htm
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Bored chemist on 15/02/2017 20:53:23
I think we are getting slightly off topic,

Lets say that we do stop human releases of CO2 to a degree the scientists are arguing for and we go far more into Solar technology.

What is that going to mean if we hit a Solar minium in 2030 and go into a mini-ice age? Solar Cells will only be producing about 40% of the electricity compared to what they currently do and Crops will be failing everywhere.

Do you not think it would be prudent to take sets to prepare for that just incase?

OK: what do you actually propose that we do?
Do you think that reducing consumption, looking to things like tidal and even nuclear power and so on would help in that scenario? (Hint: yes they would).
OK lets do them then.
It's this all over again
http://greenmonk.net/2010/01/07/what-if-we-create-a-better-world-for-nothing/
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Jolly on 15/02/2017 23:21:41
I think we are getting slightly off topic,

Lets say that we do stop human releases of CO2 to a degree the scientists are arguing for and we go far more into Solar technology.

What is that going to mean if we hit a Solar minium in 2030 and go into a mini-ice age? Solar Cells will only be producing about 40% of the electricity compared to what they currently do and Crops will be failing everywhere.

Do you not think it would be prudent to take sets to prepare for that just incase?

OK: what do you actually propose that we do?

Well in terms of Crops I would suggest building insultated growing centers of some type that would be able to produce Crops, even if there was a very low amount of sun light- So with Artificial sun light, And also able to grow and protect crops during a Necular winter.

Do you think that reducing consumption, looking to things like tidal and even nuclear power and so on would help in that scenario? (Hint: yes they would).

Reducting consumption would also reduce tax, I would advocate for less waste in packaging and more easily recyclable products. Combined with more eco friendly products to start with.

OK lets do them then.
It's this all over again
http://greenmonk.net/2010/01/07/what-if-we-create-a-better-world-for-nothing/ (http://greenmonk.net/2010/01/07/what-if-we-create-a-better-world-for-nothing/)

There are no garentees in any of this- Define "better world".

Still you have not answered the other questions I asked you.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: alancalverd on 15/02/2017 23:49:32
Plenty of good reasons to reduce CO2 output, none connected with climate.

1. Fossil fuel is a limited resource. As more people consider it their birthright, and less of it remains, it becomes a political weapon (it already is) in the hands of those who just happen to be living where the stuff is, not necessarily those with any social or political merit.

2. Anthropogenic CO2 is a function of population. There are already more people than the planet can sustain indefinitely, and a reduction in population density would be beneficial to our successors. One third of our food is the product of artificial fertilisers, the production of which is a major
contributor to CO2 generation. Fewer people would mean our successors could eat well without the Haber-Bosch process.

3.  25% of anthropogenic CO2 is exhaled by farm animals (10% is exhaled by humans!). Reducing our consumption of animal products would improve general biodiversity and sustainability

4. Arguments about renewable energy tend to focus on electricity. Problem is that electricity only accounts for about one third of our energy use. We need a sustainable means of producing liquid fuels by sequestering atmospheric CO2.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/02/2017 21:28:58

Well in terms of Crops I would suggest building insultated growing centers of some type that would be able to produce Crops, even if there was a very low amount of sun light- So with Artificial sun light, And also able to grow and protect crops during a Necular winter.


Reducting consumption would also reduce tax, I would advocate for less waste in packaging and more easily recyclable products. Combined with more eco friendly products to start with.


Do you have the slightest idea how much power it would take to produce the "artificial sunlight"?
You might as well say we could solve the problem by saying we could fertilise the crops with unicorn poop.

"Reducting consumption would also reduce tax,"
Utter bollocks
Taxes are stet by governments, not wastefulness.
Most of your questions are not meaningful enough to answer. would you like to try rephrasing them?
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Jolly on 21/02/2017 00:07:20

Well in terms of Crops I would suggest building insultated growing centers of some type that would be able to produce Crops, even if there was a very low amount of sun light- So with Artificial sun light, And also able to grow and protect crops during a Necular winter.


Reducting consumption would also reduce tax, I would advocate for less waste in packaging and more easily recyclable products. Combined with more eco friendly products to start with.


Do you have the slightest idea how much power it would take to produce the "artificial sunlight"?
You might as well say we could solve the problem by saying we could fertilise the crops with unicorn poop.

Well Unicorn poop is a good manure, but there arnt that many unicorns arround, you could maybe get some from the zoo, not sure how much they produce, but Zoos do often want rid of it.


"Reducting consumption would also reduce tax,"
Utter bollocks
Taxes are stet by governments, not wastefulness.

"Utter bollocks" of all the silly things I have heard you say this has got to be one of the best. People make products for consumption, bussiness make products for consumption, Wages, profits, sales all taxed at some level. Are you sure you are feeling ok?

Most of your questions are not meaningful enough to answer. would you like to try rephrasing them?

Really?
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Tim the Plumber on 08/03/2017 20:10:37
Dude, you're a liar.

How have you not been banned from this forum yet?

Almost every other post seems to be you saying that so and so is a liar.

Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: alancalverd on 09/03/2017 00:29:51
I take exception to being called a liar by people whose opinion (or even existence) matters. In this case, it doesn't.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: PhysBang on 16/03/2017 00:47:29
Science advances by scepticism and revolution, not  consensus.
As with most things deniers say, this is at best a half-truth, and likely one intended to deceive.

Individual acts of science may involve wrestling with the epistemic weakness of a given claim, but the goal is to establish positive claims that can convince reasonable people. That is, to produce consensus. The sociological evidence is that scientists working on global warming have convinced reasonable scientists and that there remain a cadre of unreasonable people who either do not want to believe or who do believe but have their own reasons for claiming otherwise.

Quote
When people "adjust" other people's data to fit their hypotheses, it may be called fraud, deception, politics, propaganda....anything except science.
Like all the examples of climate change deniers who cherry-pick results or promote the idea that global cooling was ever a widely adopted idea.

Quote
Meanwhile, if it is going to survive even the teensiest test of scientific plausibility, it will have to start making some accurate predictions and stop fiddling with the facts.
For the unreasonable, over 50 years of predictive success is not enough.

Quote
But even before that, someone is going to have to define global mean temperature
It is a popular canard among the deniers that there is no such thing as global mean temperature. This is not the case. It is offered as an excuse to avoid looking at all the high quality data of temperature anomalies in various locations.

One should take the willingness to offer such arguments as a sign of poor moral character.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: PhysBang on 16/03/2017 00:49:34
Time was that 100% of scientists believed in a geocentric universe, and you could be burned at the stake for thinking otherwise.
Do you have a single example of someone being burned at the stake for promoting such a belief? Or is this another of the fantasies that you like to use to promote your beliefs?

Quote
Within my lifetime the consensus has swung from an impending ice age to an impending thermal runaway. Beware of consensus: it is at best naive and frequently shortsighted.
Do you have any evidence to support your claim that there was consensus for an impending ice age? Or is this another of the fantasies that you like to use to promote your beliefs?
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: alancalverd on 16/03/2017 19:10:32
Quote
Giordano Bruno, philosopher and scientist, burnt at the stake 400 years ago
By Frank Gaglioti
16 February 2000

Four centuries ago today, on February 16, 1600, the Roman Catholic Church executed Giordano Bruno, Italian philosopher and scientist, for the crime of heresy. He was taken from his cell in the early hours of the morning to the Piazza dei Fiori in Rome and burnt alive at the stake. To the last, the Church authorities were fearful of the ideas of a man who was known throughout Europe as a bold and brilliant thinker. In a peculiar twist to the gruesome affair, the executioners were ordered to tie his tongue so that he would be unable to address those gathered.

Throughout his life Bruno championed the Copernican system of astronomy which placed the sun, not the Earth, at the centre of the solar system. He opposed the stultifying authority of the Church and refused to recant his philosophical beliefs throughout his eight years of imprisonment by the Venetian and Roman Inquisitions. His life stands as a testimony to the drive for knowledge and truth that marked the astonishing period of history known as the Renaissance—from which so much in modern art, thought and science derives.

Galileo avoided a similar fate by recanting, though his last words were reputedly "eppur si muove". 

I am drawn to the hypothesis that PhysBang may be a papal apologist. Certainly not a gentleman.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Bored chemist on 16/03/2017 22:09:58
"But even before that, someone is going to have to define global mean temperature and explain how it is and will be measured, by an absolutely consistent method.  ".
Nope.
You don't understand temperature measurement. Here's teh simplified version.
The closest they get to an "absolutely consistent method.  " is the constant volume gas thermometer, using helium as the working fluid, and extrapolated to zero pressure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_thermometer


Taking a measurement with that kit takes days.
And, since the temperature of the earth's surface changes over that time scale  it is impossible to do what you ask.
It's also impossible to measure the temperature of the glass of water on my desk.
So, your choice to require an "absolutely consistent method. " renders it meaningless.

The only things you can measure that way are things like the triple point of water or the melting point of pure materials- for the same reason that a bath of ice and water in a Dewar flask stays pretty close to 0C for ages.

So, that's what you do.
You get things like water, gallium, tin, silver platinum and whatever then measure their freezing (or triple as appropriate) points.
Then you use those  fixed points to calibrate more practical thermometers- the ones that everyone actually uses- rather than the rather silly requirement you specified.

There are lots of things that get used- thermocouple voltages and the length of a column of mercury in a glass tube are common ones.
But here's the clever bit; there's nothing magical about the choice.
You can use anything as long as you calibrate it- so, for example, you can use the ratios of isotopes in air bubbles trapped in ice.

So, you can look at a "thermometer" that recorded the temperature a wile ago.

Now, having sorted that out, let's look at the rest of what you said.
"someone is going to have to define global mean temperature".
Which word is giving you a problem?
Global- means the whole world
Mean- in this case will be an arithmetic mean and
temperature- is a measure of the average available energy per molecule or atom.
Better definitions are available, but which words are you struggling with?
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: PhysBang on 16/03/2017 22:46:20
Quote
Giordano Bruno, philosopher and scientist, burnt at the stake 400 years ago
By Frank Gaglioti
16 February 2000

Four centuries ago today, on February 16, 1600, the Roman Catholic Church executed Giordano Bruno, Italian philosopher and scientist, for the crime of heresy. He was taken from his cell in the early hours of the morning to the Piazza dei Fiori in Rome and burnt alive at the stake. To the last, the Church authorities were fearful of the ideas of a man who was known throughout Europe as a bold and brilliant thinker. In a peculiar twist to the gruesome affair, the executioners were ordered to tie his tongue so that he would be unable to address those gathered.

Throughout his life Bruno championed the Copernican system of astronomy which placed the sun, not the Earth, at the centre of the solar system. He opposed the stultifying authority of the Church and refused to recant his philosophical beliefs throughout his eight years of imprisonment by the Venetian and Roman Inquisitions. His life stands as a testimony to the drive for knowledge and truth that marked the astonishing period of history known as the Renaissance—from which so much in modern art, thought and science derives.
Giordano Bruno was not executed for his astronomical beliefs, but for his explicitly political ones.
 
Quote
Galileo avoided a similar fate by recanting, though his last words were reputedly "eppur si muove". 
Well, I'm glad that you appeal to myths in order to support all your claims.

Quote
I am drawn to the hypothesis that PhysBang may be a papal apologist. Certainly not a gentleman.
Wow, so your response is a couple of myths and an attempt at "guilt by association" attacking Catholics and, given the history of "gentleman", Jews. Nice to see that sort of bigotry associated with climate change denial and this forum.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: alancalverd on 16/03/2017 23:56:53
Thank you for your help, BC, without which I could not possibly have spent 13 years at the National Physical Laboratory designing systems for measuring microdegree temperature changes, before you sat your GCSEs.  But that was only for an international primary standard, so clearly it wouldn't stack up against your parade of archaic thermometers.

Now having decided, against your vastly better judgement, that global surface temperatures can best be measured by satellite infrared pyrometry, professional meteorologists can have a pretty good idea of the temperature at any point of  the globe at a given instant. The question is, how do we define the overall mean when each point can vary by up to 80 degrees in a day? If we are interested in heat rather than spot temperature, we also need to know the specific heat capacity of each point, because whilst a rock on top of a mountain might  get very hot at noon and freeze at night, its specific heat capacity is much less than a pond in a valley, which may only vary by a couple of degrees during the same day, and it is heat capacity that affects the transfer of incoming solar energy to atmospheric energy, or "climate".

I know it's all very complicated, but I'm appealing to your encylopaedic knowledge of thermometry, geology and oceanography (now there's a bugger! the stuff keeps moving, up, down and sideways, and sometimes anomalously!)  to tell me what you think "global mean temperature" means.       
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: PhysBang on 17/03/2017 02:47:39
Thank you for your help, BC, without which I could not possibly have spent 13 years at the National Physical Laboratory designing systems for measuring microdegree temperature changes, before you sat your GCSEs.  But that was only for an international primary standard, so clearly it wouldn't stack up against your parade of archaic thermometers.

Now having decided, against your vastly better judgement, that global surface temperatures can best be measured by satellite infrared pyrometry, professional meteorologists can have a pretty good idea of the temperature at any point of  the globe at a given instant. The question is, how do we define the overall mean when each point can vary by up to 80 degrees in a day? If we are interested in heat rather than spot temperature, we also need to know the specific heat capacity of each point, because whilst a rock on top of a mountain might  get very hot at noon and freeze at night, its specific heat capacity is much less than a pond in a valley, which may only vary by a couple of degrees during the same day, and it is heat capacity that affects the transfer of incoming solar energy to atmospheric energy, or "climate".

I know it's all very complicated, but I'm appealing to your encylopaedic knowledge of thermometry, geology and oceanography (now there's a bugger! the stuff keeps moving, up, down and sideways, and sometimes anomalously!)  to tell me what you think "global mean temperature" means.       
That's a great distraction from the actual science of climatology. Thank you for helping us ignore established temperature anomalies in favor of your particular windmill.

I love that this forum is so closely identified with deception and bigotry!
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Bored chemist on 19/03/2017 10:01:17
Thank you for your help, BC, without which I could not possibly have spent 13 years at the National Physical Laboratory designing systems for measuring microdegree temperature changes, before you sat your GCSEs.  But that was only for an international primary standard, so clearly it wouldn't stack up against your parade of archaic thermometers.

Now having decided, against your vastly better judgement, that global surface temperatures can best be measured by satellite infrared pyrometry, professional meteorologists can have a pretty good idea of the temperature at any point of  the globe at a given instant. The question is, how do we define the overall mean when each point can vary by up to 80 degrees in a day? If we are interested in heat rather than spot temperature, we also need to know the specific heat capacity of each point, because whilst a rock on top of a mountain might  get very hot at noon and freeze at night, its specific heat capacity is much less than a pond in a valley, which may only vary by a couple of degrees during the same day, and it is heat capacity that affects the transfer of incoming solar energy to atmospheric energy, or "climate".

I know it's all very complicated, but I'm appealing to your encylopaedic knowledge of thermometry, geology and oceanography (now there's a bugger! the stuff keeps moving, up, down and sideways, and sometimes anomalously!)  to tell me what you think "global mean temperature" means.       
Well, if you already knew so much better, why do you repeatedly ask such a dumb question?
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: PhysBang on 20/03/2017 09:46:04
Thank you for your help, BC, without which I could not possibly have spent 13 years at the National Physical Laboratory designing systems for measuring microdegree temperature changes, before you sat your GCSEs.  But that was only for an international primary standard, so clearly it wouldn't stack up against your parade of archaic thermometers.

Now having decided, against your vastly better judgement, that global surface temperatures can best be measured by satellite infrared pyrometry, professional meteorologists can have a pretty good idea of the temperature at any point of  the globe at a given instant. The question is, how do we define the overall mean when each point can vary by up to 80 degrees in a day? If we are interested in heat rather than spot temperature, we also need to know the specific heat capacity of each point, because whilst a rock on top of a mountain might  get very hot at noon and freeze at night, its specific heat capacity is much less than a pond in a valley, which may only vary by a couple of degrees during the same day, and it is heat capacity that affects the transfer of incoming solar energy to atmospheric energy, or "climate".

I know it's all very complicated, but I'm appealing to your encylopaedic knowledge of thermometry, geology and oceanography (now there's a bugger! the stuff keeps moving, up, down and sideways, and sometimes anomalously!)  to tell me what you think "global mean temperature" means.       
Well, if you already knew so much better, why do you repeatedly ask such a dumb question?

And when I point out that global warming deniers deceive people, I get a warning. I hope that when they point it out themselves, they will get some kind of sanction.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: alancalverd on 20/03/2017 10:02:09

Well, if you already knew so much better, why do you repeatedly ask such a dumb question?


Because I don't know the answer. Lots of people assert that "it" is increasing, and it probably is, but I haven't found a credible definition of "it"  that is consistent with what can be and has been measured. I'm hoping that someone who thinks it might be controllable can tell me what they hope to control, and how they will demonstrate that control.

If the question is that dumb, surely the answer must be really simple? Not that it matters. I'm quite capable of understanding very complicated answers. But insulting the question isn't an answer!
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: PhysBang on 20/03/2017 16:45:10

Well, if you already knew so much better, why do you repeatedly ask such a dumb question?


Because I don't know the answer. Lots of people assert that "it" is increasing, and it probably is, but I haven't found a credible definition of "it"  that is consistent with what can be and has been measured. I'm hoping that someone who thinks it might be controllable can tell me what they hope to control, and how they will demonstrate that control.

If the question is that dumb, surely the answer must be really simple? Not that it matters. I'm quite capable of understanding very complicated answers. But insulting the question isn't an answer!
What is insulting is that you are chasing this abstract fantasy when there are very careful procedures in place to identify temperature anomalies in as many locations as possible. So even though you know that there is something more practical than the "global mean temperature" that you want, you are willfully trying to distract from the actual science. I suppose, given you particular bigotry, that's your "religion".
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Petrochemicals on 30/03/2017 16:30:23
You have read about this havnt you ?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles

Coming from britian i can only say burn the fossil fuels otherwise im soon to be living under an ice sheet along with northern USA and nothern europe ! To that point I hope they are not lying about the temperature increace
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Bored chemist on 30/03/2017 21:28:59

Well, if you already knew so much better, why do you repeatedly ask such a dumb question?


Because I don't know the answer. Lots of people assert that "it" is increasing, and it probably is, but I haven't found a credible definition of "it"  that is consistent with what can be and has been measured. I'm hoping that someone who thinks it might be controllable can tell me what they hope to control, and how they will demonstrate that control.

If the question is that dumb, surely the answer must be really simple? Not that it matters. I'm quite capable of understanding very complicated answers. But insulting the question isn't an answer!
OK
Imagine you run a copy of Google earth, spin it round at random + then zoom in until you identify a single random point.

Go there and put  down a a thermometer with a radio transmitter. (you are likely to need a floating thermometer.)
Do this again and measure the temperature in another randomly chosen place.
Take the average of the two temperatures.
Keep adding thermometers  and noting the average of the temperature they read.

After a while the average will settle down to a constant value and adding more measurements won't change it (much)
(because of this sort of thing)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_limit_theorem

OK, so you now have a measure of teh average surface temperature of teh earth at any given time.

Now record it over the course of a year.
You can take your pick on whether to record it at random intervals or fixed ones- as long as you choose evenly spaced ones it doesn't matter- every hour would be a simple approach.

Take the average of the temperature measurements.

That's the "global mean temperature".

Why did  you think it was hard to define?
So, now I'm waiting for the pointless argument against it.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: alancalverd on 31/03/2017 00:22:15
So according to your definition, nobody has ever measured it, we have no useful historic data before 1900,  and it cannot be used to determine climate change.

Now that's a pity, because I know that climate change is inevitable. The difficulty is finding a credible model to predict it.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: Bored chemist on 01/04/2017 13:26:13

So, now I'm waiting for the pointless argument against it.

I didn't have to wait long.
Title: Re: Was faking of tempreture data about global warming, a Malthusian project?
Post by: PhysBang on 01/04/2017 14:04:35
So according to your definition, nobody has ever measured it, we have no useful historic data before 1900,  and it cannot be used to determine climate change.

Now that's a pity, because I know that climate change is inevitable. The difficulty is finding a credible model to predict it.
So, rather than actually look at the actual data that people collect, you are going to continue to demand a fantasy statistic instead.

Good for you, shilling for the interests of those people with a lot of money that want to confuse the issue. You're doing a great job as a white male, punching down at people who do the work of scientists. We can tell that you're smarter than they are because you insult and make fun of religious people and anything they might believe, regardless of whether its connected to their religion or not. Makes this forum look really, really good.