Comments on: Inhofe Distorts New UN Report On Climate Change: ‘We Are All Skeptics Now’

By: best company debt reduction

best company debt reduction — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 21:01:50 +0000

best company debt reduction

By: Emerson

Emerson — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:19:09 +0000

Emerson

By: Jack

Jack — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 14:26:06 +0000

Jack

Thanks for the post. I couldn’t agree with you more.

By: Particulate Emission Reduction Natural Gas Power

Particulate Emission Reduction Natural Gas Power — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 00:05:05 +0000

Particulate Emission Reduction Natural Gas Power

Found your blog on yahoo – thanks for the article but i still don’t get it.

By: business writing course london

business writing course london — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:39:56 +0000

business writing course london

The term is used colloquially for any kind of Linkback. (Blogger now has backlinks – very similar to the trackback feature in Movable

By: Eric

Eric — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 12:16:19 +0000

Eric

Truer word have never been uttered, indeed. Your point is sound and excellent. Thanks for sharing.

By: Health Insurance Gulf Breeze Insurance Flood Insurance

Health Insurance Gulf Breeze Insurance Flood Insurance — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 04:07:50 +0000

Health Insurance Gulf Breeze Insurance Flood Insurance

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

By: Home Owners Insurance Comparison

Home Owners Insurance Comparison — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 12:20:44 +0000

Home Owners Insurance Comparison

It is a quite interesting post but quite difficult to understand for me -

By: air conditioning and heating

air conditioning and heating — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 22:27:19 +0000

air conditioning and heating

Didn’t realise there was this type of information out there

By: Insurance Automobile Insurance Home Owners Insurance

Insurance Automobile Insurance Home Owners Insurance — Sat, 22 Mar 2008 13:24:25 +0000

Insurance Automobile Insurance Home Owners Insurance

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

By: Think Progress » The Inhofe scale.

Think Progress » The Inhofe scale. — Fri, 23 Mar 2007 00:18:06 +0000

[...] is commensurate with the sort of willful delusion he says is contained in Inhofe’s “greatest hoax” speech. “Just to be clear, this is a measurement of detachment from widely accepted [...]

By: carlw

carlw — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 01:40:58 +0000

Hey idiots. Until you understand the material covered here:

you should not be mouthing off like you have any idea what you’re talking about. The fact is that there is no consensus, despite what Al Gore might tell you. The Oregon Petition Project had 21,000 signatories, and this is just the some of a growing opposition.
The debate does not lie with whether or not the Earth is warming. Of course it is, environmentalists just try to put words in the mouths of skeptics to look like idiots. The debate lies with if increased evaporation will be a positive or negative feedback. In other words, will increased evaporation from higher temps contribute more to the greenhouse gases or to albedo (reflectivity in clouds)? This is very complex and not at all understood.

By: Tekkers

Tekkers — Thu, 28 Dec 2006 14:18:06 +0000

Wake up and get out of your feedback loop. Get some real facts, instead of your self-loving BS:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/05/nosplit/nwarm05.xml

By: brandX

brandX — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 13:31:33 +0000

I’m curious what this moron without a doctorate in environmental science will say when Santa is forced to move his facilities to a raft.

————————————————————————————

Experts warn North Pole will be ‘ice free’ by 2040

Lewis Smith, Environment Reporter of The Times

Ice is melting so fast in the Arctic that the North Pole will be in the open sea in 30 years, according to a team of leading climatologists.

Ships will be able to sail over the top of the world and tourists will be able visit what was, until climate change, one of planetâ€™s most inaccessible landscapes.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2499663,00.html

————————————————————————-

In fact Inhofe never even had a degree until 38 years old and then proceeded to run an insurance firm into the ground. Seems he wants to run the Earth’s environment like a business too.

From Wikipedia:

Inhofe received a B.A. degree from the University of Tulsa in 1973, at the age of 38.

In his business career, Inhofe was a real estate developer and became president of the Quaker Life Insurance Company. That company went into receivership while he managed it; it was liquidated in 1986, and despite a two year investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission into accounting irregularities connected with the failure, Inhofe was never charged with any criminal offenses, and has since denied any wrongdoing

By: DutchHenry

DutchHenry — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 05:08:05 +0000

What a sicko!

By: DrSinker

DrSinker — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 03:49:41 +0000

Walt,

Good to see you here again. This site has changed a lot in the past year or so.

By: WaltTheMan

WaltTheMan — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 03:35:02 +0000

In 67, ‘as for’ should read ‘as per’.

By: WaltTheMan

WaltTheMan — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 03:32:22 +0000

If Steve Schulin is a nuklar fizzisist, I would suggest that you find out where he works and immediately move upwind – far upwind. As for DrSinker, your only hope is another planet.

By: DrSinker

DrSinker — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 03:11:44 +0000

I don’t know how any reasonable person following the science could conclude Inhofe’s claims are well grounded in the evidence.

By: Steve Schulin

Steve Schulin — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 02:55:41 +0000

62, “Forcing” refers to the influence of something outside the climate system on the climate system. There are natural and anthropogenic forcings. A volcanic eruption is considered a natural forcing, for example, as are changes in solar output. Anthropogenic forcings include greenhouse gas emissions associated with human activities, particulate air pollution associated with human activities, and land use change.
Even if forcing was steady, the climate system exhibits variability. This is called unforced variation. One of the reasons that the “hockey stick” graph was so compelling was how it minimized the potential of unforced variability on centennial scale, thus making recent variation in the surface temperature record quite anomalous. To say what’s abnormal, one must be able to identify what is normal. The IPCC’s best estimate for 20th century warming was 0.6 degrees C +/- 0.2 degrees C. Subtract the 0.12 degrees C that IPCC attributes to urbanization, and that leaves 0.48 degrees C +/- 0.2 degrees to be attributed to forcings or unforced variation. This is a very small amount compared to the high end of various model projections for the next century. It is not at all apparent that the 20th century observations reflect change outside of the range of what’s normal. And the few years of 21st century, despite the seemingly constant barrage of headlines to the contrary, do not represent much of an increase, if any, from the 1998 peak in 20th century record.
You ask about how the ocean fits in. Well, any heat transferred to below surface of ocean would necessarily subtract from the warming that could be captured by surface record.
There’s been a lot of interesting research over the years, and much that doesn’t seem to be worth the paper its printed on. One of the interesting areas of study was looking at satellite data on radiation flux at top of atmosphere. Wielicki et al. and Chen et al. had companion papers on this in Science a year or so after the last IPCC report. They concluded that the variation of outgoing longwave was much higher than models simulated. They also concluded that the “forcing” change in a decade due to the trend observed in the satellite era was greater than the forcing total of every CO2 molecule emitted by man since beginning of industrial age. And the sign of the forcing was opposite. The notion that CO2 has driven climate, when other changes are more significant, seems silly to me.