—–8

Christy himself admitted last year that he was mistaken. He was one of the authors of a paper which states the opposite of what he says in the film. “Previously reported discrepancies between the amount of warming near the surface and higher in the atmosphere have been used to challenge the reliability of climate models and the reality of human-induced global warming. Specifically, surface data showed substantial global-average warming, while early versions of satellite and radiosonde data showed little or no warming above the surface. This significant discrepancy no longer exists because errors in the satellite and radiosonde data have been identified and corrected.”

Well, in short. There are two reasons to explain why there is a consensus among the scientific community. One, as you point, there exists a giantic conspiration to hide what Global Warming deniers have to say. Two, that Global Warming is the truth, and the majority of scientifics see it and are trying to explain it to people.

Frankly, I’m with the ones that reject thinfoil theories. Reason two, you know.

Unfortunately, he found nothing of the kind.
A paper published in the journal Eos in 2004 reveals that the “agreement” was the result of “incorrect handling of the physical data”. The real data for recent years show the opposite: that the length of the sunspot cycle has declined, while temperatures have risen. When this error was exposed, Friis-Christensen and his co-author published a new paper, purporting to produce similar results. But this too turned out to be an artefact of mistakes – in this case in their arithmetic.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about do you?

Bertrand Russell was not a scientist, but yet another empiricist fraud. Which is precisely why I used the quotation marks.

Also, if you are trying to suggest that his point about snow being black has something to do with standardization I pity your school teacher for having wasted a good deal of effort on failing to teach you critical thinking skills.

What Lord Russell, the famous pacifist who authored the first policy of nuclear preventative warfare (against Russia, before they achieved the world’s first thermonuclear explosion), was referring to was how to use Sophistry to brainwash an entire strata of society into believing the utter nonsense that racist, evil malthusians such as him would like them to.

I cannot help your ignorance on these topics, would expect a little more humility from someone who has so little comprehension of the subject matter.

Comment by RAL — March 14, 2007 @ 9:28 am

First, not every loony defending an hypothesis in minority is a Galileo or a Copernicus. Second, your favored loony, has been proved wrong by a lot of independent scientific facts and climatologists. Third, most of your favored loonies have been proved paid shills for corporations interested in denying Global Warming to preserve economic invoices. Fourth, the modern communications and computer power permit to quickly prove hypothesis and debunk them if they are ilogical or biased. Your hypothesis has been proved wrong repeatedly.

Your last paragraph

Go and read what that famous “scientist” Dr Bertrand Russell said about convincing people that snow is black for further reference.

is worth a separate debunking:

First, why do you double quote “scientist”? From Dictionary.com:

sci·en·tist /ˈsaɪəntɪst/ Pronunciation Key – Show Spelled Pronunciation[sahy-uhn-tist] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun an expert in science, esp. one of the physical or natural sciences.

So, its a correct English term. Being a foreigner, I was fearing that “scientist” (sic) weren’t an existent word in English. But it’s not the case.

It’s because you don’t consider Sir Bertrand Russell a “scientist” (sic)? Let’s check the Wikipedia about him:

Bertrand Arthur William Russell, 3rd Earl Russell OM FRS (18 May 1872 – 2 February 1970), was a British philosopher, logician, mathematician and advocate for social reform. A prolific writer, he was also a populariser of philosophy and a commentator on a large variety of topics, ranging from very serious issues to those less so. Continuing a family tradition in political affairs, he was a prominent anti-war activist for most of his long life, championing free trade between nations and anti-imperialism.[1][2] Millions looked up to Russell as a prophet of the creative and rational life; at the same time, his stances on many topics were extremely controversial.

Hey, I was thinking that a mathematician is a scientist. Silly me. But let’s continue with the meaning of the phrase you’ve quoted, or best, paraphrased or referenced:

Go and read what that famous “scientist” Dr Bertrand Russell said about convincing people that snow is black for further reference.

Well, the text of Bertrand Russell is a tirade against standardization and indoctrination in science. A very well written one. And I agree with him wholeheartedly. But maybe you’re the one that doesn’t understand the difference between sane skepticism (English scepticism), and simply ignoring the facts. And the GW deniers simply ignore the facts, and pretend that it’s skepticism, when it’s biased wishful thinking.

When you do logics, and not false sophisms, you’ll be welcome.

Science is concerned with finding the true cause of the events that we humans interpret as the reality of “sensory perception”.

The fundamental problem with a lot of the current global warming “science” that is cited by the misanthropic haters of progress and civilization who run some of our international NGOs, is that it is simply statistical mechanics based on linear computer models.

The truth behind all of this is that we are dealing with an international crisis of unbelievable proportions, in the ECONOMY, and that certain forces are moving to replace what remains of national sovereignty with WORLD GOVERNMENT (i.e. globalization).

The global warming issue is being used as a tool of economic warfare by the supranational institutions to smash the last vestiges of national independence, and put the world under their direct and unchallenged control.

To all the likely effects of this policy genocidal is an understatement, but then, that is precisely what they intend for the majority of humanity if we do not stand up and fight this with the SCIENTIFIC TRUTH.

Thanks for the open mind on this global warming issue that media is totally overblowing, distorting, underreporting, and misleading folks on.

Not to say many other scientists, many who are not true climatologists, who keep referencing each others papers that continue to advance a belief that cannot be verifiec by other scientists due to either the refusal of the authors to provide the raw date and/or the modeling formulations that were used.

So what is true science ? We could start with establishment of facts that withstand repeated statisical tests by any number of other experimentors. Then, we can see if this global warming is truly significant in the geological time frame.

“There will still be people who believe this is the end of the world, particularly when you have, for example, the chief scientist of the U.K. telling people that by the end of the century the only habitable place on the Earth with be the Antarctic and humanity may survive thanks to some breeding couples who move to the Antarctic. I mean, this is hilarious,” he says with a chuckle.

“It would be hilarious, actually, if it weren’t so sad.”

See the film at:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog?entry=24760&only

Since when was science conducted by consensus, or by counting the number of people who support a theory versus the number who do not?

If you had any actual scientific competence, you would know that it is truth, not popular opinion, that is the subject of scientific enquiry.

Furthermore, if you had any actual understanding of how science and public policy interact, and the fact that the majority of scientists will not speak out on this issue for fear of losing their funding (not to mention the viscious attacks from the environmentalist lobby), you would realize how idiotic a statement that was.

All of this is leading our world into a dark age where the public will accept whatever the modern incarnation of the babylonian priesthood (in this case politically motivated scientific peer review committees) says is the truth, and ignore the mass of emperical evidence to the contrary.

Go and read what that famous “scientist” Dr Bertrand Russell said about convincing people that snow is black for further reference.

The cause of climate change is the SUN, not CO2. Why is elementary high school science so difficult for you Al Gore lovers to grasp?

Yeah, I see how a single ‘Professor’ can debunk a conclusion based on thousands of studies done by thousands of scientists. An using a factor that surely the thousands of scientists hadn’t in mind: the Sun.

/Must I say that this is sarcasm?

The cause of climate change is the SUN, not CO2. Why is elementary high school science so difficult for you Al Gore lovers to grasp?

Al Gore is a British agent, a hedge fund manager, and a genocidalist. He has no regard for the human suffering that his idiotic misrepresentation of science will cause to developing economies.

And you stupid Americans are being duped by the British Monarchy to shut down your own industries in the name of an invisible gas that has no discernable impact on global climate.

Do you want to return to the bad old days of global empire and free trade liberalism (slavery), or keep your Republic?

But there is one scientist in the film whose work has not been debunked: the oceanographer Carl Wunsch. He appears to support the idea that increasing carbon dioxide is not responsible for rising global temperatures. Wunsch says he was “completely misrepresented” by the programme, and “totally misled” by the people who made it.

This is a familiar story to those who have followed the career of the director Martin Durkin. In 1998, the UKs Independent Television Commission found that, when making a similar series, he had “misled” his interviewees about “the content and purpose of the programmes”. Their views had been “distorted through selective editing”. Channel 4 had to make a prime-time apology.

Cherry-pick your results, choose work which is already discredited, and anything and everything becomes true.

You, wether you know it or not, have taken a seat front center stage.

The internet is not anonymous as you might think. =)

Me too, we moved A LOT until I was 7th grade, then managed to stay on the same base until I graduated. Dad alternated between the base to the USS Coral Sea a couple different times. Too cold to appreciate the beach view in the SF Bay area!