More evidences about Al Gore!

[Abdul Alhazred]

Some might say this is a silly nothing story because it proves nothing about global warming.

But it is important evidence that Al Gore is a jinx.

Global cooling hits Al Gore's home
Telegraph (UK)

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Oh Jesus ****.

Really?

 

[Towlie]

Many conservatives are still hung up on the obsolete term "global warming", but that has been replaced with "climate change" because of the complexities involved, which can actually cause cooling in some areas of the world. The wackos who persist in denying the phenomenon are either motivated by, or being deliberately manipulated by those who are motivated by, the mindless quest for profit. They aren't doing the human race any favors by spreading their misinformation.

 

[Abdul Alhazred]

"Climate change" of course. Complexities are involved.

Anything that happens to the climate is proof you're right.

 

[Cicero]

Many conservatives are still hung up on the obsolete term "global warming", but that has been replaced with "climate change" because of the complexities involved, which can actually cause cooling in some areas of the world. The wackos who persist in denying the phenomenon are either motivated by, or being deliberately manipulated by those who are motivated by, the mindless quest for profit. They aren't doing the human race any favors by spreading their misinformation.

Damn those scientists who were motivated by profit in the 1970's when they concluded the Earth was cooling!

http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf

http://www.nationalcenter.org/Time-Ice-Age-06-24-1974-Sm.jpg

 

[Towlie]

Anything that happens to the climate is proof you're right.

It used to be that we didn't expect anything to happen to the climate. It wasn't something that we expected to change. Weather normally changes from day to day, but climate was expected to stay the same from one year to the next. So in that sense, yes, you're right. Anything that happens to the climate is proof of climate change, and climate change of any sort is bad news for the planet and its many life forms.

However, we now have a pretty definite indication of how the climate is changing, and yes, it's complex. Like evolution, the debate was over a long time ago about whether or not it's happening. The only controversy among the scientific community today is in the details.

About the myth that scientists predicted global cooling in the 1970's:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=global+cooling+1970's&aq=3&oq=global+cooling&aqi=g10

1970's ice age predictions were predominantly media based with the majority of scientific papers predicting warming.

The notion that the 1970s scientific consensus was for impending global cooling is incorrect. In actuality, there were significantly more papers in the 1970s predicting warming than cooling.

more

 

[Cicero]

It used to be that we didn't expect anything to happen to the climate. It wasn't something that we expected to change. Weather normally changes from day to day, but climate was expected to stay the same from one year to the next. So in that sense, yes, you're right. Anything that happens to the climate is proof of climate change, and climate change of any sort is bad news for the planet and its many life forms.

However, we now have a pretty definite indication of how the climate is changing, and yes, it's complex. Like evolution, the debate was over a long time ago about whether or not it's happening. The only controversy among the scientific community today is in the details.

About the myth that scientists predicted global cooling in the 1970's:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=global+cooling+1970's&aq=3&oq=global+cooling&aqi=g10

Those damn conservative magazines TIME & NEWSWEEK were bamboozled by scientists to print articles about the Earth cooling instead of printing articles by scientists about the Earth warming. What was in it for these magazines to ignore these MMGW scientists then and now ignore the scientists with contrary information?

 

[Towlie]

Those damn conservative magazines TIME & NEWSWEEK were bamboozled by scientists to print articles about the Earth cooling instead of printing articles by scientists about the Earth warming.

If you want to learn who they were bamboozled by, you really need to scan through those Google hits and read some of them.

 

[SezMe]

What horrible writing. Is the Telegraph a reputable paper or a rag?

 

[Towlie]

What horrible writing. Is the Telegraph a reputable paper or a rag?

It's the online version of The Daily Telegraph^WP. Wikipedia says that the paper is politically conservative, but I guess that's pretty obvious.

 

[Cicero]

It's the online version of The Daily Telegraph^WP. Wikipedia says that the paper is politically conservative, but I guess that's pretty obvious.

You can't judge the paper's political ideology by the AlGore story since AlGore is considered persona non grata by MMGWers in JREF science threads.

 

[Abdul Alhazred]

All the newspaper story really indicates is that Al Gore is a jinx. All else is padding.

If Al Gore had served as president, he'd be taking credit for the recent cooling and all who said it would happen anyway would be laughed off the stage.

It used to be that we didn't expect anything to happen to the climate.

And now, anything bad or unusual that happens is evidence that you people should rule us.

 

[a_unique_person]

You can't judge the paper's political ideology by the AlGore story since AlGore is considered persona non grata by MMGWers in JREF science threads.

He is not "Persona non grata". He is simply irrelevant to the science. The obsession with Al is just evidence that there is no content for the case against AGW.

 

[a_unique_person]

All the newspaper story really indicates is that Al Gore is a jinx. All else is padding.

I didn't know we placed much faith in superstition here.

 

[Alt+F4]

He is not "Persona non grata". He is simply irrelevant to the science. The obsession with Al is just evidence that there is no content for the case against AGW.

Well that's just it - it's a lot easier to make fun of Al Gore than to look at the science. Science is hard, commenting on Al Gore's weight gain/loss is easy.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Where is that "See? Global warming's over!" graph when we need it, and why are people still attacking Al Gore and using the idiotic "it's cold in area x, therefore AGW isn't real"-rhetoric in 2009?!

 

[Pixel42]

Where is that "See? Global warming's over!" graph when we need it?

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Many thanks.

 

[Cicero]

He is not "Persona non grata". He is simply irrelevant to the science. The obsession with Al is just evidence that there is no content for the case against AGW.

Who are these people truly obsessed with AlGore? Those who say Bush 43 stole the 2000 election from him? Those who mistakenly beleive AlGore was awarded an Oscar? Those who ignore the fact that AlGore's lifestyle is at odds with his MMGM preaching?

What the MMGWers have in common with religious zealots is that both believe that the human race is headed for the day of reckoning. The only difference between these fanatics is their time table.

 

[Beerina]

Oh Jesus ****.

Really?

The article seems to be a hack piece, but it does claim that models predicted this would be "one of the 5 hottest summers" on record. Was this really predicted for this year?


I recall that "they", whoever the hell "they" are, predicted the year after Katrina would also be a very bad hurricane year, when it wasn't.

As skeptics, we're well aware of the "regression to the mean", which would apply even in severe global warming. Why don't these idiots who do these simulations know this?