• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

ClimateGate - A great new Website

BTW, we know that Kilimanjaro was snow-free about 11,000 years ago. Was that due to AGW? If not, how can that be?
 
To recap the essentials of this thread for you: mhaze presented a manufactured quote, got called on it, tried to deflect reality with an inanity shield. You came to his defense and posted a manufactured quote, got called on it... you know the rest of that story ;)
 
Tomblvd said:
Got what mostly right?





Glaciers in the eastern Himalayas are melting, but the ones in the west are growing. And none of the melting is due to AGW.




Then it is despicable that Gore states as a fact that glaciers are melting due to AGW.
Click to expand...

It's not despicable. The evidence he had at the time supported that claim.
 
Megalodon said:
To recap the essentials of this thread for you: mhaze presented a manufactured quote, got called on it, tried to deflect reality with an inanity shield. You came to his defense and posted a manufactured quote, got called on it... you know the rest of that story ;)
Click to expand...

Do you have proof I "manufactured" a quote? And what did I say specifically, to come to his defense. I reality, I completely ignored his posts.

Can we have a source for that statement?.
Click to expand...


According to Professor Lonnie Thompson, Ohio State University, Kilimanjaro’s ice fields could be gone by the year 2020. In his October 18, 2002, article in the journal Science, Thompson and his co-authors note that the ice on the summit, which formed more than 11,000 years ago, has dwindled by 82 percent over the past century. The authors note that the recent, dramatic decline in Kilimanjaro’s ice cap is particularly remarkable given its persistence through many previous shifts in climate, including a severe 300-year-long drought that impacted human populations living in the area about 4,000 years ago.
 
Tomblvd said:
According to Professor Lonnie Thompson, Ohio State University, Kilimanjaro’s ice fields ... note that the ice on the summit, which formed more than 11,000 years ago,
Click to expand...

So he says there is more ice now than there was 12,000 years ago?
 
casebro said:
So he says there is more ice now than there was 12,000 years ago?
Click to expand...

So sorry. I forgot to include a link to the story.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=3054

Also, I left out another article:

Professor Sinninghe Damste’s research, as discussed on the site of the Dutch Organization of Scientific Research (DOSR) — a governmental body — shows that the icecap of Kilimanjaro was not the result of cold air but of large amounts of precipitation which fell at the beginning of the Holocene period, about 11,000 years ago.

The melting and freezing of moisture on top of Kilimanjaro appears to be part of “a natural process of dry and wet periods.” The present melting is not the result of “environmental damage caused by man.”

Professor Damste studied organic biomarker molecules in the sediment record of Lake Challa, near Mount Kilimanjaro, and reconstructed the changes and intensity of precipitation in this part of Africa over the last 25,000 years. They observed an 11,500 year cycle of intense monsoon precipitation.

In the dry period between 12,800 and 11,500 years ago, Kilimanjaro was ice-free.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dutch-gore-wrong-on-snows-of-kilimanjaro/

Once again, sorry. ;-)
 
Tomblvd said:
I love how you guys ignored all the other quotes and jump on the one that doesn't have a direct source. Because, you know, nobody says anything like that.

Here. Ignore this one:

Al Gore, Grist Magazine (http://www.grist.org/article/roberts2/)

I think the answer to that depends on where your audience's head is. In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don't think there's a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.

Over time that mix will change. As the country comes to more accept the reality of the crisis, there's going to be much more receptivity to a full-blown discussion of the solutions.
Click to expand...

He means to re-present the facts OVER and OVER and OVER until folks like you get it.
 
Tomblvd said:
You mean like a "real" source for the conversation with that famous Global Warming supporter, Edward Teller?
Click to expand...

Well, I clearly cannot source my conversation beyond myself, but I can source his interest in AGW;

http://nucleargreen.blogspot.com/2008/03/edward-teller-listens-as-eugene-weigner.html

In December 1957 Edward Teller was invited to address the Annual meeting of the American Chemical Society. Teller was at the height of his fame. He was an honest to God celebrity, with reporters at his side, jotting down his comments, photographers snapping his picture, and as disgusting as it might seem now, women volunteering to sleep with him on the basis of his fame. (I know this because a beautify but wayward woman once describe an encounter with Teller to me. She would have slept with Teller had he consented to the arrangement.) He was referred to in the press as the Father of the "H-Bomb." He was also a darling of the American right-wing. No doubt the ACS thought by getting Teller to speak, they had achieved some coup. They must have been a little bit bewildered then when Teller started to talk about carbon dioxide and global climate. Teller told the assembled chemists that continued burning of carbon based fuels would increase the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, eventually warming the planet to the extent that the polar ice caps would melt, and the resulting rise in sea level would submerge costal cities under water.

When Teller talked about destroying the Russians with H-Bombs, the press, Congress, presidents listened, and beautiful women contemplated sleeping with him. But Teller's warnings about CO2 and global warming received little attention that day. Teller, for all his fame was a pariah within the nuclear research community.
Click to expand...
 
Tomblvd said:
So sorry. I forgot to include a link to the story.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=3054

Also, I left out another article:

Professor Sinninghe Damste’s research, as discussed on the site of the Dutch Organization of Scientific Research (DOSR) — a governmental body — shows that the icecap of Kilimanjaro was not the result of cold air but of large amounts of precipitation which fell at the beginning of the Holocene period, about 11,000 years ago.

The melting and freezing of moisture on top of Kilimanjaro appears to be part of “a natural process of dry and wet periods.” The present melting is not the result of “environmental damage caused by man.”

Professor Damste studied organic biomarker molecules in the sediment record of Lake Challa, near Mount Kilimanjaro, and reconstructed the changes and intensity of precipitation in this part of Africa over the last 25,000 years. They observed an 11,500 year cycle of intense monsoon precipitation.

In the dry period between 12,800 and 11,500 years ago, Kilimanjaro was ice-free.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dutch-gore-wrong-on-snows-of-kilimanjaro/

Once again, sorry. ;-)
Click to expand...

I said it was debatable, would you care to make the same claims for all the other glaciers, because overall, glaciers are retreating, and the the retreat has accelerated.
 
Tomblvd said:
Do you have proof I "manufactured" a quote?
Click to expand...

So you have a problem with English, too? I didn't say that you manufactured a quote. I wouldn't be able to prove such an assertion. I said you presented a manufactured quote. And you did...

According to Professor Lonnie Thompson, Ohio State University, Kilimanjaro’s ice fields could be gone by the year 2020. In his October 18, 2002, article in the journal Science, Thompson and his co-authors note that the ice on the summit, which formed more than 11,000 years ago, has dwindled by 82 percent over the past century. The authors note that the recent, dramatic decline in Kilimanjaro’s ice cap is particularly remarkable given its persistence through many previous shifts in climate, including a severe 300-year-long drought that impacted human populations living in the area about 4,000 years ago.
Click to expand...

Is this supposed to prove that Gore had no support when saying that climate change was melting the Kilimanjaro's ice cap? Apparently there were scientific papers proposing the idea :)
 
BenBurch said:
He means to re-present the facts OVER and OVER and OVER until folks like you get it.
Click to expand...

No, he means overhyping the dangers and leaving out the mitigating circumstances.

over-representation - to give too much representation to; represent in numbers that are disproportionately high.

Well, I clearly cannot source my conversation beyond myself, but I can source his interest in AGW;
Click to expand...

From 1957?

Do you think he might have changed his mind in over 40 years? Especially since he specifically said:

Society's emissions of carbon dioxide may or may not turn out to have something significant to do with global warming--the jury is still out.

Where besides Wikipedia (which I suspect YOU added there yourself?)
Click to expand...

I what? Do you have evidence of that?

Anyway, since you missed it the first time:

Christine Stewart, then Canadian Minister of the Environment, speaking before editors and reporters of the Calgary Herald, 1998, and quoted by Terence Corcoran, “Global Warming: The Real Agenda,” Financial Post, 26 December 1998, from the Calgary Herald, December, 14, 1998. Cited by Fred Singer, page 4


Which says NOTHING about the temperature. Ice evaporates in cold, dry air and will be gone if not replenished.
Click to expand...

But it does say that the mountain has been without snow before, without the effects of AGW. It is a cyclical event, and global warming wasn't involved.

What's most interesting about this is that a number of you asked for proof of that assertion. Given the immense amount of coverage it has received, how could you have missed it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom