Author Topic: eat that Lazs (Read 701 times)

rpm · « **Reply #15 on:** July 11, 2007, 06:51:51 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by DiabloTX
My point is that you can build a case for either side in a hotly debated topic as climate change OR dinosaur extinction. One side will lambast the other and claim it was influenced by politics or money.

I can agree with that 110%.

Watch Albert. It actually leaves you thirsty for more when it's over. I went into it with an open mind and was impressed with the way it was presented.

I'm sure there is a website somewhere that bebunks everything he says, but it's still worth watching. Heck, think of all the stuff you could use to throw back in treehuggers faces later on.

That's worth the price of admission alone.

Angus · « **Reply #16 on:** July 11, 2007, 07:10:06 AM »

Global warming debaters actually were up to this date debating whether if there was one. Now that part is mostly over, then they debate whether man has something to do with it.
Clinging on like that will not change what's going on, and I will repeat myself by saying that it is absolute foolishness to claim that mankind has no impact on global climate.
anti-environment crowd,,,,,nice word.

moot · « **Reply #17 on:** July 11, 2007, 07:15:32 AM »

Holden's illustrated pretty well that the current spike is within the range of precedent deviations...

straffo · « **Reply #18 on:** July 11, 2007, 07:37:02 AM »

Sorry Moot ? I don't understand your post.

lazs2 · « **Reply #19 on:** July 11, 2007, 08:27:16 AM »

LOL... so now.. because it the suns activity does not follow exactly to the millimeter... for every single year... it is no longer valid? one study throws it all out? even tho there were probly bigger and longer blips in the data over the eons?

Lets take the Co2 graph.. if a blip makes a theroy invalid... look at the freaking Co2 graph next to temp. !

It shows temp falling and Co2 rising all over the place. and not just for a couple of years... for decades.. the temp fell from 1940 to 76 yet co2 rose and... solar activity fell...

You can't have it both ways... you can't shout "anomaly" from the rooftops whenever we have a cold year or 30 and high Co2 and in the same breath cry "proof" when there is a drop in MEASURED solar activity and the temp continues a warming trend..

stretched out over centuries the little blip on such a graph would be nothing.

And....

Speaking of MEASUREMENTS.... have you guys seen "surfacestations.org?

The United States Historical Climate Network... yep.. the ones giving the temps that the UN and NASA use to make their graphs and to build a foundation on... the data used by "scientists" Those careful stalwarts...

This site is an attempt to inspect the 1200 or so weather stations around the country.

In 1980 (oddly enough) the UN claimed that the stations were badly flawed.

Nothing has been done to inspect or repair them.

This study has shown that in the first 50 inspected.. 38 were seriously flawed.. things like being moved to an area on asphalt.. or near an air conditoning exhaust or onto a roof... the graphs show most ere to the side of higher than real temps.

So... despite everyones faith in british scientists who are making fame and fortune off doom and gloom and... despite a tiny blip in a graph that everyone must concede is within an expected range when dealing with the entire globe... I still say...

ITS THE SUN STUPID.

lazs

Hortlund · « **Reply #20 on:** July 11, 2007, 08:32:19 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
I still say...

ITS THE SUN STUPID.

LOL

I tend to think that guys with no relevant education who think they can second guess professors or highly educated scientists are the prime candidates for "stupid".

lazs2 · « **Reply #21 on:** July 11, 2007, 08:34:44 AM »

others might ask... is it possible for the politial and money driven "man made global warming" er... "scientists" to ever be honest?

They claim a graph that ends in 1980 is dishonest yet use a graph that is so truncated that it is embarassing.. the numbers are tiny.. fractions of a degree in a short graph and tiny amounts of solar activity (one measured part of it anyway) in a tiny time span. probly the tiny amounts shown are withing calibration limits. certainly the temp data in fractions can be attributed to things like really poorly maintained weather stations. half a degree in 30 years? a planet that changes half a degree in 30-50 years is in crisis? If the so called measurements could be that accurate even. If the temp fell half a degree in the next 50 years would that be a crisis as well?

If so.. the world has been in crisis for all of its existence. I can't find any time period that is flat in temp.

They act like we have been able to measure fraction of a degree weather changes for decades with highly sophisticated equipment calibrated and read by scientists... in the US at least.. that is not the case (see above), I see no reason to believe it is the case in the rest of the world.

but wait.. the temp graph stops ten year ago? why is that? surely not because solar activity has gone down and we have had colder years for four of those missing years?

My hope is that the "man made global warming" scientists will continue to exaggerate and lie to the point where everyone will tell them to pound sand or...

They will not get what they want and a natural cooling cycle will come along (we are due historicaly) and they will go back under the rock they came from.

lazs

Hortlund · « **Reply #22 on:** July 11, 2007, 08:38:10 AM »

Look, this is really simple lasz. I'll try to explain it to you in small words.

1) Anti-environment types have claimed that increased solar output is the reason for the gobal warming.

2) A study shows that solar output has DECREASED, while temperature on earth has INCREASED.

3) That means that the theory put forth under 1) has been proven wrong, and therefore it fails.

VOR · « **Reply #23 on:** July 11, 2007, 08:45:33 AM »

So the sun's burning out?

Eeeeeeekkk!

lazs2 · « **Reply #24 on:** July 11, 2007, 08:46:42 AM »

look hortlund... I will make it simple so that a doomsday acolyte like you can understand.

co2 has risen when it has gotten colder so that proves the co2 theory wrong.

we have had cold years since the "graph" ended in (oddly) 2000 but the co2 has stll risen. the solar activity has fallen slightly.. so has the warming trend.

If you stretch out graphs of your "proof" and graphs of solar activity to reasonable lengths you will see that there is a lot more to give credence to the sun making the globe hotter and cooler than to co2.

lazs

straffo · « **Reply #25 on:** July 11, 2007, 09:27:07 AM »

lazs2 is never a disappointment

Skuzzy · « **Reply #26 on:** July 11, 2007, 09:34:21 AM »

This could have almost been a decent topic had it not been intended to be a personal attack.

Why you guys just do not leave this alone is mystifying to me. How many hundred post threads do we need on this topic?