Doesn't do the Math, Everyone got it Wrong... now censoring Science?

[Frogm4n]

yea the depletion of the ozone layer has alot to do with greenhouse gasses. boy you guyz are the smart!

[FUNKED1]

Global Warming = Cold Fusion

[john9001]

i would think canada would be in favor of global warming.

[Sabre]

Originally posted by Frogm4n
yea the depletion of the ozone layer has alot to do with greenhouse gasses. boy you guyz are the smart!

Actually, my comment was about global warming, not ozone holes.  I do not recall if volcanic eruptions cause any release of CFC-type gasses, which I believe have been blamed for the whole in the ozone layer.  I was merely commenting to Muck that I'd heard a similar statement to his.  I also recall reading someplace that some scientists have found evidence that the hole in the ozone layer is a cyclicial thing as well.  Given the fact that it appears that hole is closing, and that we've only been working on reducing CFC usage recently and sparotically (at least on a global scale), that makes sense.  Some would have us believe that, even though it took almost two centuries of industrialized history to create the "hole," it took only a few years of sparodic reduction (reduction, not elimiation) to begin to reverse the damage.

[Nakhui]

Originally posted by Ripsnort
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/resources/coldscience/aozone92000.htm

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2000/ast12dec_1.htm

http://www.epa.gov/air/aqtrnd01/ozone.html

Another liberal PNW3D!

You PNW3D your self... and it really makes you look out of touch  because the links you choose are 4 years old.

PNW3D yourself too much and you'll go blind.

The ozone hole has grown since then.

How about something a little more current

Situation at 2003 August 27-British Antarctic Survey Ozone Bulletin
The ozone has grown rapidly and now covers some 23 million square kilometres, larger than it has ever been at this time in August. Very low ozone levels have been recorded over the Antarctic Peninsula.  Temperatures in the ozone layer are low enough that Polar Stratospheric Clouds (PSCs) have formed widely over the continent.

http://www.theozonehole.com/ozonehole2003.htm
http://toms.gsfc.nasa.gov/news/press_release_2003.html

But in any case, the point of the thread is Bush is removing statements of scientific fact from official government reports - because those facts dont' agree with what he "believes" is true.

Sounds much like religious zealots plugging their ears about sceince because it contradicts their theory of life.

Same ol' pattern from this Administration.

I guess the Nobel Prize winning scientists who are behind this are just greedy grant seeking liberals.

[muckmaw]

Originally posted by Nakhui


I guess the Nobel Prize winning scientists who are behind this are just greedy grant seeking liberals.

Yes, only politicians lie. As a matter of fact, only republican politicians lie. Scientists would never lie, or distort fact, or sway statistics to make sure they get that grant, or that speaking gig, etc.

I mean after all, once you win the Nobel prize, you're no longer human and therefore immune to human nature.

Come on.

[Nakhui]

Originally posted by muckmaw
Yes, only politicians lie. As a matter of fact, only republican politicians lie. Scientists would never lie, or distort fact, or sway statistics to make sure they get that grant, or that speaking gig, etc.

I mean after all, once you win the Nobel prize, you're no longer human and therefore immune to human nature.

Come on.

But what are we talking about here?

Not human nature and not lies.

The credibility of a scientist is in that his/her opinions are backed up by facts which are proveable and verifiable by independent investigation.

Distorting the facts and out right lying will only eventually lead to a scientist's outing as a charlatan and a quack. Once that happens no other scientist and the scientific community in general would never take that scientist seriously again - let alone employ him/her for any serious work.

Politicians conjecture, orate, envision, and establish policies. (and schtoop secretaries, interns and congressional pages)...and yes distort the truth all the time... entirely different beasts.

The facts the EPA attempted to publish which the Bush Administration removed from the report - are facts, proven, verifiable, well known, irrefutable, accepted by experts as true facts. For a politician such as Bush to just dismiss facts...because they disprove his point of view.. well... what does that say about him?

He doesn't do math?

[muckmaw]

Philip Morris can produce scientists and doctors that will tell you there is no comclusive evidence linking Smoking to Lung Cancer.

Scientists are not gods. They are human. They're prone to mistakes, greed, ambition and deceipt, just like the rest of us.

[vorticon]

Global warming is the biggest piece of junk science ever invented, and only serves to give climatologists job security

so why is it currently +10 in the middle of febuary??? IT SHOULD BE AT LEAST -15 LIKE IT HAS FOR THE PAST 20 YEARS...natural earth warming doesnt cause that kind of jump...

poor science and shoddy statistical distortions,

hmm...so its wrong to assume theres a problem when if you look at the tempurature recordings from anywhere since the invention of the thermometer have gone up more since the mid 1800s than a similar time period before?

[muckmaw]

I don't know where you live but in New York, we've had the coldest winter in 40 years.

*shurgs*

[Nakhui]

Originally posted by muckmaw
Philip Morris can produce scientists and doctors that will tell you there is no comclusive evidence linking Smoking to Lung Cancer.

Scientists are not gods. They are human. They're prone to mistakes, greed, ambition and deceipt, just like the rest of us.

Come on... you can come up with a better arguement than that.

Sure you can pay someone to say anything you like.
And if they are lying... they'll be proven wrong.

Last I remember PM and the rest of the tobacco industry have been loosing their lawsuits in court, because the facts are against them.

The Facts have been against them for decades now.

They and their scientists have been discredited over and over again... no one believes what they say.

In fact...remember the movie "the Insider" with Russel Crowe. It's a true story about a scientist, Dr. Jeffrey Wigand, who worked for the tobacco industry and he knew the truth that the tobacco industry had a process which would increase the nicotine in ciggarrettes to get people addicted. He went to 60 minutes and esposed it.

My point is that a scientist who tells a lie will get exposed and eventually discredited.

Science is about facts - not opinion, not greed, not human nature.

Back to the point... Bush is removing scientific facts from government publications because they are contrary to his opinion.

And the scientists involved are pointing this out.

This administration has a pattern of behavior of denying the truth and telling lies.

[Sabre]

Originally posted by muckmaw
Philip Morris can produce scientists and doctors that will tell you there is no comclusive evidence linking Smoking to Lung Cancer.

Scientists are not gods. They are human. They're prone to mistakes, greed, ambition and deceipt, just like the rest of us.

And many have political agendas of their own.  Anyone can become a scientist.  The process of becoming one does not purge the person of any of the human failings.  Some, as in any endeavor, are in it for mostly noble and altrustic reasons, but a good many are in it to make money and become famous.  I read the CNN article you site.  It is not nearly as damning in total as you have people believe.  It does not state why, for instance the 1000-year record temperature reference was removed or downplayed, nor who specifically did so.  It is not the end of the story, but only a beginning.  Look beyond it.  From that same article:

White House science adviser John Marburger said he found the report "somewhat disappointing ... because it makes some sweeping generalizations about policy in this administration that are based on a random selection of incidents and issues."

And more:

F. Sherwood Rowland, a Nobel prize winner for his studies of ozone in the atmosphere, was particularly critical of the administration's approach to climate change.

He said the consensus of scientific opinion about global warming is being ignored and that government reports have been censored to remove views not in tune with Bush's politics.

The union's report came at the same time the National Academy of Science was releasing its own study that commends the administration's plan to study climate but also expresses concern that the research was underfunded and not being pursued vigorously enough.

Asked if they had seen any political interference in the climate program, Thomas E. Graedel of Yale University, chairman of the academy committee, said his group did not look for that. But, he added, he had not seen anything that would suggest the research plan had such political concerns.

Note that Mr. Rowland uses the term "consensus of scientific opinion", but does not qualify it.  How big of a consensus, 25-75, 49-51, what?  Could it be it was left out because they felt the conclusions reached were not solid enough to support drastic changes in government policy?

And the scientists involved are pointing this out.

No, the Union of Concerned Scientists pointed it out.  Which ones were actually involved in any of the reports mentioned in the article?

[vorticon]

Originally posted by muckmaw
I don't know where you live but in New York, we've had the coldest winter in 40 years.

*shurgs*

exactly why the overall global average hasnt really changed much...rather than proper averages you have a whole bunch of wonky things all over the place but overall you have the same thing...it doesnt take a high school graduate to realize that the weather is strange and its definatly not natural...global "warming" (i prefer global wonked weather...its more appropriate) can be proven just by looking outside and comparing what you see to the last several years of your life

[FUNKED1]

Originally posted by vorticon
global "warming" ... can be proven just by looking outside and comparing what you see to the last several years of your life

OMG STUNNING PROOF!!!
NEVAR FORGET TEH GLOBLE WRAMING!!!

[Nakhui]

Originally posted by FUNKED1
OMG STUNNING PROOF!!!
NEVAR FORGET TEH GLOBLE WRAMING!!!

Hey just think of what you can prove with a toaster and a stream of hot pee!