Global warming?

[Undertoad]

Major, major global warming news today.

A group of Russian hackers broke into systems at a Climate Research lab in East Anglia. Today they released 162 megs of data, code, and emails. One of the lab directors has said the documents are genuine.

So far only the emails have been documented by people getting into it all, and they seem to indicate that the environmental scientists there have engaged in quite a bit of FRAUD.

= manipulated evidence;
= had doubts about warming;
= suppressed evidence;
= expressed violent fantasies about GW skeptic scientists;
= attempted to disguise the Medieval Warm Period by framing it out in time;
= discussed how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process

Does this mean warming is not happening? I still think it is, based on the measurements other than instrumental. If we go back to this chart from Wikipedia, I think it's the black line that's suspect, that's the instrumental line, which comes from that data:



The other measurements show warming too, just not as wickedly ramped up.

[xoxoxoBruce]

They're just the ones that stole it, Sam, one of the lab directors said what they stole was real.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Major, major global warming news today.

Does this mean warming is not happening? I still think it is, based on the measurements other than instrumental. If we go back to this chart from Wikipedia, I think it's the black line that's suspect, that's the instrumental line, which comes from that data:
The other measurements show warming too, just not as wickedly ramped up.

I agree, we know it's getting warmer. Just (still) a question of how much is our fault, how far it will go, what meaningful things we can do about it, if anything, and which remedies are just feel good wastes of time/money?

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

... what meaningful things we can do about it, if anything, and which remedies are just feel good wastes of time/money?

Same innovations that solve so many other problems are also solutions to global warming. Put 10 gallons of gas in your car. How many gallons do any productive work? Somewhere between one and two. Over eight gallons of burned gasoline do nothing productive. Why? Because gasoline even at $5 per gallons is ridiculously cheap. Energy has always been too cheap to use efficiently.

Cruise down a level highway at 50 MPH. How many horsepower does it take to maintain 50 MPH? Somewhere between two and ten horsepower. Why is that 200 HP engine producing something like 100 horsepower? Why so much wasted energy? Energy is too cheap especially when the environmental costs do not appear on spread sheets.

"Why innovate?", asks a wacko extremist. Wackos love the status quo. Change means intelligent people (moderates) would make decisions. When Chrysler, GM, and Ford had hybrids designed in 1999 (using Federal government money), the greatest anti-Americans had them to scrap those innovations. Hybrids (innovation) was promoted by Clinton - therefore must be wrong. Anything from Clinton was obviously wrong – according to wackos. Politics tells wackos how to think – to even deny global warming. Automakers continued manufacturing obsolete technology and crappy 1968 technology V-8. Wacko solution: drill, drill, drill! Don't innovate. Don't do what every great American does - push out the envelope – think like an intelligent person – a moderate.

Same innovations that would make jobs, raise American standards of living, reduce cost of living, destroy poverty, reduce national debts, make wars less necessary, increase wealth, promote further innovations, advance science, increase American exports, etc ... also is a major solution to global warming.

Why is a technology developed in GM in 1975 still not in all GM cars some 35 years later? Why are best auto products from foreign designers? Because the US government did not force bean counters to innovate. Even entrenched those scumbags tens of $billions. Even enriched them with corporate welfare.

Solution to global warming is also the solution to our economics ills - innovation – “doing more with less energy every year”.

Instead, America that is a largest oil producer also must import more than 50% of what is consumed. According to wackos, this is good. Stifling innovation is what their political agenda advocates.

The list of potential solutions to global warming is quite long and is also what America needs to remain a world leader.

Burn ten gallons of gasoline. More than eight gallons do nothing productive. Instead, wackos would lie to create war to protect *OUR* oil as well as increase consumption, stifle innovations, welfare to the rich, and increase global warming. As George Jr said, we cannot stop it so we should not try. Wackos instead advocate war “to protect *OUR* oil”.

More than eight of ten gallons does nothing but contribute to global warming. What did wackos advocate? Stifle innovation, promote war, and waste most of the oil. That's more than eight out of ten gallons do nothing. Wackos using a political agenda say that (and the resulting wars) is good.

[spudcon]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Major, major global warming news today.

A group of Russian hackers broke into systems at a Climate Research lab in East Anglia. Today they released 162 megs of data, code, and emails. One of the lab directors has said the documents are genuine.

So far only the emails have been documented by people getting into it all, and they seem to indicate that the environmental scientists there have engaged in quite a bit of FRAUD.

= manipulated evidence;
= had doubts about warming;
= suppressed evidence;
= expressed violent fantasies about GW skeptic scientists;
= attempted to disguise the Medieval Warm Period by framing it out in time;
= discussed how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process

Does this mean warming is not happening? I still think it is, based on the measurements other than instrumental. If we go back to this chart from Wikipedia, I think it's the black line that's suspect, that's the instrumental line, which comes from that data:



The other measurements show warming too, just not as wickedly ramped up.

Why doesn't anyone want to show the temperature charts from 2000 onward? Here's what Ive been finding.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by spudcon

Why doesn't anyone want to show the temperature charts from 2000 onward?

perhaps because it doesn't support their theories. On the other hand. The change in temps seems more erratic in the last few decades...
<shrug>

[morethanpretty]

Originally Posted by spudcon

Why doesn't anyone want to show the temperature charts from 2000 onward? Here's what Ive been finding.

Why didn't you post a temperature chart showing the climate from before major industrialization?

Originally Posted by classicman

perhaps because it doesn't support their theories. On the other hand. The change in temps seems more erratic in the last few decades...
<shrug>

Yeah, just a bit erratic...