Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 60

Thread: New Study Confirms Global Warming Is Real

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    1,972

    New Study Confirms Global Warming Is Real

    Study Confirms Global Warming’s Existence
    An independent investigation of global warming solidified that global warming remains supported by scientific evidence, leaving skeptics speechless. This study represents that most comprehensive independent review of historical temperature records to date.

    Compiling more than a billion temperature records dating back to the 1800s from 15 sources around the world, the University of California, Berkeley researchers reaffirmed that global warming is occurring. More specifically, they found evidence indicating several key issues global warming skeptics claim actually have little to no effect on altering global warming figures.

    The researchers calculated the average global land temperature has risen by around 1C since the mid-1950s. These calculations agree with previous estimates from major groups that maintain official records on the world’s climate. These groups include NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the Met Office’s Hadley Centre, with the University of East Anglia, in the UK.

    By producing the largest open database of temperature records, the researchers hoped to reveal the significance of global warming and cool the debate over its existence.

    Global warming skeptics criticized the poor quality of temperature stations data collection methods and potential tweaking of data by hand to create the official global warming figures. Regardless of these factors, researchers still came to the same conclusions.

    Additionally, the researchers observed the urban heat island effect, an effect that makes cities warmer than surrounding rural areas. They found that these urban heat islands are locally large and real, yet do not contribute significantly to the average land temperature increases. They explain this by calculating these urban regions make up less than 1% of the Earth’s land area, thus limiting their effect.

    In rebuttal to criticism about poor quality data measurements, the researchers found that even if the stations collected less accurate data, the average warming trends appeared similar.

    This project was organized by Novim, a Santa Barbara-based nonprofit organization. Its goals are to use science to find answers on current issues facing society and to publish them neutrally. Additional funding came from the Fund for Innovative Climate and Energy Research and the Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley Lab.

    Researchers are still examining global warming, but have now turned their focus to ocean warming trends.
    McKown's Law: "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike."

    "We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know"
    --Dietrich Bonfhoeffer

    "I don't go to mythical places with strange men." -- Douglas Adams

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Left Coast
    Posts
    7,822
    Studies?

    Facts?

    Who gives a damn about that when we can be happy, happy in Republican LaLaLand.
    Brother, you can believe in stones as long as you do not hurl them at me. Wafa Sultan

    “War is an American way to teach geography,” British soldier

    War is sweet to those who have not tasted it, but the experienced man trembles exceedingly at heart on its approach. – Pindar

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Right under the earth.
    Posts
    84

    Folly.

    Quote Originally Posted by MrWriteLA View Post
    Global warming cannot be caused by humans because "green house gases" cannot create a greenhouse at all. The entire hoax is based on the broad lies of twenty or more fanatics. These studies are not only effected by bias, but by funding. It is akin to claiming calories cause cancer, therefore everyone should stop eating.

    Even if warming trends continued for another three hundred years at the rate of 1C every fifty years, the net effect on human populations would be positive.

    Further more, the Earth has a system for controlling CO2, its called trees. Trees take in CO2, spit out the Oxygen, and incorporate carbon into it's body. It dies, gets buried, and then turns to oil. We pump it up, burn it, the new trees get the new CO2. The more CO2 you pump in the air, the more, and faster the trees will grow. You couldn't break that system if you had 15 billion evil gas hoarding Americans.

    Excess CO2 is absorbed into clouds and comes down in the form acid. I would welcome a little global warming. Imagine the cold Russian step transformed into a huge farm.

    It won't happen because its not physically possible. You are living in an collectivist, tribalism, anti-human, fairy tale world were science dictates the holy word of Gaia, and you follow blindly. Making sure to minimize your carbon foot print, evangelize the non-believers (Climat change deniers), and hope to avoid, by the grace of Al Gore, the fires of a Global Warming.

    I scoff at the depths of your ignorance, the lengths of your hoax, and the ever present goals of this transparent deception.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Left Coast
    Posts
    7,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Atlas View Post
    Global warming cannot be caused by humans because "green house gases" cannot create a greenhouse at all. The entire hoax is based on the broad lies of twenty or more fanatics. These studies are not only effected by bias, but by funding. It is akin to claiming calories cause cancer, therefore everyone should stop eating. ...
    Baloney!
    Quote Originally Posted by Atlas View Post
    Further more, the Earth has a system for controlling CO2, its called trees. Trees take in CO2, spit out the Oxygen, and incorporate carbon into it's body. It dies, gets buried, and then turns to oil. We pump it up, burn it, the new trees get the new CO2. The more CO2 you pump in the air, the more, and faster the trees will grow. You couldn't break that system if you had 15 billion evil gas hoarding Americans....
    Earth did have a relatively decent system for controlling CO2, the system called "Trees," but our planet Earth has been devastatingly deforested.
    Quote Originally Posted by Atlas View Post
    It won't happen because its not physically possible. You are living in an collectivist, tribalism, anti-human, fairy tale world were science dictates the holy word of Gaia, and you follow blindly. Making sure to minimize your carbon foot print, evangelize the non-believers (Climat change deniers), and hope to avoid, by the grace of Al Gore, the fires of a Global Warming.

    I scoff at the depths of your ignorance, the lengths of your hoax, and the ever present goals of this transparent deception.
    Did Freepers script your tired rhetoric?
    Brother, you can believe in stones as long as you do not hurl them at me. Wafa Sultan

    “War is an American way to teach geography,” British soldier

    War is sweet to those who have not tasted it, but the experienced man trembles exceedingly at heart on its approach. – Pindar

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    I believe the Earth does heat up and cools periodically

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    127
    Quote Originally Posted by gansao View Post
    I believe the Earth does heat up and cools periodically
    The media loves to report stories that scare people. Scared people purchase newspapers, magazines, subscribe to websites, etc. Global warming generates media interest so people continue to research it so they can get grants. Sure the planet is warming. But the planet will cool as well at some point. To assume that temperatures will always remain stagnant is naive. I wonder how many scientists have studied the activity of the sun in regards to this gradual rise in average temperatures.

    Also, I would like to know how accurate these temperature recordings were back in the 1800s.
    "You will say to me then, 'Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?' On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? -Romans 9:19-21 (NASB)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,854
    AGW is established fact, this latest review, founded by sceptics, but coming to the opposite conclusion to the one sought, merely confirms it.
    " ... It's not as though he proved anything, he only refuted my evidence. ..." Archangel 04.01.09

    "Obama is not a brown-skinned anti-war socialist who gives away free healthcare. You're thinking of Jesus."

    “Probably the toughest time in anyone's life is when you have to murder a loved one because they're the devil.”

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Penfold View Post
    AGW is established fact, this latest review, founded by sceptics, but coming to the opposite conclusion to the one sought, merely confirms it.
    Does it conclude that global warming is due to mankind?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    1,972

    Gore comments:

    Al Gore: Koch-Funded Study Confirms Climate Data
    Climate skeptics were hoping this study would debunk data proving the existence of the climate crisis -- instead it reaffirmed the science:

    Back in 2010, Richard Muller, a Berkeley physicist and self-proclaimed climate skeptic, decided to launch the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) project to review the temperature data that underpinned global-warming claims. Remember, this was not long after the Climategate affair had erupted, at a time when skeptics were griping that climatologists had based their claims on faulty temperature data.

    Muller's stated aims were simple. He and his team would scour and re-analyze the climate data, putting all their calculations and methods online. Skeptics cheered the effort. "I'm prepared to accept whatever result they produce, even if it proves my premise wrong," wrote Anthony Watts, a blogger who has criticized the quality of the weather stations in the United States that provide temperature data. The Charles G. Koch Foundation even gave Muller's project $150,000 -- and the Koch brothers, recall, are hardly fans of mainstream climate science.
    So what are the end results? Muller's team appears to have confirmed the basic tenets of climate science.

    With the evidence reconfirmed (again), I would hope that skeptics would rethink their position and join me in pushing our government, and governments around the world, to take steps to solve the climate crisis.
    McKown's Law: "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike."

    "We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know"
    --Dietrich Bonfhoeffer

    "I don't go to mythical places with strange men." -- Douglas Adams

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,414
    Quote Originally Posted by simone View Post
    Earth did have a relatively decent system for controlling CO2, the system called "Trees," but our planet Earth has been devastatingly deforested.
    CO2 does not need to be controlled, it needs to be unleashed; if I were a plant I would be lobbying for larger carbon footprints.

    Cutting down trees does destroy trees, but trees have always died like all living organisms the stability of the system is unharmed be the feedback still and always will strengthen the farther from equilibrium you go. If there were 1% of the plants there are now and five times the CO2 the forces consuming the CO2 (growth of new plants) would be massive.

    I love plants, and because of that I love to release CO2, I don't care about lies and neither do my photosynthesizing idols.
    Quote Originally Posted by Penfold View Post
    AGW is established fact, this latest review, founded by sceptics, but coming to the opposite conclusion to the one sought, merely confirms it.
    You'll find no fear here.
    Morals are a religious Myth.. - Xcaliber
    How is Evil Immoral? - Xcaliber
    I am right until you prove otherwise - Xcaliber

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,854
    Science accepts the evidence, sceptics accept the evidence, the only ones left in denial are those who choose belief in spite of the facts. It appears these new results show that the previous claims were, if anything, on the optimistic side.
    " ... It's not as though he proved anything, he only refuted my evidence. ..." Archangel 04.01.09

    "Obama is not a brown-skinned anti-war socialist who gives away free healthcare. You're thinking of Jesus."

    “Probably the toughest time in anyone's life is when you have to murder a loved one because they're the devil.”

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,414
    Quote Originally Posted by Penfold View Post
    Science accepts the evidence, sceptics accept the evidence, the only ones left in denial are those who choose belief in spite of the facts. It appears these new results show that the previous claims were, if anything, on the optimistic side.
    Those who choose belief.... belief that they believe in the facts
    Morals are a religious Myth.. - Xcaliber
    How is Evil Immoral? - Xcaliber
    I am right until you prove otherwise - Xcaliber

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    1,972
    Jon Stewart Rips Media For Ignoring 'Climategate' Debunking, Covering McRib Instead (VIDEO)
    On Wednesday night's "Daily Show," Jon Stewart picked up on a story that rocked the science world in 2009: the email hacking that exposed hundreds of exchanges between global warming scientists known as Climategate.

    If you remember, the emails weren't a big deal because they proved anything, but because they suggested irregularities in data which in turn encouraged climate change skeptics to continue to deny global warming. As Stewart reminisced with a series of clips, Fox News pundits and conservative analysts on all the 24-hour news networks had a field day proclaiming that these emails proved global warming was a fraud. And it worked, too. As Stewart pointed out, studies show the amount of people who acknowledge global warming dropped nearly 20% since the emails were leaked.

    Given the media circus that was Climategate, Stewart was shocked to learn that a study done by a noted climate change skeptic AND funded by Tea Party oil tycoons the Koch brothers which intended to disprove global warming recently reaffirmed the science behind it. What shocked him even more? How little coverage the findings, printed in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, received compared to that of McDonald's "McRib."

    Watch the full segment above (or click here to watch on "The Daily Show" website) and be sure to watch Senior Correspondent Aasif Mandvi's follow-up report below.
    McKown's Law: "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike."

    "We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know"
    --Dietrich Bonfhoeffer

    "I don't go to mythical places with strange men." -- Douglas Adams

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    1,972
    Richard Muller, Global Warming Skeptic, Now Agrees Climate Change Is Real
    WASHINGTON — A prominent physicist and skeptic of global warming spent two years trying to find out if mainstream climate scientists were wrong. In the end, he determined they were right: Temperatures really are rising rapidly.

    The study of the world's surface temperatures by Richard Muller was partially bankrolled by a foundation connected to global warming deniers. He pursued long-held skeptic theories in analyzing the data. He was spurred to action because of "Climategate," a British scandal involving hacked emails of scientists.

    Yet he found that the land is 1.6 degrees warmer than in the 1950s. Those numbers from Muller, who works at the University of California, Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, match those by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA.

    He said he went even further back, studying readings from Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. His ultimate finding of a warming world, to be presented at a conference Monday, is no different from what mainstream climate scientists have been saying for decades.

    What's different, and why everyone from opinion columnists to "The Daily Show" is paying attention is who is behind the study.

    One-quarter of the $600,000 to do the research came from the Charles Koch Foundation, whose founder is a major funder of skeptic groups and the tea party. The Koch brothers, Charles and David, run a large privately held company involved in oil and other industries, producing sizable greenhouse gas emissions.

    Muller's research team carefully examined two chief criticisms by skeptics. One is that weather stations are unreliable; the other is that cities, which create heat islands, were skewing the temperature analysis.

    "The skeptics raised valid points and everybody should have been a skeptic two years ago," Muller said in a telephone interview. "And now we have confidence that the temperature rise that had previously been reported had been done without bias."

    Muller said that he came into the study "with a proper skepticism," something scientists "should always have. I was somewhat bothered by the fact that there was not enough skepticism" before.

    There is no reason now to be a skeptic about steadily increasing temperatures, Muller wrote recently in The Wall Street Journal's editorial pages, a place friendly to skeptics. Muller did not address in his research the cause of global warming. The overwhelming majority of climate scientists say it's man-made from the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and oil. Nor did his study look at ocean warming, future warming and how much of a threat to mankind climate change might be.

    Still, Muller said it makes sense to reduce the carbon dioxide created by fossil fuels.

    "Greenhouse gases could have a disastrous impact on the world," he said. Still, he contends that threat is not as proven as the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says it is.

    On Monday, Muller was taking his results – four separate papers that are not yet published or peer-reviewed, but will be, he says – to a conference in Santa Fe, N.M., expected to include many prominent skeptics as well as mainstream scientists.

    "Of course he'll be welcome," said Petr Chylek of Los Alamos National Lab, a noted skeptic and the conference organizer. "The purpose of our conference is to bring people with different views on climate together, so they can talk and clarify things."

    Shawn Lawrence Otto, author of the book "Fool Me Twice" that criticizes science skeptics, said Muller should expect to be harshly treated by global warming deniers. "Now he's considered a traitor. For the skeptic community, this isn't about data or fact. It's about team sports. He's been traded to the Indians. He's playing for the wrong team now."

    Muller's study found that skeptics' concerns about poor weather station quality didn't skew the results of his analysis because temperature increases rose similarly in reliable and unreliable weather stations. He also found that while there is an urban heat island effect making cities warmer, rural areas, which are more abundant, are warming, too.

    Among many climate scientists, the reaction was somewhat of a yawn.

    "After lots of work he found exactly what was already known and accepted in the climate community," said Jerry North, a Texas A&M University atmospheric sciences professor who headed a National Academy of Sciences climate science review in 2006. "I am hoping their study will have a positive impact. But some folks will never change."

    Chris Field, a Carnegie Institution scientist who is chief author of an upcoming intergovernmental climate change report, said Muller's study "may help the world's citizens focus less on whether climate change is real and more on smart options for addressing it."

    Some of the most noted scientific skeptics are no longer saying the world isn't warming. Instead, they question how much of it is man-made, view it as less a threat and argue it's too expensive to do something about, Otto said.

    Skeptical MIT scientist Richard Lindzen said it is a fact and nothing new that global average temperatures have been rising since 1950, as Muller shows. "It's hard to see how any serious scientist (skeptical, denier or believer – frequently depending on the exact question) will view it otherwise," he wrote in an email.

    In a brief email statement, the Koch Foundation noted that Muller's team didn't examine ocean temperature or the cause of warming and said it will continue to fund such research. "The project is ongoing and entering peer review, and we're proud to support this strong, transparent research," said foundation spokeswoman Tonya Mullins.
    McKown's Law: "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike."

    "We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know"
    --Dietrich Bonfhoeffer

    "I don't go to mythical places with strange men." -- Douglas Adams

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    Last edited by gansao; 10-30-2011 at 12:05 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •