[GreenSpartan]

Originally Posted by lars

Kinda like when I have posted scientific data that says exactly that 'data is not matching predictions' You don't address it. There is nothing inaccurate in this article. You're right it isn't scientific..but then again he is just 'reporting' current data from others. That doesn't make it irrelevant just a report on the current science.

OK, fine lars. I'll debunk your op-ed. As I've said before, it's too bad you never show the same skepticism toward random people that you do the actual scientists.

Point 1.

So a German study, published by Nature last week, claimed that, while the world is definitely warming, it may cool down until 2015

There's debate over whether this one article out weighs numerous studies (yes it is possible, but usually the data show why), and note "until". It still says we're warming the globe and it will continue to warm because of us. Linky. So much for point one of "we don't warm the earth".

Point 2.

A little vignette of the media's one-sided view was given by recent events on Snowdon, the highest mountain in southern Britain.

I won't bother arguing the evidence from one snow cap. If you think you have a point, carry on. You don't. So much for point two.

Point 3.

Two weeks ago, as North America emerged from its coldest and snowiest winter for decades...March temperatures plunging to one of their lowest points in 30 years.

{gasp} You mean there's year to year variations (not sure how precipitation matters anyway)?? Yeah, again, not relevant. In fact we know why the northern hemisphere (hey not global) winter was cold and snowy. ENSO. Yep weather. Strike 3.

Point 4.

Mr McIntyre is the computer expert who exposed the infamous "hockey stick" graph

The hockey stick exists. McIntyre is wrong. Sorry. Strike 4.

Point 5.

What the WWF omitted to mention was that by March the ice had recovered to 14 million sq km (see the website Cryosphere Today), and that ice-cover around the Bering Strait and Alaska that month was at its highest level ever recorded..

So we're now comparing arctic ice trends over years with ice from one region for one year that we already know was colder for weather reasons not climate. Strike 5.

Point 6.

(At the same time Antarctic sea ice-cover was also at its highest-ever level, 30 per cent above normal).

Yeah, well score one for those models that don't work. They predict Antarctica will be colder during this time.

Pointg 7.

The most dramatic evidence, however, emerged last week with an announcement by Nasa's Jet Propulsion Laboratory that an immense slow-cycling movement of water in the Pacific, known as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), had unexpectedly shifted into its cool phase, something which only happens every 30 years or so, ultimately affecting climate all over the globe.

See point one. Still don't know what to do with that extra energy re-radiated back to the earth. We've known the oceans were heat sinks for some time.

Point 8.

debate is almost entirely overlooked by the media, and is instead conducted largely on the internet, through expert websites such as those run by Mr McIntyre and Mr Watts.

50 years ago Martin Gardner pointed out cranks operate outside the scientific discussion. Congrats. Welcome to the club that include diviners, mysitics, etc. And see my previous post. The discussion occurred and continues to occur.

Point 9.

On the other hand, a growing number of scientists are producing ever more evidence to show how those computer models are based on wholly inadequate data and assumptions - as is being confirmed by the behaviour of nature itself (not least the continuing non-arrival of sunspot cycle 24).

As I said before, if this is true you should easily show the graphs showing the diverging curves.

Point 10.

The fact is that what has been happening to the world's climate in recent years, since global temperatures ceased to rise after 1998,

As I've pointed out before, this is misleading to the point of inaccuracy. 1998 was an unusually warm year, just like some others in recorded time. We are continuing to warm. Stop confusing weather with climate.

Point 11.

In view of what is now at stake, such quasi-religious incantations masquerading as science are something we can no longer afford. We should get back to proper science before it is too late.

See above.


Now gee lars, why don't I go through every link of you deniers point by point? Maybe because I waste my time rehashing the same BS and it wouldn't sink in. You'll once again claim warming stopped in 98. You'll again claim it's solar cycles. What's the point? As is evidenced from Poly's post, you guys are no longer rational about this.

And for the record I did respond to Spencer's Aqua data. I said he's a legit scientist. Lets see what the other scientists have to say. That's different from your response which was to quote a biologist who works for a conservative think tank.