And just remember to put "a tiger in your tank" the next time you fill up at 
your local Gulf station. 
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----
From: Jon <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 21:02:00 
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: {Dawgs/Dittos} How to Answer the Dumb Things Climate Deniers Say

Logo
« Return to Article
Click to Print
>From the Register's Opinion Page: What to say to a global warming advocate
By MARK LANDSBAUM
2010-02-12 13:30:12

It has been tough to keep up with all the bad news for global warming
alarmists. We're on the edge of our chair, waiting for the next shoe
to drop. This has been an Imelda Marcos kind of season for
shoe-dropping about global warming.

At your next dinner party, here are some of the latest talking points
to bring up when someone reminds you that Al Gore and the U.N.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change won Nobel prizes for their
work on global warming.

ClimateGate – This scandal began the latest round of revelations when
thousands of leaked documents from Britain's East Anglia Climate
Research Unit showed systematic suppression and discrediting of
climate skeptics' views and discarding of temperature data, suggesting
a bias for making the case for warming. Why do such a thing if, as
global warming defenders contend, the "science is settled?"

FOIGate – The British government has since determined someone at East
Anglia committed a crime by refusing to release global warming
documents sought in 95 Freedom of Information Act requests. The CRU is
one of three international agencies compiling global temperature data.
If their stuff's so solid, why the secrecy?

ChinaGate – An investigation by the U.K.'s left-leaning Guardian
newspaper found evidence that Chinese weather station measurements not
only were seriously flawed, but couldn't be located. "Where exactly
are 42 weather monitoring stations in remote parts of rural China?"
the paper asked. The paper's investigation also couldn't find
corroboration of what Chinese scientists turned over to American
scientists, leaving unanswered, "how much of the warming seen in
recent decades is due to the local effects of spreading cities, rather
than global warming?" The Guardian contends that researchers covered
up the missing data for years.

HimalayaGate – An Indian climate official admitted in January that, as
lead author of the IPCC's Asian report, he intentionally exaggerated
when claiming Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035 in order to
prod governments into action. This fraudulent claim was not based on
scientific research or peer-reviewed. Instead it was originally
advanced by a researcher, since hired by a global warming research
organization, who later admitted it was "speculation" lifted from a
popular magazine. This political, not scientific, motivation at least
got some researcher funded.

PachauriGate – Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman who accepted with
Al Gore the Nobel Prize for scaring people witless, at first defended
the Himalaya melting scenario. Critics, he said, practiced "voodoo
science." After the melting-scam perpetrator 'fessed up, Pachauri
admitted to making a mistake. But, he insisted, we still should trust
him.

PachauriGate II – Pachauri also claimed he didn't know before the
192-nation climate summit meeting in Copenhagen in December that the
bogus Himalayan glacier claim was sheer speculation. But the London
Times reported that a prominent science journalist said he had pointed
out those errors in several e-mails and discussions to Pachauri, who
"decided to overlook it." Stonewalling? Cover up? Pachauri says he was
"preoccupied." Well, no sense spoiling the Copenhagen party, where
countries like Pachauri's India hoped to wrench billions from
countries like the United States to combat global warming's melting
glaciers. Now there are calls for Pachauri's resignation.

SternGate – One excuse for imposing worldwide climate crackdown has
been the U.K.'s 2006 Stern Report, an economic doomsday prediction
commissioned by the government. Now the U.K. Telegraph reports that
quietly after publication "some of these predictions had been watered
down because the scientific evidence on which they were based could
not be verified." Among original claims now deleted were that
northwest Australia has had stronger typhoons in recent decades, and
that southern Australia lost rainfall because of rising ocean
temperatures. Exaggerated claims get headlines. Later, news reporters
disclose the truth. Why is that?

SternGate II – A researcher now claims the Stern Report misquoted his
work to suggest a firm link between global warming and more-frequent
and severe floods and hurricanes. Robert Muir-Wood said his original
research showed no such link. He accused Stern of "going far beyond
what was an acceptable extrapolation of the evidence." We're shocked.

AmazonGate – The London Times exposed another shocker: the IPCC claim
that global warming will wipe out rain forests was fraudulent, yet
advanced as "peer-reveiwed" science. The Times said the assertion
actually "was based on an unsubstantiated claim by green campaigners
who had little scientific expertise," "authored by two green
activists" and lifted from a report from the World Wildlife Fund, an
environmental pressure group. The "research" was based on a popular
science magazine report that didn't bother to assess rainfall.
Instead, it looked at the impact of logging and burning. The original
report suggested "up to 40 percent" of Brazilian rain forest was
extremely sensitive to small reductions in the amount of rainfall, but
the IPCC expanded that to cover the entire Amazon, the Times reported.

PeerReviewGate – The U.K. Sunday Telegraph has documented at least 16
nonpeer-reviewed reports (so far) from the advocacy group World
Wildlife Fund that were used in the IPCC's climate change bible, which
calls for capping manmade greenhouse gases.

RussiaGate – Even when global warming alarmists base claims on
scientific measurements, they've often had their finger on the scale.
Russian think tank investigators evaluated thousands of documents and
e-mails leaked from the East Anglia research center and concluded
readings from the coldest regions of their nation had been omitted,
driving average temperatures up about half a degree.

Russia-Gate II – Speaking of Russia, a presentation last October to
the Geological Society of America showed how tree-ring data from
Russia indicated cooling after 1961, but was deceptively truncated and
only artfully discussed in IPCC publications. Well, at least the
tree-ring data made it into the IPCC report, albeit disguised and
misrepresented.

U.S.Gate – If Brits can't be trusted, are Yanks more reliable? The
U.S. National Climate Data Center has been manipulating weather data
too, say computer expert E. Michael Smith and meteorologist Joesph
D'Aleo. Forty years ago there were 6,000 surface-temperature measuring
stations, but only 1,500 by 1990, which coincides with what global
warming alarmists say was a record temperature increase. Most of the
deleted stations were in colder regions, just as in the Russian case,
resulting in misleading higher average temperatures.

IceGate – Hardly a continent has escaped global warming skewing. The
IPCC based its findings of reductions in mountain ice in the Andes,
Alps and in Africa on a feature story of climbers' anecdotes in a
popular mountaineering magazine, and a dissertation by a Switzerland
university student, quoting mountain guides. Peer-reviewed? Hype?
Worse?

ResearchGate – The global warming camp is reeling so much lately it
must have seemed like a major victory when a Penn State University
inquiry into climate scientist Michael Mann found no misconduct
regarding three accusations of climate research impropriety. But the
university did find "further investigation is warranted" to determine
whether Mann engaged in actions that "seriously deviated from accepted
practices for proposing, conducting or reporting research or other
scholarly activities." Being investigated for only one fraud is a
global warming victory these days.

ReefGate – Let's not forget the alleged link between climate change
and coral reef degradation. The IPCC cited not peer-reviewed
literature, but advocacy articles by Greenpeace, the publicity-hungry
advocacy group, as its sole source for this claim.

AfricaGate – The IPCC claim that rising temperatures could cut in half
agricultural yields in African countries turns out to have come from a
2003 paper published by a Canadian environmental think tank – not a
peer-reviewed scientific journal.

DutchGate – The IPCC also claimed rising sea levels endanger the 55
percent of the Netherlands it says is below sea level. The portion of
the Netherlands below sea level actually is 20 percent. The Dutch
environment minister said she will no longer tolerate climate
researchers' errors.

AlaskaGate – Geologists for Space Studies in Geophysics and
Oceanography and their U.S. and Canadian colleagues say previous
studies largely overestimated by 40 percent Alaskan glacier loss for
40 years. This flawed data are fed into those computers to predict
future warming.

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/-234092--.html

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 8:33 PM, DUG853 <[email protected]> wrote:
> Balderdash-!
>
> Check this for the real story:
>
> Climate change confusion – a conspiracy of sorts
>
> http://openparachute.wordpress.com/2010/02/16/climate-change-confusion-a-conspiracy-of-sorts/
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yzxy548
>
> On Feb 14, 7:17 pm, Jon <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has
>> been no global warming since 1995
>>
>> Read 
>> more:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-As...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 5:34 PM, DUG Nunya-Bidness <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > How to Answer the Dumb Things Climate Deniers Say
>>
>> > Below are a few responses to some of the more frequent statements these
>> > deniers toss our way.
>>
>> >http://www.alternet.org/story/145609/how_to_answer_the_dumb_things_cl...
>>
>> >http://tinyurl.com/yhp9mc3
>>
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> > "WebTV Dawgs/Dittos" group.
>> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> > [email protected].
>> > For more options, visit this group at
>> >http://groups.google.com/group/webtv-pals?hl=en.
>>
>> --
>> ~~~~~~~~~
>> ~~ J O N ~~
>> ~~~~~~~~~- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "WebTV Dawgs/Dittos" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/webtv-pals?hl=en.
>
>



-- 
~~~~~~~~~
~~ J O N ~~
~~~~~~~~~

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"WebTV Dawgs/Dittos" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/webtv-pals?hl=en.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"WebTV Dawgs/Dittos" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/webtv-pals?hl=en.

Reply via email to