Remember NASA's "Hockey Stick" graph that showed the crazy spike in temperatures? Ummmm.... Yeah that's been proven to be wrong. There was no big press conference and no concerts to announce it, but it disappeared from the global warming propoganda and we don't talk about it anymore. Kind of like Piltdown man.
Well that must have been pretty tough for NASA and algore to deal with, but now we have this;
In the United States, the calendar year 1998 ranked as the hottest of them all – until someone checked the math.
After a Toronto skeptic tipped NASA this month to one flaw in its climate calculations, the U.S. agency ordered a full data review.
Days later, it put out a revised list of all-time hottest years. The Dust Bowl year of 1934 now ranks as hottest ever in the U.S. – not 1998.
No way there could be other mistakes or anything right? I mean one man with his abacus doing the math in his basement just corrected the global warming "experts" not once, but twice! Seems like one of those cases where they either lied, are not really that smart, or more than likely decided what the outcome was going to be before they did the math and then found the numbers they wanted to find to support their conclusions. I'm not even mentioning the financial aspect of this...... oh wait, yes i am. The global warming industry is worth BILLIONS of dollars for NASA and other organizations. So lets do the math together.
Find evidence of man made global warming = Billions of dollars
Find evidence that global warming is bullshit = 0
It's really quite simple when you break it down by the numbers.
Story
23 comments:
Not so fast....
I still blame Bush
1934 was the year that Prescott Bush made partner at Brown Brothers Harriman & Co.? Coincidence? I think not.
... and not only was the "skeptic" you cite a member of the evil oil and gas cartel he was also President of CGX Energy Inc.
I havent time for the factual rantings of some anonymous yet successful and respected businessman when I can get my info from the likes of Laurie David, Leo Dicaprio, and Ed Begley Jr.
The revolution will be televised on reality tv
We dont need no thought control
Hey dude is that fascist rock? Well turn it up!
yawn.
meanwhile, the wannabe fascists in washington have rushed passage of the "protect america act of 2007" that authorizes an unprecedented level of spying on american citizens even if they're not part of any criminal investigation.
no post on that?
Yawn is right.
First of all you avoid the issue altogether and change the subject of the post which was that agw is a hoax and then secondly you show your hypocrisy by railing against the "man" for spying on its citizens when just last week you were banging the drum for the congestion tax, as an industry expert mind you, which would be enforced by yup you guessed it thousands of surveillance cameras.
So in other words you are full of shit.
Yawn?
I'm sorry if we're boring you donsky. Maybe you can craft some public policy that taxes me for continually crushing the myth of global warming and then use that $ to perpetuate said myth...
oh wait, that tax already exists. my bad.
well maybe you can craft some public policy that will shut me and my ilk up from exposing this myth?
oh shit, isn't that the fairness doctrine?
Yeah lets quiet the detractors! those troublemakers!!!
wait what is the first act of the fascists again????
i'd never support a policy to shut you (or your boss, The Donkey) up.
you work SO HARD to make your ilk "appear" to be on the correct side of the issues. sometimes you are quite convincing, but hey, i can never get my facts straight anyway, so that, plus $2.00 will get me a ride on the subway.
but hey,it's fun to watch. because OUR ilk KNOWS you are on the WRONG side of MOST of the issues ...
ha ha ha ...
yawn.
wow thanks anita,
I thought you were going to go with the "i'm rubber you're glue" retort but somehow you managed to come up with something even less substantial than that!
Maybe that financial aid from jimmy c could have been better spent somewhere else.
So does anyone want to try to defend their ever weakening position on global warming or will it just be sticks and stones all day?
well, rhino, let's put it this way. according to The Union of Concerned Scientists, 2005 was the hottest year on record since 1880. so if there was a "flaw" in the 1998 data, i haven't heard of any such flaw for 2005.
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/recordtemp2005.html
Well anita, maybe you should read a little more because the article i linked clearly states that the warmest year on record was 1934. That's according to NASA. And the article you linked only includes the northern hemisphere so i guess that means we don't give a shit about anyone below the equator.
xenophobe!
I didnt read past the first sentence of your link and heres why...
"Global average surface temperatures pushed 2005 into a virtual tie with 1998 as the hottest year on record worldwide.[1] For people living in the Northern Hemisphere—most of the world's population—2005 was the hottest year on record since 1880"
Virtual tie? So pretty much not the warmest but rather a very close second (using the aforementioned flawed data), this is a joke right?
More importantly and damaging to their argument is the fact that they are leaving out half of the equation south of the eqautor as we are talking about GLOBAL warming here not overpopulation in the Northern Hemisphere and the lack of affordable housing in the Tropic of Capricorn region.
Once again proves that the alarmists are all to willing to play loose with the data that they use and skew to advance their agenda.
I didnt know you were a percussionist, nice!
their use of the term "tie" is, if your data is correct, flawed. but no one has, as far as i know, said that 2005 was not the hottest year on record (granted, in the northern hemisphere) since 1880. and, if you take it one step further, 2005 was the hottest year on record (for both hemispheres) since 1934.
so what's your problem?
anita are you serious?
did you read my post or the article that i linked?
If you want to continue to defend AGW that's fine, but just admit that it's based on FAITH because the science is just not there.
yawn is right because we've beat this topic to death and no one is going to change anyone's mind.
second, there are two important, substantive difference between the congestion plan and spying: you have a CHOICE to drive or live or walk or do whatever in NYC and therefore a CHOICE to be recorded; you have no such choice in the spying (though i suppose you could choose to stop communicating with everyone everywhere, or choose to leave the country altogether, but that wouldn't even guarantee you weren't spied upon).
the second difference is that we KNOW we'd be recorded by the cameras. you have no idea whether or not you're being spied upon.
these are two very critical differnces.
so, no, i'm not a hypocrite in this respect. but thanks for asking.
and, rhino, i'm against the fairness doctrine. you somehow have it in you're head that i'm a liberal, which isn't surprising since it seems you barely read the substance of my posts.
"second, there are two important, substantive difference between the congestion plan and spying: you have a CHOICE to drive or live or walk or do whatever in NYC and therefore a CHOICE to be recorded; you have no such choice in the spying (though i suppose you could choose to stop communicating with everyone everywhere, or choose to leave the country altogether, but that wouldn't even guarantee you weren't spied upon)."
Thats about the weakest argument youve yet to make. You may want to just sit this one out.
So I have a choice to live and walk in NYC and woe is me if I get caught in a compromising but mutually agreed and consented on postion with a lady of high professionals nocturnal standards in a closed subway stairwell on Broadway but not telecommunicate with suspected terrorists.
BULLSHIT!
I talk regularly with family in Dubai and Saudi Arabia, and if Big Bro listening to me and my uncles talking about Ethiopian strippers and contraband counterfeit Guiness can potentially make our country safer then so be it...
I dont care what you call yourself little l big L liberal libertarian.... you seem to be fine with surveillance when it results in more taxation but not the very security of your own country.
Nobody detests big bro more than I, but if Im going to have to sacrifice some of my personal privacy it better be to secure my Country and not fund some all gay public high school on the lower east side.
Actually donsky i haven't labeled you at all. You're claiming that the president is a wanna be fascist. I'm simply pointing out the fact that the first move of the fascists is to take over the media and silence their critics.
This is not a policy being pushed by the current administration but by the wanna be fascists who are the majority in congress.
Now if i was asked to label you i would say you're a future conservative. You still think there's a good reason to raise taxes, you still think there's such thing as well crafted public policy, you still believe in AGW, etc. so you're certainly leaning left. However you're also obviously intelligent so you'll realize the error of your youth eventually and then you'll be a conservative.
the fact that 2005 was the warmest year on record says something. but there are other statistics that are relevant as well, including those relative to the melting of the polar ice caps, the rise ocean temperatures, the increased frequency and severity of tropical storms and hurricanes,, etc., etc. you can, as you love to do, focus on one glitch in the system and say it is representative of ALL the facts. but that ain't right my son. it just ain't right. and you know it. or at least you should.
well first of all, i'm assuming that you just made a mistake and meant to say that 2005 WASNT the warmest year since umm you know .......it WASNT!
2005 was NOT the warmest year. The very article you linked said it was the second warmest and that is with data tilted to their already made up conclusion (do you really take seriously a global temperature claim that only measures half the planet?)
So once agin I will kind point out that by the very evidence that you provided that 2005 was NOT the warmest month.
Its not a glitch when the CONSENSUS claims that the hottest year ever was 1998 or a close second 2005 when the FACT is it was in 1934. ITS FRAUD!!!
Now a quick question....
What the fuck is the matter with you?
... and read the newest post above
So I have a choice to live and walk in NYC and woe is me if I get caught in a compromising but mutually agreed and consented on postion with a lady of high professionals nocturnal standards in a closed subway stairwell on Broadway but not telecommunicate with suspected terrorists.
first, the cameras that would be installed for the congestion tax wouldn't be pointed at closed subway stairwells.
second, there is NOTHING in the "protect america act" that mentions terrorism or suspected terrorists. the act gives the federal govt the authority to spy on anyone communicating with anyone else who can be "reasonably believed to be outside the US." so that means ALL your email and all int'l calls. this bill DOES NOT limit surveillance to contact with suspected terrorists.
now how about trying to refute my points?
i'm not "fine with surveillance;" but we all know that you're already on camera in almost all of midtown plus every other highly trafficked neighborhood.
and i am in favor of a tax that corrects a distortion in the free market, as a congestion tax would. i also think it provides us with an opportunity to drastically cut our city income tax (though i doubt bloomberg would agree).
and i didn't say specifically that the president is a wannabe fascist (and with his theory of the unitary executive, no one can credibly deny that he is not); the democrats in congress, wannabe fascists themselves as you point out, pushed this bill through, and i blame them first and foremost.
and while i think there is a such thing as well-crafted public policy, i'm not so sure about well-executed public policy.
i'm in the business of privatizing govt!
I dont have to, you refute yourself.
I was trying to make light with my hooker analogy, which was apparently lost on you. You can not support and justify one sort of surveillance while condemning the other just because of your robertmosian grand plan of atrafficless city. A congestion tax will not accomplish anything that you mentioned, not a single thing but fatten the wallets of the special interest du jour.
For the record I dont approve of any gov't surveillance unless there is strong legal cause to do so and have more issues with these patriot/protect acts than you might think, but as I said, and you just acknowledged it is a fact of our daily life and if thats the case Id rather it was in an attempt to catch bad guys then to pay transit workers for doing crossword puzzles or fund moslem schools.
...but thats just me, Im an idealist.
However, my point was to call you out on your hypocrisy (check) and throw the bullshit flag on you for changing the subject (check) which getting back to once again is the blatant disregard for the truth from the warming alarmists, the willy nilly approach they take in cherry picking selective data that fits into their ideology and the compliance of a complicit media that will shout from the rooftops that THIS IS THE HOTTEST YEAR EVERRRRRRRRRRR....
... and then convienently sweep under the rug when that information is proven to be false.
Check Check Give that man his money
There is NO tax that will correct ANYTHING!
I don't understand why you can't see this.
Will it slow down congestion? NO
Will the money be used efficiently to improve mass transit? NO
If they made mass transit better more people would use it and you would have less congestion. This is not rocket science. You don't have to graduate from UPS university to figure this out.
Finally, although it has nothing to do with the original post i don't see the problem with listening to our phone calls. Think about it. What's the problem? You think they have time to waste to listen to you having phone sex with your girlfriend? And even if they do, so what?
I say lets get down to business and start spying on all suspected criminals. Lets do some racial profiling and listen to every one of muhammeds calls and make sure he's not doing bad things, and in the mean time if they want to listen to me and donkey laughing about gary then so be it. They can get a good laugh too.
Just kidding gary, we love you man.
who is calling whom willy nilly ??? YOU guys are doing the cherry picking here. (no pun intended ... or maybe not. oh never mind).
first, you did not prove me to be hypocritical. the two instances--the congestion cameras and the govt surveillance of emails and intl calls--are qualitatively different. you didn't show how they're not.
if anyone's hypocritical, donkey, it's you, for supporting the biggest power grab by the executive branch in the history of our country but claiming to be a civil libertarian--maybe you should re-read some orwell.
the congestion tax HAS WORKED in london. check out the results. congestion has lessened and business transportation is more efficient.
yes, i didn't even want to address global warming this morning. how many times do we have to go over a subject where you adamantly refuse to attempt to understand the big picture and the balance of the evidence? you prefer to grasp onto statements made by ignoramuses and opportunists and treat them with the levity that one would an actual expert's opinions, then dismiss the actual experts as part of some liberal conspiracy by the weather channel.
rhino, you should read some economics articles on the subject of internalizing external costs. auto users are freeloaders and suck at the govt teet by not paying for all of the costs of driving. that's what we call a market distortion.
If they made mass transit better more people would use it and you would have less congestion.
no, actually, they wouldn't. you have no idea what you're talking about. do some reading on modal choice.
i don't see the problem with listening to our phone calls.
hmm... you can't possibly be this ignorant, can you?
what if our govt was taken over by socialists (a green/left-wing democrat coalition or something) and they wanted to round up every prominent person who espoused the capitalist ideology.
what would you think of govt surveillance then?
maybe some of it is my jewish paranoia, but i do not trust our govt.
and, of course, it's not the capitalists that they'd be rounding up in the near future: it's those damn civil libertarians and leftists.
combined with the patriot act that defines terrorism so broadly it includes nonviolent protest, and halliburton being awarded a no-bid contract to build concentration camps inside the US (conveniently ready in early 2009), i'm not exactly relaxed.
Ohhhhhh....
They ARE qualitatively different.
See theres the problem, youre too smart for your own good with your fancy words.
If a married couple installed video cameras in their home with the husband thinking about home security and the Mrs looking to keep an eye out on the housekeeper stealing her thou sheet linens, well in the grand scheme of things the end result is the same if the husband is caught banging the babysitter in the broom closet.
My point is that you cant have it both ways and qualify the discrepancies or conflicting reasoning behind your support of one type of spying and not the other. Its a flawed position and you can spin it how you want but thats that.
You have wide eyed ideals of a traffic free Utopia and thats commendable Im not knocking it but it clouds you on this issue as cameras on every corner is ok if it justify your goals, I say fuck cameras on the corners they should be in the Mosques if anywhere at all, and certainly not to enforce more taxation.
So I guess what Im saying is fuck the qualitive differences.
... and I think I was clear on my position of govt surveillance. Its a flawed policy cloaked behind a necessity, like most things the govt does but I would rather err on the side of catching bad guys than on taxation.
Listen, in my lifetime on more than one occasion has video evidence been presented against me and I have been racially profiled more times than I can count. So on a personal level Im no fan of either, but on a pragmatic note it works to about as much a degree of effiency as can be expected from the incompetents running this country.
... and Im not being condiricesending but thanks for the laugh, a green/left-wing democrat coalition coming to round me up hardy har har, they better think twice bout THAT!
Post a Comment