The everything you need to know about climate change thread.

http://www.accuweather.com/watches-warnings.asp?partner=accu...

I'm as easily sidetracked by these intellectual discussions as anyone, but they are really sidestepping the real issue which is whether the proposed legislation is authorized by the constitution. This usually ends the debate, especially since most people who support AGW tend to know very little about the constitution.

Some other arguments I use:

In the '70's Global Cooling was all the rage. If we had enacted legislation based on this 'science', then, assuming global warming theory is correct, how long would it have taken to convince the bureaucrats that the legislation needed to be changed when the 'science' changed to warming? Meanwhile, our tax dollars would be going toward counterproductive and even 'dangerous' activities, and the same is likely true of the 'science' today.

Similarly, how much longer would bloodletting have been practiced if the constitution were formed with a Health Department? This one I used before the current health care debate, so now I usually don't use it since it tends to force a segue into a health care debate.

Watts Up With That? is about the best blog I've found for tracking the 'skeptics', and about half the action is in the comments, which are all too often way over my head. For the first time that I'm aware, Anthony Watts just made a sticky on a thread titled "Smoking Gun at Darwin Zero" and if you can understand everything in that post, please post a layman's summary for the rest of us, but from what I can gather "homogenized" data is the issue. A recent post featured a video with a sixth-grader and his father very basically demonstrating the danger of homogenizing data because of the Urban Heat Island Effect (UHI).

Anthony Watts also has a project he runs called Surfacestations.org. From the summary page of the Mid term census report [pdf]:

During the past few years I recruited a team of more than 650 volunteers to visually inspect and photographically document more than 860 of these temperature stations. We were shocked by what we found.

We found stations located next to the exhaust fans of air conditioning units, surrounded by asphalt parking lots and roads, on blistering-hot rooftops, and near sidewalks and buildings that absorb and radiate heat. We found 68 stations located at wastewater treatment plants, where the process of waste digestion causes temperatures to be higher than in surrounding areas.

In fact, we found that 89 percent of the stations – nearly 9 of every 10 – fail to meet the National Weather Service’s own siting requirements that stations must be 30 meters (about 100 feet) or more away from an artificial heating or radiating/reflecting heat source.

I strongly recommend reading that report as it so clearly and simply demonstrates the weakness of the temperature record itself.

It seems to me that if we cannot trust the raw data that is used to create the hockey stick graph, then we have no evidence of any temperature trend - warming, cooling, or otherwise.

this was posted on another thread but ill post it here too..
"the great global warming swindle" its a good documentary.

http://neithercorp.us/media

To understand why 95% of the computer modeling that "supports" anthropogenic global warming is bunk you must understand a little chaos theory.

According to the science of chaos, there are systems - both man-made and natural - that have some very special characteristics. One of the most important characteristics of these chaotic systems is that future conditions of the system cannot be predicted because the course of the system is hypersensitive to initial conditions. In other words, it is not possible to predict what the system will be doing in the future based on current conditions because immeasurably small characteristics of the current condition will be amplified into significance by the very nature of the system. So unknown current conditions will become significant in the future.

For an easy example, imagine dropping a rubber ball on a concrete surface. No matter how carefully you drop it and how accurate you are at hitting the same spot on the concrete, your ability to predict where the ball will land after its first bounce is minimal. After the second bounce the predictability is dramatically less. After three bounces, forget it. The immeasurable conditions of the initial system (dust on the ball, subtle wind currents, tiny contours in the concrete) are amplified into greater importance each time the ball bounces until they have thrown the system far beyond your ability to predict.

The Earth's climate is a chaotic system. In fact, one of the pioneers in chaos theory had his first contact with chaos when he was trying to model weather patterns using a computer. It is no exaggeration to say that weather and climate are the paradigm chaotic systems. Future weather conditions (climate) simply cannot be predicted with any reliability with computers.

There ARE strange attractors (look it up if you are interested) in climate that can be tracked. But they do not allow prediction of future change.

Computer modeling of future earth climate change is simply crap.

on this link to be very informative.
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

Water vapor is the over-riding player in the greenhouse effect, and man-made CO2 is basically a non-factor.

climate change propaganda is what happens when science is mistaught or eliminated from school curriculums because of an agenda to make money & gain power.

CO2 = 0.54% (thats 1/2 of one per cent)
of ALL gasses in atmosphere.

oceans = biggest continuous emission of CO2

its a mutually satisfying relationship:
flora (plants, trees, etc) inhale-need and love CO2
flora then, exhales OXYGEN.
fauna (you, me, all living creatures) inhale OXYGEN
fauna then, exhales CO2.

Here's his talk. Here's a very similar talk more British-sounding. Here are some rarely seen interactions by the media. And Monckton on the Canadian media, where he explains Gore won't debate him. Here's some evidence it's an "old" idea.

I keep track of the effective eye-openers I find here.

Couldn't hurt to check here or search the forums, either.