In 2005, the United Nation predicted 50 million refugees from the effects of global warming. Where are they?
Is the Earth warming? Data does suggest the Earth is warming as we come out of the “Little Ice Age.”
But looking at the geological record, more than 90 percent of the last 10,000 years were warmer than they are now. Both the Roman and Minoan civilizations thrived in warmer climes than seen today.
Energy conservation is a good thing. Using wind and solar and other green sources, as appropriate, are to be lauded. We should, indeed, consider ourselves stewards of this planet for both humanity and its other inhabitants.
And it is indeed possible that mankind’s activities are affecting the climate, but with the Earth having feedback loops upon feedback loops, and cycles and factors we still don’t even know about, it’s hubris to the highest degree to think we are the sole determinate of any changes.
When a theory makes predictions and those predictions do not come true, the scientific process mandates that the theory is weak or even disproven.
And when the staunchest promulgators of said theory are found to falsify evidence, drop inconvenient data sets, conspire to suppress dissent and evidence attacking their theory, thinking minds should recoil from their claims.
Where else have we seen the faithful stick with the holy writ? Oh, yes, creationism.
Today’s warmists are exactly like creationists, retreating to the faith in the face of contradictory evidence and outright fraud.
David Hunt
Nashua
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Conspiracy Theory!
- “No One Is Above The Law”
- CNN Experts Discuss Medicine
- Looking For Their Lost Keys
- Rapid Climate Change
- CBS News 1982 : One Fourth Of Florida To Drown
- Affordable Transportation
- “Why Scientific Fraud Is Suddenly Everywhere”
- She Hates Her State
- Climate Friendly War
- Office Of Climate Change And Health Equity And Environmental Justice
- “100% Non-Carbon By 2030”
- 1991 : United Nations Calls For Genocide
- Mainstream Fascism In Academia
- California Finds A New Way To Drive Businesses Out
- Powerful Climate Mathematics
- NY Times – Cameras Are Racist
- Forests Cause Forest Fires
- Climate Engineering
- The World’s Worst Scientists
- “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- A Real Hockey Stick
- A Real Hockey Stick
- Doubling Energy Costs
- Doubling Energy Costs
Recent Comments
- czechlist on Conspiracy Theory!
- Disillusioned on Conspiracy Theory!
- John on Conspiracy Theory!
- Tony Heller on Conspiracy Theory!
- dm on Conspiracy Theory!
- arn on “No One Is Above The Law”
- Wes Tyler on “No One Is Above The Law”
- Disillusioned on CNN Experts Discuss Medicine
- Conrad Ziefle on “No One Is Above The Law”
- Gordon Vigurs on “No One Is Above The Law”
Steve,
where did dave’s 90% figure come from?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Holocene_Temperature_Variations.png
What’s the dashed line in that plot? How often is the thick line above the dashed line?
TonyD:
You really lack knowledge of historical climate!
I would suggest you refrain from participating in discussions with those that do!
Any REPUTABLE reproduction of the temperature records for the last 10,000 years show the same general trends for the entire globe.
One only needs to be smart enough to recognize the signal. I guess that leaves you out!
Tony,
Learn from someone who had done geology. See the graphs on the following link
http://hot-topic.co.nz/cooling-gate-easterbrook-fakes-his-figures-hides-the-incline/
When we say there is nothing unusual with modern temps we mean it.
Jimbo,
this link says that the claim is totally bogus. That it is from Don Easterbrook.
I just looked at the claim from National Review
http://www.nationalreview.com/planet-gore/256079/only-9098-last-10500-years-warmer-2010-brian-bolduc
and the 2nd comment links to this site
http://initforthegold.blogspot.com/2011/01/garbled-reasoning-at-wuwt.html
according to those warmists, they also ascribe the claim to Easterbrook and that the record ends either at 1855 or 1950 at latest so does not include current warming
See page 301
http://books.google.com/books?id=Qh82IW-HHWAC&lpg=PA299&ots=v1DTHb2as0&dq=holocene%20temperature%20reconstruction%20minoan%20medieval%20holocene%20climate%20optimum&lr&pg=PA301#v=onepage&q&f=false
Jimbo,
that is another totally alarmist link. Did you not read it? All doom and gloom destroying the planet stuff!
Steve, unless the Jurrassic was in the last 10,000 years, the link does not say anything about Dave’s assertion.
and Mike could you supply me with a “REPUTABLE reproduction of the temperature records for the last 10,000” so that I may decrease my embarrassing ignorance.
TonyD:
I already provided you with sources for that information. You apparently ignored them.
mike,
Sorry for disappointing you, but I don’t have time to go through the 8,000 posts on my mail to find it. I have just never considered the possibility that 90% of last 10,000 years has been hotter than today. That would pretty much mean that of the last 10,000 years there were only 2 or three periods like the little ice age and all the rest of the time was hotter than today, and I have never read anyone say that.
I don’t get the confusion. The earth is only 6,000 years old so there have clearly been some pretty dramatic climate changes. All these ‘denier’ types who keep scoffing about the predictions of sea level rise are ignoring the research by Noah et al which proved conclusively just how fast that can happen. It is written.
[almost always sarcastic]
Tony,
Since you don’t “have the time”, I’ll put some reconstructions here so you don’t have work so hard (unless this post gets more than 8,000 comments.)
First, we need to find out who you would consider “Reputable”.
UNECP?
HERE
Journal of Quaternary Science?
HERE
EPICA & Vostok ice core reconstructions?
HERE
Loehle, C. and Hu McCulloch. 2008?
>HERE
Ljungqvist, F.C. 2010?
HERE
There are dozens more, ranging from hemispheric reconstructions to New Zeland, South Africa, China, Spain, Canada, Pakistan, ad infinitum.
But again, I’m sure you don’t have the time to check them all out.
Getting to the point of the graph Steve linked to (in response to your question about where Dave got the 90% number). I’ve taken the liberty of blocking out the last 10,000 years and drew a baseline at today’s temps. From a quick eyeball, it looks like the avg. spends ~70% of the time above current temps over the last 10k yrs. (293/432 pixels) It’s not the most scientific method so Dave’s claim could be close to the truth or somewhat exaggerated. But that’s all I have time for right now. I’ll try to get better data on the actual TACT (Time Above Current temperature) when I can find the time.
Tony…………….Tony…………. 😉
Sea Level as well? http://www.photographers-resource.co.uk/a_heritage/Castles/LG/Wales/Harlech_castle.htm
My only wonder is why it has taken anyone this long to realize Dave’s thesis. It was blatant a long time ago when Algore made it into a religion.
Steve,
A post of mine (in response to Tony Duncan) seems to have gone down the rabbit hole. (probably for the three links I inserted) Any way you can get it back for me?
Never mind
Robb,
all of those are fine and the 70% figure seems quite reasonable to me.
Tony,
So, based on your reply, you agree it’s reasonable that temps were higher than today 70% of the tome in the last 10,000 years?
Does that mean you feel today’s temps aren’t anything special?
Robb,
I was well aware of the general holocene temps, but did not think they were higher than the current temps for 90% of the time. But I am not surprised that at the 70% figure.
So yes the actual temperatures are not particularly “special” at the moment form a geological point of view. If CO2 has been the major factor in the recent increase, and if temps continue to increase over the next 100 years because of GHE, then it probably will be something special.
Tony,
OT: Were you ever on HBO or ShowTime IN THE 80s?
Robb,
Not as far as I know. I have had someone tell me I absolutely was on Sesame street, which I don’t remember. You think I would. I did a few soap operas, commercials and music videos.
Oh, I was wondering because during the HBO “One Night Stand” era (mid 80’s?) I vaguely remember an act that seemed similar to yours (tightrope held by audience member, 6-ball, etc.) by a young-ish guy and was wondering if it was you.
Nope. if there were people holding it on BOTH sides I would be surprised. There is one guy who ripped off parts of my act, and he did do those kind of shows back then. Of course I am much better looking. 😉
well you are self-promotes as a :babe magnet”!
Tony,
Don’t take this the wrong way, but this is why I really don’t get guys like you. You seem reasonable about the vast amount of uncertainties concerning AGW, yet you always seem to land on the side of the “believer” crowd.
If you honestly feel that 7,000 out of the last 10,000 years being warmer than today is not surprising, how can you logically add the “but if CO2… and if temps continue to increase because of CO2…than probably it will…”? That’s quite a supposition you’re making there.
It’s akin to saying: “I know there’s nothing unusual about what’s going on right now, but if, just if, a certain complex series of events takes place, my personal beliefs will be validated.
Do you even realize how many conditional modifiers you had to put in your statement to justify it? I know you have a background in psychology/behavior, have you ever read the book “When Prophecy Fails”? It’s probably the seminal work on cognitive dissonance.
I know, thats what you believe us “deniers” suffer from, but to me the difference is, I’m looking at as much available evidence as I can to see how strong a hypothesis is, and I don’t see strong evidence. While I see AGW proponents as latching on to a hypothesis and claiming everything as evidence to resolve the dissonance between the hypothesis and observations. (wonder what group would show more activity in the anterior cingulate cortex)
Headline in today’s Dallas Morning News: “Natural Disasters: 42 million people displaced in 2010.”
It’s an AP story by Bjoern Amland.
If you don’t find it, see the Voice of America report: http://www.voanews.com/english/news/africa/decapua-nat-disasters-displacement-6jun11-123227883.html
Ed, its an interesting study. You can see the report here, http://www.internal-displacement.org/8025708F004BE3B1/%28httpInfoFiles%29/15D7ACEC7ED1836EC12578A7002B9B8A/$file/IDMC_natural-disasters_2009-2010.pdf
It would be worthwhile to note though, there are about 7 billion people on this earth. So, 42 million being displaced, while horrific, is 0.006 of 7 bil or 0.6% of the earth’s population.
Also, its interesting to note, 85% of that is blamed on “hydrological” events, (read floods). Most of that would be caused by improper mitigation, land and water management. Sadly, in many countries, much of the population distribution still exists in flood plains. If we’d show them how to properly irrigate, we could get many of them out of harms way…….. just some quick thoughts…..
1) These 42 million people have been displaced … it does not say if they are displaced temporarily or permanently. My understanding of refugees is that the displacement is permanent.
2) At least 1.6 million of those displaced are from the earthquake in Haiti, which was not caused by global warming (unless you are totally delusional, like actor Danny Glover). I would like to know how many of those were displaced by earthquakes, how many were due to floods, hurricanes, etc.
Once it is all tallied up, I think you will see that the that the total number of those 42 million who are actual refugees is much lower. On top of that, you are making the assumption that hurricanes, etc. are caused by global warming. A warmer world means fewer hurricanes, so I don’t see this article as anything more than selling fear to get attention.