Monday, November 26, 2007

Increased Sun activity = Global warming?...

.

1996-06-16 1998-06-04 1999-12-16



Has V.P Al Gore been told about this?
You would think so but it seems the V.P. and many from his group just choose to ignore other data\studies that do not agree with his agenda. He has had numerous offers to debate this topic but instead has declared “The debate on Global Warming is closed” and has refused to participate in these debates.




“Gore’s reluctance to go toe-to-toe with global warming skeptics may have something to do with the - from the standpoint of climate change alarmists - unfortunate outcome of a global warming debate in New York last March. In the debate, a team of global warming skeptics composed of MIT scientist Richard Lindzen, University of London emeritus professor of biogeology Philip Stott, and physician-turned novelist/filmmaker Michael Crichton handily defeated a team of climate alarmists headed by NASA scientist Gavin Schmidt. Before the start of the nearly two-hour debate, the audience of several thousand polled 57.3 percent to 29.9 percent in favor of the proposition that global warming is a “crisis.” At the end of the debate, the numbers had changed dramatically, with 46.2 percent favoring the skeptical point of view and 42.2 percent siding with the alarmists.”
http://theclimatebet.com/




This is not uncommon for Rightside posted some information and links to studies that contradict the V.P.’s claims and agenda. And that there is a returning commentator who follows “The debate is closed” gameplan…
http://rightsideva.blogspot.com/2007/11/mainstream-media-on-thin-ice.html




The interesting thing is how this frequent commentator continues to make comments such as: “The grownups have long moved on”, “deny reality”, “When you start off with misleading arguments, it doesn't really help your credibility when you then switch to alternative arguments”, “talking points”, “Narrow minded”, and then goes on to attack the President. But like V.P. Gore, this commentator refuses to address two simple questions. If the sun’s activity has increased is it possible that this is responsible for documented increased temperatures on Earth and Mars? And how is it 35 years ago the media was reporting the “Cooling Crisis” in the 1970’s and how did we get to where we are now? Where will we be in another 35 years?




These questions have been ignored by many in the media, blog commentators, and it would be nice to see the “Global Warming Guru” Al Gore address these questions. RightsideVA, as well as many other bloggers and public, agree that the temperature has risen over the years but questions the claims that this is solely the result of manmade pollution. There is a considerable amount of data and studies showing that the environment is not static and is always changing.
The world temperature has been cooler hundreds of years ago, 35 years ago, and has changed overtime. We must look at the data and studies out there that contradict the “Guru’s” claim.

11 comments:

dignan said...

Clowns like you should really stop embarrassing yourself by clinging to fictions, as you did when you pretended the polar bear population is not decreasing. Stop trying to mislead everyone, it's tiresome, immoral, and stupid.

By the way, we also don't need to redebate whether evolution or the Holocaust really happened either.

RightsideVA said...

Thank you for providing the above example...

dignan said...

still waiting for your apology for trying to mislead people into thinking that the polar bear populatino is not threatened by global warming, schmuck . . .

RightsideVA said...

At what time did I "mislead" the people by presenting alternative studies\info provide by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service?

Info that you have not proved accurate or wrong.

dignan said...

You "misled" by pretending that the media "once again was called" (that never happened, douchebag; a right-wing editorial mentioned an irrelevant statistic about the polar bear population in the 1950's that you're inexplicably obsessed with) on their "one sided support of environmental scare tactics". (The polar bear population decline and threat of much further decline is real, douchebag, no matter how many times you cover your ears and eyes and pretend its not.)

You pretend that the polar bear population is just fine by citing this irrelevant statistic, while ignoring the fact that the polar bear population is seriously threatened by global warming and is already declining in an area that has experienced an increase in temperature.

And to top it off, you're moronic enough to pretend this is about the accuracy of the irrelevant statistic, which I never challenged.

What I can't tell with right-wing nuts like you is, when you're proven wrong, whether you're just too embarrassed to admit it so you keep immorally denying it, or whether you're so delusional that you just convince yourself you're still right even as the facts show you to be wrong.

RightsideVA said...

Dignan has responded with “the whole focus of every one of my comments is how this stat is irrelevant, and that you childlishly ignore the relevant statistics and ocnclusions of the scientific community“. but yet he will not explain or discuss documented data provided the same way Al Gore will not debate the global warming issue with scientist who provide data that does not agree with his agenda.

Simple. There are numerous reports that show a correlation between increased Sun activity and the changing temperature on Earth and other planets. Are these reports false or wrong? Are they being ignored because they do not fit the agenda and in fact provide alternate reasons for the increased temperature we are experiencing? Simple question but one that both Al Gore and Dignan will not address after repeated requests.

Instead Dignan has continued to attack Rightside and other commentators with claims that we are clinging to false reports and date but does not provide decisive information to disprove the reports\data. Dignan has also used insults and verbal attacks to sidetrack the issues at hand. These attacks and name calling towards Rightside have been allowed to show visitors to Rightside the integrity and actions of Dignan in his responses and statements. I will not allow these attacks towards other people commenting to Rightside just as I have asked people who have emailed me asking to “Give Dignan the same thing back” not to do so. By allowing Dignan to verbally attack Rightside and avoid the two questions asked, numerous times, shows readers to Rightside the integrity, maturity, and worth of Dignans replies to the subject at hand…

dignan said...

Blah, blah, blah, just keep trying to change the subject from how you tried to mislead people about the threat to polar bears from global warming. And no, I'm not going to explain for the umpteenth time how you "misled", learn to read the prior comments. Please, show your ignorance one more time and (1) change the subject from the polar bears; (2) ask how you were misleading again, even though it's been pointed out numerous times; or (and this is my favorite) (3) cite your favorite irrelevant statistic about the polar population in the 1950's. What a hack.

Kooch said...

Dignan:

Read

Long-term warming of late spring (April-June) air temperatures has been proposed by Stirling et al. [Stirling, I., Lunn, N.J., Iacozza, J., 1999. Long-term trends in the population ecology of polar bears in western Hudson Bay in relation to climatic change. Arctic 52, 294-306] as the "ultimate" factor causing earlier sea-ice break-up around western Hudson Bay (WH) that has, in turn, led to the poorer physical and reproductive characteristics of polar bears occupying this region. Derocher et al. [Derocher, A.E., Lunn, N.J., Stirling, I., 2004. Polar bears in a warming climate. Integr. Comp. Biol. 44, 163-176] expanded the discussion to the whole circumpolar Arctic and concluded that polar bears will unlikely survive as a species should the computer-predicted scenarios for total disappearance of sea-ice in the Arctic come true. We found that spring air temperatures around the Hudson Bay basin for the past 70 years (1932-2002) show no significant warming trend and are more like!
ly identified with the large-amplitude, natural climatic variability that is characteristic of the Arctic. Any role of external forcing by anthropogenic greenhouse gases remains difficult to identify. We argue, therefore, that the extrapolation of polar bear disappearance is highly premature. Climate models are simply not skilful for the projection of regional sea-ice changes in Hudson Bay or the whole Arctic. Alternative factors, such as increased human-bear interaction, must be taken into account in a more realistic study and explanation of the population ecology of WH polar bears. Both scientific papers and public discussion that continue to fail to recognize the inherent complexity in the adaptive interaction of polar bears with both human and nature will not likely offer any useful, science-based, preservation and management strategies for the species. © 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Clearly even in the peer reviewed scientific liturature, the debate is not settled. I know this abstract is a long post, but it is important to see vebatim what has been written. Clearly, you should stop saying that Rightside is misleading, Dignan, you really need to do your homework and not follow the false prophet at the Church of Gore and stop buying carbon credits (modern day indulgences for worshipers of Gaia)

kooch said...

Sorry, forgot to paste the reference for the abstract

yck M.G., Soon W., Baydack R.K., Legates D.R., Baliunas S., Ball T.F., Hancock L.O.
Polar bears of western Hudson Bay and climate change: Are warming spring air temperatures the "ultimate" survival control factor?
(2007) Ecological Complexity, 4 (3), pp. 73-84.

RightsideVA said...

While looking into more reports on this I found studies and reports from both sides of the debate but I found that attacking the other side and it’s players a waste of time and detracting from the subject at hand. In allowing Dignan the opportunity to repeatedly ignore simple questions about the Sun’s activity and overall polar bear population it showed that “his side” continues to avoid data or discussion that does not fit the Gore-genda… To allow Dignan to repeatedly spew insults and name calling just showed his level of integrity and maturity…

I found the following in a article about global warming and it describes both sides of the Ice berg, melting or not…


“There are those who look at facts and make their judgments based on what they see and know. Their findings can be matched by any other scientist, using the same data and set of circumstances to reach the same conclusions. It's a age-old practice called "peer review." It's the only true science“.

“And then, there are those who yearn for a certain outcome and set about creating the needed data to make it so. Usually, you will find this group of scientists greatly dependent on grants supplied by those with a specific political agenda who demand desired outcomes for their money“.

“Let's just take NASA, for example -- the most trusted name in American science. A lot of NASA scientists have fallen into the money trap. Environmental science has become the life-blood of the space program as the nation has lost interest in space travel. To keep the bucks coming, NASA has justified launches through the excuse of earth-directed environmental research. And the budgets keep coming“

Thanks “Kooch“ for the info posted and I found it interesting that it shows there are numerous possibilities for the decline of bear population in the Western Hudson…

"Both scientific papers and public discussion that continue to fail to recognize the inherent complexity in the adaptive interaction of polar bears with both human and nature will not likely offer any useful, science-based, preservation and management strategies for the species".



Still think the increased hunting quota has a lot to do with it….

Christian said...

Look at this http://en.sevenload.com/videos/ha4PoKY/The-Great-Global-Warming-Swindle