| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
potan
Joined: 30 Jul 2007
Posts: 582
  
votes: 2
Location: Ontario
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2009 1:21 pm Post subject: This decade 'warmest on record' |
 |
|
This has been today's biggest headline all over the MSM, that this is the warmest decade ever!
It turns out that.....
"the WMO said global temperatures were 0.44C (0.79F) above the long-term average"
We are going to spend possibly billions and trillions of dollars to fix 0.44C. |
|
|
|
 |
Alan A.
Joined: 31 Jul 2009
Posts: 237
votes: 4
Location: Western Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The S&P 500 index is up 60% since the lows of last March, woo-hoo!... but down 20% for the decade... ahhhhh. Ask any chartist, it's all about the time window you use. Same applies for climate. You can use the stats you want to prove your point, you'll always be right. |
|
|
|
|
SFrank85
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2269
votes: 4
Location: Toronto - Scarborough Southwest
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I would like to see these numbers, because many other climatologists have been saying that the globe has been cooling since 1998. |
|
|
|
|
Alan A.
Joined: 31 Jul 2009
Posts: 237
votes: 4
Location: Western Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2009 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SFrank85 wrote: | | I would like to see these numbers, because many other climatologists have been saying that the globe has been cooling since 1998. |
Just read the post above if only you care. |
|
|
|
|
Craig
Site Admin
Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
votes: 36
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2009 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Why does the MSM love global warming so much. I don't get it. Why are they so one-sided on this? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2009 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig wrote: | | Why does the MSM love global warming so much. I don't get it. Why are they so one-sided on this? |
I think it would be because of their general liberal bias...
Global warming places the little guy vs big businesses... I guess. It's the only answer I can think of. |
|
|
|
|
Alan A.
Joined: 31 Jul 2009
Posts: 237
votes: 4
Location: Western Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2009 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Besides, here's another big lie heard and read all over the place today: it's not the "warmest decade ever", it's the warmest decade on record (that is: only 150 years or so of temperature readings, which are contested by many because they were not taken in consistent conditions over those 150 years). And change the ten year window slices from zeros to fives (i.e 1995-2005 and so on) and you get a different picture.
May I also say that 150 years out of some 4 billion years of earth's history is 0.0000003%. That's not like "ever", now is it. And of the remaining 99.99999997% for which we don't have direct readings but only proxy data (e.g fossil records), well we know there was also glaciations and warm periods, some of the latter a lot warmer than now. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2009 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig wrote: | | Why does the MSM love global warming so much. I don't get it. Why are they so one-sided on this? |
I think that the more left-leaning elements of the MSM (which is, to say, probably 75% or more of the MSM, especially here in Canada) view "the environment" as the ultimate Achilles heel issue for conservatives. In particular, right now, the MSM widely views "the environment" as the only real chink in Prime Minister Stephen Harper's otherwise very firm armor.
The MSM loves pointing out how Stephen Harper is "a laggard" on the environment. They feel that this is the one issue that they can slag the Conservatives over the head with... and with impunity. |
|
|
|
|
DFP
Joined: 15 Dec 2009
Posts: 313
votes: 7
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Alan A. wrote: | Besides, here's another big lie heard and read all over the place today: it's not the "warmest decade ever", it's the warmest decade on record (that is: only 150 years or so of temperature readings, which are contested by many because they were not taken in consistent conditions over those 150 years). And change the ten year window slices from zeros to fives (i.e 1995-2005 and so on) and you get a different picture.
May I also say that 150 years out of some 4 billion years of earth's history is 0.0000003%. That's not like "ever", now is it. And of the remaining 99.99999997% for which we don't have direct readings but only proxy data (e.g fossil records), well we know there was also glaciations and warm periods, some of the latter a lot warmer than now. |
We've also only been around for the last 200k years, and that at the figurative year 1 point, life was not present on the planet.
but it's not like these *records* matter much in the long run. The planet will eventually scratch us off its back. |
|
|
|
|
Mac
Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 10:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig wrote: | | Why does the MSM love global warming so much. I don't get it. Why are they so one-sided on this? |
Aside from the leftard bias, I would suggest it's the drama. After all, fear and panic sell papers and their stock and profits have been dropping dramatically. As a result, they need controversy... they need strife... they need to wag the dog so they can shake some money out of our pockets.
-Mac |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mac wrote: | | Craig wrote: | | Why does the MSM love global warming so much. I don't get it. Why are they so one-sided on this? |
Aside from the leftard bias, I would suggest it's the drama. After all, fear and panic sell papers and their stock and profits have been dropping dramatically. As a result, they need controversy... they need strife... they need to wag the dog so they can shake some money out of our pockets.
-Mac |
Well. If they were concerned about profits you would think they would attempt to emulate Fox and shift right. They all (with the exception of the National Post) seem to falling over themselves to divvy up the Canadian left. |
|
|
|
|
DFP
Joined: 15 Dec 2009
Posts: 313
votes: 7
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Failing to understand what good journalism is should not be an excuse for picking favourites in the media that cater to your views.
Newspaper companies are there to serve the public good through accurate reporting of events. The process of reporting differs from journalist to journalist and from company to company for the simple reason that malignant interested parties influence fair and accurate reporting. This is as much true from the Left as it is the Right. Politics have no place in journalism, unfortunately this is not the case and partisanship has seriously tested the integrity of the major media sources.
An example of the differences can be explained through the lack of critical inquiry which is necessary for accurate reporting. If the reporters are just showing up to the scrums and grasping for tidbits of news from our own elected officials, then there is a problem with the accuracy of their work. |
|
|
|
|
Bugs
Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 1937
votes: 5
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 24, 2010 1:24 am Post subject: Re: This decade 'warmest on record' |
|
|
| potan wrote: | This has been today's biggest headline all over the MSM, that this is the warmest decade ever!
It turns out that.....
"the WMO said global temperatures were 0.44C (0.79F) above the long-term average"
We are going to spend possibly billions and trillions of dollars to fix 0.44C. |
Could your story be wrong?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/201.....n-the-usa/
Maybe somebody's cheating???
Can anyone explain? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 24, 2010 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SFrank85 wrote: | | I would like to see these numbers, because many other climatologists have been saying that the globe has been cooling since 1998. |
I believe that 1998 was the warmest year ever. By definition, you could say every year since the hottest is cooler. Its a lawyers argument, but it works. |
|
|
|
|
DFP
Joined: 15 Dec 2009
Posts: 313
votes: 7
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 24, 2010 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Since 1998, according to NCDC’s own figures, temperatures in the US have been dropping at a rate of more than 10 degrees F per century. |
oh right yes this makes sense. Since 1998, the NCDC figures indicate that the century in between 1998 and 2010 has seen a dramatic drop in temperatures of more than 10 degrees F.
It's pretty accurate to come up with a century-long trend if the sample is only 12 years. |
|
|
|
|
|
