BS: Palin v. Gore...

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 06:00 PM

Well, lemme see, now. With the Arctic Sea ice melting, polar bears will no longer be able to go after their main diet, seals, by waiting at a seal's blow hole and grabbing it. With no ice to walk on, the bears will have to take to the land to seek for provender.

Maybe some nice, cuddly polar bear will come along, grab sweet Sarah, and eat her all down.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 05:44 PM

"By Robert Matthews
Published: 12:00AM GMT 14 Jan 2001

FRESH doubt has been cast on evidence for global warming "

FRESH doubt?? 2001?

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 04:41 PM

Global warming claims 'based on false data'

By Robert Matthews
Published: 12:00AM GMT 14 Jan 2001

FRESH doubt has been cast on evidence for global warming following the discovery that a key method of measuring temperature change has exaggerated the warming rate by almost 40 per cent.

Studies of temperature records dating back more than a century have seemed to indicate a rise in global temperature of around 0.5°C, with much of it occurring since the late 1970s. This has led many scientists to believe that global warming is under way, with the finger of blame usually pointed at man-made pollution such as carbon dioxide.


Related Articles
Alps may crumble as permafrost melts
Scientists' discoveries give lie to doom-monger predictions
BBC abandons 'impartiality' on warming
Climate change to cause rise in kidney stones
Global warming to push London temperatures up to 105F
Global warming and a tale of two planetsNow an international team of scientists, including researchers from the Met Office in Bracknell, Berkshire, has found serious discrepancies in these temperature measurements, suggesting that the amount of global warming is much less than previously believed.

The concern focuses on the temperature of the atmosphere over the sea, which covers almost three quarters of the Earth's surface. While scientists use standard weather station instruments to detect warming on land, they have been forced to rely on the crews of ships to make measurements over the vast ocean regions.

Crews have taken the temperature by dipping buckets into the sea or using water flowing into the engine intakes. Scientists have assumed that there is a simple link between the temperature of seawater and that of the air above it.

However, after analysing years of data from scientific buoys in the Pacific that measure sea and air temperatures simultaneously, the team has found no evidence of a simple link. Instead, the seawater measurements have exaggerated the amount of global warming over the seas, with the real temperature having risen less than half as fast during the 1970s than the standard measurements suggest.

Reporting their findings in the influential journal Geophysical Research Letters, the scientists say that the exact cause of the discrepancy is not known. One possibility is that the atmosphere responded faster than the sea to cooling events such as volcanic eruptions.

The findings have major implications for the climate change debate because the sea temperature measurements are a key part of global warming calculations. According to the team, replacing the standard seawater data with the appropriate air data produces a big cut in the overall global warming rate during the last 20 years, from around 0.18°C per decade to 0.13°C.

This suggests that the widely-quoted global warming figure used to persuade governments to take action over greenhouse gases exaggerates the true warming rate by almost 40 per cent. The team is now calling for climate experts to switch from seawater data to sea-air temperature measurements.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 04:35 PM

This may help Ms Sarah's case
false GW data

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: Louie Roy
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 04:16 PM

You have described Al Gore very well remember he is the one who invented the internet

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 11:56 AM

Sarah Palin is that unusual character one runs into on occasion. Stupid yet glib. It's a dangerous combination because they string words together just well enough to sound like they might have a brain driving the mouth. Alas, it is simply methane gas and hot air propelling those muscles.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: pdq
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 11:53 AM

Sarah Palin and Al Gore were both journalism majors (at one time) in college.

Sarah Palin has a four degree in journalism.

Al Gore changed his attentions to poly sci, but his bachelors degree is said to be in "government". He also was classified as a "journalist" during his three months in Viet Nam.

Both these people are trained writers and word-slingers. It's the content of those words that is quite different.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: olddude
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 11:52 AM

She can Russia, so maybe one of those great Russian authors penned it!
Come on Bobster, and Amos how about a "Sarah Palin Blues song?

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 11:25 AM

Come on, Amos... Do you really thing that Ms. Sarah wrote that op-ed??? I doubt it seriously... The grammer and spellin' was too perfect even for the accomplished journalist/author that she is...

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: olddude
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 09:47 AM

Amos,
sure is, but what would big oil do if we all got 50+ miles per gallon on our cars and we all started to rethink all of it.   When you are in bed with big oil as she is... the denial approach is all that remains.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 09:43 AM

First all the Republicans were saying there is no global warming.

Next, they said there is global warming, but it is natural, not caused by humans.

Next they will be saying there is global warming, and it is caused by humans, but it might actually be a good thing.

(There is at least one guy who is already saying this. Unfortunately I can't remember his name.)

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: Amos
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 09:17 AM

esterday, the Washington Post published a "falsehood-laden" op-ed by Sarah Palin attacking the science underpinning climate change. In her piece, Palin cast doubt on the science of global warming, stating that she "recognize[s]" global warming as merely "cyclical environmental trends" that are unrelated to the burning of fossil fuels. Responding to Palin's misinformation about climate change science, Al Gore said yesterday:

    The deniers are persisting in an era of unreality. The entire North Polar ice cap is disappearing before our eyes. What do they think is happening? [...] It's a principle in physics. It's like gravity, it exists.

In turn, Palin responded on her Facebook, writing incredulously:

    However, he's wrong in calling me a 'denier.' As I noted in my op-ed above and in my original Facebook post on Climategate, I have never denied the existence of climate change. I just don't think we can primarily blame man's activities for the earth's cyclical weather changes.

Both claims — that she's never denied climate change and that she's always doubted anthropogenic causes — are untrue. As early as last month, she was indeed denying the existence of climate change. Unable to understand the science, she asked Rush Limbaugh: "Are we warming or are we cooling?" And merely 15 months ago, Palin told voters during the 2008 campaign that human activity is contributing to climate change:

    PALIN: I belive that man's activities can certainly be contributing to the issue of global warming and climate change.



While warming temperatures — caused by the burning of fossil fuels — are prompting the bark beetle to devour a chunk of forest the size of Connecticut in Alaska, Palin is more interested in throwing political bombs. Like her phony "death panels" designed to kill health reform, Palin is making a mockery of science in order to stop clean energy reform.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 09:01 AM

Oh, come on, ya'll... She's just planted a left hook up under the jaw of Al Gore and he's on the ropes hangin' on fir dear life... Don't discount Ms. Sarah... Heck, if she's even close in the polls the month before the election she'll pose nude for Playboy and the rest will be history...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: olddude
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 08:51 AM

I would not expect anything different from her. I have a friend who is all excited about her and told me she will win in 2012 because she represents the real Americans ... Gosh .. that is a scary thought ... If that is really the case, we are in a lot more trouble then I think we are. Somehow, I believe he is pretty much wrong on his assumption.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 08:46 AM

Can someone plesee change the title of this thread to "Palin vs. Reality"

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 08:34 AM

Well, art, ya' gotta admit that Sarah is ahead on points right now...

Subject: RE: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: artbrooks
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 08:22 AM

Hummm - the Nobel Prize vs the Ignoble Princess. A true battle of the wits when one side is completely unarmed. Al needs a more worthy challenger; I'd suggest Joe the Plumber.

Subject: BS: Palin v. Gore...
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 07:54 AM

Well, this one oughta be fun to watch...

Palin says that global warming exists but has nuthin' to do with human behavior...

Gore says that like gravity it is not debatable that human behavior is causing global warming...

Palin shoots back that global warming is like gravity: a natural occurance...

Al???

B~