Australian Politics Forum - Climate change is an Observational science

chicken_lipsforme

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7090
Townsville NQ
Gender: male

Re: Climate change is an Observational science
Reply #30 - May 24^th, 2011 at 6:50am

Maqqa wrote on May 23^rd, 2011 at 7:42pm:

Here's Observational Science and Peer Review in action

It won a freaking Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. To win this prize the report would have to pass panel of scientists who would have "checked" it for authenticity.

Yet the report was found to be false

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/un-says-sorry-for-glaci...

THE UN's top climate change body has issued an unprecedented apology over its flawed prediction that Himalayan glaciers were likely to disappear by 2035.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said yesterday the prediction in its landmark 2007 report was "poorly substantiated" and resulted from a lapse in standards. "In drafting the paragraph in question, the clear and well-established standards of evidence, required by the IPCC procedures, were not applied properly," the panel said.

"The chair, vice-chair and co-chairs of the IPCC regret the poor application of IPCC procedures in this instance."

The stunning admission is certain to embolden critics of the panel, which is already under fire over a separate scandal last year involving stolen emails that mentioned suppressing data to freeze out climate change sceptics.

The 2007 report, which won the panel the Nobel Peace Prize, said the probability of Himalayan glaciers "disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high".

It caused shock in Asia, where about two billion people depend on melted water from Himalayan glaciers for their supplies during the dry seasons.

It emerged last week that the prediction was based not on a consensus among climate change experts but on a media interview with a single Indian glaciologist in 1999.

That scientist, Syed Hasnain, has now said he never made such a specific forecast in his interview with New Scientist.

Oops, and this is 'peer reviewed' data.

Back to top

"Another boat, another policy failure from the Howard government"

Julia Gillard
Shadow Health Minister
2003.

IP Logged

progressiveslol Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 17029	Re: Climate change is an Observational science Reply #31 - May 24^th, 2011 at 7:46am With that report getting a nobel prize, you can tell what nuts and hopeless scientific direction we have to contend with.
Back to top	IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Climate change is an Observational science
Reply #32 - May 24^th, 2011 at 9:46am

progressiveslol wrote on May 23^rd, 2011 at 9:45pm:

astro_surf wrote on May 23^rd, 2011 at 9:19pm:

Maqqa wrote on May 23^rd, 2011 at 5:57pm:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observational_science

An observational science is a science where it is not possible to construct controlled experiments in the area under study. For example, in astronomy, it is not possible to create or manipulate stars or galaxies in order to observe what happens. [Other examples of necessarily observational sciences include geology, paleontology, epidemiology, and much of the social sciences.

Maqqa doesn't believe in heliocentrism, tectonic plates, dinosaurs or cancer either!

Maqqa really is a BIG smacking dimwit. Like a gibbering monkey. A BIG, one trick, gibbering monkey. Cheesy

Funny how real science manages to model their observations correctly. Church of climatology cant.

WHERE IS THE NEXT LEVEL 8 EARTHQUAKE GOING TO BE AND WHEN?

WHERE IS THE NEXT LEVEL 8 EARTHQUAKE GOING TO BE AND WHEN?

Grin

WHERE IS THE NEXT LEVEL 8 EARTHQUAKE GOING TO BE AND WHEN?

WHERE IS THE NEXT LEVEL 8 EARTHQUAKE GOING TO BE AND WHEN?

Grin

... answer ploooooooooooooooooooooooooooise! LIKE NOW!!! Cool

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Climate change is an Observational science
Reply #33 - May 24^th, 2011 at 9:54am

astro_surf wrote on May 23^rd, 2011 at 10:04pm:

progressiveslol wrote on May 23^rd, 2011 at 9:45pm:

Funny how real science manages to model their observations correctly. Church of climatology cant.

Ah, deniers, all lies and very little substance.

PROPAGANDA MUST BE SPEEDY!

SUBSTANCE WILL SLOW IT DOWN!!

don't laugh, it's true!!!! Cool

Nothing beats speed but speed yet with no substance it equals out to being a momentumless nothingness.

To survive it must actually be delivering some substance: that's how it engages people, by twisting what is actually fact!

Wink

**** COMMUNICATION BREAKDOWN IS ALWAYS THE SAME: LED ZEPPELIN TOLD THE WORLD THAT !!! Cool

****

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

astro_surf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2981	Re: Climate change is an Observational science Reply #34 - May 24^th, 2011 at 7:03pm chicken_lipsforme wrote on May 24^th, 2011 at 6:50am: Oops, and this is 'peer reviewed' data. Haha, no it wasn't! Such ignorance yet such strong opinions. Why? http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=international-science-panel-rec...
Back to top	Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 11^th, 2011 at 11:23am: So tell me, you'd like to see more and more craphouse coloured people in Australia right?&&Yeah good idea moron.&& IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Climate change is an Observational science
Reply #35 - May 24^th, 2011 at 7:37pm

astro_surf wrote on May 24^th, 2011 at 7:03pm:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on May 24^th, 2011 at 6:50am:

Oops, and this is 'peer reviewed' data.

Haha, no it wasn't! Grin

Such ignorance yet such strong opinions. Why?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=international-science-panel-rec...

Funny enough, this mob will trot out any propaganda to keep the fearmongering going. They dont care where is came from as long as it says the world is DOOOOOMED.

IPCC, what a joke.

Back to top

IP Logged

creep

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1881

Re: Climate change is an Observational science
Reply #36 - May 24^th, 2011 at 7:40pm

Maqqa wrote on May 23^rd, 2011 at 6:02pm:

This is meant for you to understand on some of the methodology used to come up with these so called "undeniable proof"

Facts are the IPCC is stacked with leftist environmentalist nuts or those who have a vested interest in supporting the ALP - therefore the IPCC is a sham!!

Yes, the ICCP use simple 'models' and they are based on the assumption that water vapour does not lead to clouds!

What the!!!

As the ICCP claim that Co2 results in increased water vapour (from the earth heating the water) but then claim that that water vapour does not in kind lead to increased cloud cover.
Then where's the water vapour go?????????????/

The reason that the ICCP claim that the increased water vapour doesnt result in increased clouds is because the ICCP and their house full of global warmists admit that more clouds will destroy the global warming claim.

So...simply remove from the model the fact of increased water vapour results in an increase in cloud cover and now thats how you get global warming!

So what happens to the increased water vapour that the ICCP advises does happen, where's the increased water vapour go again???????????

Back to top

IP Logged

astro_surf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2981	Re: Climate change is an Observational science Reply #37 - May 24^th, 2011 at 8:20pm creep wrote on May 24^th, 2011 at 7:40pm: Yes, the ICCP use simple 'models' and they are based on the assumption that water vapour does not lead to clouds! You're a big, lying, ignorant fool. http://www.google.com.au/search?rlz=1C1CHKB_en-GBAU430AU431&sourceid=chrome&ie=U...
Back to top	Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 11^th, 2011 at 11:23am: So tell me, you'd like to see more and more craphouse coloured people in Australia right?&&Yeah good idea moron.&& IP Logged

perceptions_now

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: male

Re: Climate change is an Observational science
Reply #38 - May 24^th, 2011 at 10:59pm

creep wrote on May 24^th, 2011 at 7:40pm:

Maqqa wrote on May 23^rd, 2011 at 6:02pm:

This is meant for you to understand on some of the methodology used to come up with these so called "undeniable proof"

Facts are the IPCC is stacked with leftist environmentalist nuts or those who have a vested interest in supporting the ALP - therefore the IPCC is a sham!!

Yes, the ICCP use simple 'models' and they are based on the assumption that water vapour does not lead to clouds!

What the!!!

As the ICCP claim that Co2 results in increased water vapour (from the earth heating the water) but then claim that that water vapour does not in kind lead to increased cloud cover.
Then where's the water vapour go?????????????/

The reason that the ICCP claim that the increased water vapour doesnt result in increased clouds is because the ICCP and their house full of global warmists admit that more clouds will destroy the global warming claim.

So...simply remove from the model the fact of increased water vapour results in an increase in cloud cover and now thats how you get global warming!

So what happens to the increased water vapour that the ICCP advises does happen, where's the increased water vapour go again???????????

The IPCC being
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is a scientific intergovernmental body tasked with reviewing and assessing the most recent scientific, technical and socio-economic information produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of climate change. It provides the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic consequences, notably the risk of climate change caused by human activity.

The panel was first established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), two organizations of the United Nations—an action confirmed on 6 December 1988 by the United Nations General Assembly through Resolution 43/53. The IPCC shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former Vice President of the United States Al Gore.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_Panel_on_Climate_Change

The ICCP being
an International group of companies, with vested interests, which is fronted by one Lord Monckton who isn't really a lord, at all.
http://www.iccp.net/membership.html

Who members include -
3M Company
Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute
Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric Policy
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers
Association of International Automobile Manufacturers
Arkema
Boeing
Carrier
CH2M Hill
Dow Chemical
DuPont
General Electric
General Motors
Hewlett Packard
Honeywell
Intel Corporation
Japan Fluorocarbon Manufacturers Association
Kodak
Natsource
United Technologies
World Energy
York International

This is no Scientific organisation, it is a simple front, which is pretty much what Monckton is!
==============================

What we've got here, is failure to communicate (honestly)!

First, Maqqa suggests by association that the IPCC is a Greens/ALP front
and a sham,
when it is actually an organisation established by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations, which collates the views of reputable scientists, worldwide!

Then, the Creep turns IPCC into ICCP
, pretends they are the same and goes of on another insane & incorrect tangent!

Lies & misdirection, should be noted!

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Climate change is an Observational science
Reply #39 - May 25^th, 2011 at 12:02am

reputable

The scare campaign mantra "reputable". There is nothing reputable about the science that still says, deep down, if we are wrong, because we may be, then we have still done the right thing, because if we are right, because we may be, then the earth will get a bit hotter (or is that the earth will burn in flames) and to have fruit loops on here and many other places, try to tell us it is fact about the AGW.

Back to top

IP Logged