Are you now, or have you ever been, a denier of AGW?

[AE 87]

No. I could not get it to open and gave up.

Nothing happened when you clicked on the words, "this link" ?

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Nothing happened when you clicked on the words, "this link" ?

No. I will try again and tell you what it says.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

O.K., it finally opened.
It was probably my cable service. For some reason which I do not understand our internet speed seems to come and go. Sometimes links do not open with repeated efforts and sometimes streaming movies stop cold. Other times every thing I do through cable moves right along.

I suspect we have had this discussion before but is it safe to say you do not find the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to be a reliable source on global warming?

 

[AE 87]

O.K., it finally opened.
It was probably my cable service. For some reason which I do not understand our internet speed seems to come and go. Sometimes links do not open with repeated efforts and sometimes streaming movies stop cold. Other times every thing I do through cable moves right along.

I suspect we have had this discussion before but is it safe to say you do not find the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to be a reliable source on global warming?

You are right that we've had that discussion before. I want to move beyond it. I would like to hear your reaction to the reporting in the link.

I don't mean that you have to accept it as authority. Please introduce other data you find as part of your reaction. I am interested in your reaction to the data that suggests Mann was cooking the books and that the "consensus" lobby has not rejected him.

It would be helpful if you could provide an example of where you respect support given (without censure) to a comparably errant scientist with whom you disagree.

 

[AE 87]

@OldJacketFan it's been a few days since I responded to your post. I was wondering if you had a chance to look at it and whether you now agree that @Whiskey_Clear was probably right in his assessment.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

You are right that we've had that discussion before. I want to move beyond it. I would like to hear your reaction to the reporting in the link.

I don't mean that you have to accept it as authority. Please introduce other data you find as part of your reaction. I am interested in your reaction to the data that suggests Mann was cooking the books and that the "consensus" lobby has not rejected him.

It would be helpful if you could provide an example of where you respect support given (without censure) to a comparably errant scientist with whom you disagree.

Bear with me.
I have two big conferences I am getting ready for, one in Maine and one in Atlanta, so it may be a few weeks before I can get to this.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Lol....I still haven't read much of the document I posted a link to....read the forward but that's about it so far....hopefully soon.

 

[OldJacketFan]

@OldJacketFan it's been a few days since I responded to your post. I was wondering if you had a chance to look at it and whether you now agree that @Whiskey_Clear was probably right in his assessment.

@AE 87 I have already said I'm not qualified to address it or any of the responses. Thanks

 

[awbuzz]

View attachment 1246 View attachment 1247

Thanks for the images. I have told folks that back in the 70s we were to freeze to death in the near future.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

@OldJacketFan

I ain't qualified either but I'm less reserved in offering inexpert opinions . Fwiw I think we have had a pretty amicable discussion on it. Me and @Northeast Stinger have pretty opposed views on the matter. I respect his take, opinions, and info he has provided putting forth his side. His side gives me more things to consider in forming my own opinions. That opinion hasn't changed much yet but ya never know.

 

[MWT89]

Regarding the letter to the University of Colorado, are they legally required to respond? Though unlikely and probably foolish, what would have happened if Colorado had refused? I don't see anything in the letter that implies a response to the request for information is mandated by law.

 

[AE 87]

NASA Goddard: Just because the data doesn't match the narrative doesn't mean that the narrative is wrong
http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...shock-study-antarctica-growing-not-shrinking/

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

So the alarmists....are wrong again on another piece of the pie....but expect us to buy into their analysis of the whole pie.

Yeah let's wreck the economy just in case.

 

[AE 87]

It could be getting interesting soon ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ena-commerce-secretary-to-get-noaa-documents/

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Just means more servers are being erased....one would think the administration will do a better job cleaning them going forward.....hell....they will probably just start lighting them on fire now.

 

[awbuzz]

Would setting them on fire add CO2 to the atmoshpere and doom us all?

 

[AE 87]

Mark Steyn puts issue in Political Context

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Well I think it's been over a decade, or nearly, since a major hurricane has struck the U.S. mainland. Wasn't AGW supposed to bring about a rash of such catastrophic events? Isn't that why arguments were made to spend so much money on AGW and block domestic production of fossil fuels? Just another BS prediction from the much acclaimed but inaccurate weather forecasting models.

There is some activity brewing off Cuba now....and gulf waters are very warm. Maybe the models just jumped the gun a bit. On a serious note I hope it doesn't evolve into anything major. Cat 2s and less can cause plenty of damage themselves depending on where they strike.