Given your quote from Schneider above I thought you might enjoy this (hat tip: Not PC). May favourites were all the ones where he goes on about global cooling, back in 1978, before his big career change, he declared

“There is a finite possibility that a serious worldwide cooling could befall the Earth within the next 100 years.”…….

and

“….our calculations suggest a decrease in global temperature by as much as 3.5 degrees Celsius. Such a large decrease in the average temperature of Earth, sustained over a period of a few years, is believed to be sufficient to trigger an ice age.”

Not PC has a hilarious list of “when we were cooling” vs “when we were warming” quotes from him. The common theme is apocalyptic. Of course it’s not surprising when you read this comment from him:

Looking at every bump and wiggle of the record is a waste of time – it’s like trying to figure out the probability of a pair of dice by looking at the individual rolls. You’ve got to look at averages. So, I don’t set very much store in looking at the direct evidence.

Classic stuff – looks like he needs a remedial stats course from Wegman as well! You’ll note that the question that Julian Simon asked in general is never asked by the warmists:

Does this sort of person ever stop and ask himself such questions as: Why should anyone believe me now if I was so wrong then? Would it have been a good thing if I had then been more effective in getting the public’s attention? What about if I had stretched the truth then as I now advocate doing – would that have been a good thing?

And it doesn’t take a lot to find that all the objections raised by the AGW deniers are dealt with in the high profile works like the IPCC reports and those of majr institutions like the NOAA and NASA (and whose works are often distorted and misrepresented).

So do you deny that Sir John Houghton, first chairman of IPCC said:
“Unless we announce disasters no one will listen.”

Against that backdrop if you choose to blindly accept anything emanating from the IPCC, despite evidence of data tampering, selective data-set adoption and other junk-science activities then you are a fool.

revisionist history has a long and proud history, dating all the back to perhaps 700BC – the time period of the earliest tracts of that wonderful work of historical accuracy, the Bible.

I don’t claim t be the font of all knowledge. I enjoy valid objections and concede when I have clearly mispoke or simply have been proved factually incorrect. Credibility is neither here nor there amongst a bunch of anonymous ranters to cowardly to put their names up for all to see.

And it doesn’t take a lot to find that all the objections raised by the AGW deniers are dealt with in the high profile works like the IPCC reports and those of majr institutions like the NOAA and NASA (and whose works are often distorted and misrepresented).

What puzzles me more is the psychology behind this line of thinking. A seeming willingness to strum a ukulele while the storm clouds gather.

Hurf: And as far as the corruption chart goes, I would say the US is kindly dealt with because the worst corruption there is the legalised corruption by which members of the Houses of Congress raise their funds. But that’s just an opinion.

I agree with some of Lazlo’s ideas but not others – especially not ends/starts of ages and cycles and target dates for great or terrible things. Time is an ongoing thing, sure there are cycles but our (or Mayan) calendars are meaningless with nature.

Note in the Mayan link:

Mainstream Mayanist scholars argue that the idea that the Long Count calendar “ends” in 2012 misrepresents Maya history. To the modern Maya, 2012 is largely irrelevant

To me 2012 is just another spin around the sun, no one can predict what good or bad or ordinary things may happen in that particular year or any other year. Event predictions have been totally unreliable. No one can foretell the future.

No one in mainstream climate science is predicting any year for anything specific for effects of climate change, it’s all just a bunch of possibilities and probabilities. There are certain things, the climate will fluctuate, there will be storms and droughts and floods. If there are significant climate changes for any reason it could be sudden or gradual, sooner or later, no one knows for certain.

That peer reviewed scientific data . . .
Yeah.
Ok.
Sure.
*roll eyes*
Whatever.

If you want to garner even some form of credibility on this site, desist with the platitudinous white-liberal-guilt-progressive-minded talking points.
( As if your revisionist take on Islam & the Crusades isn’t a strong enough emetic)

The US is rated the 19th most corrupt country in the world, according to a new report. That’s just gotta be crap. The place reeks of corruption. and the SPPI is but one example. The US Supreme Court even split down strictly party lines to decide a president!

Look above for my earlier posts on the Arctic and Antartica.

Maybe I should give you his name D4J, and the address on Main Street, Oxford, North Canterbury he lives. Then you can go and smash his face in, in person.

Well, disprove the data. Prove the models. Go for it. It is always good to work with actual data as opposed to politically motivated “models”

The link: http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monthly_report/sppi_monthly_co2_report_july.html

The IPCC assumes CO2 concentration will reach 836 ppmv by 2100, but, for almost eight years, CO2 concentration has headed straight for only 570 ppmv by 2100. This alone halves all of the IPCC’s temperature projections. Pages 5-6.

Since 1980 temperature has risen at only 2.5 °F (1.5 °C)/century, not the 7 F° (3.9 C°) the IPCC imagines. Pages 7-9.

Sea level rose just 8 inches in the 20th century and has been rising at just 1 ft/century since 1993. Sea level has scarcely risen since 2006. Also, Pacific atolls are not being drowned by the sea, as some have suggested. Pages 10-12.

Arctic sea-ice extent is about the same as it has been at this time of year in the past decade. In the Antarctic, sea ice extent – on a 30-year rising trend – reached a record high in 2007. Global sea ice extent shows little trend for 30 years. Pages 13-15.

Hurricane and tropical-cyclone activity is at its lowest since satellite measurement began. Page 16.

Solar activity has declined again, after a large sunspot earlier in the month. The Sun is still very quiet. Pages 17-18.

Science Focus this month studies the effect of the Sun on the formation of clouds. IT’S THE SUN, STUPID! Pages 22-23.

As always, there’s our “global warming” ready reckoner, and our monthly selection of scientific papers. Pages 24-27.

And finally, a Technical Note explains how we compile our state-of-the-art CO2 and temperature graphs. Page 28.

poor old d4j was once besotted by a young woman by the name of Kirsty, last name I will not reveal, but it wasn’t Bentley. Anyhoo, I can’t blame him for being besotted, she was a charmer, attractive, intelligent, athletic and going places. Sadly for d4j, she chose to go those places with me, and the pooor old sould has never quite gotten over the heartbreak of losing her to me.

Who is predicting doom in x year Mike

Pete – re 2012. Check out this – Worldshift 2010, by Dr Ervin Laszlo, Founder and President of The Club of Budapest, Author of WorldShift 2012: Making Green Business, New Politics & Higher Consciousness Work Together.

The window of opportunity for shifting our current path and breaking through to a peaceful
and sustainable world may be no more than a few years from now. This timeline coincides
with the many forecasts and prophecies that speak of the ending of the current cycle of
human life on this planet, and the possible dawning of a new consciousness, by the end of
the year 2012.

The Club Of Budapest is an offshoot of the Club of Rome. Dec 21, 2012 is a significant date in the Mayan calendar.

It’s funny that Puke is the only one here who watches MSNBC opinion shows.

I do not “advocate” for extreme toture of prisonors, that is a world apart from my suggestion that the option be given exclusively to the family of the innocent victims of henious brutal murderers that you people so passionatley defend and champion

and you advocate extreme torture of prisoners..

pick any one of those as reason for the silence..

you will be totally deluded as well.. if you see/read that silence as agreement to the drivel you write..

eh..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)

hot usually refers to women of similar calibre to nat portman, sophia bush , insert victorias secret model here etc

each to their own i guess..