Off Topic Dark Matter and other Astronomy information.

There you go yet again...

You're a complete expert I know **** all, your standard MO.

You admitted last night that you'd barely looked into yourself, and now you're the all knowing being on the subject. 3 minute expert indeed.

There's conflicting opinion and a scarcity of hard facts around on the net loss of the rain forests. The link I posted is the most comprehensive I could see. Is it important to keep the pressure up to reduce the destruction in light of what information is currently available? Imo yes, for a whole host of reasons that go beyond merely the CO2 debate.

 

Makes me laugh, UK has cleared much of it's forests over the centuries as has Europe and the US.

The poor Brazilians, Africans and Sumatrans clear some rain forest for a better life and there is outrage from first world progressives. Most of it internet rage, as they (raging progressives) never even planted one plant in their lives

While there is so much global rain forest as to cover Europe a few times over. But that doesn't stop progressive rage on the internet.
maybe they should go live in Brazil without a job or income, see if they resort to cutting down trees to build a farm... to survive.

Modernisation will mean less and less will choose farming, it's been happening for decades, where economics will allow.

Take away the wages and cushy life of a guardian reader, and give them nothing but their own wits to survive, they'll be cutting down trees in 5 minutes flat.

Such sickening delusion and hypocrisy

 

#Green
These are the new forests in the UK

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

Why cant those poor people be like us and have lovely forests..
#beautiful

 

This would make great forest land.

please log in to view this image

#scotland
#blamebrazilians

 

save the planet, burning wind turbines are not that uncommon. This one mitigated the emissions prevented from all the others around it.

please log in to view this image

 

Clear forests and nature and put up wind farms
#savetheplanet

please log in to view this image

Clear forest to survive, bad, clear forest for green first world smugness that causes more pollution that it ever mitigates.. good.

#hypocrisy

 

I honestly think progressive ideology is mental disorder. It's an ideology that aggressively attacks anything that contradicts it, cos if you don't agree with a progressive outlook you are therefor evil and want to destroy the planet and you are "not thinking of the children".

Practicality and facts often have no place in progressive thinking. Proven by having facts met with claims of "oil shill"

So I work for Exxon and Putin it seems

 

Germans have been cutting down trees because of fuel poverty because of Germany's mad rush into wind energy.

The Germans launched into massively subsidised wind and solar power with power prices rising 80 per cent in real terms in little over a decade. Unable to pay skyrocketing power bills, 800,000 German households have been disconnected from the grid
http://stopthesethings.com/2014/04/22/wind-power-costs-send-germans-back-to-the-stone-age/

 

How many British have been cut off? Thanks to saving the planet 100 years from now based on pseudoscience

Smug academic progressives can pay their bills, so they dont mind

 

Yep. that was a trick my late dad used to do after I read an article in the Telegraph decades ago debunking, or so they thought, rising sea levels. We were having as whisky and i demonstrated the indisputable fact, as i thought, by marking my glass (you always had to anyway, in our house!) and thought the case proven when the ice melted and the level went down. My dad took my niece's Tommy Tippee beaker, that had a sort of ledge on the side, and packed it with ice cubes, both in the water and outside on the ledge, marked the level and we observed when the ice had melted. You know the result. And my niece grew up with insatiable need for ice in her Southern Comfort too.

Look, can't find a YouTube link, but bore alert - Donga's going to quote the Apollo astronauts again. If you ever get a chance watch In The Shadow Of The Moon, a documentary film made by Ron Howard a decade ago. It's not just for Apollo obsessives like me - I've known people completely disinterested in the moon-landings get wistful and emotional about it too. In it, Alan Bean, LMP of 12, talks about returning to earth and appreciating wether, including snow and storms, and just watching people in the rain and the wind and suchlike, completely oblivious to the alternative of utter desolation out there. Mike Collins talks about returning to the total paradise of a deep blue Pacific Ocean, and what a fantastic planet this is we inhabit. We went to the moon to discover the earth indeed.

Our home IS Heaven. We can't do everything, but we should do everything we can for future generations, regardless of how we got to this point.

Right, off my soapbox to walk the dog and feed the horses their lucky carrots before the game so that we win. You can't argue with science!

 

The telegraph is full of ballsack The last place you go for your climate arguments in the media, the right will deny it and the left will insist it is true, and both lie their arses off.

Long term, look at that melting over 14000 years ago, Fred Flintstone's SUV

please log in to view this image

More recent.
Note the rate of rise is slightly lower now than before man made CO2 was an "issue" Of course just before this chart there was the little ice age that ended mid to late 1800s.

please log in to view this image

When they switched from tide gauges to satellites the rate of measured increase was doubled.They never even considered the rise in rate could be the change in measurement systems.. convenient

please log in to view this image

Every single alteration to data and measurement always leads to a worsening scenario, temp, ocean warming, ocean rises.. all very convenient

 

Temps, now I get better measurement of recent record with better tech, so you could justify that sort of, but the cooling of the past is where half of the claimed warming comes from.

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

and of course, the southern hemisphere record is entirely made up

 

If you alter the original price of your first company shares to a lower price in your ledgers, you can fabricate the fiction that your share price increase to the current price was greater.

They did the same with temp to show more warming than measured.
Cos people from 1880 to 1960 could not read thermometers right apparently

 

Changes to NCDC US temperatures from 1991 to 2014

please log in to view this image

Changes to GISS Iceland temperatures between V2 and V3

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

2014 : Data.GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis

2012 : Data.GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

NCDC has dramatically cooled pre-1963 Northern Hemisphere temperatures since the 1975 National Academy of Sciences report.

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

NCDC changes

please log in to view this image

 

#conspiracyloonconspiracy

 

Here is a plot of just alterations to data, see a trend?

please log in to view this image

This means that if this mathematical process continued for a thousand years, this adjustment would be increased to several degrees added per dot as each adjustment is a % increment relative to the temp. It diverges from reality by design

To simplify, the longer this time series would run, the biggest and bigger the added "adjustment " temperature gets. Run it long enough and it would be 100 degree adjustments added to measured temp per adjustment. Or, the longer it runs the more adjustments will diverge from measurement, simply put

#fraud

 

Here is the temperature difference between raw data (measurements) and adjustments.

please log in to view this image

As I say, half of global warming is fiction, from adjusting measurement data to suit the agenda, political, not science. Been saying .6 degrees added by cooling the past and adding to current temps (no data for over half the planet for surface temps btw, and much more is estimated when data is there)

Lets not forget, NOAA are now being investigated.

please log in to view this image

Being sued for it now, government agency refuses to give up emails to congress. Why one might ask. If they are honest and not lying and there is no political interference in science what have they to hide?

Now after checking the funding source of every skeptic scientist, the same creeps are moaning because Congress wants the funding sources of the alarmist science. Citing academic freedom, academic freedom that they didn't afford the skeptic scientists

measurement is empirical, best science can offer, to 0.1 degrees of accuracy. Computer models in the hands of environmental lefties are not empirical, I try explaining this but no one listens

 

Here is the Goddard institute director, environmentalist and politically appointed. Calling for a global carbon tax.

Tell me how his ideology not interfere with his science. Carbon tax instead of action, only a banker puppet would say that. He's no climatologist, he is a mathematician, appointed by a politician, this is not science.. see Lysenkoism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism

And I quote "warming is caused by humans" This is what he says in that video, not some, not almost all, just warming. Utter nonsense. Not science at all, pseudo science

Complete ****ing fraud, this guy is a prick.

he even wrote a solar physics paper, to refute solar physicists both past and present from Cern and all like, the neck of him.

Even though solar physicists say he got basic things wrong (cos it's not his field) do the IPCC go with solar physicists for their data, nope, they had 1, and Schmidt, to refute past giants of the field and current top scientists, top scientists who the greenies attacked. #science

 

Bloody hell Sisu. No disrespect but you turn this thread into a spamfest.

There's no chance someone like me can read all that, let alone follow it, let alone understand what half of it means!

 

It's not spam if you read the ****ing things, I spammed a few wind turbine examples yes but the nasa data altering is not spam neither is anything else