Re: HowTheWorldWorks, Tree Ring Proxies & Hacked Climate Emails

[HumbleWillis]

Ice core samples have proven that more than 90% of the last 10K years have been WARMER than current temperatures by an average of about 5 degrees F. About 1000 years ago we had the Medieval Warm Period, which was warmer than now. 400 years ago we had The Little Ice Age, which plunged global temperatures for a few hundred years. Since then global temperatures have been gradually warming ... not just since the industrial revolution. We're SUPPOSED to be warming!

[dingo2306]

It's funny.... about 40 years ago the was a scientific concenses that we we heading into another Ice Age. The first Earth Day was used to create awareness of this. Now the new generation is screaming about global warming. Gee, i wonder whats next???

[Richard482]

@dingo2306 Nope, your wrong on that.

watch?v=EU_AtHkB4Ms&feature=ch­annel_video_title

watch?v=iG-hCar-GTo

[Illumified]

sorry but both you and lee r wrong what matters is "weather"climate change is actually happening and not in a 10 yr 200 or 10 million period but because of us, in the last 5000 yrs the minoan and roman warm periods still beat our temps, those from the greenland icecore temps, global warming may be happening but it wont last long and its good for life and biodiversity

[ThinkAbout1t]

@Illumified No... weather is an instant, like how the climate has behaved over a short period of time... like a month, or a year.

Climate is the amalgamation of approx. a decade, and to understand climate trends you'd need to go farther back still.

And where are you getting the roman and minoan temps from? Greenland ice core? I can't find anything to substantiate that.

[Illumified]

@ThinkAbout1t I meant weather as a pun, I get what the difference between weather and climate is. The point was that there has been hotter and colder than it is now constantly and wether we r the cause of it. thoughout history if you look at the last 400,000yrs from the Vostok Ice cores youll see at least 4 periods with warmer temp that show a pattern that we just happen to fall directly into. that aside warmer climates r good for biodiversity, not the other way around

[ThinkAbout1t]

@Illumified We don't fall into it at all. We completely break out of it. CO2 balance is entirely disrupted, and temperature is predicted to follow.

[Illumified]

@ThinkAbout1t over the last 400,000 yrs there have been 4 periods when co2 has increased consistently for 800 yrs while temperature steadily decreased, so how does that work exactly??

[Aanthanur]

@Illumified I get what the difference between weather and climate is.

no you don0t as you take LOCAL measurements and seem to believe you can just take those as global temperature proxies, no you cant, there are actually resent peer reviewed papers that look at it in a global scale and today it is warmer.

[Illumified]

@Aanthanur "no you don0t as you take LOCAL measurements and seem to believe you can just take those as global temperature proxies" , do you know me, have we ever met?? I didnt think so , so how the hell would you know what I look at or study or know, the answer you dont. 2nd "papers that look at it in a global scale and today it is warmer" warmer than when exactly, the last 10 yrs, 150 yrs 2000 yrs, 400,000 yrs or since the existence of the planet? has it never ever been warmer on this planet.

[Aanthanur]

@Illumified yeah sure it was warmer on this planet in the past, what is your point?

[camcheck]

@ThinkAbout1t Then you should Bing SCIENCESKEPTICAL MWP . Most Peer-reviewed studies show the earth to be warmer before Fossil fuel use. "IPCC peer review " just ignores it. NOT very scientific of them.

[Richard482]

@camcheck What icecores tell us about the MWP

watch?v=ANhzWyYOeyY&feature=fe­edrec_grec_index

[Aanthanur]

@Illumified minoan and roman warm periods were not global. on a global scale, temperature average is higher today as it was during the MWP

[QuestionReadLearn]

how much do you think lee gets payed to make these attack/propoganda videos?



[AxisMundiOnline]

Nice vid, thanks.

[awfulnhead]

thank you very much for these videos, howtheworldworks i think deliberately misinforms his audience of the nuance in the issues he purports to understand, but my opinion is not fact as you say, thanks again!

[PlasteredDragon]

Subbed. How the World Works is a mouthpiece.

[GBS990]

Follow the money, it leads to the data.

[TheMaximumoverload]

This video is fails!

[hyperseauton]

Leave HowtheWorldWorks alone...leave him alone!

[ThinkAbout1t]

@hyperseauton lol

[DarkwingScooter]

The notion of the medieval warm period existed long before. The first I heard of it was in an old book. That was in the eighties.

[DarkwingScooter]

I think that the medieval warm period is a well established fact, I have never seen any data arguing for it's removal.

I am not sure where you get your 400million year figure from, but one thing is for sure: The CO2 levels was an order of magnitude higher at earlier periods, the very fact that there was no runaway green-house then shows that it is hardly plausible to believe there will be one now.

There are real problems facing us, big ones, and pollution is one of them. CO2 is not.

[DarkwingScooter]

Now start the series at 1050...

15 years is not a decent scale, but neither is 150.

Aligning with previous data does not science, you can find an infinite number of stories that explain a given set of facts, including known random ones. Science is ONLY, and let me reiterate O-N-L-Y forecasts.

Adjusting present facts to match a theory which explains past facts is in no way shape or form scientific practice, ever. It is fraud.

[ilikenoodles1]

It's NOT reliable! They made it up! Why don't you just accept it!

[ThinkAbout1t]

@ilikenoodles1 For what reason do you suspect it's not reliable? If you can't think of a good one, question why you commented as such, you might be suprised.

[ilikenoodles1]

We all know what the emails said. Hacked, leaked, whatever, I don't care, but we all know what they said: "Hide the decline." They had a METHOD for hiding the fact that global warming is a JOKE! And after throwing their skeptical counterparts out on their asses for questioning them... for shame

[ZangaroZen]

@ilikenoodles1, what emails?

Many 1000s from over 10 years ago?

--or--

A few quote mined emails taken from those many 1000s?

If anyone had access to many 1000s of your emails, they could quote mine a few examples to "prove" some nonsense.

If you believe brilliant global warming deniers found a calculation fraud, then why haven't they corrected the results, and published refutting papers?

Deniers at best are critics of those that do real scientific research, and at worst shills.

[ilikenoodles1]

We're not talking about normal people like you and me. These are scientists providing information for the United Nations. If this happened in a regular company, those people's asses would be fired, public apologies would be made, mistakes would be corrected. The reason they haven't done anything is because they're not accountable for anything they say or do. Have you heard them refute fudging with the numbers? I haven't

[ZangaroZen]

@ilikennoodels1, is HTWW a normal person? A Lawyer without even an undergrad in science is certainly not a scientist, and yet you take his opinion as gospel.

I'm very familiar with how hard science Phd's work. They research, analyze data, peer review work and publish conclusions with supporting details.

The idea is to advance knowledge/truth without looking foolish by publishing nonsense in public. That's accountability.

They didn't fudge data, there is nothing to appologize for.

[ilikenoodles1]

They absolutely did screw with the numbers. THEY SAID SO. And they ARE looking foolish in public. They completely went against any code of honor ever, of science, of having Phds, of being Boy Scouts, whatever. I have NEVER heard of a code of conduct instructing people to lie

[ZangaroZen]

@ilikenoodles, what did they say in many 1000s of emails?

"Hide the decline", "use a trick", is that about it?

Many of 1000s of emails and all the deniers could come up with is 6 words.

Did you know these 6 words showed up in scientific papers published a little later?

To repeat:

If you believe brilliant global warming deniers found a calculation fraud, then why haven't they corrected the results, and published refutting papers?

Don't ignore this questino a second time.

[ThinkAbout1t]

@ilikenoodles1 And they didn't lie. You haven't provided evidence, nor has anyone else in fact, of a single lie. There's a lot of blown up hype about certain cherry-picked out of context quotes and phrases, but light is shed on these when reading them in context. Check potholer54's vid, he posted a bunch of the more talked about emails there. Even if you don't want to listen to what he has to say, just turn the volume off and read the emails that pop up in his 7th climate change video.

[crackerkiller89]

Because they havent fudged with the numbers. What you dont get is that any scientists who is found to fudge with the numbers would be fired on the spot and would never earn any of their credibility back. Why do you think it is that these guys are not fired yet? Because they work to actually give us information. We spend milliions of dollars on these guys every year, and if someone credible and with common sense actually thought they were lying, they would have been fired already.

[ilikenoodles1]

Proving that the CRU either is not credible, or has no common sense. As well as the IPCC and the UN...

[ThinkAbout1t]

In other words, the entire world is conspiring, it's not simply your misunderstanding of some points of discussion.

[crackerkiller89]

And on top of what we just said, all you need to do is find the hottest years on record to see if anthropogenic global warming is real or not.

According to NASA, "The ten warmest years on record have all occurred between 1997 and 2008."

Coincidence? I think not.

[ilikenoodles1]

I'm not saying that the earth isn't heating up (it may be, it may not be), but for every study out there showing rising temperatures, there's one showing cooling temperatures. The point is we can't detect stuff like this for a hill of beans, and as Lee said, there's no point in screwing up our economy over something that A) is quite probably nothing B) has very little effect on us and/or C) is something we can't do about it anyway

[ThinkAbout1t]

@ilikenoodles1 The statements you've just given are categorically wrong. At least if we're talking about published literature.

Furthermore, if you had paid attention to either mine, or HTWW's videos, you would know what "Hide The Decline" meant. It was in regard to tree ring data, and the problem is whether tree rings can still be used as proxies for data before the instrumental record.

And Lee is also wrong in all 3 statements. We can detect this stuff, and do, daily, hourly. Check vid desc.

[ilikenoodles1]

No, I'm not talking about published literature. As I said, I was talking about the emails circulating around the CRU, whose research was then used by the IPCC. As for it referring to tree rings, I don't care. These people should be stripped of their credibility, just like what they did to their peers who dared question them. Their research sure as hell shouldn't be used by the UN

[ThinkAbout1t]

@ilikenoodles1 I was referring to this when I said you were categorically wrong. " for every study out there showing rising temperatures, there's one showing cooling temperatures."

It's just simply not true.

And your lack of understanding regarding the tree ring data is why you hold this position, it wasn't so much "hidden" as it was disregarded, as it lost it's correlation. The phrase "hide the decline" was used since they still wanted to use tree ring proxies up to 1950, where they're valid.

[ilikenoodles1]

Yeah, as soon as it no longer matches what the doomsayers say, it's suddenly not a viable source of information. How convenient

[ThinkAbout1t]

@ilikenoodles1 Tree rings? We have instrumental data, as in, thermometers, machine-read data. And the tree rings stopped agreeing, we know what the temperature was, cause we measured it first hand. That's the problem, that's why tree rings are being called into question as a proxy.

[ZangaroZen]

@ilikenoodles1, you've said you're a normal person so why would your opinion on global warming matter?

Leave expert analysis to experts. If your tooth hurts you see a dentist not HTWW.

When did you survey reputable scientific journals? A 50/50 split on the reality of global warming? Did you pull that crap out of your ass?

Name one national/international non-partisan scientific organization (sorry HTWW doesn't qualify) that denies global warming. You can't because the concensus is 100%.

[ilikenoodles1]

They're not experts if they lie about it. Rather, they're not experts if they lie about it, then everybody finds out about it

[ZangaroZen]

@ilikennoodles1, who said experts lied about anything? HTWW?

Why believe a science iliterate lawyer, who's stated purpose on youtube is to make money with tabloid news?

Reading many 1000s of emails, and quote mining 6 words, does not qualify as scientific research or a valid conclusion.

If the tabloid claims are true, then let experts like HTWW write refutting scientific papers for publication. If that's not forth coming then it should be obvious the deniers are shills and morons.

[ilikenoodles1]

Have you been living under a rock for the past few weeks? Does the phrase "Climategate" mean anything to you? This isn't some secret cult started by HTWW, this was kind of a big deal in the news. Except for maybe the Huffington Post and the NYT... So if that's where you get all your information from, it's time for a change

[crackerkiller89]

Any person who thinks "Climategate" is supposed to be proof of some kind of conspiracy REALLY does not know the terminology scientists use. Go watch Greenman3610"s video on this. And the only "news casts" that this was broadcast on are conservative ones. And not only that, only conservative CREATIONIST ones.

[ilikenoodles1]

Only conservative newscsts, huh? See the link in my above comment: The New York Times. You think that's conservative? And what does creationism have anythhing to do with this? As for the terminology, it's not difficult to understand. "Hiding" some facts and using "tricks" on the public is dishonest and wrong. Don't overthink it

[ThinkAbout1t]

Hiding the decline, again, and you're just not listening, referred to tree ring proxies only. The reason they were hidden using this "trick" was because the proxy no longer worked with reference data as tree ring growth was stunted by rising CO2 emissions, since the plants shot up more instead of growing in girth.

The word trick is used in the same context as "Oh, that's a neat trick." And is not a deceptive term. The proxies were hidden, since they didn't match the INSTRUMENTAL record.

[crackerkiller89]

Trick in this case is used to mean the art of doing something skillfully, not decieving people. And about the hiding, the author of this video already explained it to you. Honestly, all these assholes can do is quote mine. I mean, they dont even have a FULL SENTENCE to go off of, and they think they have something? Pathetic.

And creationists are typically the ones who do not accept anthropogenic global warming, for whatever retarded reason.

[Illumified]

@ZangaroZen youre totally right ilikenoodle and myself should just hide under the covers, let the experts like yourself decide all public policies for us, not bother questioning anything you say. Considering you know everything and we know nothing, you knew that of course, all those in your echo chamber are always correct and those who oppose it r either shills for the big oil or stupid, oh or evil. we shouldnt question the regulation of the gas that provides food,heats homes and Plants breath

[ZangaroZen]

@Illumified, listen to your nonsense "myself should just hide under the covers, let the experts...decide all public policies...not bother questioning anything...we know nothing...echo chamber are always correct and those who oppose it r either shills...or stupid...shouldn't question the regulation of the gas that provides food...plants breath" WTF?

You DIDN'T ADDRESS ANY OF MY POINTS...NOT ONE...You can't.

You want to push misinformation and red herrings? Then be your own doctor too. 

[NemSoha]

The emails weren't hacked, they were leaked by a whistle blower, which is why the email addresses were censored.

Even if they were hacked, it doesn't matter because the main point is the cover up of the data, which shows that "man-made global warming" is fake.

[ThinkAbout1t]

@NemSoha No, it doesn't.

[NemSoha]

It's been proven the world has been cooling over the past decade, and this winter we've had temperatures across the US in some places that are colder than Antarctica.

These emails came from the head of the whole Global Warming movement (pretty much like their Pentagon), it's quite significant. Al Gore also claims the earth is millions of degrees inside, rather than the few thousand it really is. The earth heats and cools naturally and has been for thousands of years (like the ice ages)

[ZangaroZen]

@NemSoha, even CEI, the shill that HTWW works, has dropped the claim that the earth is cooling and now admits the average temperatures have been increasing (although only a few tenths of a degree).

So Al Gore misspoke (about the sun not earth), haven't you ever?

Sure the Earth naturally oscillates between heating and cooling over tens of 1000s of years. The problem is it's suppose to be in a cooling period, and yet it's heating 1000s of times the natural rate.

[npeffer]

Yet the scientific consensus of hundreds of independent scientific research groups across the world remains almost unanimously in favor of anthropogenic warming. You've got a lot of work to do to prove that every one of them is fudging their data so that they all independently line up and agree with one another.

To maintain that the entire field of climate science across the world is dishonest shows how much your political bias distorts your views, and makes you a nut job conspiracy theorist.

[NemSoha]

Actually you're the one who has yet to prove that it's true. Furthermore, people like you who think the earth is dying are the true nut job conspiracy theorists. You should keep your tin foil hat on.

[ThinkAbout1t]

@NemSoha Nope, he's actually got a point, you should check out the article I referenced at the end, there's a link in the sidebar. And to suggest that there's a multinational conspiracy in the scientific community about global warming, and yet not question the scientific community on other basic scientific concepts, like weather prediction, is what doesn't make sense to me.

[npeffer]

Almost nothing that's useful in science is or can be "proven." Scientific theories are made by creating hypothesis, gathering data, and through rigorous peer review, publishing papers. As experiments and data are replicated and evidence piles up in the literature, scientists in the field sometimes arrive at a strong consensus.

What good reason do you have to dismiss the strong consensus formed by an entire field of people who have dedicated their entire lives to finding truth on this issue?

[arcanekrusader]

None of this matters though, because it is not human activity that is causing it!

[ThinkAbout1t]

@arcanekrusader Stay tuned, I'll be addressing that in the next video.

I'd also recommend seeing potholer54's videos on climate change. He destroys BS like An Inconvenient Truth.

[npeffer]

Lee was quick to one star this vid haha

Lee has some good points sometimes but he's often so blinded by his political bias that he slaps reason (or in this case, science) in the face.

[NemSoha]

The would be true if this were actually SCIENCE. It is skewed data, much like the government's claims that millions of jobs were saved (which is impossible to prove, and statistics have shown that actually the opposite has happened, and unemployment has risen) Skewed data seems to be the theme of 2009.

[ZangaroZen]

@NemSoha, what's your idea of science? Listening to Lawyers from CEI and talking heads on Fox?

Every government in the world collects economic data, interprets that information and form predictions based on statistics.

Pre stimulous spending statistics (ie massive job loss) were compared to post stimulous spending (ie less job loss) to get the difference, or positive effect.

No one claimed the unemployment rate would decrease instantly to zero, but rather it would be slowed.

[ZangaroZen]

@Npeffer, how do you know Lee one starred this video?

What good points has Lee ever made? Can't think of any.

[npeffer]

I'm subscribed to his channel, and youtube gives you "recent activity" of your subs on the homepage if you scroll down a bit.

I think Lee has made some good points on the economy and the healthcare bill, but we won't debate that on this vid!

[ZangaroZen]

@npeffer, thanks for the one starring log tip.

As for HTWW making good points on the economy and healthcare bill, I'd have to hear one, as I still doubt it.

Even it HTWW made a good point, I'd bet he plagarized it from else where and presented it as his own idea. Don't think Lee is smart enough to come up with his own material.

[ThinkAbout1t]

@ZangaroZen I frankly just wouldn't see the relevance, since the issue isn't in question.

[ZangaroZen]

@ThinkAbout1t, relevance of what?

Lee can't make a point without plagarizing?

or

The fact the stimulus was meant to slow the job loss not to turn unemployeement to 0%?

[ThinkAbout1t]

@ZangaroZen A single good point economically does not overturn the science supporting global warming. it merely means a different approach is required towards handling the situation.

[ZangaroZen]

@ThinkAbout1t, what npeffer said was that HTWW is wrong and you are right. Not an issue.

Npeffer then went on to say but "Lee has made some good points on the economy and the healthcare bill". Good points on other issues.

My question to Npetter was to name some of Lee's good points on the economy/healthcare, because I can't recall Lee saying anything not based on a bias towards the large corporate interests that pay his salary.

[ThinkAbout1t]

@ZangaroZen Aye, what I meant was that, even if Lee had a good point regarding the economy/healthcare, it wouldn't impact the reality of climate science.

[ZangaroZen]

@ThinkAbout1t, yes already I realize that.

A good point on economy/healthcare does not effect the reality of climate science where HTWW is categorically wrong.

My point is that HTWW hasn't even made good points on the economy/healthcare as npeffer has openly claimed.

I'm still waiting for npeffer to provide examples where HTWW makes valid points on the economy and/or healthcare.

Maybe you know of a valid point HTWW has made on any other subject?

[asetentay8]

The author of this video been brainwashed,need serious help.

[ThinkAbout1t]

@asetentay8 For what reason do you suspect brainwashing? If you can't think of a good one, question why you commented as such, you might be suprised.

[asetentay8]

a good one? dude, you are supporting the Big mafia.

sorry if my comment bother you , but im tired of people supporting the church of Al Gore, what next? support the Federal reserve and Bernanke?

give me a break.

[harvellt]

@asetentay8 Oh come on there is waaaaay more money to be made in the sort term denying global warming. If there is one thing consistent thing in conspiracy theory it is money drives it all so it doesn't make sense that global warming is a conspiracy theory.

[ZangaroZen]

@asetentay8, listen to yourself:

1. "author of this video been brainwashed, need serious help"

2. "you are supporting the Big mafia"

3. "people supporting the church of Al Gore"

How are your opinions different from a paranoid man screaming nonsense?

Who's been brainwashed by the fossil fuel shill industry, their shill's and the church of tabloid denial?

Answer: The guy that thinks personal opinions counts as fact, logic, and an arguement all rolled up into one. Yes it's you.

[asetentay8]

dude!, wake up there no probe that Global Warming(!?) is man made.

The Climate been always changing and the planet didn't warm up in the last ten years!!!! Doh! O_o

[ThinkAbout1t]

@asetentay8 No, it warmed up in the last 50 years, since the industrial age really hit it's stride. Furthermore, the last 10 years have seen a massive volcanic eruption, as well as a very strong la nina, to keep the temperature AT BAY. Now the la nina is ending, and the el nino will be coming in in the next couple years, and we'll see another rise for about 5-7 years. The first year (2009) has already occurred, reaching the 2nd highest temp on the instrumental record.

[asetentay8]

that's not true.There is no solid probe, the base of the global warming theory is wrong.

Google:

kusi+Global Warming: The Other Side

research more and you will see that this is just an excuse to redirect business to companies of their interests (monopoly) and destroy the industries that are trying to emerge in poor countries.

[ThinkAbout1t]

@asetentay8 A brief search led me to John Coleman's take on global warming, is that what you meant? If so, dear god there are more categorically wrong statements in that paper than I can shake a fist at.

Check the article I linked (published by the magazine "Science") regarding climate change concensus, it's at the bottom of the sidebar.

Coleman says no consensus, Oreskes says consensus. Difference? Oreskes did the research, and looked through all the studies he found to reach his conclusion.

[lavawarior]

Lee Doren is a twat.

It's disturbing how some people take him seriously.

[Saukko31]

Howtheworldworks hides the increase.

[ThinkAbout1t]

@Saukko31 Also true, recent temperature data shows 2009 as the 2nd highest temp on the instrumental record.