MSNBC labeled global warming skeptic Gray a "top meteorologist"

Yeah, love the way you reich wing christians mocked Al Gore for his Nobel because you don't agree. Hope you are OK if I mock back whenever y'all get any recognition, cause that's the world you created. Reich back at ya!

The right-wingers are in a tizzy because of Gores' win. It's comical and sad.

"Gore believed in global warming almost as much as Hitler believed there was something wrong with the Jews."

So, in essence, we can take the amount of "belief" in global warming that it would take to enact a final solution of hauling global warming skeptics to the gas chambers...

then back it off just a little, and you'll have Al Gore.  </sarc>

What a nitwit. 

I guess they can't even do basic math much less understand something that is so complicated (Earth climate) it takes a supercomputer to model it.

 

"So his numbers, Mika, not too far off thus far ... We've had seven -- he said -- predicted seven hurricanes in October, and thus far, we have had four. "

So off by about 50%, roughly.

 

Hate Gore, must destroy messenger, must hate anybody who agrees with Gore, GRRR GRRR grrr....

MMFA: The slight of hand that you pulled off with this headline is a joke.  You imply that Grey is not a Top Meteorologist, when in fact he is.

 

Your only assertion that he is not a Top Meteorologist is that you make false statements made from the IPCC report that most scientists disagree with him.

 

In fact, many scientists had to sue to have their names removed and they were only asked to agree with their own sections.

they always come up with the few who disagree.  [like wesley.]   so therefore that means the issue is "unsettled".

What is really telling, is that the scientists who actually are up there doing ice cores, measuring CO2 levels in Greenland, you know, the scientific process, are trying to figure out why we are'nt seeing the cooling trend that 800,000 years of evidence predicts. Other than the record breaking levels of CO2 and other atmospheric gasses that have what is called a positive feedback effect on temperatures. 

Scientists are'nt sure if past warming trends were caused by increases in CO2, or the wariming trend caused CO2 levels to rise, but they do know that once the CO2 levels rise, the warming trend is exacerbated by the positve feedback. So to sum up, the research going on now is, did we miss some natural cause or make a mistake interpreting our data? No? Okay, then how fast, where and how strong will the warming trend be assuming different levels of human emissions of greenhouse gases.

 

Greatest Hoax Ever?

Perhaps Gray might enhance his credibility if he could explain this conspiracy (my word, but that's what he is implying) to perpetuate on the American people the "greatest hoax ever". Why is this "greatest" hoax being perpetuated?

I would point out to Gray that he's proof, he's got an uphill climb to demonstrate that this alleged hoax is the "greatest" ever since the George W. Bush build-up to the Iraq war undoubtedly qualifies as the greatest hoax evr perpetuated on the American people...at least in my lifetime it is.

Hannity grabed onto this and didn't let go during his radio show, chanting the same old thing about Gores hypocricy and the use of a private jet. He said the Nobel Peace Prize has been degraded to the point that he would not accept it if he ever won - Well guess what Hannity - you'll never have to face that unless there Nobel Idiots Prize

Let's compare Gray v. Gore on qualifications: 

 

William M. "Bill" Gray (b. 1931), Ph.D., is a pioneer in the science of forecasting hurricanes. In 1952 he received a BS degree in Geography from George Washington University, and in 1959 a MS in Meteorology from the University of Chicago, where he went on to earn a PhD in Geophysical Sciences in 1964.Gray pioneered the concept of "seasonal" hurricane forecasting — predicting months in advance the severity of the coming hurricane season. Gray's prognostications, issued since 1983, are used by insurance companies to calculate premiums. [1]Gray is Emeritus Professor of Atmospheric Science at Colorado State University (CSU), and head of the Tropical Meteorology Project at CSU's Department of Atmospheric Sciences. Gray is noted for his forecasts of Atlantic hurricane season activity.Professor Gray served as a weather forecaster for the United States Air Force, and as a research assistant in the University of Chicago Department of Meteorology. He joined Colorado State University in 1961. He has been advisor of over 70 Ph. D. and M. Sc. students. His team has been issuing seasonal hurricane forecasts since 1984.After the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season, Professor Gray announced that he was stepping back from the primary authorship of CSU's tropical cyclone probability forecasts, passing the role to Philip J. Klotzbach. Gray indicated that he would be devoting more time to the issue of global warming. He is a controversial figure to global warming proponents as he does not subscribe to anthropogenic causes for global warming. Al Gore:

Lost 2000 election to GWB.  Lost court case in Britain and had to admit that "documentary" was largely fiction.  No scientific credentials.  World champion "sigher".

 

I would like to personally apologize for my generation's responsibility for the current global warming.  In the late 60's, early 70's we were warned of the coming Ice Age due to global COOLING.  Same scientific data, tons of books and articles by experts - all blamed on human activity.  In our urgent response to this serious threat, I fear we overreacted and are now apparently the cause of the warming of the planet.  Mea Culpa.

Where does the peace prize winner stand on peace....as in troop withdrawal....????

That bit about "having to admit it was fiction" is JUST ASTOUNDING.

 One has to ask why people like Billybob have to outright LIE to post anything.

The court in Great Britian only asserted that certain parts, THE COURT FELT, with no scientific backup, that certain parts were not settled science, and that the film had a political slant to it, BUT the Court said there was NO REASON NOT TO ALLOW THE FILM IN SCHOOLS IN GREAT BRITAIN. AND RULED AGAINST THE GW DENIALIST.

OF course the rightwing whackjobs lied about that as well.

So who's really lying here? The rightwing whackjob denialists who are no different than the Holocaust denialists, or....well that would pretty much clear it then wouldn't it.

The GW denialists just lie.

I cannot understand why they pretend to be the party of "values" when their entire existence is predicated upon lying, sliming, and denigrating anyone who disagrees with them.

I mean anyone who backs up the sliming of a 12 year old boy with lies and fact twisting, cannot be anyone who can be trusted to tell the truth.

So why do they lie all the time?

There is consensus among the business community that anything that upsets the "status quo" will cost them money, and so they actively OPPOSE any information that threatens them. This is understandable.

Cigarette companies spent a fortune denying scientific medical facts, until their denials were overcome by the sheer overwhelming nature of evidence. At that point, it was revealed the lengths they went to fabricating and falsifying THEIR OWN studies, when the evidence THEY contracted came up supporting the claims they wished to deny.

The MOTIVE for the rightwing is no mystery: MONEY. Tons and tons of money, which is threatened if it is accepted that the methods they use to make that money might be damaging to people, the environment, the community, the world.

Common sense informs our instructions to kids, from kindergarten to Boy Scouts. Simple rules for living include thing like cleaning up your own messes, putting things back where you found them, leaving an area unaffected by your passing (or better), not using any more resources than you need for survival, and replenishing natrual resources when possible. These and other rules adopted by the Boy Scouts (considered a very CONSERVATIVE organization), recognize a basic truth that each of us is responsible for our own impact on the world around us. That impact can be irresponsible and harmful, or responsible and positive.

BUSINESS does not follow these common sense rules. They have ONE rule: Profit. Anything that enhances that profit is GOOD, and anything that interferes (or might some day interfere) with that profit is BAD.

This is the debate today. It's NOT over the science and facts and evidence. It is quite simply the struggle between whether the forces of GOOD STEWARDSHIP of our planet will prevail, or whether instead the forces of PROFIT MOTIVE will prevail.

In this debate, of course, the Business Community (and their defenders) have the ideological mindset that anything which might threaten their profits must be a communist conspiracy, a socialist power grab, and a movement which would not CHANGE the way they do business, but instead would DESTROY business entirely. They believe they are actually fighting for survival, and thus their efforts to deny, debunk, and discredit the other side is a fight to the death.

Bottom line: There will be no "reasoning" with them. They will either be defeated, or they will prevail. And in this fight, they have MOST of the money on their side, while WE who support Gore have only the FACTS and the SCIENCE and the MORALITY.

There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.

The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a degree – a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars’ worth of damage in 13 U.S. state

To scientists, these seemingly disparate incidents represent the advance signs of fundamental changes in the world’s weather. The central fact is that after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the earth’s climate seems to be cooling down. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic. “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.”

A survey completed last year by Dr. Murray Mitchell of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reveals a drop of half a degree in average ground temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between 1945 and 1968. According to George Kukla of Columbia University, satellite photos indicated a sudden, large increase in Northern Hemisphere snow cover in the winter of 1971-72. And a study released last month by two NOAA scientists notes that the amount of sunshine reaching the ground in the continental U.S. diminished by 1.3% between 1964 and 1972.To the layman, the relatively small changes in temperature and sunshine can be highly misleading. Reid Bryson of the University of Wisconsin points out that the Earth’s average temperature during the great Ice Ages was only about seven degrees lower than during its warmest eras – and that the present decline has taken the planet about a sixth of the way toward the Ice Age average. Others regard the cooling as a reversion to the “little ice age” conditions that brought bitter winters to much of Europe and northern America between 1600 and 1900 – years when the Thames used to freeze so solidly that Londoners roasted oxen on the ice and when iceboats sailed the Hudson River almost as far south as New York City.Just what causes the onset of major and minor ice ages remains a mystery. “Our knowledge of the mechanisms of climatic change is at least as fragmentary as our data,” concedes the National Academy of Sciences report. “Not only are the basic scientific questions largely unanswered, but in many cases we do not yet know enough to pose the key questions.” (continued below)

I do not feel the NPP holds much clout these days. Whi was the Prize winner a few years back? That murdering slob Yasser Arafat .

So I just got an email forwarded to me by my step father about this exact subject. I linked the Relaclimate.org info to a reply. I doubt he will read it, but it was nice to be able to send him the facts. Thanks again MMFA.