sci.environment censorship or deleted? Graphs justifying globalwarming theory fabricated

I sent two previous messages in a thread I started entitled "Global
dimming and ice age predictions after WW2 contradict global warming
theory" to sci.environment and four other groups. However, when I
tried to send my latest message proving that graphs have been
fabricated, Google Groups said that it does not support sending
messages to sci.environment. I suspected censorship but I have just
noticed that sci.environment does not exist at all as far as Google
Groups is concerned. Can anybody else access that newsgroup?

I want to reach scientists conducting work on global warming and other
issues to do with the environment, to influence them and get feedback.
Hence I've included my latest message in the thread to these five
vaguely related groups. If you want to read the whole thread, you can
go to http://groups.google.co.uk/group/alt...2fb81971711597.

On 11 Aug, 15:20, "V for Vendicar"
m wrote:
"Peter Muehlbauer" wrote
TSI is significantly involved in temperature increase and decrease.

How sad for you that the total energy output from the sun (TSI) has
decreased over the last 20-30 years as the earth's temperature has been
rising.

Well, I just googled "total energy output from the sun TSI" (without
quotes) and the first item that came up was a March 2003 SPACE.COM
article entitled "Sun's Output Increasing in Possible Trend Fueling
Global Warming" (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/
sun_output_030320.html).

The first paragraph says "In what could be the simplest explanation
for one component of global warming, a new study shows the Sun's
radiation has increased by .05 percent per decade since the late
1970s.", which rather contradicts your assertion.

What is perhaps more significant is a graph showing "Northern
Hemisphere Land Temperature and Solar Cycle", with an "Astrophysical
Journal" source and showing temperatures clearly decreasing over a
period of 30 years or so (quite possibly 1943-74 which Fran
mentioned). The graphs in the Wikpedia pages (http://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Global_dimming and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histori...erature_record)
show cooling from 1940-50, particularly looking at 5-year averages,
and no noticeable cooling in the subsequent decades. Those Wikipedia
graphs are clearly a fabrication; I can't see how an ice age could
seriously have been predicted in the 1970s if it hadn't actually got
colder in the previous 20 years!

Does anybody know of any graphs for southern hemisphere temperatures,
which I have heard haven't actually increased when northern
hemisphere
ones have?

Maybe I haven't browsed as many science websites as others, mainly
getting information from mainstream media and New Scientist (which
incidentally had a small item recently predicting cooling over the
next decade!) However, it is difficult to distinguish disinformation
from the truth with big vested interests at stake, so I prefer to put
my views on public forums such as these and let both sides put their
views forward and we'll see who wins the argument. I'm perfectly
prepared to change my position and support the global warming
consensus if there's strong enough evidence for it.

--
Steve Wallis (Glasgow, Scotland)
For important/urgent communications, please email:

Blogs: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/steve-...socialist-blog,
http://blog.myspace.com/galaxiasteve
My socialist website: http://www.socialiststeve.me.uk
My pages at MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/galaxiasteve and Bebo:
http://www.bebo.com/SteveW519
Founder, Good Intentions Network: http://www.goodintentionsnetwork.org
Founder, Ethical Capitalism Network: http://www.ethicalcapitalism.net
Founder, Foundation for PR-based Socialism: http://www.PRsocialism.org
Founder, Revolutionary Platform Network: http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net
My socialist band, Red Day: http://www.red-day.net
Author, "Revolution Destroyed? Have I ensured that a world socialist
revolution will never happen?": http://www.revolutiondestroyed.net
For discussion of the credit crunch, go to
http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net....php?board=156
For discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories, go to
http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net...x.php?board=89

Dear Steve Wallis:

On Aug 12, 12:46*pm, Steve Wallis
wrote:
...
I want to reach scientists conducting work on global
warming and other issues to do with the environment,

You won't find them on sci.astro.

to influence them and get feedback.

Offer money. That always gets attention. Everyone has opinion, and
everyone thinks they are worth special attention.


David A. Smith

On Aug 12, 12:46*pm, Steve Wallis
wrote:
theory" to sci.environment and four other groups. However, when I
tried to send my latest message proving that graphs have been
fabricated, Google Groups said that it does not support sending
messages to sci.environment.

http://groups.google.com/group/group...9ab61d4783ca00

They are having problems. They know. Maybe we won't have to hear
about Chinese knockoffs of Nike shoes or $100 gas vouchers any more.

David A. Smith

On 12 Aug, 21:55, dlzc wrote:
On Aug 12, 12:46*pm,Steve Wallis

wrote:
theory" to sci.environment and four other groups. However, when I
tried to send my latest message proving that graphs have been
fabricated, Google Groups said that it does not support sending
messages to sci.environment.

http://groups.google.com/group/group..._frm/thread/d1...

They are having problems. *They know. *Maybe we won't have to hear
about Chinese knockoffs of Nike shoes or $100 gas vouchers any more.

David A. Smith

The link you gave was merely about people misspelling the name of the
group when sending messages by email. I'm sending messages using the
Google Groups web interface and it didn't find sci.environment
yesterday and still doesn't today.

However, the link was useful because I searched for sci.environment
there and found somebody else complaining about sci.environment not
existing at Google. I've just sent the following reply (with the text
of my original message in this thread below it). You can find it at
http://groups.google.com/group/Group...212e40e9b65184


On Aug 12, 11:07 am, rocky63 wrote:
How do we get Google to include this important group?

The group was hosted by Google; I posted a message to it on the 11th
of August (a day before your message and before I found the same
problem as you). I posted the following message to various other "sci"
groups afterwards, suggesting censorship:
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/sci...f9f923f9153e0a

I'm suspicious of censorship because I'm posting messages undermining
the global consensus around global warming, regarded by many as the
most important issue facing the human race, and that group is probably
the best one for scientific discussion around this issue.

Whether I had much to do with it or not, sci.environment is accessible
again using Google Groups. Yippee!

On 13 Aug, 14:19, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" wrote:
Dear Steve Wallis:

"Steve Wallis" wrote in
...
...

I'm suspicious of censorship because I'm
posting messages undermining the global
consensus around global warming, regarded
by many as the most important issue facing
the human race, and that group is probably
the best one for scientific discussion around
this issue.

First of all, sci.astro isn't appropriate.

The data from the graph in the article I gave a link to uses
"Astrophysical Journal" as a source, but I agree that it is not the
most appropriate of newsgroups.

Second of all, "suspicion" is one of the hallmarks of a crank.

Well, I do have a conspiratorial mind, but I have a rational basis for
my suspicions. I've never noticed a newsgroup disappear from Google
Groups before (despite using it quite a lot over a number of years)
and this is arguably the most important discussion I've been involved
in - and probably the most important of the groups I sent it to
vanished.

Thirdly, I'd recommend you browse alt.global-warming if you think
there is concensus still. *There is at least lively discussion.

Yes, I probably should follow discussions there to a greater degree
than I have done in the past...

--
Steve Wallis (Glasgow, Scotland)
For important/urgent communications, please email:

Blogs: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/steve-...socialist-blog,
http://blog.myspace.com/galaxiasteve
My socialist website: http://www.socialiststeve.me.uk
My pages at MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/galaxiasteve and Bebo:
http://www.bebo.com/SteveW519
Founder, Good Intentions Network: http://www.goodintentionsnetwork.org
Founder, Ethical Capitalism Network: http://www.ethicalcapitalism.net
Founder, Foundation for PR-based Socialism: http://www.PRsocialism.org
Founder, Revolutionary Platform Network: http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net
My socialist band, Red Day: http://www.red-day.net
Author, "Revolution Destroyed? Have I ensured that a world socialist
revolution will never happen?": http://www.revolutiondestroyed.net
For discussion of the credit crunch, go to
http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net....php?board=156
For discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories, go to
http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net...x.php?board=89
For discussion of global warming, including my views and articles from
the media, go to http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net....php?board=107

Not sure how I missed this all these years but living is learning.

I updated the POW to include some info on it.

js

--
PHOTO OF THE WEEK: http://schmidling.com/pow.htm
Astronomy, Beer, Cheese, Fiber,Gems, Sausage,Silver http://schmidling.com

I have sent the following message widely; it follows on from the
previous messages...

I've been discussing environmental issues in the last three weeks,
including solar versus nuclear energy, whether "thorium" reactors
could be a cheap safe kind of nuclear energy and whether global
warming is mainly caused by mankind, on various internet forums
initiated by my message "Guardian: Solar power from Sahara could
provide Europe's electricity, says EU" (which you can read at
http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net...hp?topic=9154). I've
posted most of my contributions to the debates on the Environment
bulletin board of my Revolutionary Platform Network Forum (http://
http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net...php?board=106).

Someone twice directed me to the "Skeptical Science" website,
subtitled "Examining the science of global warming skepticism". I have
just posted the following comments on the web page discussing the most
common argument used by those sceptical of global warming theory,
entitled "Solar activity & climate: is the sun causing global
warming?" (http://www.skepticalscience.com/sola...vity-sunspots-
global-warming.htm).

--

No-one has yet commented on the massive disparity in temperatures
between the two graphs shown at the top of this page during the post-
war boom (roughly the first three decades after the Second World War)

In a debate I've been involved in on various newsgroups (http://
groups.google.co.uk/group/alt.global-warming/browse_thread/thread/
912fb81971711597), a supporter of global warming called Fran mentioned
"global dimming" reducing temperatures from 1943-74.

However, I have discovered that there are two completely different
graphs of average northern hemisphere temperatures on the internet!
The graph shown in "The Great Global Warming Swindle", displayed at
the top of this page, looks to be based on the same data as a March
2003 SPACE.COM article entitled "Sun's Output Increasing in Possible
Trend Fueling Global Warming" (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/
sun_output_030320.html). This page came top when I googled "total
energy output from the sun TSI" (without quotes). The graph on it uses
data from an article by Baliunas and Soon in the Astrophysical
Journal. This seems to tally with Fran's dates.

However, two Wikipedia pages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Global_dimming and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histori...erature_record)
look to have similar data to the "Land-Ocean Temperature Anomaly" line
in the second graph on this page (except the Wikipedia pages show 5-
year rather than 11-year averages). These show falling temperatures in
the 1940s but not in the subsequent decades.

It seems utterly ridiculous for predictions to have been made about a
new ice age in the 1970s (rather than earlier decades) if temperature
had not been falling as the latter graphs suggest. One set of graphs
must be based on fake data, and my current opinion that the latter
ones are fake appears to be supported by the NASA GISS data from
individual measuring statements linked to by Whata Fool on
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/alt...2fb81971711597.

I have heard (I can't remember where) that the southern hemisphere has
not been warming in recent decades unlike the north. Does anybody have
any data about southern hemisphere temperatures? If not, why not?

My particular take on the climate/weather, irrespective of whether CO2
is really the main contributor to global warming, is that it is being
controlled by conspirators on the side of big business in the big
political struggles in the world (to some degree or other, and maybe
less so now than in the past). A BBC documentary "The Science of
Superstorms" largely about the USSR regime's measures to affect where
radioactive rainfall from Chernobyl came down and Chinese measures to
stop rainfall at the time of the Olympics opening ceremony indicate
that some level of control is possible. As weather forecasting has
improved, so has the ability to control it - and having high levels of
warming in some parts of the world and low levels in others suits the
divide-and-rule agenda of unethical forces in positions of power.

--

I forgot to mention in the above comment that the whole argument that
the sun is not to blame is based on data/graphs that may be
fabricated.

There are massive vested interests, on both sides of the global
warming debate, so fabrication of data is to be expected.

Bearing in mind that one set of data for cooling during the post-war
boom (despite higher production of carbon dioxide than earlier in the
20th century when temperatures were rising) is incorrect and clearly
fabricated, the same may be true of recent solar radiance data.

--
Steve Wallis (Glasgow, Scotland)
For important/urgent communications, please email:

Blogs: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/steve-...socialist-blog,
http://blog.myspace.com/galaxiasteve
My socialist website: http://www.socialiststeve.me.uk
My pages at MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/galaxiasteve and Bebo:
http://www.bebo.com/SteveW519
Founder, Good Intentions Network: http://www.goodintentionsnetwork.org
Founder, Ethical Capitalism Network: http://www.ethicalcapitalism.net
Founder, Foundation for PR-based Socialism: http://www.PRsocialism.org
Founder, Revolutionary Platform Network: http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net
My socialist band, Red Day: http://www.red-day.net
Author, "Revolution Destroyed? Have I ensured that a world socialist
revolution will never happen?": http://www.revolutiondestroyed.net
For discussion of the credit crunch, go to
http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net....php?board=156
For discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories, go to
http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net...x.php?board=89
For discussion of the environment, including global warming
scepticism, go to http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net....php?board=106

On Aug 14, 4:20 pm, Steve Wallis
wrote:
[snip]

Someone twice directed me to the "Skeptical Science" website,
subtitled "Examining the science of global warming skepticism". I have
just posted the following comments on the web page discussing the most
common argument used by those sceptical of global warming theory,
entitled "Solar activity & climate: is the sun causing global
warming?" (http://www.skepticalscience.com/sola...vity-sunspots-
global-warming.htm).

--

No-one has yet commented on the massive disparity in temperatures
between the two graphs shown at the top of this page during the post-
war boom (roughly the first three decades after the Second World War)

When you talk about temperature you have to ask "where?". Do you mean
just land? Land and ocean? Surface or mid-troposphere?

Look at the graph found he
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/in...hings-changed/

Note that only the UAH scientists calibrated their satellite data to
data collected by weather balloons.

--Mike Jr

[snip]

On Aug 14, 7:35 pm, "Mike Jr." wrote:
On Aug 14, 4:20 pm, Steve wrote:

[snip]



Someone twice directed me to the "Skeptical Science" website,
subtitled "Examining the science of global warming skepticism". I have
just posted the following comments on the web page discussing the most
common argument used by those sceptical of global warming theory,
entitled "Solar activity & climate: is the sun causing global
warming?" (http://www.skepticalscience.com/sola...vity-sunspots-
global-warming.htm).

--

No-one has yet commented on the massive disparity in temperatures
between the two graphs shown at the top of this page during the post-
war boom (roughly the first three decades after the Second World War)

When you talk about temperature you have to ask "where?". Do you mean
just land? Land and ocean? Surface or mid-troposphere?

Look at the graph found hehttp://www.worldclimatereport.com/in...hings-changed/

Note that only the UAH scientists calibrated their satellite data to
data collected by weather balloons.

--Mike Jr

[snip]

Better charts can be found here. See Figures 1, 2, and 3.

http://www.weatherquestions.com/Roy-...al-warming.htm

--Mike Jr

On 15 Aug, 01:17, "Mike Jr." wrote:
On Aug 14, 7:35 pm, "Mike Jr." wrote:
On Aug 14, 4:20 pm,Steve wrote:

[snip]

Someone twice directed me to the "Skeptical Science" website,
subtitled "Examining the science of global warming skepticism". I have
just posted the following comments on the web page discussing the most
common argument used by those sceptical of global warming theory,
entitled "Solar activity & climate: is the sun causing global
warming?" (http://www.skepticalscience.com/sola...vity-sunspots-
global-warming.htm).

--

No-one has yet commented on the massive disparity in temperatures
between the two graphs shown at the top of this page during the post-
war boom (roughly the first three decades after the Second World War)

When you talk about temperature you have to ask "where?". *Do you mean
just land? *Land and ocean? *Surface or mid-troposphere?

Good point.

A graph showing cooling from the 1940s to 1970s (http://www.space.com/
scienceastronomy/sun_output_030320.html) shows northern hemisphere
land temperature.

One of the Wikipedia pages used to justify global warming theory
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histori...erature_record which
redirects to "instrumental temperature record") states "The
instrumental temperature record shows the fluctuations of the
temperature of the atmosphere and the oceans as measured by
temperature sensors."

I've just discovered even more blatant evidence of fabrication that I
didn't notice before - the Wikipedia page I mentioned above shows
clear warming between 1950 and 1975, whereas the global dimming page
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming) shows fluctuations but
no clear warming or cooling over the same period. Clicking on the
graph on the latter page yields http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:C...ttribution.png,
which supposedly explains it. The instrumental temperature record
graph is shown on that image page, with the text "Instrumental
temperature record of the last 150 years. This data is the same as the
black curve in the figure." The two curves are actually very different
as I have just explained!

The graph at http://www.skepticalscience.com/sola...al-warming.htm
supposedly shows the "land-ocean temperature anomaly" and very little
change over the 1950-75 period (I presume this is on a similar basis
to the Wikipedia pages - somebody please correct me if I'm wrong).
It's nearly 48 hours since I posted my comments on that page and
nobody has yet countered my arguments...

Look at the graph found hehttp://www.worldclimatereport.com/in...hings-changed/

Note that only the UAH scientists calibrated their satellite data to
data collected by weather balloons.

--Mike Jr

Thanks a lot for that link. It shows a later time frame than I was
talking about, but that graph massively undermines the graphs
suggesting substantial warming from the 1980s. If anybody objects to
the UAH scientists' claim that only their data has been calibrated to
that collected by weather balloons, please say so!

Better charts can be found here. See Figures 1, 2, and 3.

http://www.weatherquestions.com/Roy-...al-warming.htm

That's a very interesting and persuasive page giving counter-arguments
to global warming theory. Have advocates of that theory critiqued Roy
Spencer's arguments?

--
Steve Wallis (Glasgow, Scotland)
For important/urgent communications, please email:

Blogs: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/steve-...socialist-blog,
http://blog.myspace.com/galaxiasteve
My socialist website: http://www.socialiststeve.me.uk
My pages at MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/galaxiasteve and Bebo:
http://www.bebo.com/SteveW519
Founder, Good Intentions Network: http://www.goodintentionsnetwork.org
Founder, Ethical Capitalism Network: http://www.ethicalcapitalism.net
Founder, Foundation for PR-based Socialism: http://www.PRsocialism.org
Founder, Revolutionary Platform Network: http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net
My socialist band, Red Day: http://www.red-day.net
Author, "Revolution Destroyed? Have I ensured that a world socialist
revolution will never happen?": http://www.revolutiondestroyed.net
For discussion of the credit crunch, go to
http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net....php?board=156
For discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories, go to
http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net...x.php?board=89
For discussion of the environment, including global warming
scepticism, go to http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net....php?board=106