Global warming data FAKED by government to fit climate change fictions

[BlueLaser]

50% because the other half of the day is nighttime when solar cells work really well?

If only we had developed some technology to store energy. Just think of all the possibilities, not only would we be able to store energy from solar cells to use them at night and during storms, but we could make things that work without wires! Just think, we could have tiny computers you carry in your hand, maybe you could make phone calls on them too. Or even just portable music players. Even if it was just a tape player that you could carry with you and could use stored energy, that'd be better than not having access to music anywhere. We could have cars that are able to store excess energy and be able to start themselves with electrical starters instead of needing to crank them, we could even help people that have hearts that can't keep a regular heartbeat by putting tiny electrical devices that can use stored power to help regulate their beats.

God, what a fantastic world it would be. Someone should really dedicate resources to some form of energy storage device.

Or, you know, maybe it's because Germany needs a lot of energy and it takes time to transition over... Perhaps that's why it's only 50%. But let's go with the "can't store energy" argument. That makes more sense.

 

[ohgr]

http://www.naturalnews.com/045695_global_warming_fabricated_data_scientific_fraud.html#

This whole sham is just another tax on the sheeple.

BS

You may as well have quoted a story from the Onion as fact..

 

[BlueLaser]

Germany has reduced its use of nuclear by increasing its reliance on coal-fired plants and increasing its man-made CO2 emissions.

I'm not sure that's what the Al Gore crowd had in mind.

It's a stop-gap measure. Germany has been iffy on Nuclear for some time, was already planning on shutting down nuclear power, and simply moved up the timetable in the wake of Fukushima. When you know you're losing 1/4 of your power generation in 8 years, you need to ramp up. The nice thing with coal is that it's also really easy to shut them down (something that can't be said for nuclear) and since coal doesn't really spoil, you can stockpile and keep them as a reserve. Solar has a shelf life of about 25 years with current tech, so Germany knows when it will need to start upgrading them. They could have built more solar, but it's never good to put all your eggs in one basket. You also have to keep in mind that these are efficient lignite plants, and produce far less emissions than coal-fired plants of a decade ago.

Yes, it still pollutes, but it pollutes a lot less and they're still eyeing expansion of their renewable resource production methods like solar and wind.

It naturally figures that when one group takes great strides towards lowering emissions and cutting back on pollution, someone will always point the finger at them for the ways in which they aren't doing it. They're still better than the vast majority of countries out there (including Canada) and instead of criticizing them for building new polluting plants to give them 50 years or so to complete the change over, we should be looking at how they managed to ramp up solar so quickly instead and trying to imitate that.

 

[whitewaterguy]

I have never heard a single scientist say it was caused by 1 thing. I think you're inventing things now.

And without doubt, that one thing is far from anything humans might be able to concoct during their brief existence on this rock

 

[basketcase]

If only we had developed some technology to store energy. Just think of all the possibilities, not only would we be able to store energy from...

Sarcasm aside, battery storage is very inefficient.

 

[FAST]

Sarcasm aside, battery storage is very inefficient.

And disposing of them when done,...isn't a environmentally friendly.

FAST

 

[kid_kuh]

Whether the government fakes it or not we all need to do something about our wasteful and inefficient use of our resources. Even if it's fake, I see a lot of good coming from people/businesses taking correct measures to ensure that we create a better and cleaner environment for our future generations. As long as the government doesn't use 'this' to tax everyone under the sun and use the money for there own agenda.

 

[GPIDEAL]

Does this really need to come up over and over and over and over again? There's obviously an overwhelming consensus in the scientific community. Sure, it's not unanimous, but we aren't talking about the dark ages where a group of people getting all their information from a book are telling one or two people who actually look at evidence that they're wrong, we're talking about scientists debating the issue with each other, where initially a handful of scientists felt one way, more research and papers were done over the years, and now 98% of scientists in the fields of atmosphere, meteorology and Earth sciences are of the same opinion.

It's the "smoking causes lung cancer" debate all over again, and even big tobacco has admitted there's a link there. How much longer are people going to stick their head in the sand and ignore this, spouting bullshit about how it's a hoax and continuing to pollute the environment?

Germany provides for 50% of it's energy needs via solar. They're on their way to 100%, and we could be too. There's no need for oil, coal and natural gas anymore, we don't have to debate fracking because we don't need it. All these industries do is line greedy pockets. "But what about the jobs?!?!?" When people aren't buying gas, they'll have more disposable income. Queue new industries moving in. The world will march on. Grab a book on economics if that's your only concern. I'm getting really tired of seeing this. Didn't the poll recently conducted here show that most people on Terb were highly educated? You don't sound educated when you deny global warming, you sound ignorant as fuck.

Really? That sounds high. Also, if people aren't buying gas, they'll be paying more for electricity. A transition period won't be cheap but better in the long run, especially if we exploit alternative, cleaner energy sources to the fullest.

 

[GPIDEAL]

I have never heard a single scientist say it was caused by 1 thing. I think you're inventing things now.

Don't the scientists argue that CO2 emissions are the greatest cause of AGW?

 

[elise]

Its not faked after all….

 

[Moviefan-2]

Its not faked after all….

Let's hope Al Gore isn't tempted to present the evidence in his rumored sequel to An Inconvenient Truth.

 

[rhuarc29]

This new, altered chart shows that historical data -- especially the severe heat and droughts experienced in the 1930's -- are now systematically suppressed to make them appear cooler than they really were. At the same time, temperature data from the 1970's to 2010 are strongly exaggerated to make them appear warmer than they really were.

How?

Seriously, why doesn't the guy explain how they suppressed certain years while exaggerating others? They just magicked the hard data points into new ones?

My guess is that the data wasn't faked; the true data was presented in such a way as to suggest the desired visual. Which is what you see politicians, scientists, marketers, and people with agendas do all the time.

It's also exactly what the guy writing the article is doing.