IPCC falsified data?

As someone who has studied Oceanography and ecology it puzzles me why so many scientists are ignoring real scientific data and coming out with so many different theories about global warming, sea level rising and Climate Change, I wonder if it is something to do with the fact that very few scientists are independent these days, most are in the pay of governments or big business and have to amend their data accordingly? While sea level rise may happen, Arctic Ice melting (because is is oceanic ice) will have little or no effect on sea level at all. Antarctic ice melting (land based) will have some effect. Because of the chemical and physical properties, it is unlikely that Carbon Dioxide will have much effect on Climate Change (heavier than air, soluble in water (more solubal in warm than cold water), etc.

It is not just possible but more than likely probable! Yeah sure people can take historical data and use it to make predictions; and your personal scientific interest to the point of making your own logical conclusions is commendable. The problem in my opinion though is that the Earth's evolution, progression or adaptation as a direct result of both natural and unnatural causes is ENTIRELY unpredictable in my opinion! The only way mankind can better their chances of "rolling with the punches" is to become far more aware of their own contributions to cause and effect through industry and development etc and act accordingly. The rest will occur by default whether we like it or not! Sustainable development should be the mantra globally and we should all just strap ourselves in and hope to God that we are still all here 1000 years from now. We are ultimately at the mercy of natural evolution.....

It does'nt matter if IPCC falsified their data or not.The fact remains that sea levels are on the rise and this is leading to catastrophic effects on megacities that are built on coastlines that had sea levels about a few inches lower than what they are now a hundred odd years ago.We are being selfish here.We need to address the issue that there will be no coastal cities for our future generations or there will be no future generations of human kind if we keep polluting at this rate.

Guh...! /facepalm... There is a good deal of data saying its only going to be 1 to 2 inches. There was also an article about a major iceshelf core dig in Greenland. The ancient DNA of the critters (thousands of years) in the core had indication of the times being warmer by a few degrees. Oh and the ice didn't melt... Eh? Go figure.

AAARRGHHH!! I can't find the article that listed the name of the guy who was the "chief" scientist that fudged the numbers. But I did read about 3 weeks ago about him. As I remember, he worked for NASA. Back in the '70s, he fudged data to support his claim for the coming "mini ice age". It is the same scientist who now claims that there is global warming. But I did find this link that shows flaws with Gore's movie. http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html If I remember correctly, it mentions the report about the sea level rise. Just goes to show how unreliable reliable sources can be.

In our finite world "Global Warming" is not our most pressing problem. Our most pressing problem is the finiteness of our energy supply or it could be the infiniteness of our economy. I guess it depends on how you look at as to which is the problem finite energy or infinite economy. Our economic system is infinite so we need an infinite supply of energy to make our economy sustainable. Anybody know were we can find an infinite energy supply? I know people don't like thinking in real terms when it comes to our economic and energy systems because the reality of unattainability built into these systems are too hard for us to handle. It is, however, easy to understand once you think about infinite growth not being possible using a finite energy supply to fuel our infinite economy. Many avoid thinking about it while others deny the reality of our finite energy source. No matter how you try to avoid this tidbit of information you will not be able to hide from this reality as energy shortages manifest themselves as a series of recessions and depressions. $100 a barrel oil is just the start and many who said we will never see $100 a barrel of oil are now saying we will never see $150 a barrel of oil. The deniers simply raise the highest price possible we can pay for energy instead of facing the reality and limitations that exist in our current energy supply and the fact that it can and will be depleted by our infinite economy. When you hear people saying this is just another economic cycle and the price of oil has nothing to do with, you know they are denying the differences in this upcoming economic slowdown and other in the past. In the past the economic slowdown relieved the pressure on oil supplies lowering the price of oil. Does anybody see that happening with this economic cycle? So you see it matters not whether "Global Warming" is real as there are many other factor we know are real that will destroy our way of life. "Global Warming" if true, will be the cherry on top of our economic and societal demise. It is just too bad we have all failed to leave a better world for our lineage instead of the trial of energy shortages, financial collapse, and (if "Global Warming" pans out as claimed) unstable weather such that it will be hard to grow food to feed the 6 billion plus people currently living on this planet.

This may be slightly off topic, but possibly relevant. In 2007, the U.K. had the worst flooding during summer for many years, the cause was listed as being because the 'Jet Stream' had moved direction so that the rain fell on the U.K. instead of somewhere else. I just wondered if there could be any connection between the jet stream moving and the number of wind farms which have now sprung up? It would be interesting to know if there has been any large scale Published scientific experiments on this. There have been windmills in the U.K. for several hundred years, but not on a large scale, we now have 169 operational wind farms with 1966 turbines, there are also 140 Off Shore Turbines (presumably not included in the above), with many more under construction or approved. see http://www.bwea.com/ukwed/index.asp The weather including Jet stream, and also currents are always in a state of flux, and it probably wouldn't take much change to move the jet stream. You must also remember some of the phyics laws, 'Matter cannot be created or destroyed' and 'For every action there is an equal but opposite reaction'. Could this mad rush for 'Renewable' energy (ie wind & waves) cause much more harm to the environment than anyone has ever thought of?

Nigel Lawson (ex U.K. government minister) published an article in today's 'Daily Mail' arguing against some parts of global warming http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/newscomment.html?in_article_id=557372&in_page_id=1787 This is very brave of someone of his stature to come out against established government policy, but also shows that there are still some people of influence who will not just roll over and accept everything that is said about global warming.