Feel free, I can admit I may be wrong----doubt it, but I may be. More than I can say for people who would rather make climate jokes than face scientific fact. Lets spend out money elsewhere, I agree-----maybe finding those W.M.D.'s or on that Star Wars program. Much bigger threats there,
Carbon dioxide making our planet hotter overall and climate change due to the gasses.....not any way plausible. Man born of a virgin, turning water to wine, rising from the dead, and having the time and energy to look out for the betterment of all mankind (as long as you believe in him)....yeah, that sounds more like the safe bet.
Feel free, I can admit I may be wrong----doubt it, but I may be. More than I can say for people who would rather make climate jokes than face scientific fact. Lets spend out money elsewhere, I agree-----maybe finding those W.M.D.'s or on that Star Wars program. Much bigger threats there,
Just one thing, they are not scientific fact, they are scientific theories.
So why is the scientific theories you believe in fact where as all the scientific theories that prove the opposite are BS to you? That is what I do not understand. There is just as much evidence that global warming is a scam but that evidence somehow isn't good enough. This is what I do not understand about people with a liberal mindset. They believe what they believe no matter what. You put the videotape of them picking their nose in front of them and they will sit there and deny it. They can never admit they were wrong. They can never consider another option or listen to the other side. You either believe what they believe or it is all out war against you.
Snake, I agree that ultra liberals, just as ultra conservatives are often the way you described. With regards to me specifically,, I do consider myself middle of the road (and probably like to play devils advocate more than is healthy) and have read many scietists writings and published reports on each side. Those taken into account, and all the knowledge I have to this point...the side of climate change being a real problem and a man made one seems to be more plausible to me in a landslide. I could be wrong and am willing to concede that, but some VERY VERY good evidence would have to be shown first and nothing I have seen at this point has done that. Cheers Snake, please dont take my as$holness personally, I am an antagonist and like to bicker for some reason----one of my character flaws....hope you have a good one.
Vulchor, I do not hate you and enjoy your cigar related postings. I just think you play devils advocate alot and I think it just rubs some people the wrong way. I care what my wife and family think about me because they matter most. I was a cop and have thick skin and have heard it all. I brush it off and move on. That said some of my replies to you are to try to figure out where you are coming from. I haven't taken anything here to heart or personally just so you know. You didn't ruin my day or upset me. We all need to remember to agree to disagree and try to keep the debate friendly and non-personal. I do appreciate your response to explain where you are coming from. I am here to make friends not enemies. Sometimes it is hard to judge a person's tone or intentions in writing. You may just be frustrated and misunderstood
I do agree there are extremists on both sides and the extremists do nothing more than hurt their point of view.
Snake, I agree that ultra liberals, just as ultra conservatives are often the way you described. With regards to me specifically,, I do consider myself middle of the road (and probably like to play devils advocate more than is healthy) and have read many scietists writings and published reports on each side. Those taken into account, and all the knowledge I have to this point...the side of climate change being a real problem and a man made one seems to be more plausible to me in a landslide. I could be wrong and am willing to concede that, but some VERY VERY good evidence would have to be shown first and nothing I have seen at this point has done that. Cheers Snake, please dont take my as$holness personally, I am an antagonist and like to bicker for some reason----one of my character flaws....hope you have a good one.
My biggest problem with global warming, is the fact that it is so easy to "prove" or at least find evidence to support is. The plant IS getting warmer, it has been since the last ice age started to thaw. This planet was warming long before any of us were around to cause it, why then all of the sudden is it because of us? I believe because there is money in the theory that we are causing it... The same way Phobic and Laker and Vulchor talk about corporations in other areas that do things out of greed. Climate research is really no different. The funniest thing they say to "prove" their research is that the Earth has started warming more rapidly... My question to them is, have you ever boiled a pot of water with a thermometer in it and watched the temp rise? The warmer it gets, the more quickly the temps rise. It's just the way I see things... A little different than others.
the point of this all being theory was a very valid point, lest we forget that 600 years ago, the general concensus was that our planet was flat and not round. we can all see how that turned out. i am not motivated by fear, from either side of the fence. I'm like Public Enemy, Don't believe the hype!
Snake, I agree that ultra liberals, just as ultra conservatives are often the way you described. With regards to me specifically,, I do consider myself middle of the road (and probably like to play devils advocate more than is healthy) and have read many scietists writings and published reports on each side. Those taken into account, and all the knowledge I have to this point...the side of climate change being a real problem and a man made one seems to be more plausible to me in a landslide. I could be wrong and am willing to concede that, but some VERY VERY good evidence would have to be shown first and nothing I have seen at this point has done that. Cheers Snake, please dont take my as$holness personally, I am an antagonist and like to bicker for some reason----one of my character flaws....hope you have a good one.
My biggest problem with global warming, is the fact that it is so easy to "prove" or at least find evidence to support is. The plant IS getting warmer, it has been since the last ice age started to thaw. This planet was warming long before any of us were around to cause it, why then all of the sudden is it because of us? I believe because there is money in the theory that we are causing it... The same way Phobic and Laker and Vulchor talk about corporations in other areas that do things out of greed. Climate research is really no different. The funniest thing they say to "prove" their research is that the Earth has started warming more rapidly... My question to them is, have you ever boiled a pot of water with a thermometer in it and watched the temp rise? The warmer it gets, the more quickly the temps rise. It's just the way I see things... A little different than others.
You have said something similar to this before Puro.
My reply then was the same as it is now. Do you think that all the scientists who agree that climate change is happening and that humans are having a large impact on it, will just suddenly be out of a job if climate change were to be proven untrue?
That is like believing all Doctors will be out of work if they ever cure Cancer.
What exactly is their vested interest in climate change science Puro. It is just one field of science amongst many.
Snake, I agree that ultra liberals, just as ultra conservatives are often the way you described. With regards to me specifically,, I do consider myself middle of the road (and probably like to play devils advocate more than is healthy) and have read many scietists writings and published reports on each side. Those taken into account, and all the knowledge I have to this point...the side of climate change being a real problem and a man made one seems to be more plausible to me in a landslide. I could be wrong and am willing to concede that, but some VERY VERY good evidence would have to be shown first and nothing I have seen at this point has done that. Cheers Snake, please dont take my as$holness personally, I am an antagonist and like to bicker for some reason----one of my character flaws....hope you have a good one.
My biggest problem with global warming, is the fact that it is so easy to "prove" or at least find evidence to support is. The plant IS getting warmer, it has been since the last ice age started to thaw. This planet was warming long before any of us were around to cause it, why then all of the sudden is it because of us? I believe because there is money in the theory that we are causing it... The same way Phobic and Laker and Vulchor talk about corporations in other areas that do things out of greed. Climate research is really no different. The funniest thing they say to "prove" their research is that the Earth has started warming more rapidly... My question to them is, have you ever boiled a pot of water with a thermometer in it and watched the temp rise? The warmer it gets, the more quickly the temps rise. It's just the way I see things... A little different than others.
You have said something similar to this before Puro.
My reply then was the same as it is now. Do you think that all the scientists who agree that climate change is happening and that humans are having a large impact on it, will just suddenly be out of a job if climate change were to be proven untrue?
That is like believing all Doctors will be out of work if they ever cure Cancer.
What exactly is their vested interest in climate change science Puro. It is just one field of science amongst many.
For someone who has spent their entire career studying climatology, then yes, that would hurt their career. Plus if your entire focus of your career was proven wrong, how much faith would anyone have in you for any other job? You think just because you are labeled a scientist you can study anything? I'm sure someone who studies cloud formations wouldn't know diddly squat about designing space rockets... Climatology is a pretty limited field of study. Not much else you can apply that to...
Snake, I agree that ultra liberals, just as ultra conservatives are often the way you described. With regards to me specifically,, I do consider myself middle of the road (and probably like to play devils advocate more than is healthy) and have read many scietists writings and published reports on each side. Those taken into account, and all the knowledge I have to this point...the side of climate change being a real problem and a man made one seems to be more plausible to me in a landslide. I could be wrong and am willing to concede that, but some VERY VERY good evidence would have to be shown first and nothing I have seen at this point has done that. Cheers Snake, please dont take my as$holness personally, I am an antagonist and like to bicker for some reason----one of my character flaws....hope you have a good one.
My biggest problem with global warming, is the fact that it is so easy to "prove" or at least find evidence to support is. The plant IS getting warmer, it has been since the last ice age started to thaw. This planet was warming long before any of us were around to cause it, why then all of the sudden is it because of us? I believe because there is money in the theory that we are causing it... The same way Phobic and Laker and Vulchor talk about corporations in other areas that do things out of greed. Climate research is really no different. The funniest thing they say to "prove" their research is that the Earth has started warming more rapidly... My question to them is, have you ever boiled a pot of water with a thermometer in it and watched the temp rise? The warmer it gets, the more quickly the temps rise. It's just the way I see things... A little different than others.
You have said something similar to this before Puro.
My reply then was the same as it is now. Do you think that all the scientists who agree that climate change is happening and that humans are having a large impact on it, will just suddenly be out of a job if climate change were to be proven untrue?
That is like believing all Doctors will be out of work if they ever cure Cancer.
What exactly is their vested interest in climate change science Puro. It is just one field of science amongst many.
For someone who has spent their entire career studying climatology, then yes, that would hurt their career. Plus if your entire focus of your career was proven wrong, how much faith would anyone have in you for any other job? You think just because you are labeled a scientist you can study anything? I'm sure someone who studies cloud formations wouldn't know diddly squat about designing space rockets... Climatology is a pretty limited field of study. Not much else you can apply that to...
Actually "climatology" is not a pretty limited field at all. It covers a vast range of resaerch. That is why when all the various fields of science are pointing toward the same thing then you can pretty much bet on it.
There will ALWAYS be some who say the complete opposite, but if you weigh it logically, and the vast majority of scientist from all fields involved in any way are predicting the same scenario, then I don't think I will trust the few who hold the opposite view.
Perhaps it is THESE "scientists" who are trying to hide something for their "employers" and it is their "science" that we should be distrustful of?
Snake, I agree that ultra liberals, just as ultra conservatives are often the way you described. With regards to me specifically,, I do consider myself middle of the road (and probably like to play devils advocate more than is healthy) and have read many scietists writings and published reports on each side. Those taken into account, and all the knowledge I have to this point...the side of climate change being a real problem and a man made one seems to be more plausible to me in a landslide. I could be wrong and am willing to concede that, but some VERY VERY good evidence would have to be shown first and nothing I have seen at this point has done that. Cheers Snake, please dont take my as$holness personally, I am an antagonist and like to bicker for some reason----one of my character flaws....hope you have a good one.
My biggest problem with global warming, is the fact that it is so easy to "prove" or at least find evidence to support is. The plant IS getting warmer, it has been since the last ice age started to thaw. This planet was warming long before any of us were around to cause it, why then all of the sudden is it because of us? I believe because there is money in the theory that we are causing it... The same way Phobic and Laker and Vulchor talk about corporations in other areas that do things out of greed. Climate research is really no different. The funniest thing they say to "prove" their research is that the Earth has started warming more rapidly... My question to them is, have you ever boiled a pot of water with a thermometer in it and watched the temp rise? The warmer it gets, the more quickly the temps rise. It's just the way I see things... A little different than others.
You have said something similar to this before Puro.
My reply then was the same as it is now. Do you think that all the scientists who agree that climate change is happening and that humans are having a large impact on it, will just suddenly be out of a job if climate change were to be proven untrue?
That is like believing all Doctors will be out of work if they ever cure Cancer.
What exactly is their vested interest in climate change science Puro. It is just one field of science amongst many.
For someone who has spent their entire career studying climatology, then yes, that would hurt their career. Plus if your entire focus of your career was proven wrong, how much faith would anyone have in you for any other job? You think just because you are labeled a scientist you can study anything? I'm sure someone who studies cloud formations wouldn't know diddly squat about designing space rockets... Climatology is a pretty limited field of study. Not much else you can apply that to...
Actually "climatology" is not a pretty limited field at all. It covers a vast range of resaerch. That is why when all the various fields of science are pointing toward the same thing then you can pretty much bet on it.
There will ALWAYS be some who say the complete opposite, but if you weigh it logically, and the vast majority of scientist from all fields involved in any way are predicting the same scenario, then I don't think I will trust the few who hold the opposite view.
Perhaps it is THESE "scientists" who are trying to hide something for their "employers" and it is their "science" that we should be distrustful of?
Name another area of scientific research that is creating this much "buzz" and fear and is a better target for the amount of government funding, like "climate change." There isn't one... Climate Change is a cash cow for these people... The government funding for other research doesn't even come close to what they drag in for this.
"Climate change-related projects accounted for over 25% of the 3-year total reported grants and contributions received by 10 of the top-20 institutions receiving support from foundations. For 6 organizations, climate change grants accounted for 50% of their reported grants and contributions received."
"North Attleborough - James Inhofe, the great senator from Oklahoma, declared on the floor of the United States Senate in 2003 that the theory of man-caused global warming is: "the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people." Unlike the Marxists and corrupt scientists behind the hoax, Sen. Inhofe based this declaration on sound science. Well, six years, many government mandates, and billions of wasted dollars later, he has been vindicated.
Emails obtained from the founding fathers of the man-caused global warming movement have revealed that they manipulated data, used corrupt computer models and lead a global conspiracy to push forth the theory that humans have caused a potentially catastrophic increase in global temperatures.
My next three columns will present the facts and an in-depth analysis of the hoax, its origins, the guilty parties and the true motives behind it.
Of course, to me, the theory of global warming has always been a ridiculous one. It doesn't take a scientist to figure this out either. All it takes is a little common sense. First of all, let me ask you this: what is the temperature of the earth right now? I'll help you out. There is no one temperature of the earth. To suggest that there is, is laughable. I don't care how many temperature gauges they put on the planet, it is simply not enough to come up with one reliable temperature reading that can be compared annually with any precision within any sound margin of error.
Second, our reliable temperature records only go back, at best, 100 years or so, and even these are from just a few areas on the globe.
How can we seriously say that global temperatures are catastrophically rising when we only have a few temperatures records from 100 years ago? How do we know that temperatures aren't falling from 150, 200 or 1000 years ago? We don't. Like I said, the very notion is ridiculous.
Anyway, that is the common sense approach. Those of us who have been trying to expose this sinister hoax from the beginning, however, know that common sense has nothing to do with it. So, let's stick with the raw facts.
Lee Gerhard is a Senior Scientist Emeritus from the University of Kansas and an IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Reviewer. He presents the following scientific facts about our climate. You may be surprised to learn the following:
• The most effective greenhouse gas is water vapor, comprising approximately of 95 percent of the total greenhouse effect.
• Carbon dioxide concentration has been continually rising for nearly 100 years. It continues to rise, but carbon dioxide concentrations at present are near the lowest in geologic history.
• Temperature change correlation with carbon dioxide levels is not statistically significant.
• There are no data that definitively relate carbon dioxide levels to temperature changes.
• The greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide logarithmically declines with increasing concentration. At present levels, any additional carbon dioxide can have very little effect.
We also know a lot about Earth temperature changes.
• Global temperature changes naturally all of the time, in both directions and at many scales of intensity.
• The warmest year in the U.S. in the last century was 1934, not 1998. The U.S. has the best and most extensive temperature records in the world.
• Global temperature peaked in 1998 on the current 60-80 year cycle, and has been episodically declining ever since. This cooling absolutely falsifies claims that human carbon dioxide emissions are a controlling factor in Earth temperature.
• Voluminous historic records demonstrate the Medieval Climate Optimum (MCO) was real and that the "hockey stick" graphic that attempted to deny that fact was at best bad science. The MCO was considerably warmer than the end of the 20th century.
• During the last 100 years, temperature has both risen and fallen, including the present cooling. All the changes in temperature of the last 100 years are in normal historic ranges, both in absolute value and, most importantly, rate of change.
Contrary to many public statements:
• Effects of temperature change are absolutely independent of the cause of the temperature change.
• Global hurricane, cyclonic and major storm activity is near 30-year lows.
Any increase in cost of damages by storms is a product of increasing population density in vulnerable areas such as along the shores and property value inflation, not due to any increase in frequency or severity of storms.
• Polar bears have survived and thrived over periods of extreme cold and extreme warmth over hundreds of thousands of years - extremes far in excess of modern temperature changes.
• The 2009 minimum Arctic ice extent was significantly larger than the previous two years. The 2009 Antarctic maximum ice extent was significantly above the 30-year average. There are only 30 years of records.
• Rate and magnitude of sea level changes observed during the last 100 years are within normal historical ranges. Current sea level rise is tiny and, at most, justifies a prediction of perhaps ten centimeters rise in this century.
Now you have the facts. A bit different from what you've been told, aren't they?
From here, we can now go into some of the sordid details of the complex and elaborate hoax that is man-caused global warming.
Gerhard ends his report with this statement: "I have been a reviewer of the last two IPCC reports, one of the several thousand scientists who purportedly are supporters of the IPCC view that humans control global temperature. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Many of us try to bring better and more current science to the IPCC, but we usually fail. Recently we found out why. The whistleblower release of e-mails and files from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University has demonstrated scientific malfeasance and a sickening violation of scientific ethics."
I am going to tell you more about these e-mails from the corrupt leaders of the global warming mafia next week.
When you consider just how much the theory of global warming has impacted all of us over the past few years, you can see just how big this story is.
Stay tuned…"
Global Carbon Dioxide levels are increasing, Global temperatures are declining....? Kinda shoots holes "man-made global warming" propaganda.... It's all about the control of money. If they can tax carbon, then there's no limit how much tax pressure they can put on us to act in accordance with whatever they would have us do. It's a scam, a hoax, a greedy, money grubbing, hike the taxes up to control the population scheme with no actual science to back it up. Deny that!
cabi, thank you for a very relevant post on this giant hoax and the people behind the lies.
the thing to remember here is that we on the conservative side have our liars as well. there is no denying that. the problem I have is that the left is lying, and doing it in a way that makes us feel eco-guilty and doing it under the guise of betterment for man. at least the liars on my side are forthcoming about saying its about business and capitalism
Listening to some of this trash is just saddening. Nor surprising ... just sad.
I will say this however. I am sure glad that these climate change scientists (the lying basturds) and the people around the world (stupid basturds) do NOT agree with the few guys on the forums who have been exposing their wisdom to the BOTL here.
It seems that lies, fear mongering and attacking peoples credibility are the order of the day. No need to argue science, instead look for the obscure report or statement from some unheard of or corporate scientist which supports your view, or better yet a conspiracy theory that can be put forward and held up as proof of there being no climate change.
I just hope that your "wisdom" allows you to one day hold one of your grand children or great grand children on your lap while you tell them stories or teach them to tie their shoes.
Cause if you are wrong then instead you may be explaining to those same grand children why they can't play outside, or why does God think it is OK for so many little children to have to live with Cancer.
Maybe you could tell them, (if you have the courage and honesty within you) about the time that the world chose to do nothing instead of taking actions to try to reverse or slow the effects of climate change, because we wanted to stop those nasty scientists from trying to take advantage of us and stealing our money. Instead we decided that our markets and economies were far more important then the environment and climate change, and that business leaders and politicians were to be trusted much more then those lying basturd scientists, and that it is better to be at death's door from the global human point of view then it would have been to stay alive for eons while subcribing to the views of all those corrupt, lying basturd scientist's. Good thing we made the right decision, our money is safe. LMAO
Listening to some of this trash is just saddening. Nor surprising ... just sad.
I will say this however. I am sure glad that these climate change scientists (the lying basturds) and the people around the world (stupid basturds) do NOT agree with the few guys on the forums who have been exposing their wisdom to the BOTL here.
It seems that lies, fear mongering and attacking peoples credibility are the order of the day. No need to argue science, instead look for the obscure report or statement from some unheard of or corporate scientist which supports your view, or better yet a conspiracy theory that can be put forward and held up as proof of there being no climate change.
I just hope that your "wisdom" allows you to one day hold one of your grand children or great grand children on your lap while you tell them stories or teach them to tie their shoes.
Cause if you are wrong then instead you may be explaining to those same grand children why they can't play outside, or why does God think it is OK for so many little children to have to live with Cancer.
Maybe you could tell them, (if you have the courage and honesty within you) about the time that the world chose to do nothing instead of taking actions to try to reverse or slow the effects of climate change, because we wanted to stop those nasty scientists from trying to take advantage of us and stealing our money. Instead we decided that our markets and economies were far more important then the environment and climate change, and that business leaders and politicians were to be trusted much more then those lying basturd scientists, and that it is better to be at death's door from the global human point of view then it would have been to stay alive for eons while subcribing to the views of all those corrupt, lying basturd scientist's. Good thing we made the right decision, our money is safe. LMAO
A single tear streams down my cheek... I gently wipe it away with a 1 hundred dollar bill; because that, after all, is all I seem to care about...
Besides, let's not let actual scientific fact stand in the way of true emotion.... That would hurt algore's feelins'...
You got any? Scientific facts and or feelings...
Do you read my posts??
Why is what I post not considered facts by you? They are facts, but you just don't like them, so like the rest of the left you simply dimish the persons making the posts, and ignore the facts...pitiful...
Besides, let's not let actual scientific fact stand in the way of true emotion.... That would hurt algore's feelins'...
You got any? Scientific facts and or feelings...
Do you read my posts??
Why is what I post not considered facts by you? They are facts, but you just don't like them, so like the rest of the left you simply dimish the persons making the posts, and ignore the facts...pitiful...
they aren't fact because you are not in his political viewpoint. plain and simple. it's funny how hippies want us to think for ourselves and be responsible but when we find out the hippies are being irresponsible and lying for money and contributions, we are still wrong for condemming them in their pursuit of money mongering by using lies.
do you remember when the ELF (Environmental Liberation Front) lit all those Hummer H2's on fire in SoCal to try and make a point about pollution. Did you know that 100 H2's don't pollute the air 1/10th as much as the fire from the burning plastic and rubber from those cars being set ablaze in the interest of "Awareness for a better environment"
Laker, you stir the pot but you don't want the answers. Typical hippy bullshlt
"Bob Unruh of WorldNetDaily reported that 31,000 U.S. scientists - 9,000 with doctorate degrees in atmospheric science, climatology, Earth science, environment and other specialties - have signed a petition rejecting global warming."
Besides, let's not let actual scientific fact stand in the way of true emotion.... That would hurt algore's feelins'...
You got any? Scientific facts and or feelings...
Do you read my posts??
Why is what I post not considered facts by you? They are facts, but you just don't like them, so like the rest of the left you simply diminish the persons making the posts, and ignore the facts...pitiful...
This is what I was trying to say yesterday and you worded it wonderfully. The fear mongering of the left is ok and appropriate in their eyes because it serves their agenda. The left subscribes to do as I say not as I do. The company behind much of this fear mongering that is profiting from all of this is Generation Investment Management, a London-based company with offices in Washington, D.C., chaired by Al Gore himself. Funny how the left seem to hate capitalism and corporate fat cats but say nothing about their own profiting by millions when is suits their agenda.
Besides, let's not let actual scientific fact stand in the way of true emotion.... That would hurt algore's feelins'...
You got any? Scientific facts and or feelings...
Do you read my posts??
Yeah, do you read mine? What's the difference except what each of us beleive? I never mentioned Al Gore BTW.
Why is what I post not considered facts by you? They are facts, but you just don't like them, so like the rest of the left you simply dimish the persons making the posts, and ignore the facts...pitiful...
they aren't fact because you are not in his political viewpoint. plain and simple. it's funny how hippies want us to think for ourselves and be responsible but when we find out the hippies are being irresponsible and lying for money and contributions, we are still wrong for condemming them in their pursuit of money mongering by using lies.
So now I am a Hippie? Too funny. You don't even know me! What about not attacing people instead of idea's or beliefs? Or does that only apply if someone disagrees with you?
do you remember when the ELF (Environmental Liberation Front) lit all those Hummer H2's on fire in SoCal to try and make a point about pollution. Did you know that 100 H2's don't pollute the air 1/10th as much as the fire from the burning plastic and rubber from those cars being set ablaze in the interest of "Awareness for a better environment"
There are idiots EVERYWHERE so what? How much damage was done by the Exxon Valdez?
Laker, you stir the pot but you don't want the answers. Typical hippy bullshlt
Again with the name calling. You're funny. My opinions are bullshit and conspiracies. Your's are facts, !!!
What I say here is opinion. What I post from other sources are others opinions. When you post something it is the SAME THING. It is YOUR opinion, nothing more.
"Bob Unruh of WorldNetDaily reported that 31,000 U.S. scientists - 9,000 with doctorate degrees in atmospheric science, climatology, Earth science, environment and other specialties - have signed a petition rejecting global warming."
Eh...I'm aware of that survey. Unfortunately, its credibility is diminished by the number of those that have signed the survey, but have no real bearing to make a judgment on climate change. C'mon... 31,000 scientists, but only 9,000 of them actually have applicable knowledge? I'm not saying I disagree with their findings, because I don't - I just wish they had gone for quality over quantity, instead of the reverse as they did.
Besides, let's not let actual scientific fact stand in the way of true emotion.... That would hurt algore's feelins'...
You got any? Scientific facts and or feelings...
Do you read my posts??
Yeah, do you read mine? What's the difference except what each of us beleive? I never mentioned Al Gore BTW.
Why is what I post not considered facts by you? They are facts, but you just don't like them, so like the rest of the left you simply dimish the persons making the posts, and ignore the facts...pitiful...
they aren't fact because you are not in his political viewpoint. plain and simple. it's funny how hippies want us to think for ourselves and be responsible but when we find out the hippies are being irresponsible and lying for money and contributions, we are still wrong for condemming them in their pursuit of money mongering by using lies.
So now I am a Hippie? Too funny. You don't even know me! What about not attacing people instead of idea's or beliefs? Or does that only apply if someone disagrees with you?
do you remember when the ELF (Environmental Liberation Front) lit all those Hummer H2's on fire in SoCal to try and make a point about pollution. Did you know that 100 H2's don't pollute the air 1/10th as much as the fire from the burning plastic and rubber from those cars being set ablaze in the interest of "Awareness for a better environment"
There are idiots EVERYWHERE so what? How much damage was done by the Exxon Valdez?
Laker, you stir the pot but you don't want the answers. Typical hippy bullshlt
Again with the name calling. You're funny. My opinions are bullshit and conspiracies. Your's are facts, !!!
What I say here is opinion. What I post from other sources are others opinions. When you post something it is the SAME THING. It is YOUR opinion, nothing more.
Hippie, LMFAO, too funny.
Hippies? What??? Can they start selling Ccom Tie dyed shirts??? LMAO I'd be all over that one!
"Bob Unruh of WorldNetDaily reported that 31,000 U.S. scientists - 9,000 with doctorate degrees in atmospheric science, climatology, Earth science, environment and other specialties - have signed a petition rejecting global warming."
Eh...I'm aware of that survey. Unfortunately, its credibility is diminished by the number of those that have signed the survey, but have no real bearing to make a judgment on climate change. C'mon... 31,000 scientists, but only 9,000 of them actually have applicable knowledge? I'm not saying I disagree with their findings, because I don't - I just wish they had gone for quality over quantity, instead of the reverse as they did.
Regardless of the number 9,000 qualified scientist saying global warming is a farce is huge. 9,000 with doctorates. That shouldn't take away from the other 22,000 opinions because they do not have doctorates. I know plenty of professionals who are greatly knowledgeable and considered experts in their fields and they do not have doctorates.
Also, while I may agree with the opinions of certain people here and disagree with others there is no need for name calling on either side. Not saying I disagree with your point of view guys but name calling isn't cool no matter what your intentions.
Besides, let's not let actual scientific fact stand in the way of true emotion.... That would hurt algore's feelins'...
You got any? Scientific facts and or feelings...
Do you read my posts??
Yeah, do you read mine? What's the difference except what each of us beleive? I never mentioned Al Gore BTW.
Why is what I post not considered facts by you? They are facts, but you just don't like them, so like the rest of the left you simply dimish the persons making the posts, and ignore the facts...pitiful...
they aren't fact because you are not in his political viewpoint. plain and simple. it's funny how hippies want us to think for ourselves and be responsible but when we find out the hippies are being irresponsible and lying for money and contributions, we are still wrong for condemming them in their pursuit of money mongering by using lies.
So now I am a Hippie? Too funny. You don't even know me! What about not attacing people instead of idea's or beliefs? Or does that only apply if someone disagrees with you?
do you remember when the ELF (Environmental Liberation Front) lit all those Hummer H2's on fire in SoCal to try and make a point about pollution. Did you know that 100 H2's don't pollute the air 1/10th as much as the fire from the burning plastic and rubber from those cars being set ablaze in the interest of "Awareness for a better environment"
There are idiots EVERYWHERE so what? How much damage was done by the Exxon Valdez?
Laker, you stir the pot but you don't want the answers. Typical hippy bullshlt
Again with the name calling. You're funny. My opinions are bullshit and conspiracies. Your's are facts, !!!
What I say here is opinion. What I post from other sources are others opinions. When you post something it is the SAME THING. It is YOUR opinion, nothing more.
Hippie, LMFAO, too funny.
What, you can't wear your hat with pride. You sure seem to want to, until the shlt rolls your way then it's abandon ship. Fu(k that. Now if you want to talk about the Exxon Valdez, let's do that. Since my ex employer was Exxon CEO Lee Raymond's head of security and was the Chief of Police for the City of Valdez when the accident happened, I know a little about that scenario. First of all, the big bad evil oil company didn't wreck the ship, the drunken captain did. Second, Exxon Mobil designed an oil eating enzyme that consumes oil. They designed it to help clean the Valdez spill. That enzyme is used world over to help clean up spills, not only for it's effectiveness but also because mass quantities of dish soap has an adverse effect on the wildlife, much like the oil does. I guess big bad oil companies aren't allowed to help the environment in removing pollutants. Don't worry though, you're right, you always will be, as long as you don't have to actually think about other possibilities.
Comments
I do agree there are extremists on both sides and the extremists do nothing more than hurt their point of view.
My reply then was the same as it is now. Do you think that all the scientists who agree that climate change is happening and that humans are having a large impact on it, will just suddenly be out of a job if climate change were to be proven untrue?
That is like believing all Doctors will be out of work if they ever cure Cancer.
What exactly is their vested interest in climate change science Puro. It is just one field of science amongst many.
There will ALWAYS be some who say the complete opposite, but if you weigh it logically, and the vast majority of scientist from all fields involved in any way are predicting the same scenario, then I don't think I will trust the few who hold the opposite view.
Perhaps it is THESE "scientists" who are trying to hide something for their "employers" and it is their "science" that we should be distrustful of?
"Climate change-related projects accounted for over 25% of the 3-year total reported grants and contributions received by 10 of the top-20 institutions receiving support from foundations. For 6 organizations, climate change grants accounted for 50% of their reported grants and contributions received."
http://www.marshall.org/article.php?id=289
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html?_r=1
"North Attleborough - James Inhofe, the great senator from Oklahoma, declared on the floor of the United States Senate in 2003 that the theory of man-caused global warming is: "the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people." Unlike the Marxists and corrupt scientists behind the hoax, Sen. Inhofe based this declaration on sound science. Well, six years, many government mandates, and billions of wasted dollars later, he has been vindicated.
Emails obtained from the founding fathers of the man-caused global warming movement have revealed that they manipulated data, used corrupt computer models and lead a global conspiracy to push forth the theory that humans have caused a potentially catastrophic increase in global temperatures.
My next three columns will present the facts and an in-depth analysis of the hoax, its origins, the guilty parties and the true motives behind it.
Of course, to me, the theory of global warming has always been a ridiculous one. It doesn't take a scientist to figure this out either. All it takes is a little common sense. First of all, let me ask you this: what is the temperature of the earth right now? I'll help you out. There is no one temperature of the earth. To suggest that there is, is laughable. I don't care how many temperature gauges they put on the planet, it is simply not enough to come up with one reliable temperature reading that can be compared annually with any precision within any sound margin of error.
Second, our reliable temperature records only go back, at best, 100 years or so, and even these are from just a few areas on the globe. How can we seriously say that global temperatures are catastrophically rising when we only have a few temperatures records from 100 years ago? How do we know that temperatures aren't falling from 150, 200 or 1000 years ago? We don't. Like I said, the very notion is ridiculous.
Anyway, that is the common sense approach. Those of us who have been trying to expose this sinister hoax from the beginning, however, know that common sense has nothing to do with it. So, let's stick with the raw facts.
Lee Gerhard is a Senior Scientist Emeritus from the University of Kansas and an IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Reviewer. He presents the following scientific facts about our climate. You may be surprised to learn the following:
• The most effective greenhouse gas is water vapor, comprising approximately of 95 percent of the total greenhouse effect.
• Carbon dioxide concentration has been continually rising for nearly 100 years. It continues to rise, but carbon dioxide concentrations at present are near the lowest in geologic history.
• Temperature change correlation with carbon dioxide levels is not statistically significant.
• There are no data that definitively relate carbon dioxide levels to temperature changes.
• The greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide logarithmically declines with increasing concentration. At present levels, any additional carbon dioxide can have very little effect.
We also know a lot about Earth temperature changes.
• Global temperature changes naturally all of the time, in both directions and at many scales of intensity.
• The warmest year in the U.S. in the last century was 1934, not 1998. The U.S. has the best and most extensive temperature records in the world.
• Global temperature peaked in 1998 on the current 60-80 year cycle, and has been episodically declining ever since. This cooling absolutely falsifies claims that human carbon dioxide emissions are a controlling factor in Earth temperature.
• Voluminous historic records demonstrate the Medieval Climate Optimum (MCO) was real and that the "hockey stick" graphic that attempted to deny that fact was at best bad science. The MCO was considerably warmer than the end of the 20th century.
• During the last 100 years, temperature has both risen and fallen, including the present cooling. All the changes in temperature of the last 100 years are in normal historic ranges, both in absolute value and, most importantly, rate of change.
Contrary to many public statements: • Effects of temperature change are absolutely independent of the cause of the temperature change.
• Global hurricane, cyclonic and major storm activity is near 30-year lows.
Any increase in cost of damages by storms is a product of increasing population density in vulnerable areas such as along the shores and property value inflation, not due to any increase in frequency or severity of storms.
• Polar bears have survived and thrived over periods of extreme cold and extreme warmth over hundreds of thousands of years - extremes far in excess of modern temperature changes.
• The 2009 minimum Arctic ice extent was significantly larger than the previous two years. The 2009 Antarctic maximum ice extent was significantly above the 30-year average. There are only 30 years of records.
• Rate and magnitude of sea level changes observed during the last 100 years are within normal historical ranges. Current sea level rise is tiny and, at most, justifies a prediction of perhaps ten centimeters rise in this century.
Now you have the facts. A bit different from what you've been told, aren't they?
From here, we can now go into some of the sordid details of the complex and elaborate hoax that is man-caused global warming.
Gerhard ends his report with this statement: "I have been a reviewer of the last two IPCC reports, one of the several thousand scientists who purportedly are supporters of the IPCC view that humans control global temperature. Nothing could be further from the truth. Many of us try to bring better and more current science to the IPCC, but we usually fail. Recently we found out why. The whistleblower release of e-mails and files from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University has demonstrated scientific malfeasance and a sickening violation of scientific ethics."
I am going to tell you more about these e-mails from the corrupt leaders of the global warming mafia next week.
When you consider just how much the theory of global warming has impacted all of us over the past few years, you can see just how big this story is.
Stay tuned…"
Global Carbon Dioxide levels are increasing, Global temperatures are declining....? Kinda shoots holes "man-made global warming" propaganda.... It's all about the control of money. If they can tax carbon, then there's no limit how much tax pressure they can put on us to act in accordance with whatever they would have us do. It's a scam, a hoax, a greedy, money grubbing, hike the taxes up to control the population scheme with no actual science to back it up. Deny that!
the thing to remember here is that we on the conservative side have our liars as well. there is no denying that. the problem I have is that the left is lying, and doing it in a way that makes us feel eco-guilty and doing it under the guise of betterment for man. at least the liars on my side are forthcoming about saying its about business and capitalism
I will say this however. I am sure glad that these climate change scientists (the lying basturds) and the people around the world (stupid basturds) do NOT agree with the few guys on the forums who have been exposing their wisdom to the BOTL here.
It seems that lies, fear mongering and attacking peoples credibility are the order of the day. No need to argue science, instead look for the obscure report or statement from some unheard of or corporate scientist which supports your view, or better yet a conspiracy theory that can be put forward and held up as proof of there being no climate change.
I just hope that your "wisdom" allows you to one day hold one of your grand children or great grand children on your lap while you tell them stories or teach them to tie their shoes.
Cause if you are wrong then instead you may be explaining to those same grand children why they can't play outside, or why does God think it is OK for so many little children to have to live with Cancer.
Maybe you could tell them, (if you have the courage and honesty within you) about the time that the world chose to do nothing instead of taking actions to try to reverse or slow the effects of climate change, because we wanted to stop those nasty scientists from trying to take advantage of us and stealing our money. Instead we decided that our markets and economies were far more important then the environment and climate change, and that business leaders and politicians were to be trusted much more then those lying basturd scientists, and that it is better to be at death's door from the global human point of view then it would have been to stay alive for eons while subcribing to the views of all those corrupt, lying basturd scientist's. Good thing we made the right decision, our money is safe. LMAO
Why is what I post not considered facts by you? They are facts, but you just don't like them, so like the rest of the left you simply dimish the persons making the posts, and ignore the facts...pitiful...
do you remember when the ELF (Environmental Liberation Front) lit all those Hummer H2's on fire in SoCal to try and make a point about pollution. Did you know that 100 H2's don't pollute the air 1/10th as much as the fire from the burning plastic and rubber from those cars being set ablaze in the interest of "Awareness for a better environment"
Laker, you stir the pot but you don't want the answers. Typical hippy bullshlt
"Bob Unruh of WorldNetDaily reported that 31,000 U.S. scientists - 9,000 with doctorate degrees in atmospheric science, climatology, Earth science, environment and other specialties - have signed a petition rejecting global warming."
Here's the full link: http://www.tulsabeacon.com/?p=462
Again with the name calling. You're funny. My opinions are bullshit and conspiracies. Your's are facts, !!!
What I say here is opinion. What I post from other sources are others opinions. When you post something it is the SAME THING. It is YOUR opinion, nothing more.
Hippie, LMFAO, too funny.
Also, while I may agree with the opinions of certain people here and disagree with others there is no need for name calling on either side. Not saying I disagree with your point of view guys but name calling isn't cool no matter what your intentions.