D
Darryl1958
Guest
That is why it is the biggest scientific scandal in history.
But apparently the data no longer matters. It is all about making good looking graphs with power point.
The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever
- Status
But apparently the data no longer matters. It is all about making good looking graphs with power point.
L
lynnvinc
Guest
When I see Eagle Ford, I can’t help but think of those being harmed by that fracking.
See vimeo.com/86979931 or stories.weather.com/fracking
Why do we have to harm and kill people to live profligate, wasteful, inefficient, non-conservative lives.
Especially when we could be saving money by becoming energy/resource efficient/conservative and going on alt energy when feasible.
Why this will to kill? I guess it’s always been there, since Cain.
L
lynnvinc
Guest
That’s what I mean – everyone thinks they are an expert scientist who knows better than the actual climate scientists. Don’t listen to me; contact some real climate scientists (not ones on the fossil fuel dole) and ask him or her. They are very gracious about answering such questions.
Here is something that might help:
- skepticalscience.com/CO2-trace-gas.htm
- newscientist.com/article/dn11638-climate-myths-human-co2-emissions-are-too-tiny-to-matter.html#.VOQMRU1MG70
- realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/08/the-co2-problem-in-6-easy-steps/
- realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/11/how-much-co2-emission-is-too-much/
Champion of AGW most certainly do NOT want to make people pay higher for energy (e.g., just go on emitting the same GHGs, only paying higher for that). That’s not the aim at all. What they may want is for people to find ways (and there are plenty of cost-effective ways) to reduce their GHG emissions.Families are having difficult times surviving now, and champions of AGW want to whack us with outrageous new taxes and energy costs. We pay enough now!
We’ve actually been saving many $1000s by mitigating AGW over the past 25 years (since 1990, when JPII called on us to do so) – reducing our GHGs 60%+ below our 1990 emissions (and reducing concomitant local and regional pollution, and conserving finite resources for future generations).
Where there is a will, where people turn to God in prayer for help and in times of trouble, there comes grace-filled solutions. We are going into lent tomorrow – it is a good time to start looking for ways we can reduce our harms to others and turn to God in prayer for help in this.
It was all counter-intuitive to us 25 years ago when we started mitigating that we’d be saving $$ and setting ourselves up for a good retirement within a year from now, and quite frankly my husband was only “on-board” if it didn’t lower our living standards and didn’t cost much…but, praised by the Lord, we ended up net saving r/t net losing money…and now my husband is champing at the bit to get on to more such savings
I cannot over-emphasize the importance of prayer in this…
R
Retread_Mick
Guest
:
That might explain all the alarmists
R
Retread_Mick
Guest
The problem is, the scientists you listen to have gained immensely, and are continuing to.
“Researchers pound the global-warming drum because they know there is politics and, therefore, money behind it. . . I’ve been critical of global warming and am persona non grata.”
Dr. William Gray
(Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado
“Scientists who want to attract attention to themselves, who want to attract great funding to themselves, have to (find a) way to scare the public . . . and this you can achieve only by making things bigger and more dangerous than they really are.”
Petr Chylek
(Professor of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia)
Commenting on reports by other researchers that Greenland’s glaciers are melting.
(Halifax Chronicle-Herald, August 22, 2001) (8)
Only the most naïve among us would believe that there are no scientists that would sell out for profit. Read on
We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."Stephen Schneider (leading advocate of the global warming theory)
(in interview for Discover magazine, Oct 1989)
Quite evident that the big lie was the order of the day right from the get go.
In the United States…we have to first convince the American People and the Congress that the climate problem is real."former President Bill Clinton in a 1997 address to the United Nations
In case anyone doubts that the big lie was endorsed by the biggest liar.
“Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing – in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”
Tim Wirth , while U.S. Senator, Colorado.
After a short stint as United Nations Under-Secretary for Global Affairs (4)
he now serves as President, U.N. Foundation, created by Ted Turner and his $1 billion “gift”
Another Democrat, who went on to profit extensively from the farce.
“No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits… Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
Christine Stewart, former Minister of the Environment of Canada
quote from the Calgary Herald, 1999
In an earlier post I mentioned that the big lie suited the socialist movement to a T. Here is a true blue socialist, with whom I am all too familiar. Ms. Stewart realizes that some are rich while others are poor, some happy while some are not. If it were not for the Liberal Party’s ouster she would be gleefully using this panic to ensure equality, where everyone was poor and miserable…Except her and her Liberal cronies, of course.
And for the GRAND FINALE
Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are…
former Vice President Al Gore
(now, chairman and co-founder of Generation Investment Management–
a London-based business that sells carbon credits)
(in interview with Grist Magazine Reference_Docs/An_inconvenient_truth.pdf Reference_Docs/An_inconvenient_truth.pdfMay 9, 2006, concerning his book, An Inconvenient Truth)
Apparently Forest Gore learned the art of prevarication well during his time with Clinton. Like Forrest Gump this southern yokel seems destined for unbelievable wealth. However in this case not by simple good fortune. This time the use of chicanery and deceit are all too evident…
The big boohoo over the big oil companies always pops its head up. Every time a new study comes out , opposing the notion of global warming, no matter the source, we hear “Well that was probably funded by Big Oil” in sneering tones. The false studies are being funded by Big Carbon, and have been right from the get go. The shameful part is aiding an abetting we find Big Government, whose duty is to serve and protect the people, not fleece them.
R
Retread_Mick
Guest
One more time!!! The Vostok cores indicate, that rising CO2 FOLLOWS rising temperature, not causes it. They also indicate six points, over the last 420,000 years, when the temperature was considerably higher than today, the most recent only 1000 years ago.
Water vapour in the atmosphere is more prevalent in the greenhouse effect than CO2. The only plausible reason, for jumping all over CO2, is MONEY
We produce 3% or less of the CO2 introduced into the atmosphere every year and we could be eliminated entirely without affecting the climate one way or the other.
As pointed out in someones earlier post fossil fuels are critical in maintaining our economy and way of life. Since the Liberal Government of the Province of Ontario forced a renewable energy program on us our electric costs have doubled and they’ve squandered billions on eyesore wind and solar projects that can’t even produce 3% of our total needs, along with wasting, hundreds if not thousands of farmland. (Higher food costs folks)
Summation. Like it or not global warming alarmists, the whole thing has been a boondoggle from day one, and all the “scientific data” you’ve been spouting is just so much hogwash. When someone lies to make a point they have no point to make. It amazes me, that there are so many egotistical people around, that smugly refuse to accept how truly insignificant we really are.
This will be my last post, on this thread. I was thinking of continuing to read the alarmist hogwash, as penance for Lent, but I’m afraid all that smugness might lead me to lose my temper, and that would not be being a good Christian.
Water vapour in the atmosphere is more prevalent in the greenhouse effect than CO2. The only plausible reason, for jumping all over CO2, is MONEY
We produce 3% or less of the CO2 introduced into the atmosphere every year and we could be eliminated entirely without affecting the climate one way or the other.
As pointed out in someones earlier post fossil fuels are critical in maintaining our economy and way of life. Since the Liberal Government of the Province of Ontario forced a renewable energy program on us our electric costs have doubled and they’ve squandered billions on eyesore wind and solar projects that can’t even produce 3% of our total needs, along with wasting, hundreds if not thousands of farmland. (Higher food costs folks)
Summation. Like it or not global warming alarmists, the whole thing has been a boondoggle from day one, and all the “scientific data” you’ve been spouting is just so much hogwash. When someone lies to make a point they have no point to make. It amazes me, that there are so many egotistical people around, that smugly refuse to accept how truly insignificant we really are.
This will be my last post, on this thread. I was thinking of continuing to read the alarmist hogwash, as penance for Lent, but I’m afraid all that smugness might lead me to lose my temper, and that would not be being a good Christian.
H
Hans_W
Guest
Excellent examples of selected quote mining!
The problem is, the scientists you listen to have gained immensely, and are continuing to.
“Researchers pound the global-warming drum because they know there is politics and, therefore, money behind it. . . I’ve been critical of global warming and am persona non grata.”
Dr. William Gray
(Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado
“Scientists who want to attract attention to themselves, who want to attract great funding to themselves, have to (find a) way to scare the public . . . and this you can achieve only by making things bigger and more dangerous than they really are.”
Petr Chylek
(Professor of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia)
Commenting on reports by other researchers that Greenland’s glaciers are melting.
(Halifax Chronicle-Herald, August 22, 2001) (8)
Only the most naïve among us would believe that there are no scientists that would sell out for profit. Read on
We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."Stephen Schneider (leading advocate of the global warming theory)
(in interview for Discover magazine, Oct 1989)
Quite evident that the big lie was the order of the day right from the get go.
In the United States…we have to first convince the American People and the Congress that the climate problem is real."former President Bill Clinton in a 1997 address to the United Nations
In case anyone doubts that the big lie was endorsed by the biggest liar.
“Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing – in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”
Tim Wirth , while U.S. Senator, Colorado.
After a short stint as United Nations Under-Secretary for Global Affairs (4)
he now serves as President, U.N. Foundation, created by Ted Turner and his $1 billion “gift”
Another Democrat, who went on to profit extensively from the farce.
“No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits… Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
Christine Stewart, former Minister of the Environment of Canada
quote from the Calgary Herald, 1999
In an earlier post I mentioned that the big lie suited the socialist movement to a T. Here is a true blue socialist, with whom I am all too familiar. Ms. Stewart realizes that some are rich while others are poor, some happy while some are not. If it were not for the Liberal Party’s ouster she would be gleefully using this panic to ensure equality, where everyone was poor and miserable…Except her and her Liberal cronies, of course.
And for the GRAND FINALE
Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are…
former Vice President Al Gore
(now, chairman and co-founder of Generation Investment Management–
a London-based business that sells carbon credits)
(in interview with Grist Magazine Reference_Docs/An_inconvenient_truth.pdf Reference_Docs/An_inconvenient_truth.pdfMay 9, 2006, concerning his book, An Inconvenient Truth)
Apparently Forest Gore learned the art of prevarication well during his time with Clinton. Like Forrest Gump this southern yokel seems destined for unbelievable wealth. However in this case not by simple good fortune. This time the use of chicanery and deceit are all too evident…
The big boohoo over the big oil companies always pops its head up. Every time a new study comes out , opposing the notion of global warming, no matter the source, we hear “Well that was probably funded by Big Oil” in sneering tones. The false studies are being funded by Big Carbon, and have been right from the get go. The shameful part is aiding an abetting we find Big Government, whose duty is to serve and protect the people, not fleece them.
H
Hans_W
Guest
Wow, that’s great news. That will overthrow all their theories.
Good idea…
This will be my last post, on this thread. I was thinking of continuing to read the alarmist hogwash, as penance for Lent, but I’m afraid all that smugness might lead me to lose my temper, and that would not be being a good Christian.
T
Theo520
Guest
In true ***Warmist Alarmist ***fashion, you label anyone driving a combustion vehicle as a natural born killer
Not everyone else knew how the *work the system *and get
tax $ to pay for their solar panels and subsidized electric cars.
In truth, the system can’t afford to subsidize everyone as it did you.
In truth, combustion engines and carbon power have saved millions of lives.
If you are genuinely concerned about Eagle Ford, donate to set up temporary remote air quality stations that can be used to monitor and bring real data to the discussion.
Not everyone else knew how the *work the system *and get
tax $ to pay for their solar panels and subsidized electric cars.
In truth, the system can’t afford to subsidize everyone as it did you.
In truth, combustion engines and carbon power have saved millions of lives.
If you are genuinely concerned about Eagle Ford, donate to set up temporary remote air quality stations that can be used to monitor and bring real data to the discussion.
R
RACJ
Guest
A lot of meteorologists such as Roy Spencer and Joe Bastardi do NOT believe in AGW, Lynn. Why are proponents afraid to debate these guys? I would love to see this debate, which allegedly is over, according to Al Gore et al. RobThat’s what I mean – everyone thinks they are an expert scientist who knows better than the actual climate scientists. Don’t listen to me; contact some real climate scientists (not ones on the fossil fuel dole) and ask him or her. They are very gracious about answering such questions.
Here is something that might help:
I know it seems counter-intuitive, but sometimes in science it is found that very small amounts lead to large effects. CO2 and other GHGs are not the only cases of this.
- skepticalscience.com/CO2-trace-gas.htm
- newscientist.com/article/dn11638-climate-myths-human-co2-emissions-are-too-tiny-to-matter.html#.VOQMRU1MG70
- realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/08/the-co2-problem-in-6-easy-steps/
- realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/11/how-much-co2-emission-is-too-much/
Champion of AGW most certainly do NOT want to make people pay higher for energy (e.g., just go on emitting the same GHGs, only paying higher for that). That’s not the aim at all. What they may want is for people to find ways (and there are plenty of cost-effective ways) to reduce their GHG emissions.
We’ve actually been saving many $1000s by mitigating AGW over the past 25 years (since 1990, when JPII called on us to do so) – reducing our GHGs 60%+ below our 1990 emissions (and reducing concomitant local and regional pollution, and conserving finite resources for future generations).
Where there is a will, where people turn to God in prayer for help and in times of trouble, there comes grace-filled solutions. We are going into lent tomorrow – it is a good time to start looking for ways we can reduce our harms to others and turn to God in prayer for help in this.
It was all counter-intuitive to us 25 years ago when we started mitigating that we’d be saving $$ and setting ourselves up for a good retirement within a year from now, and quite frankly my husband was only “on-board” if it didn’t lower our living standards and didn’t cost much…but, praised by the Lord, we ended up net saving r/t net losing money…and now my husband is champing at the bit to get on to more such savings
I cannot over-emphasize the importance of prayer in this…
W
weller2
Guest
Again, you should finally realize that the carbon age is coming to an end. This is indisputable; the big question is what will follow it.
Fracking is akin to selling your family house to get one last heroin fix.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Apparently you think that the proper way to conduct science is to stage an event with podiums for the opposing sides, like a political debate. That is not how science works. Scientific debates are carried on through published research. And on that level, these alternate viewpoints have been debated - thoroughly. But with your style of debate, the guy with the flashiest presentation and personal charisma wins. No thanks.
R
RACJ
Guest
Sorry Leaf, it is sheer cowardice on the parts of the AGW crowd. If I knew what I believed was true, as the AGW people claim to, I would be anxious to expose my opposition as either misguided or fraudulent. Anyway, stay warm! Oh, have you seen the Niagra Falls ice sculpture? It’s really cool!
Blessings, Rob
R
RACJ
Guest
What is “safe”, enviro-friendly" energy in your opinion, energy which will supply the needs of the world? I still have a hitching post outside my home, to remind me of the good old days. Oh, I forgot. Gotta go and look for my syringe.
T
Theo520
Guest
Fracturing technology was used as far back as the 1860s, when liquid (and later, solidified) nitroglycerin (NG) was used to stimulate shallow, hard rock wells in Pennsylvania, New York, Kentucky, and West Virginia
If not normal gas and oil, we will use synthetic versions. Nothing beats it as a safe energy storage medium
If not normal gas and oil, we will use synthetic versions. Nothing beats it as a safe energy storage medium
L
lynnvinc
Guest
Al Gore is not a climate scientist. It would be better if they debate with real climate scientists, which apparently they have done and lost.A lot of meteorologists such as Roy Spencer and Joe Bastardi do NOT believe in AGW, Lynn. Why are proponents afraid to debate these guys? I would love to see this debate, which allegedly is over, according to Al Gore et al. Rob
There are usually a few outlier scientists who have a position different from the mainstream, accepted position. That doesn’t mean they are correct – it means they are likely wrong.
Spencer’s claim that satellite temps showed no warming was shown to be wrong & he accepted that there was warming (unlike many here), but said it was not human-caused. His degree is in meteorology, so it seems he is not quite up on climate science. Also, he apparently “fiddled with temp data,” mixing in higher altitude temps (which are getting colder as less heat is radiated back out into space due to the GH effect) into the lower altitude temps where the warming is occurring, and he reversed the signs on some of the data. Maybe it was by mistake, or who knows?
Joe Bastardi is a weatherman, not a climate scientist.
But even if both of these men were climate scientists with extensive knowledge of climate science, it is not unusual to find a few scientists in any field research or observational type of science that disagrees to some extent or the other with the mainstream. And there is always a slight possibility they may be right in some way or another. However, now global warming has been robustly established from many perspectives by 1000s of climate scientists and other scientists noting various changes. Those climate scientists who may have been skeptical in the 80s and 90s, now accept that AGW is real.
What the Church calls on us to do is take the prudent course of mitigating AGW, which could pose very grave risks of harm, even if we personally are not completely sure it is happening.
M
mikekle
Guest
Thats the million dollar question…I have a feeling the powers that be are not prepared and we are just speeding towards a brick wall.
If Im not mistaken, peak oil was reached back in the late 1970s…yet they just keep on cranking out new cars with the same old internal combustion engines!!! Sure they have hyrids and full electrics, but they ensure they wont become too popular, Im sure big oil has alot to do with that as well. LOL, so while those cars may be cheaper to operate, it equals out when the price tag is ridiculously expensive.
I tend to believe there are probably very cheap energy sources out there, but the powers that be, DO NOT want the public to ever hear about them, as this would lead to the collapse of major industries, just google the topic, there have been a few people who had great ideas but oddly, they were either threatened or bought out, making sure they never release their discovery.
T
Theo520
Guest
Please provide a reference for this lost debate
Your proposal that science is consensus based is, frankly, shocking.
Nobody here claims we are not still exiting the mini ice age. It’s kinda cute how you try to discredit Spencer using innuendo. Also, you are wrong on your theory, at altitude we were supposed to see hot spots from global warming, not ‘getting colder’
I’ve shown you very clearly how Hansen’s projections were not validated by measurement, hence his models failed the scientific method. Stop attacking Spencer and Bastardi when they have been proven right.
Why do you insist
S
sps49
Guest
The simplest explanation is that the alternative modes of personal transportation over useful distances are too expensive for the vast majority of people, and that the carbon based primary energy source is still the most ubiquitous and cheapest energy solution. However, I am open to examine what ever proof you have that contradicts the simplest explanation.
W
weller2
Guest
Nuclear.
BTW, fracking is still insane on economical grounds alone. The energy sector needs to invest $130 in drilling to produce $100 worth of tight oil. The fracking “miracle” is only posisble because Fed is printing money, giving this money to the banks, who then borrow it to the energy companies.
- Status