| Author | Message | ||
     Aesquire |
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/02/08/ear ths-polar-ice-melting-less-than-thought Pilots have known for a few years about the ice coverage reports coming from a malfunctioning satellite. Nasa was reporting clear water as airliners were reporting solid ice cover. Didn't get any press to speak of. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/08/ glaciers-mountains?intcmp=122 The fraudulent reports of glacier melt also were well known. Dude just faked the data and never went near the mountains. The U.N, go figure. http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,8 13814,00.html Very hostile interview, lots of good data. ... SPIEGEL: So your contention that we are wrong about global warming is merely a provocation? Vahrenholt: No. I mean it very seriously, and I know that dozens of solar researchers agree with me. I am perfectly aware of the defamation I will have to listen to in the near future. The climate debate also has some of the trappings of an inquisition. I'm curious to see which truth ministry will now initiate proceedings against me. Perhaps it'll be the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, which is headed by Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, an adviser to the chancellor. ... | ||
| Danger_dave |
You goobers really believe that pumping less pollutants into the atmosphere is not a good idea? Funny as. | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
We think less pollution and more efficiency is good we just dont want slimeballs like gore forcefeeding us his snakeoil. Do you support a carbon tax system dangerdave? | ||
| Danger_dave |
Moot point. We've got a doozie of a Carbon Tax as law already. I do believe that the crud 'we' are pumping into the air is doing harm. What that harm is - is as contentious as religion. | ||
| Geedee |
DD, I'd be more worried about the crud 'they' are pumping into the air, and why. A global Chemtrail/Aerosol spraying programme in conjunction with HAARP that few wish to admit exists. Contrails and 'Persistant Contrails' - bollocks. I'm going for a spin on the DR to cool off. | ||
| Geedee |
Off topic, maybe, but diesels pollute  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ow0a06gsiF4 | ||
| Geedee |
I think Doogle appears @ 28secs. | ||
| Aesquire |
You goobers really believe that pumping less pollutants into the atmosphere is not a good idea? No. You really believe that you should be taxed for exhaling? You really believe that "Global Warming" can make the same people rich as "Global Climate Change" and "Global Ice age" with the exact same solution? That the solution is to impose an unelected world government of self appointed elites who will dictate to you how much you can drive, what you are allowed to eat, where you are allowed to live, and how many children you are allowed to have? ( see UN Agenda 21 ) | ||
| Danger_dave |
>>You really believe that you should be taxed for exhaling?<< Gold. | ||
| Reepicheep |
That's probably the sad part of the whole thing... the focus on carbon dioxide as a "pollutant" has taken our eyes off the *real* pollutants. Carbon dioxide is what any animal exhales after they have taken a breath and metabolized oxygen. Carbon dioxide is *also* what a plant (or algae) consumes, and they "exhale"... oxygen. They then "fixate" the extra carbon molecule to make... well... more plant. Where did all the carbon we are turning into carbon dioxide come from? Um, from dead plants long ago. Where did they get it? Um, from the air. It's a big cycle. Long ago, there was less carbon in the air (in the form of carbon dioxide) and more oxygen. That's why dragon flies (and other animals without lungs) could get so HUGE... like a 1 foot wingspan. As the ratio of oxygen to carbon dioxide changed (without the help of any member of the Bush family), the planet did change. It's a natural cycle. Mankind is (maybe, if you make a lot of really really extreme assumptions) lightly impacting these natural cycles. Ironically, if anything, we are moderating them. But the majority of the effects of the cycle happen with or without us. I remember when environmental science was more science than religion, and we did some fantastic things as a result (for example car emissions). Now it's a dogmatic religion. | ||
| Mayerhd |
"How about a more reliable source than the frickin' Daily Mail?" "NASA finds 2011 to be the 9th warmest year on record since 1880; 9 of the 10 warmest years in the modern meteorological record have occurred since the year 2000" In response to the above: "Of the past 10,500 years, 9,100 were warmer than 1934/1998/2010. Thus, regardless of which year ( 1934, 1998, or 2010) turns out to be the warmest of the past century, that year will rank number 9,099 in the long-term list." - WUWT http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/28/2010%E2%80%9 4where-does-it-fit-in-the-warmest-year-list/ DD, I've always been curious, why is it when someone doesn't buy into the global warming argument, they are then considered to be anti-environment by those that do? | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
It was fun when the gores were chasing heavy metal bands with pitchforks accusing them of satan worship now they have goobers like dave forcing us to subsidize stuff like the chevy volt. Alot of money is at stake. | ||
| Admin |
More CO2 in the air means more vigorous plant growth, which means more productive farming. Can't have that now can we? >>> You goobers really believe that pumping less pollutants into the atmosphere is not a good idea? Is carbon dioxide really a pollutant? Isn't it an odorless, colorless gas that is vital to life on this planet? Who you callin' "goobers" there doogler? | ||
| Madduck |
Actually a case can be made for pollution in the air strengthening the immune system by giving it trace elements to exercise against. The complete absence of any pollution could easily be unhealthy. A study needs to be commisioned to find that level where benefit ends and harm begins. Studies have confirmed that pet dandruff early in a babies life significantly reduce the emergence of asthma in later years. Dogs are good, cats seem to be equivocal. | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
Maddux, George Carlin said as much, too. | ||
| Sifo |
That's probably the sad part of the whole thing... the focus on carbon dioxide as a "pollutant" has taken our eyes off the *real* pollutants. DING, DING, DING! A winner! The reality is that we are currently close to being CO2 deficient in our atmosphere. Past periods had many times this amount of CO2 and the Earth flourished. | ||
| Aesquire |
Carbon dioxide is the perfect tool for the big con. You can's see it, ( unlike soot and the sulfur dioxide rising from powerplants ) you can't smell it, or taste it, ( unless bubbled through water, making carbolic acid... a prime ingredient in Coke ) or even measure it easily without equipment the vast majority of humans don't have. So you can claim anything you want. Perfect for the Con. The Prophet Gore claims his world travel and massive use of energy is ok, since he buys carbon credits. If you didn't know he sells them to himself, and actually takes a profit on the deal with govt. tax incentives, ( he does after all, have friends in high places ) that would seem ok. A great deal of the money invested in Gore's credits goes to Waste Management. It gives them money to put into methane collection gear in their dumps. Which they were already installing to make money. I have no proof that the "mob" is involved or that The Prophet gets a kickback, but I'd bet you $100 that you can't prove it's not so..... Carbon Credits are a major con. They look to steal $trillion$ from, well, you. The trading is to be centered in Chicago. How odd. They people in Charge are good buddies of the current Prez. strangely enough. You of course will pay for them every day. The tax/theft will be buried, as Congress has shown in the phone taxes that the phone companies are forbidden BY LAW to list on the bill you get each month. ( It's For the Children! ) Carbon Credits are like Indulgences a rich man could buy from the Church. A donation to the local Bishop or Cardinal and you got a slip of paper saying your sins were forgiven. You could even buy them before you did the sin, so you could be sure your soul was safe, ( and your reputation protected ) before hand. One of the main things that led to the Protestant Reformation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indulgence More important is how you can be taxed and the money given to foreign rich guys. http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/ http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/un_agenda_2 1_coming_to_a_neigh.html http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/ Even the smart lefties know better than to accept this stuff. | ||
| Sifo |
Wait! You mean to tell me that Coke is POISONING us with CO2! YOU BASTARDS! | ||
| Kenm123t |
Lies always come out When you falsify data and research for grant money you should be stripped of thier degrees. The global scam artists should be jailed for criminal activity. The damage they did to real research. The so called scientists are nothing more than the Program junkies we support. Only difference is the price and one has a so called degree one has a commuinity organizer. Our colleges need a house cleaning commonsense and reasoned learning were removed long ago. News Flash folks you are Carbon based life forms! | ||
| Aesquire |
Soylent Green is People!!!!! | ||
| Kenm123t |
Yes AE it is depend on the how you like your Carbon Sugar or Starches lol. Did you hear the Idiot HHS spokeswoman tell the media to day pregnancy is a threat to a family for 30 years. You can't make this stuff up Looks like a Liberal Arts Degree and or Gov service requires a lobotomy ROFL | ||
| Aesquire |
The term "Useful Idiot" was not chosen lightly. I suppose they will confiscate Diamonds next. They are Carbon. Sifo, the Carbolic acid is what makes Coca-Cola the best for removing rust from bolts. ( compared to Fresca, etc ) Dissolves teeth too. I wonder, does the act of opening a Coke, the release of the trapped CO2, make me worse than a Private Jet Owner? ( like Warren Buffet ) | ||
| Aesquire |
Another of my notes is on the climate debates: so far we have on the one side a group of scientists and others who point out that the data do not support the AGW hypothesis predictions, and the AGW Believers have responded by attacking the credentials of those who point out that the data don’t match the predictions. That’s pretty irrelevant. Why do I need scientific credentials to point out that your own data do not match your predictions? When I was a Marxist back in undergraduate days, we had a debate phrase we used often: “Before you attack your opponent’s motives, answer his arguments.” I thought that was right then and I think it now. Of course when I questioned some of the Marxist predictions I got denunciations from my former colleagues, thus proving that it was a catch phrase. And gee, I thought they meant it. I did. Ah well. But the data keep coming in, and so long as you actually believe in science rather than merely Believe, it’s getting hard to ignore. The current policies are based on assumptions. 1. The Earth is in fact steadily warming; not only is the cold not coming back, but AGW is overcoming the ‘natural’ trend of the past 200,000 years toward glaciation. 2. That warming is caused by CO2 and the cooling from 1320 to about 1800 was caused by something else; volcanism, perhaps, rather than solar activity. A seldom discussed corollary is that we can ignore volcanism as a determinant of the future. 3. Warming is bad, not good. There is some discussion of this but no big grants to do definitive studies that I know of. 4. People in the West – USA, Europe, perhaps Japan – can do something about this even if the Chinese and Indians are Deniers and will continue to burn fossil fuels. 5. What we can do will be cost effective: that it won’t bankrupt us while accomplishing little to nothing. At least if we bankrupt ourselves and fail it may be easier to live under more primitive conditions if it’s warm. The worst would be that we bankrupt ourselves, stop warming, and we have no way to combat the cold. Admittedly I have been a bit whimsical there, but the questions are serious, and I see little discussion of them. Most of the “defense” of the “consensus” position on AGW is that those who don’t believe it are incompetent and not worthy to be part of the great climate science community – and probably take oil money. Government grants through universities are not corrupting. Oil money corrupts. Jerry Pournelle. view February 07, 2012 http://jerrypournelle.com/jerrypournelle.c/chaosma nor/ ( the original Blog. Really. ) | ||
| Blake |
Nice. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://bartlesvilleradio.com/pages/news/25962012/i nhofe-book-on-global-warming I totally agree that there is in fact Climate Change. Always has been, I can give dozens of historical examples from the Frost Fairs on the Thames in London to the Pueblo cliff dwellers. I'm also a fan of the concept that Man affects the Climate by his actions, based on clear correlation between atmospheric soot in coal fired England and Europe before and after the electrification of France and England. Less soot meant the famous London Fogs went away and people froze to death on the beaches of the Riviera. That was in the 1970's and marks the beginning of the whole Climate Scam. The obviously approaching Ice Age ( if you are short sighted and ignorant, like most politicians ) led to a movement in the U.N. toward Centralized Control of Resources to ease the upcoming famines as crops failed in the cold. It was a crisis, and far too good to waste. With such a crisis, Control could be had over everyone. Decisions Had To Be Made To Save The World. This meant control over How much, and what you are allowed to eat. ( Cows fart methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, and so.... ) Control over Where and how you live. ( suburbs use too much fuel to commute to the jobs.... ) How many Children you are allowed to have. etc. etc. The perfect opportunity for seizing the reins of power over the planet, but especially America. Which uses too many resources and thus must pay restitution to the World for it's sins. ( and the skim off that will be more billions than they stole from U.N. Iraq Oil for Food program that starved countless thousands while Russian, French and U.N. Elites got very, very, rich ) That was when it got cold for a few years. When it got hot for a few, ( in pretty much the normal sunspot cycle ) it became Global Warming, and they had a great Senate Hearing carefully scheduled for the hottest day of the year in D.C., went in the night before and turned off the AC and opened the windows. Then shut them just before the hearing. Brilliant stagecraft. Then it became Global Climate Change, and now.... Is it cold out again? same answer for different problems means the answer is the goal and the problems are just excuses. Does Danger Dave know all this, or am I in error anywhere? Looking forward to the Senators book. | ||
| Moxnix |
Bookmarked, thanks. | ||
| Boltrider |
The problem is the climate change debate has become infected with lies and bad data, and this goober doesn't like being lied to. The proposed "solutions" to climate change won't be given up on easily because of how much additional tax revenue is at stake. It's a plan (for them) that's too big to fail. | ||
| Aesquire |
One of the obvious targets for Control is recreational vehicles. 4 wheelers, motorcycles, motor homes, etc. All represent what the Elite would consider frivolous use of fossil fuels. Does it bring the crops to market? Does it meet the needs of the collective? Then it must be banned. ( wait for it. This one is coming, I bet you $50 ) It makes no difference that my Cyclone gets better mileage than a Prius and uses FAR less Precious Resources to make, I'm a dirty biker and an obvious threat to Order, while the Prius owner is far more likely to have a "Coexist" sticker next to his "Obama 2012" one. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Only a goober would believe CO2 is a pollutant. Part of he reason we no longer have giant trees is that the CO2 levels are SIGNIFICANTLY lower than in the past. Were we to have levels that high again, we would see rapid and profound vegetation growth to compensate for it. We have very efficient scrubbers for CO2. Al Gore isn't one of them. He's the music man selling music instruments and band uniforms to a parade that doesn't exist. | ||
| Chauly |
OK, I can't stand it: Carbon dioxide dissolved in water (as in Coca-Cola) is carbonic acid}. Phenol, when used as an antiseptic, iscarbolic acid. back to normal programming...}} |
