[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet

This AMAZING Math Formula Will Teach You About God!

The GOSPEL of the ALIENS | Fallen Angels | Giants | Anunnaki

The IMAGE of the BEAST Revealed (REV 13) - WARNING: Not for Everyone

WEF Calls for AI to Replace Voters: ‘Why Do We Need Elections?’

The OCCULT Burger king EXPOSED

PANERA BREAD Antichrist message EXPOSED

The OCCULT Cheesecake Factory EXPOSED

Satanist And Witches Encounter The Cross

History and Beliefs of the Waldensians

Rome’s Persecution of the Bible

Evolutionists, You’ve Been Caught Lying About Fossils

Raw Streets of NYC Migrant Crisis that they don't show on Tv

Meet DarkBERT - AI Model Trained On DARK WEB

[NEW!] Jaw-dropping 666 Discovery Utterly Proves the King James Bible is God's Preserved Word

ALERT!!! THE MOST IMPORTANT INFORMATION WILL SOON BE POSTED HERE

Pinguinite You have mail..

What did Bill Clinton and Gavin Newsom talk about in Mexico? I have an idea


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

New World Order
See other New World Order Articles

Title: The Cornered Rats of Climate Change
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://finance.townhall.com/columni ... s_of_climate_change/page/full/
Published: May 2, 2012
Author: Marita Noon
Post Date: 2012-05-02 01:11:46 by Mad Dog
Keywords: BUSTED, the watermelons are, FREAKING out
Views: 22816
Comments: 66

Public confidence in scientific “consensus” regarding the theory of manmade climate change is threatening the believing scientists’ confidence. While polls show that taking action to fight climate change is off the radar of most Americans, the behavior of the theory’s advocates is even more telling. They are behaving like "cornered rats"—taking extreme actions to protect their turf.

On February 23, European Union officials are expected to vote on a draft law would assign a higher carbon-emissions value to bitumen-derived fuels, compared to more conventional crudes. The European Commission has proposed a Fuel Quality Directive that, if passed, will exclude fuel derived from Canada’s oil sands from European use. The premise is that the production of the oil in question produces more carbon emissions than conventional oil.

While virtually none of the bitumen-derived fuels are currently shipped to Europe, supporters of the manmade climate change viewpoint have been using the pending vote in attempt to get the issue back on the public’s horizon.

On February 21, two days before the scheduled vote, a half-page ad was placed in the Financial Times. The ad’s large print states: “Eight Nobel Peace Laureates—including Archbishop Desmond Tutu—want to keep dirty oil out of Europe. Support the European Commission’s Fuel Quality Directive.” The expensive ad then features a letter that the Nobel Laureates sent to “European Heads of State” in which they say, among other things: “Tar sands development is the fastest growing source of greenhouse gas emissions in Canada, and threatens the health of the planet. As the tar sands have contributed to rising emissions, Canada recently stepped away from the Kyoto Protocol. Europe must not follow in Canada’s footsteps.” Therein lies the true purpose of the ad.

The original letter is on stationary from the “Nobel Women’s Initiative” whose olive-branch logo includes this statement: “advocating for peace, justice, and equality.” The letterhead lists Laureates from many developing and/or under-developed countries. As I have previously posited, the Europeans’ support for the wealth-transferring Kyoto Protocol is that it would “equalize” energy costs between resource-rich North America and dependent Europe. The Kyoto Protocol would penalize the “wealthy” countries and financially reward the under- developed.

The expensive ad seems to have been purchased out of fear that the “equalizing” Kyoto Protocol may be dropped by Europe—as it has been by Canada.

It is, additionally, interesting to note that the Laureates mentioned in the ad are not Laureates in physics, chemistry, physiology, medicine, or even economic sciences—who might have some unique insight toward climate issues. They are Nobel “Peace” Laureates.

The day before the Financial Times carried the “keep dirty oil out of Europe” ad, a story broke citing water scientist and climate analyst Peter Gleick’s admission that his “judgment was blinded by my frustration with the ongoing efforts—often anonymous, well-funded and coordinated—to attack climate science.” He apologized for his hoax that “tricked” The Heartland Institute into releasing confidential documents. Gleick, who has been active in defending the manmade climate change view, used a false name in his ruse. He acknowledges that his actions were the result of “a serious lapse of my own and professional judgment and ethics.”

A UK Guardian news report about Gleick’s admission stated that his behavior “was seen by some as crossing a new line in the increasingly vitriolic debate.” In the New York Times, journalist Andrew Revkin describes what Gleick did as “an act that leaves his reputation in ruins.”

What would cause these two well-reputed sources to go to such extremes—expensive advertising and reputation-ruining acts—to defend their manmade climate change positions? The rat is cornered.

Anyone who follows the climate change debate knows that the Heartland Institute gives voice to scientists who do not ascribe to the theory of human-caused climate change. Their purpose is well known, and their strategies should not be a surprise. True scientists would welcome the debate—not seek to squash it. Gleick’s actions in tricking the Heartland Institute were aimed at discrediting it. If the science on the warmer’s side were solid, they wouldn’t need to resort to underhanded actions. But as more evidence, that began with the “Climategate” e-mails, comes out that shows that dissenters were silenced and that the predictions are being proven false, the scared promoters are taking extreme actions to protect their turf.

While Gleick’s ruse supposedly exposed Heartland’s “skeptic” funding, their budget is a drop in the bucket compared to the massive amounts of money spent in support of the manmade climate change position.

Years of steady funding in support of manmade climate change is being threatened. The cornered rats are taking extreme actions to protect their investment.

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 30.

#3. To: Mad Dog (#0)

hat began with the “Climategate” e-mails, comes out that shows that dissenters were silenced and that the predictions are being proven false, the scared promoters are taking extreme actions to protect their turf.

Who has been fired for fraud in the so-called "climate(empty)gate" scandal?

NewsJunky  posted on  2012-05-02   2:03:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: NewsJunky (#3)

hat began with the “Climategate” e-mails, comes out that shows that dissenters were silenced and that the predictions are being proven false, the scared promoters are taking extreme actions to protect their turf.

Who has been fired for fraud in the so-called "climate(empty)gate" scandal?

LOL!

I'm not your mommy. Look it up yourself.

Man caused global WEATHER change is, and always has been, a total FRAUD.

DEAL with it.

Mad Dog  posted on  2012-05-02   14:07:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Mad Dog (#5) (Edited)

a total FRAUD.

My suggestion to you would be to go over to RealClimate.org and post there and explain your reasoning to them. Watch out, you will probably get laughed at for your ignorance. But I bet you are too chicken to do it anyway.

NewsJunky  posted on  2012-05-02   15:29:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: NewsJunky (#8) (Edited)

My suggestion to you would be to go over to RealClimate.org and post there and explain your reasoning to them. Watch out, you will probably get laughed at for your ignorance...

The truly ignorant are those who think that pitiful little humans can affect the climate of the entire 4.5 billion year old planet.

The climate does change.

14,000 years ago, North America was buried under ice that was 1 mile deep.

Why is the ice gone? Because of global warming.

Humans didn't have any SUVs or coal fired electrical plants to cause it.

So what causes climate change?

The earth is not a perfect sphere, it doesn't rotate on its axis perfectly (Polaris is the North Star today, but it wasn't 13,000 years ago), its orbit around the sun isn't a perfect circle, and the entire solar system periodically drifts up and down the gallatic plane every 43 million years (which closely corresponds to major extinctions).

There are 7 thousand year, 26 thousand year, and 43 million year cycles at work.

Is human civilization having an affect? Maybe, but it is a very small affect

There is no reason at all to panic and destroy everything that we've built.

jwpegler  posted on  2012-05-02   19:59:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: jwpegler (#12) (Edited)

14,000 years ago, North America was buried under ice that was 1 mile deep.

Why is the ice gone? Because of global warming.

Carbon dioxide ended last Ice Age: study

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2012/04/05/3471948.htm

Is human civilization having an affect? Maybe, but it is a very small affect

That's not scientific consensus.

NewsJunky  posted on  2012-05-02   22:12:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: NewsJunky (#19)

Carbon dioxide ended last Ice Age: study

From SUVs???

No.

jwpegler  posted on  2012-05-03   9:24:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: jwpegler (#25) (Edited)

CO2 is a greenhouse gas. More CO2 means more warming. We have released large amounts of CO2 in the industrial age. Those are all well established facts.

NewsJunky  posted on  2012-05-03   14:31:28 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 30.

#31. To: NewsJunky, jwpegler (#30)

CO2 is a greenhouse gas. More CO2 means more warming. We have released large amounts of CO2 in the industrial age. Those are all well established facts.

You are a shallow, superficial, ignorant FOOL and a TOOL of tyrants.

All you have is your POSE, FOOL.

You can't even use grade school LOGIC.

What is your highest level of formal edujumacation boy?

Do they let you use anything but a big spoon at meals, (for your own safety of course)?

Mad Dog  posted on  2012-05-03 14:40:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: NewsJunky (#30)

LOL!

Let's try it this way.

What percentage of ALL so called "greehouse gases" is CO2?

What percentage of that total of CO2 is due to MANKIND?

What is the historical trend of the production of CO2 due to MANKIND?

I'd say that I'd wait for a SCIENTIFIC answer to those questions skunky, but WE have been waiting for over FOUR decades for an answer so far.

So ... feel free to tell us ALL the SCIENTIFIC answers anytime genius.

LMAO!!!

Mad Dog  posted on  2012-05-03 15:16:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: NewsJunky (#30) (Edited)

CO2 is a greenhouse gas. More CO2 means more warming. We have released large amounts of CO2 in the industrial age. Those are all well established facts.

You are missing the entire point.

The earth's climate has changed dramatically, numerous times in the past.

Regardless of what humans do, the climate is going to change again.

When the next asteroid slams into us, or when the super volcano under Wyoming erupts the next time, or when the 413,000 year orbital period puts us in a bad climate period, or when the 26,000 year rotational wobble changes the environment once again...

IT WON'T MATTER WHETHER YOU ARE DRIVING A FORD EXPLORER OR A NISSAN LEAF.

It won't matter at all.

I am not going to stand by and let these socialist watermelon tyrants destroy our freedoms for nothing.

That's the bottom line.

jwpegler  posted on  2012-05-03 15:21:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: NewsJunky (#30) (Edited)

CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

Fine. What is the contribution of CO2 to the global warming (which now doesn't exist)?

Let's look at a picture:

In other words, the CO2 issue is MOOT.

More CO2 means more warming.

REALLY?

A 2012 study by Shakun et al. looked at temperature changes 20,000 years ago (the last glacial-interglacial transition) from around the world and added more detail to our understanding of the CO2-temperature change relationship. They found that:

The Earth's orbital cycles trigger the initial warming (starting approximately 19,000 years ago), which is first reflected in the the Arctic. This Arctic warming caused large amounts of ice to melt, causing large amounts of fresh water to flood into the oceans. This influx of fresh water then disrupted the Atlantic Ocean circulation, in turn causing a seesawing of heat between the hemispheres. The Southern Hemisphere and its oceans warmed first, starting about 18,000 years ago. The warming Southern Ocean then released CO2 into the atmosphere starting around 17,500 years ago, which in turn caused the entire planet to warm via the increased greenhouse effect.

In other words, CO2 LAGS temperature changes, so your conclusions are completely wrong.
We have released large amounts of CO2 in the industrial age. Those are all well established facts.
The only thing you have firmly established is that your head is firmly up your ass.

LOL. You make it too easy. :)

Capitalist Eric  posted on  2012-05-03 15:26:49 ET  (2 images) Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 30.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com