[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: 22768
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

Comments (1-13) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#14. To: jwpegler, NewsJunky (#12)

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.

There is also an 11 year solar cycle.

The solar cycle (or solar magnetic activity cycle) has a period of about 11 years. The cycle is observed by counting the frequency and placement of sunspots visible on the Sun. Solar variation causes changes in space weather and to some degree weather and climate on Earth. It causes a periodic change in the amount of irradiation from the Sun that is experienced on Earth.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle

We The People  posted on  2012-05-02   20:22:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: NewsJunky, SJN (#10)

What is FACT/TRUTH is FACT/TRUTH.

Its not the truth just because you say it is. Just do what I suggested and see how far you go with your thoroughly unsupported claims.

LOL!

You really are a moron.

Unlike YOU moron, I know what SCIENTIFIC TRUTH and FACT are, (I graduated GRADE school).

I'm not "claiming" anything on my own moron. (Alinsky strikes out isolation wise eh MORON?)

In fact MORON that's exactly what your heroes have been doing.

Which is ESTABLISHED FACT, read all about it search it MORON. YOUR heroes have admitted to LYING and FRAUD MORON.

LOL!

You already have said that you don't KNOW anything. You obviously just repeat what others tell you with absolutely no understanding of what the so called SCIENCE of it is alleged to be MORON.

So now you are defending an infamous admitted FRAUD by TRYING to force me to prove a negative MORON! (Which is logically impossible moron.) That's not how SCIENCE works MORON. In SCIENCE the people making the assertions have the burden of PROOF. MORON.

They have admitted that the so called "proof" that they have based ALL of their assertions on is based on FABRICATED and CHERRY PICKED "data". Which means that they FAKED it to make it match their specious assertions MORON.

That's NOT SCIENCE MORON, that's POLITICS.

I understand that you are PROUD of your stupidity, but it's BORING.

SCIENCE is what we're supposedly talking about MORON.

All I care about is the actual objective FACTUAL TRUTH of anything.

But you need to PROVE it with REAL data using the SCIENTIFIC METHOD which is transparent and repeatable then and only then will I even consider it.

And MORON, I'll STAY skeptical of that THEORY as I am of ALL THEORIES.

Just like ALL THINKING people are.

MORON.

"Belief in the infallibility of the latest scientific consensus may be useful in the process of learning about science when we are children, but the history of science teaches us that the scientific consensus of today is no more immune to future scientific revolutions than the scientific consensus of the past. To label as anti-science anyone who is skeptical of the current scientific consensus may be a clever political stunt, but it betrays a hopelessly naïve idea of the nature of science. The real enemy of science is not the skeptic, but the true believer."

libertysflame.com/cgi-bin...gi?ArtNum=29863&Disp=2#C2

Spoiled, stupid and ignorant, brain dead phuckwads, libTURD fools, tools, and idiots, are the real sickness; the messiah "king" obammy and his regime are only the symptoms.

Mad Dog  posted on  2012-05-02   20:26:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: We The People (#11)

LOL!

Spoiled, stupid and ignorant, brain dead phuckwads, libTURD fools, tools, and idiots, are the real sickness; the messiah "king" obammy and his regime are only the symptoms.

Mad Dog  posted on  2012-05-02   20:27:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: We The People (#13)

heads are going to explode.

Dimwitted heads


Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate

jwpegler  posted on  2012-05-02   20:36:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: We The People (#14) (Edited)

There is also an 11 year solar cycle.

Absolutely true, which is why these morons can't explain whether we are warming or cooling.

Oooo... Something is different than last year... Lets panic...

Chicken Little... The sky is falling, the sky is falling...


Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate

jwpegler  posted on  2012-05-02   20:41:18 ET  Reply   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   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: NewsJunky, jwpegler (#19) (Edited)

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

supercilious moron's specious assertion; That's not scientific consensus.

I honestly dislike being so rude to you njunky.

But when I'm dealing with you jackasses I need to get your attention first.

Lucky for me that I'm used to doing things that I don't like, so as to be tough enough to do what must be done.

Which in your case is to instruct a supercilious moron, (you), in some of the basic concepts of actual SCIENCE.

Which you love to squawk about while obviously being a total stranger to it, it's application and it's requirements.

Oh well ... TRUTH is an ABSOLUTE defense.

"MORON.

"Belief in the infallibility of the latest scientific consensus may be useful in the process of learning about science when we are children, but the history of science teaches us that the scientific consensus of today is no more immune to future scientific revolutions than the scientific consensus of the past. To label as anti-science anyone who is skeptical of the current scientific consensus may be a clever political stunt, but it betrays a hopelessly naïve idea of the nature of science. The real enemy of science is not the skeptic, but the true believer."

libertysflame.com/cgi-bin...gi? http://ArtNum=29863&Disp=2#C2">libertysflame.com/cgi-bin...gi? ArtNum=29863&Disp=2#C2

Spoiled, stupid and ignorant, brain dead phuckwads, libTURD fools, tools, and idiots, are the real sickness; the messiah "king" obammy and his regime are only the symptoms.

Mad Dog  posted on  2012-05-02   22:37:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: We The People (#13)

Ohhhhhhh.... heads are going to explode.

Great job. Great post.

Concise, factual, well put together. Bravo.

You've never heard of Earth's precession?

Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET

mininggold  posted on  2012-05-03   1:47:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: mininggold, jwpegler (#21)

You've never heard of Earth's precession?

OMG! :o

You've never heard of simply making a point, IF you have one, instead of asking asinine, baited questions?

What in the world would make you not just think such a thing in the first place, but to also ask such an asinine question?

See, this is a perfect example of what I've been telling you. Your question makes absolutely no sense.

OF COURSE I've heard of Earth's precession. Everyone above 5th grade has heard of Earth's precession. And nothing in anything I've posted in this thread could give you the notion that I had never heard of it.

jwpegler even touched on it in his post when he stated, "The earth is not a perfect sphere, it doesn't rotate on its axis perfectly".

Do you have a point to make about Earth's precession or was your question another feeble minded attempt to make a point about me?

We The People  posted on  2012-05-03   6:51:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: Mad Dog, NewsJunky (#20) (Edited)

"Belief in the infallibility of the latest scientific consensus may be useful in the process of learning about science when we are children, but the history of science teaches us that the scientific consensus of today is no more immune to future scientific revolutions than the scientific consensus of the past.

And don't forget they used to think the world was flat!!!!! (Seems like that one got debunked too didn't it)......

I also remember about 20 some years ago they decided refrigerants were killing the atmosphere. So the government decided to changed the chemical composition of them and mandated you had to reclaim all refrigerants instead of releasing them into the atmosphere...... Do you what justification they used for doing that.... GLOBAL COOLING!!!!!! Presently they are doing the same things (Nothings changed) with refrigerants and guess what they cite as the reason for it ....MANMADE GLOBAL WARMING!!!!! (Come on guys make up your minds which phucking lie you're gonna stick with, or does it really matter because there are way too many dumbasses that will believe whatever you say)..... ROTFLMMFAO!!!!

By the way Junky maybe YOU should go to RealClimate.org and make a post saying YOU BELIEVE what they are shoveling, that should give THEM a good laugh!!!!

"If you voted for Obama in 2008 to prove you're not a racist, you'll need to vote for someone else in 2012 to prove you're not an idiot."

CZ82  posted on  2012-05-03   7:17:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: NewsJunky (#19)

That's not scientific consensus.

Lol..what the fuck is scientific consensus?

Is there a secret ballot?

Thunderbird  posted on  2012-05-03   8:59:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: NewsJunky (#19)

Carbon dioxide ended last Ice Age: study

From SUVs???

No.


Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate

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


#26. To: CZ82 (#23)

And don't forget they used to think the world was flat!!!!!

Exactly.

This entire man-made global warming thing was concocted by socialists who want power and control.

Watermelons -- green on the outside, red on the inside.


Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate

jwpegler  posted on  2012-05-03   9:26:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: We The People (#22)

jwpegler even touched on it in his post when he stated, "The earth is not a perfect sphere, it doesn't rotate on its axis perfectly".

Yep, precession is the earth's 26,000 year cycle that I mentioned.

I didn't mention the variation in the earth's orbital shape, which goes through a complete cycle every 413,000 years.

There are huge astronomical variations at work here.

Anything who thinks that banning SUVs is going to make any difference against these astronomical variations is just foolish.


Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate

jwpegler  posted on  2012-05-03   9:34:31 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: Mad Dog (#0)

The liberal mind is a crazy house wall paper of endless epicycles - subjective view points !

Einstein confessed ... unable to come up with a unified theory --- that relativity was a hoax !

If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !

BorisY  posted on  2012-05-03   9:42:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: BorisY (#28)

The liberal mind is a crazy house wall paper of endless epicycles - subjective view points !

They really are fun to watch, as long as they have no power.

IMO libTURDISM is best represented by that youTUBE of some african guy giving a chimp a fully automatic AK.

THEN the fun really starts!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Spoiled, stupid and ignorant, brain dead phuckwads, libTURD fools, tools, and idiots, are the real sickness; the messiah "king" obammy and his regime are only the symptoms.

Mad Dog  posted on  2012-05-03   14:29:12 ET  Reply   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   Trace   Private Reply  


#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)?

Spoiled, stupid and ignorant, brain dead phuckwads, libTURD fools, tools, and idiots, are the real sickness; the messiah "king" obammy and his regime are only the symptoms.

Mad Dog  posted on  2012-05-03   14:40:45 ET  Reply   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!!!

Spoiled, stupid and ignorant, brain dead phuckwads, libTURD fools, tools, and idiots, are the real sickness; the messiah "king" obammy and his regime are only the symptoms.

Mad Dog  posted on  2012-05-03   15:16:15 ET  Reply   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.


Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate

jwpegler  posted on  2012-05-03   15:21:06 ET  Reply   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. :)


The economy is wonderful!
Re-elect Obama, he'll pay your rent!
A chicken in every pot!
-Baghdad Bri-bri-

LoonyMing: I brandish my ignorance like a crucifix at vampires.
Translation: IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

'It's now very common to hear people say, "I'm rather offended by that", as if that gives them certain rights. It's no more than a whine. It has no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. "I'm offended by that." Well, so fucking what?' —Stephen Fry

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


#35. To: jwpegler (#33)

.

Well said and right F'ing on.

Spoiled, stupid and ignorant, brain dead phuckwads, libTURD fools, tools, and idiots, are the real sickness; the messiah "king" obammy and his regime are only the symptoms.

Mad Dog  posted on  2012-05-03   15:29:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: Capitalist Eric (#34)

'It's now very common to hear people say, "I'm rather offended by that", as if that gives them certain rights. It's no more than a whine. It has no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. "I'm offended by that." Well, so fucking what?' —Stephen Fry

I SO love THAT! It's 100% OLD SCHOOL! It's so F'ing RIGHT ON!

Even children USED to KNOW that, "sticks and stone may break my bones, BUT words can NEVER hurt me."

You used to get a reason to whine if you whined for no reason.

Btw eric, as I'm sure that you know, this man made glowbull climate cooling/warming/change mouth breather doesn't give a chit about actual FACTS or SCIENCE. "He" just wants to belong. "He" just wants to roll with "the consensus". They always seek the the comfort of the HERD. ALWAYS.

Spoiled, stupid and ignorant, brain dead phuckwads, libTURD fools, tools, and idiots, are the real sickness; the messiah "king" obammy and his regime are only the symptoms.

Mad Dog  posted on  2012-05-03   15:37:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: jwpegler (#33)

the bottom line

If its man and we can do something about it and move to renewable resources and in the process guarantee our energy future then why not do it?

NewsJunky  posted on  2012-05-03   16:07:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: Capitalist Eric (#34)

In other words, the CO2 issue is MOOT.

No what matter what percentage of the atmosphere since it is a greenhouse gas then a large increase WILL have an effect on the climate period.

In other words, CO2 LAGS temperature changes, so your conclusions are completely wrong.

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

Carbon dioxide was the big driver that ended the last Ice Age, according to a new study of ice core data from around the world.

About 10,000-20,000 years ago, Earth started to emerge from a quarter million years of deep freeze as the terrestrial ice sheet rolled back and warmer temperatures prevailed.

What caused the end of this age, known as the Pleistocene, has long been debated.

Until now, the main evidence has come from ice cores drilled in Antarctica whose air bubbles are a tiny time capsule of our climate past.

Traces of CO2 in Antarctic ice show that carbon concentrations in the atmosphere rose after temperatures were on the rise.

This timing has been used by sceptics as proof that man-made carbon gases either do not cause global warming or at least do not make it as bad as mainstream scientists say.

But the new study, published in Nature , indicates that the Antarctic record doesn't reflect global temperature rise.

The study is based on 80 ice cores and sedimentary samples taken from Greenland, lake bottoms and sea floors on every continent.

The data suggests that while changes in CO2 concentration did not trigger deglaciation, they were either synchronous with, or led global warming during the various steps of deglaciation.

"Putting all of these records together into a reconstruction of global temperatures shows a beautiful correlation with rising CO2 at the end of the Ice Age," says lead author Dr Jeremy Shakun of Harvard University.

NewsJunky  posted on  2012-05-03   16:11:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: NewsJunky (#38)

No what matter what percentage of the atmosphere since it is a greenhouse gas then a large increase WILL have an effect on the climate period.

Big deal. The question is whether the effect is significant.

Since the answer is most definitely "no," your argument is still moot.

Thanks for playing, "cornered rat."


The economy is wonderful!
Re-elect Obama, he'll pay your rent!
A chicken in every pot!
-Baghdad Bri-bri-

LoonyMing: I brandish my ignorance like a crucifix at vampires.
Translation: IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

'It's now very common to hear people say, "I'm rather offended by that", as if that gives them certain rights. It's no more than a whine. It has no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. "I'm offended by that." Well, so fucking what?' —Stephen Fry

Capitalist Eric  posted on  2012-05-03   16:40:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: NewsJunky (#37)

If its man and we can do something about it and move to renewable resources and in the process guarantee our energy future then why not do it?

If renewable energy was economically viable, then absolutely.

Today, they are not economically viable.

Instead of panicking and turning everything over to a bunch of central planners, who will only make things worse, need to let the market decide.


Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate

jwpegler  posted on  2012-05-03   17:25:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: NewsJunky (#37)

If its man

It isn't.

and we can do something about it

We can't.

and move to renewable resources

LOL!

and in the process guarantee our energy future then why not do it?

Man, you've got it bad.

We The People  posted on  2012-05-03   17:33:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: NewsJunky, Capitalist Eric (#38)

Traces of CO2 in Antarctic ice show that carbon concentrations in the atmosphere rose after temperatures were on the rise.

We The People  posted on  2012-05-03   17:36:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: Capitalist Eric (#39)

The question is whether the effect is significant.

That's is a scientific question and the evidence points to the fact that it is significant.

NewsJunky  posted on  2012-05-03   17:39:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: We The People (#42)

But the new study, published in Nature , indicates that the Antarctic record doesn't reflect global temperature rise.

The study is based on 80 ice cores and sedimentary samples taken from Greenland, lake bottoms and sea floors on every continent.

The data suggests that while changes in CO2 concentration did not trigger deglaciation, they were either synchronous with, or led global warming during the various steps of deglaciation.

Did you forget this part?

NewsJunky  posted on  2012-05-03   17:40:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: NewsJunky (#43)

and the evidence points to

Got the evidence? Show it....

SJN  posted on  2012-05-03   17:41:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: NewsJunky (#44)

But the new study, published in Nature , indicates that the Antarctic record doesn't reflect global temperature rise.

The study is based on 80 ice cores and sedimentary samples taken from Greenland, lake bottoms and sea floors on every continent.

The data suggests that while changes in CO2 concentration did not trigger deglaciation, they were either synchronous with, or led global warming during the various steps of deglaciation.

Did you forget this part?

Did you even read that part?

If you did, are you sure you want to use that to bolster your argument?

We The People  posted on  2012-05-03   17:53:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: NewsJunky (#43)

That's is a scientific question and the evidence points to the fact that it is significant.

Really?

You have hard, repeatable, empirical evidence which establishes a significant correlation? That is, you can PROVE that man-made CO2 is the cause of global warming?

You also have hard, repeatable, empirical evidence that establishes a significant effect on temperatures, instead of CO2 levels actually being a result of temperature variation?

Provide the raw data, as well as your methology for establishing that causality. Include all assumptions, null-hypotheses and statistical analyses used, as well as justifications for the different approaches. Also, be sure to include any multiple-regression analyses which would factor for water vapor and its effect on the results.

In other words, you proclaim that "the evidence points to the fact that it is significant."

My answer is simple: Post your "research" so that I can verify your "evidence."


The economy is wonderful!
Re-elect Obama, he'll pay your rent!
A chicken in every pot!
-Baghdad Bri-bri-

LoonyMing: I brandish my ignorance like a crucifix at vampires.
Translation: IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

'It's now very common to hear people say, "I'm rather offended by that", as if that gives them certain rights. It's no more than a whine. It has no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. "I'm offended by that." Well, so fucking what?' —Stephen Fry

Capitalist Eric  posted on  2012-05-03   17:59:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: SJN (#45)

Got the evidence? Show it....

Exactly what I said in the post above.

But I want more. I don't want the self-serving pronouncements from global-warming "scientists" (who must make such pronouncements to keep getting funding)...

I want ALL the raw data, ALL the assumptions, ALL the calculations and assumptions they made... And then I'll run the stats for myself, and we'll see what we see.


The economy is wonderful!
Re-elect Obama, he'll pay your rent!
A chicken in every pot!
-Baghdad Bri-bri-

LoonyMing: I brandish my ignorance like a crucifix at vampires.
Translation: IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

'It's now very common to hear people say, "I'm rather offended by that", as if that gives them certain rights. It's no more than a whine. It has no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. "I'm offended by that." Well, so fucking what?' —Stephen Fry

Capitalist Eric  posted on  2012-05-03   18:03:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: Thunderbird (#24) (Edited)

Lol..what the fuck is scientific consensus?

LOL!

It's what dullards are told by government to believe. And they believe that until government tells them to believe something different. Then they believe that, until..... well, you get the point.

We The People  posted on  2012-05-03   18:04:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: Capitalist Eric (#48)

I want ALL the raw data, ALL the assumptions, ALL the calculations and assumptions they made... And then I'll run the stats for myself, and we'll see what we see.

Since that is how we utilize and practice science it seems a reasonable request.

SJN  posted on  2012-05-03   18:09:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: SJN, NewsJunky (#45)

and the evidence points to

Got the evidence? Show it....

You mean objective, repeatable, public, transparent, valid, non-cherry picked, non-falsified, non made up out of whole cloth to get the results they want"proof" "proof"?

No they most certainly DON'T have THAT, you flat earth DOUBTER!

How DARE you question the CONSENSUS of our betters?

Sniff ...

Peasants. /S

Spoiled, stupid and ignorant, brain dead phuckwads, libTURD fools, tools, and idiots, are the real sickness; the messiah "king" obammy and his regime are only the symptoms.

Mad Dog  posted on  2012-05-03   18:13:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: Capitalist Eric, NewsJunky (#48)

I want ALL the raw data, ALL the assumptions, ALL the calculations and assumptions they made... And then I'll run the stats for myself, and we'll see what we see.

Send it to me too, I need something to wipe my ass with!!!!

"If you voted for Obama in 2008 to prove you're not a racist, you'll need to vote for someone else in 2012 to prove you're not an idiot."

CZ82  posted on  2012-05-03   18:36:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: Mad Dog (#51)

lol

Dang Mad Dog. I do admire your prose.

: )))

SJN  posted on  2012-05-03   18:38:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: Mad Dog, jwpegler, NewsJunky (#32)

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

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

Why is it that these people always conveniently forget that if they do manage to get rid of as much CO2 as they want to they will probably have killed themselves and everybody else on this planet??????

I have a better idea, they just need to go jump off a cliff and put themselves our of our misery!!!!

"If you voted for Obama in 2008 to prove you're not a racist, you'll need to vote for someone else in 2012 to prove you're not an idiot."

CZ82  posted on  2012-05-03   18:42:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  



      .
      .
      .

Comments (55 - 66) not displayed.

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