PDA

View Full Version : Let the cries of "heretic!" begin.


catswiththum
07-08-2015, 07:50 AM
Of course, these disillusioned crackpots must have been co-opted by big energy, somehow. :)

Pitchforks and torches will be issued at the back of the building.

As the Obama administration and Senate Democrats feverishly stoke up hellfire and brimstone global warming alarm to promote a Climate Action Plan, leading voices in green choir robes have abandoned the climate crisis hymnal.

Dr. Patrick Moore, a co-founder of Greenpeace, quit the activist environmental organization in 1986 after it strayed away from objective science and took a sharp turn to the political left.

Testifying on February 25 before the Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight, Moore took issue with the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claim that, “Since the mid-20th century it is ‘extremely likely’ that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming.”

Moore pointed out “There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years,” arguing that “perhaps the simplest way to expose the fallacy of extreme certainty is to look at the historical record.”

He told the committee: “When modern life evolved over 500 million years ago, CO2 was more than 10 times higher than today, yet life flourished at this time. Then an ice age occurred 450 million years ago when carbon dioxide was 10 times higher than today.”

Moore also noted that “The increase in temperature between 1910 and 1940 was virtually identical to the increase between 1970 and 2000. Yet the IPCC does not attribute the increase from 1910–1940 to human influence.” Why then, he asks, “does the IPCC believe that a virtually identical increase in temperature after 1950 is caused mainly by human influence, when it has no explanation for nearly identical increase from 1910 to 1940?”

Moore emphasized that there is no reason to believe that a warmer climate would be anything but beneficial for humans and the majority of other species. On the other hand, there is ample reason to believe that a sharp cooling of the climate would bring disastrous results for human civilization.

Dr. Fritz Vahrenholt, a prominent So************************t and a father of Germany’s environmental movement, has become another strong critic of the IPCC’s alarmist global warming doctrine. His lack of trust began while serving as an expert reviewer for an IPCC renewable energy report as the renewable energy division head of Germany’s second largest utility company.

Upon discovering and pointing out numerous factual inaccuracies to IPCC officials, they simply brushed them aside. Stunned by this, he began to wonder if IPCC reports on climate change were similarly sloppy. After digging into the IPCC’s climate report he was horrified to find similar incompetency and misrepresentations, including climate models that were fudged to produce exaggerated temperature increases.

Dr. Vahrenholt concluded: “The facts need to be discussed sensibly and scientifically, without first deciding on the results.” And although CO2 may have some warming influence, he believes that the sun plays a far greater role in the whole scheme of things.

James Lovelock, a highly respected scientist, predicted in 2006 that: “Before this century is over billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of lovelockpeople that survive will be in the Arctic where climate remains tolerable.”

More recently, however, he admitted to MSNBC: “We don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books . . . mine included . . . because it looked clear cut . . . but it hasn’t happened.”

The 92-year-old Lovelock went on to note, “The climate is doing its usual tricks . . . there’s nothing much happening yet even though we were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now.” He added, “Yet the temperature has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising . . . carbon dioxide has been rising, no question about that.”

Moore, Vahrenholt, and Lovelock are but three within an expanding multitude of scientists who are cooling on climate alarm.

When previously asked on Fox Business News who is responsible for promoting unwarranted fear and what their motives are, Moore said: “A powerful convergence of interests. Scientists seeking grant money, media seeking headlines, universities seeking huge grants from major institutions, foundations, environmental groups, politicians wanting to make it look like they are saving future generations. And all of these people have converged on this issue.”

Moore warns that, “The alarmism is driving us through scare tactics to adopt energy policies that are going to create a huge amount of energy poverty among the poor people. It’s not good for people and it’s not good for the environment. In a warmer world we can produce more food.”

Nobel Laureate physicist Dr. Ivar Giaever has referred to global warming ideology as a “pseudoscience” that begins with an emotionally appealing hypothesis, and “then only looks for items which appear to support it,” while ignoring ample contrary evidence.

Tragically, that pseudoscience does greatest injustice to those who can least afford it.

Tom Joad
07-08-2015, 11:23 AM
I'm sticking with my boy Neil.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJhbQIlu4mk

catswiththum
07-08-2015, 11:37 AM
I'm sticking with my boy Neil.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJhbQIlu4mk

Well, he certainly has made an investment in that position.

The scientists in my original post have a body of scientific work unparalleled by many.

What is most upsetting to me is an emotional cause/a need to believe has superseded the tenets of the scientific principle - the very foundation of learning that has brought us out of the dark ages. Scientists and pseudo scientists abandoned the basic scientific method for political/emotional/financial reasons.

Science - the lone wall standing against superstition, human emotion, and lies has been dealt a blow against it's credibility by the very people who were trusted to uphold it.

The whole emotional climate movement not unlike what we see among confederate flag proponents - it matters not how much documentation, evidence, or testimony you show them - they want to believe, so they will, that the flag had nothing to do with hate, slavery, or biggotry.

Tom Joad
07-08-2015, 11:54 AM
The whole emotional climate movement not unlike what we see among confederate flag proponents - it matters not how much documentation, evidence, or testimony you show them - they want to believe, so they will, that the flag had nothing to do with hate, slavery, or biggotry.

Dude, you're actually going to compare climate change activists with racist crackers? ;)

Well, he certainly has made an investment in that position.

The scientists in my original post have a body of scientific work unparalleled by many.



Right now in the scientific community the score is about 97% that believe climate change is real and being accelerated by human activity and 3% that think like your boy whats his name?

Now I'll give you this. If the 3% are correct, it won't be the first time in human history when a small minority was right while the great majority were wrong. But so what if the 97% are wrong. It's still a Helluva good idea to get off our addiction to carbon fuels and develop cleaner more abundant and renewable sources of energy, so what the fuck?

catswiththum
07-08-2015, 12:04 PM
Dude, you're actually going to compare climate change activists with racist crackers? ;)

I thought you would appreciate that.



Right now in the scientific community the score is about 97% that believe climate change is real and being accelerated by human activity and 3% that think like your boy whats his name?

Now I'll give you this. If the 3% are correct, it won't be the first time in human history when a small minority was right while the great majority were wrong. But so what if the 97% are wrong. It's still a Helluva good idea to get off our addiction to carbon fuels and develop cleaner more abundant and renewable sources of energy, so what the fuck?

As the scientists in the OP stated, the scientific results in which policy decisions are being made are false, made up, in order to maintain a cause.

I do not want decisions affecting the lives of billions made on a whim, an emotional freight train - as stated by the eminent researchers above, a sensible course of action based on facts - not manufactured data to support what we want to be true - should be the basis of policy.

I don't expect that to happen. Everybody needs a cause - f*&k a bunch of facts, we can change those - we know we're right.

Boreas
07-08-2015, 12:15 PM
A couple of degreed skeptics deserve to be heard and their data, if they can actually furnish any, should be objectively assessed but... a couple of guys versus virtually the rest of the scientific community? Shit, there are more than a couple of biologists who believe in "intelligent design."

catswiththum
07-08-2015, 12:21 PM
A couple of degreed skeptics deserve to be heard and their data, if they can actually furnish any, should be objectively assessed but... a couple of guys versus virtually the rest of the scientific community? Shit, there are more than a couple of biologists who believe in "intelligent design."

The worse thing to come out of all this is that now - if such an objective assessment were to be attempted - all data would be suspect; scientific results will be dismissed by both sides.

donquixote99
07-08-2015, 12:28 PM
As the Obama administration and Senate Democrats feverishly stoke up hellfire and brimstone global warming alarm....

Doesn't this lurid polemic style ring any alarm bells itself, for you?

Tom Joad
07-08-2015, 12:33 PM
The worse thing to come out of all this is that now - if such an objective assessment were to be attempted - all data would be suspect; scientific results will be dismissed by both sides.

OK, Fuck all the scientific data.

Let's leave it up to the plants an animals.

You can't say they are biased.

They can't even read the studies.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/up-and-up-plants-and-animals-migrating-as-climate-changes/2011/08/18/gIQAzlTxNJ_story.html

Up and up: Plants and animals migrating as climate changes

Moreover, the greater the warming in any given region, the farther its plants and animals have migrated, according to the largest analysis to date of the rapidly shifting ranges of species in Europe, North America, Chile and Malaysia.

“The more warming there’s been in an area, the more you would expect a species to move, and the more they have moved,” said Chris D. Thomas, a conservation biologist at the University of York in England, who led the work published Thursday in the journal Science. “This more or less puts to bed the issue of whether these shifts are related to climate change. There isn’t any obvious alternative explanation for why species should be moving poleward in studies around the world.”

catswiththum
07-08-2015, 12:36 PM
Doesn't this lurid polemic style ring any alarm bells itself, for you?

Of course - journalists are journalists - I looked up the scientists quoted to make sure it isn't BS.

In the process, had to go back to their original articles in many cases - not much mainstream reporting on the issue.

Senate subcommittee and IPCC records are accessible, but you have to wade through a sh&tload of links and pap to get there.:(

catswiththum
07-08-2015, 12:38 PM
OK, Fuck all the scientific data.

Let's leave it up to the plants an animals.

You can't say they are biased.

They can't even read the studies.



Some days you make more sense than most of us. Don't quote me.

Pio1980
07-08-2015, 12:45 PM
Doesn't this lurid polemic style ring any alarm bells itself, for you?

Smacks mightily of a partisan agenda, negating credibility.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

catswiththum
07-08-2015, 12:48 PM
Smacks mightily of a partisan agenda, negating credibility.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

I don't care what some journalist thinks - interested in what the scientists had to say - views expressed by them on record elsewhere.

Tom Joad
07-08-2015, 12:50 PM
I thought you would appreciate that.

I see.

You were trolling.

I do that too. :)

catswiththum
07-08-2015, 12:56 PM
I see.

You were trolling.

I do that too. :)

Guilty. Residual adolescent smartass residue. I try to control it.

Tom Joad
07-08-2015, 01:05 PM
I don't care what some journalist thinks - interested in what the scientists had to say - views expressed by them on record elsewhere.

Whatever.

But since you are in a coastal city like me, it might be a good idea to check your elevation to see how much time you have.

I did mine and my house sits at 96 feet.

So I'm good for a while, but I may need to pick up a Kayak to get around some of the low areas in town.

http://www.daftlogic.com/sandbox-google-maps-find-altitude.htm

Boreas
07-08-2015, 01:06 PM
Guilty. Residual adolescent smartass residue. I try to control it.

And there's nothing worse than residual residue!

catswiththum
07-08-2015, 01:08 PM
And there's nothing worse than residual residue!

I know, I know - too lazy to edit - and I have a f*&king English degree.

Larnin' are impotant.

Tom Joad
07-08-2015, 01:09 PM
Guilty. Residual adolescent smartass residue. I try to control it.

I'm a 13 year old boy in a 68 year old man's body.

About par for us dudes.

catswiththum
07-08-2015, 01:11 PM
Whatever.

But since you are in a coastal city like me, it might be a good idea to check your elevation to see how much time you have.

I did mine and my house sits at 96 feet.

So I'm good for a while, but I may need to pick up a Kayak to get around some of the low areas in town.

http://www.daftlogic.com/sandbox-google-maps-find-altitude.htm

Back in 2000 they said I would be shark food by now. Still dry. I wish they would climate change some of these f*&king bugs out of here.

I have to move. Sick of bugs and humidity.

I say that every year. Here I sit.

bobabode
07-09-2015, 11:18 PM
OK, Fuck all the scientific data.

Let's leave it up to the plants an animals.

You can't say they are biased.

They can't even read the studies.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/up-and-up-plants-and-animals-migrating-as-climate-changes/2011/08/18/gIQAzlTxNJ_story.html

Well played, sir. Well played. :D