See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: No smoking hot spot
Source:
The Australian
URL Source: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.a ... /0,25197,24036736-7583,00.html
Published: Jul 18, 2008
Author: David Evans
Post Date: 2008-07-18 13:33:59 by farmfriend
Ping List: *Agriculture-Environment* Subscribe to *Agriculture-Environment*
Keywords: None
Views: 1335
Comments: 126
David Evans | July 18, 2008 I DEVOTED six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia's compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector. FullCAM models carbon flows in plants, mulch, debris, soils and agricultural products, using inputs such as climate data, plant physiology and satellite data. I've been following the global warming debate closely for years. When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the old ice core data, no other suspects. The evidence was not conclusive, but why wait until we were certain when it appeared we needed to act quickly? Soon government and the scientific community were working together and lots of science research jobs were created. We scientists had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet. But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming. As Lord Keynes famously said, "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" There has not been a public debate about the causes of global warming and most of the public and our decision makers are not aware of the most basic salient facts: 1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it. Each possible cause of global warming has a different pattern of where in the planet the warming occurs first and the most. The signature of an increased greenhouse effect is a hot spot about 10km up in the atmosphere over the tropics. We have been measuring the atmosphere for decades using radiosondes: weather balloons with thermometers that radio back the temperature as the balloon ascends through the atmosphere. They show no hot spot. Whatsoever. If there is no hot spot then an increased greenhouse effect is not the cause of global warming. So we know for sure that carbon emissions are not a significant cause of the global warming. If we had found the greenhouse signature then I would be an alarmist again. When the signature was found to be missing in 2007 (after the latest IPCC report), alarmists objected that maybe the readings of the radiosonde thermometers might not be accurate and maybe the hot spot was there but had gone undetected. Yet hundreds of radiosondes have given the same answer, so statistically it is not possible that they missed the hot spot. Recently the alarmists have suggested we ignore the radiosonde thermometers, but instead take the radiosonde wind measurements, apply a theory about wind shear, and run the results through their computers to estimate the temperatures. They then say that the results show that we cannot rule out the presence of a hot spot. If you believe that you'd believe anything. 2. There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None. There is plenty of evidence that global warming has occurred, and theory suggests that carbon emissions should raise temperatures (though by how much is hotly disputed) but there are no observations by anyone that implicate carbon emissions as a significant cause of the recent global warming. 3. The satellites that measure the world's temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year (to the temperature of 1980). Land-based temperature readings are corrupted by the "urban heat island" effect: urban areas encroaching on thermometer stations warm the micro-climate around the thermometer, due to vegetation changes, concrete, cars, houses. Satellite data is the only temperature data we can trust, but it only goes back to 1979. NASA reports only land-based data, and reports a modest warming trend and recent cooling. The other three global temperature records use a mix of satellite and land measurements, or satellite only, and they all show no warming since 2001 and a recent cooling. 4. The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect. None of these points are controversial. The alarmist scientists agree with them, though they would dispute their relevance. The last point was known and past dispute by 2003, yet Al Gore made his movie in 2005 and presented the ice cores as the sole reason for believing that carbon emissions cause global warming. In any other political context our cynical and experienced press corps would surely have called this dishonest and widely questioned the politician's assertion. Until now the global warming debate has merely been an academic matter of little interest. Now that it matters, we should debate the causes of global warming. So far that debate has just consisted of a simple sleight of hand: show evidence of global warming, and while the audience is stunned at the implications, simply assert that it is due to carbon emissions. In the minds of the audience, the evidence that global warming has occurred becomes conflated with the alleged cause, and the audience hasn't noticed that the cause was merely asserted, not proved. If there really was any evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming, don't you think we would have heard all about it ad nauseam by now? The world has spent $50 billion on global warming since 1990, and we have not found any actual evidence that carbon emissions cause global warming. Evidence consists of observations made by someone at some time that supports the idea that carbon emissions cause global warming. Computer models and theoretical calculations are not evidence, they are just theory. What is going to happen over the next decade as global temperatures continue not to rise? The Labor Government is about to deliberately wreck the economy in order to reduce carbon emissions. If the reasons later turn out to be bogus, the electorate is not going to re-elect a Labor government for a long time. When it comes to light that the carbon scare was known to be bogus in 2008, the ALP is going to be regarded as criminally negligent or ideologically stupid for not having seen through it. And if the Liberals support the general thrust of their actions, they will be seen likewise. The onus should be on those who want to change things to provide evidence for why the changes are necessary. The Australian public is eventually going to have to be told the evidence anyway, so it might as well be told before wrecking the economy. Dr David Evans was a consultant to the Australian Greenhouse Office from 1999 to 2005.
No smoking hot spot
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: farmfriend (#0)
Two out of three ain't so bad.
We have just discovered an important note from space ... In the minds of the audience, the evidence that global warming has occurred becomes conflated with the alleged cause, and the audience hasn't noticed that the cause was merely asserted, not proved. If there really was any evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming, don't you think we would have heard all about it ad nauseam by now? ... "The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
ping
Fox News Channel is the television version of Free Republic
Ah yes, the same "journal" that published the rants of some fool who claimed we were heading into global cooling because he claimed there were only two sunspots this year, where there had been close to or a little over a hundred from January up to the day he wrote the article. He also forgot to mention that we are at the minimum point in the solar cycle, where it was EXPECTED that there would be very little activity. I'd like to see a respected group of scientists make the claim that this present author makes. I don't believe the rants of those who are biased in favor of their pet theory.
So, do you dispute the evidence presented or simply wish to disparage personally people who hold a contrary viewpoint? You know my point of view - I am a Missouri kind of guy. I don't jump on any bandwagon just because "everybody else is on board". Does that include the proponents of Global Warming?
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
I'd believe a team of NASA scientists before I'd believe a random quack that collects his pay from Exxon/Mobil.... The source you are quoting from is known for it's pro big-oil stance, and offers a biased view on things with little or no valid scientific evidence to back up its positions.
Uh, WHAT evidence?
Excellent article. And the man is correct--the burden of proof is, or should be, on those who posit the theory, not those who doubt the validity of what appears to be a swindle that is making Al Gore a very wealthy man.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. There's plenty. How about ice cores that show CO2 ALWAYS follows temperature? BTW there is NO evidence of AGW. None. Remember correlation does not equal causation. There has been some correlation with recent warming and CO2 increase but there has also been correlation between recent warming and an active sun. The clincher comes when you look at the recent cooling. Despite continued increases in CO2 you have cooling temps. There is still the correlation between a quiescent sun and cooler temps. It's the science you should be looking at, not who pays the paycheck. I know one of the scientists you disparage as having been paid by an oil company was a consultant for them in an area having nothing to do with oil or science for that matter. I guess government lackies are more trust worthy though.
Sadly their "proof" is fading like sun spots.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There's plenty. How about ice cores that show CO2 ALWAYS follows temperature? BTW there is NO evidence of AGW. None. Remember correlation does not equal causation. There has been some correlation with recent warming and CO2 increase but there has also been correlation between recent warming and an active sun. That is exactly the point among others. The ice cores all show two things. Historically higher levels of CO2 in the atmospheric mix. (Which actually has a variety of beneficial effects such as faster plant growth and an INCREASE in Oxygen levels resulting from plants metabolizing CO2 and giving off an increased amount of waste i.e., OXYGEN.) And the time lag between CO2 level increases and warming temperatures which shows CO2 level increases trailing global temperature increases. We know from both the Geologic and the Paleontologic records that the earth has, at different eras, sustained a much higher average global temperature. Atmospheric Chemist J. E. Lovelock in the "Gaia Hypothesis" has suggested, and produced evidence to support it (which really annoyed Global Warming advocates) that the earth is a self correcting system which fluctuates between different points in an equilibrium range. There is no sound evidence linking CO2 levels and global warming. There are models and theories but nothing which proves it beyond the hypothesis level. From what I have been reading as of late the numbers of scientists willing to speak out against the global warming hysteria appears to be increasing. Global Warming is an UNPROVED hypothesis.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
The author of the article makes that CLAIM, but provides ZERO evidence to back up his claim. Try again? The clincher comes when you look at the recent cooling. A) A short term trend is irrelevant and has nothing to do with long term trends. It's the science you should be looking at, not who pays the paycheck. Try taking your own advice.
The atomic bomb was just a theory before they actually put one together and blew it up.
Oh, so your "consultant" friend who works on the RNC hit team who's resume includes leading the swift boat attacks agaisnt Kerry, who has also shilled for big oil, and who gathers dirt for Rush Limburgh can be considered an honest sort of guy who cares about his fellow citizens, while scientists at the FDA that tried to warn people against Aspartame, and the EPA scientists that were against water fluoridation, they are "government lackeys", eh?
And even MORE sadly people such as you try to misrepresent the current situation by claiming the sky is falling because there are fewer sunspots than usual, while failing to mention that it is NORMAL for there to be fewer at this time as we are at the MINIMUM point in the solar cycle. Now what sort of person would misrepresent scientific data in order to scare people and/or pacify them with false conclusions and misleading statements, eh? You are doing exactly that which you accuse NASA scientists of doing, except in reality they ARE concerned for mankind, whereas YOU are concerned about oil company profits. Do you get a commission on those?
Al Gore. That b@$tard is making a fortune on this global warming scam. And if he found out tomorrow that there would be more money in yammering about "the coming Ice Age" (which was what they were claiming in the 70's) you can bet your @$$ he would be on that bandwagon.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Now what sort of person would misrepresent scientific data in order to scare people and/or pacify them with false conclusions and misleading statements, eh? You are doing exactly that which you accuse NASA scientists of doing, except in reality they ARE concerned for mankind, whereas YOU are concerned about oil company profits. Do you get a commission on those? This from someone who has analyzed NASA's latest release Nasa’s announcement that there is nothing wrong with the sun needs in this frame a little investigation. (By the way how can sun be "wrong"?). Nasa says that "The ongoing lull in sunspot number is well within historic norms for the solar cycle." I assume that they mean past behavior by their "historic norms". To be able to assess the value of this claim I counted the length of the cycle minima beginning from the second month below 10 Wolfs to the second last month below 10 Wolfs. I compare this time frame to the cycle that is beginning. Below 1 year: 2 cycles (2 1766- and 18 1944-). 1.0-1.9 years: 12 cycles (includes all the five cycles 19-23 (1954-, … ,1996-). 2.0-2.9 years: 2 cycles (1 1755- and 17 1933-). The cycle 24 will be at least in this category, because in July 2008 the lull preceding the cycle 24 has lasted already 2.4 years. 3.0-3.9 years: 3 cycles (5 1798-, 12 1878- and 15 1913-). 4.0-4.9 years: 3 cycles (7 1823-, 13 1889- and 14 1901-). 5.0-5.9 years: none. 6.0-6.9 years: none. 7.1 years: cycle 6 (1810-). 1810 is the only year after 1713 that has been wholly spotless. In August 2008 there will be 16 cycles with shorter minima and 7 cycles with longer minima than the on-going minimum. Still more important is that the longer minima are in two consecutive groups: cycles 5-7 (Dalton minimum) and 12- 15 (1878-1913) and that all the cycles 16-23 (1923-1996) have shorter minima than will be due to the cycle 24. Nasa continues: "This report, that there’s nothing to report, is newsworthy because of a growing buzz in lay and academic circles that something is wrong with the sun." Probably Nasa means that our observations/hypotheses/theories, not the sun, is wrong. What is newsworthy is that since 1913 not one minimum has lasted as long as the on-going one. And the end is not in sight. What is newsworthy is that after a period of 76 years or one Gleissberg (1923-1996) of short minima we are back to periods like the 25-year Dalton (1798-1823) or the second part of the Maunder minimum (1675-1699) or the cycles 12-15 (1878-1913). The active part of the long minima cycles lasted 7-8 years and of the short minima cycles about 9 years. So there is a phase shift going on with the cycle 24 and that is what is newsworthy. The climate changes to cool and warm in step with the solar phase shifts. Nasa continues: "Decaying solar cycle 23 has so far lasted 142 months – well within the first standard deviation and thus not at all abnormal." (Why don’t they tell is their SD .95 or .98?). But in theory this is true in a mathematical sense, but unfortunately it has no relevance in this context. The reason is that we have here no socalled normal distribution, where you could use the standard deviation in a statistically and logically meaningful way. Instead we have here a series of phase shifts: 1798 (1796) to long minima, 1833 (1832) to short minima, 1878 (1876) to long minima, 1923 (1922) to short minima and now again (from 2005/2006) again to long minima. Nasa continues: "The current minimum is not abnormally low or long." But that’s not the point. The point is the ongoing phase shift with cycle 24. Nasa compares this minimum also with Maunder minimum ("the longest minimum on record"), which is not a valid comparison because the on-going minimum is between cycles (could be also between super-cycles, but that we can’t know) and the Maunder minimum was a super-minimum where we can (barely, but still) see five cycles. Nasa: "The quiet of 2008 is not the second coming of the Maunder Minimum, believes Hathaway. We have already observed a few sunspots from the next solar cycle, he says. This suggests the solar cycle is progressing normally." I take this as an overstatement. Three very tiny spots lasting 1-2 days during the last half year. Normal? Surely not. 10.7cm flux going down to some 65 during the same period. Normal? Maybe if we put together Maunder, Dalton and the hyper-active sun of the 1900’s. So this leads to the conclusion that however the sun behaves, it is normal. But there is really some point to that. The sun really behaves always normal (according to physical laws), but the various ways and many surprises in which it shows its normality is really fascinating. I'm not really sure if that is true or not, as I don't really pay Al Gore much attention. How is he making a fortune?
When sunspot activity rises again later this year, what will be your next most favorite scare tactic?
That's a crock of shit BTW... There's nothing all that remarkable about the current cycle. Why are you and your pals so desparate to push this "global cooling" idea of yours?
That is a total and complete lie. Here's the current year's daily sunspot numbers. As anyone can see, there have been far more than just THREE. Do you really think you can pull off your scams here this easily? From ftp://ftp.ngd c.noaa.gov/STP/SOLAR_DATA/SUNSPOT_NUMBERS/2008
DAILY SUNSPOT NUMBERS 2008
===============================================================================
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Yr Day
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 11 0 16 0 0 2008 01
7 9 0 9 0 0 2008 02
7 9 7 9 0 0 2008 03
12 8 0 7 7 0 2008 04
10 0 0 0 8 9 2008 05
11 0 8 0 0 0 2008 06
11 0 0 0 0 0 2008 07
9 0 0 0 0 0 2008 08
0 0 0 0 0 0 2008 09
8 0 9 0 0 9 2008 10
8 0 0 0 0 8 2008 11
0 0 0 0 0 0 2008 12
0 0 0 7 8 8 2008 13
0 0 0 7 0 0 2008 14
0 0 7 0 9 7 2008 15
0 0 7 0 14 7 2008 16
0 0 7 0 12 7 2008 17
0 0 0 0 15 8 2008 18
0 0 0 8 11 7 2008 19
0 0 0 0 7 8 2008 20
0 0 0 0 0 8 2008 21
0 0 0 8 0 8 2008 22
0 0 0 8 0 0 2008 23
0 0 19 7 0 0 2008 24
0 8 32 0 0 0 2008 25
0 8 36 0 0 0 2008 26
0 8 35 0 0 0 2008 27
0 0 34 0 0 0 2008 28
0 0 30 0 0 0 2008 29
8 31 0 0 0 2008 30
8 25 0 2008 31
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.4 2.1 9.3 2.9 2.9 3.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Values are preliminary after Dec 07.
You still don't understand the concept of cycle 23 and 24 do you?
If you are FormerLurker you have a shit fit.
God is always good!
The guy is a troll for the global warming scam. He must be on the payroll. No one would defend such utter garbage unless they were.
God is always good!
A person like you?
God is always good!
Al Gore is not the only one making money off of the global warming scam, many scientists are too. Anyone that thinks that just because a person has the knowledge and intelligence to be scientist that they would not put money above the truth is nuts. Scientists are no more moral than any other person is.
God is always good!
Are you serious? You should pay attention to crooks and thieves who tell you the sky is falling but they will keep any of the big pieces from hitting you if you will just make an "investment" in one of their companies or buy some of their bs "carbon credits." LOL! As NewsBusters reported here, here, and here, there are huge dollars to be made from global warming alarmism. However, conceivably no one is better positioned to financially benefit from this scam than Dr. Global Warming himself, former Vice President Al Gore, a fact that the media will surely not share with Americans any time soon. Yet, if America’s press would take some time out of their busy schedules covering the earth-shattering details surrounding Anna Nicole Smith’s demise, they might find a deliciously inconvenient truth about the soon-to-be-Dr. Gore that is significantly more fascinating and diabolical than anything likely to emerge from that courtroom in Broward County, Florida. As reported by Dan Riehl (emphasis mine throughout): Former Vice President Al Gore has built a Green money-making machine capable of eventually generating billions of dollars for investors, including himself, but he set it up so that the average Joe can't afford to play on Gore's terms. And the US portion is headed up by a former Gore staffer and fund raiser who previously ran afoul of both the FEC and the DOJ, before Janet Reno jumped in and shut down an investigation during the Clinton years. Think Katie, Charlie, or Brian will be all over this tonight? Regardless, that was just the tip of the questionably melting iceberg as reported by Bill Hobbs in Nashville, Tennessee: [H]ow Gore buys his "carbon offsets," as revealed by The Tennessean raises serious questions. According to the newspaper's report, Gore buys his carbon offsets through Generation Investment Management: Gore is chairman of the firm and, presumably, draws an income or will make money as its investments prosper. In other words, he "buys" his "carbon offsets" from himself, through a transaction designed to boost his own investments and return a profit to himself. To be blunt, Gore doesn't buy "carbon offsets" through Generation Investment Management - he buys stocks. Fascinating. So, as Dr. Global Warming travels the world in his private jet while spending 20 times the average American on energy for his home, all the time telling us its okay because he’s buying carbon offsets, he’s actually purchasing these investments from himself. Furthermore, and maybe more important, Gore stands to benefit financially in a potentially huge way if more and more people buy into this junk science. Isn’t that special? Yet, it is not clear that Gore’s money is going to purchase carbon offsets at all. Riehl reported: Here's a list indicating what it takes to make money along with Al. Funds associated with these companies have placed millions of dollars under Al Gore's control. And, as you'll see below, Gore's selection for the US President of GIM might raise a few eyebrows as well. According to their own documents, GIM intends to invest in, or buy companies poised to cash in on Global Warming concerns. More at Media Ignore Al Gore’s Financial Ties to Global Warming
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. And many of them are completely immoral. They are just people, some of them good and some not so good.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Don't play that game with me. I know, and you know, the impression the following sentence conveys; "Three very tiny spots lasting 1-2 days during the last half year." Most people could care less if it's solar cycle 0 or 999,999, the words, "Three very tiny spots lasting 1-2 days during the last half year", to most people mean ONLY THREE VERY TINY SPOTS DURING THE LAST SIX MONTHS. And you know, and I know, and I'd bet even RickyJ knows, that is ONE BIG HUGE F'ING LIE.
Fuck you pal. I bet you're taking money from AIPAC and the ADL, you certainly play the role of the forum Jew hater quite well. People that care about the safety of the world and the environment are your enemies, where you pretend to care about the future of America so much, yet loathe those that actually try to fix what is wrong. I bet you are one of those that posts on other forums against "Paultards" and suck up to Obama.
So what would you rather do, sell all your worldly possessions in order to put gas in your tank and heat (or cool) your house, then cry about what went wrong, or try to realize that by enriching those whose only concern in life is making MORE money will simply make those people richer, and the rest of us poorer. Those who are AGAINST alternative energy and power have an agenda, and that is to derail any serious consideration of those alternatives in order to ensure the oil companies will continue to monopolize the world's energy supply for the forseeable future. I truly believe that those scientists who are the pioneers in the global warming theory are simply reporting the facts, and have not taken sides on the issue due to politics or promises of future fortunes. When you look at exactly WHO IS behind the ANTI-global warming cabal however, you'll see those that DO stand to make enormous profits if the status quo stays the same. I don't buy into this "carbon credit" idea, and think there has to be better and more realistic solutions to the problem. But just because the solution isn't perfect, or that there are those who are trying to profit from the problem that confronts us, doesn't mean that there is no problem. So far, I've seen mostly bullshit and outright lies coming from global warming critics, yet have not seen ANYTHING like that coming from REAL scientists who have studied the matter over decades. I am also surprised and saddened that I have seen those I once trusted and thought of as friends behave in ways I wouldn't have expected. I would have thought the few people that that I've thought of as friends across both forums to be more skilled at discerning between facts and bullshit. Apparently I was mistaken.
I would rather not be taken in by Al Gore's stupid scam like so many have been. Global Warming: A Chilling Perspective I don't buy into this "carbon credit" idea, and think there has to be better and more realistic solutions to the problem. But just because the solution isn't perfect, or that there are those who are trying to profit from the problem that confronts us, doesn't mean that there is no problem. There IS a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. If you look at who is pushing the AGW you will see the same folks who are pushing NAU and the NWO and for the same reasons. This has nothing to do with the environmrnt or saving the world. It has everything to do with global control.
So you're trying to tell us that the Rockefellar's and the other oil tychoons are NOT trying to bring us the NAU and the NWO? How is Dr. James Hansen involved with the NAU? What I HAVE noticed is that those who ARE involved with the NWO are painting their victims with the NWO brush, and projecting thier own crimes onto their targets.
And that is precisely what your pals are doing. He who controls the world's energy controls the world. The oil companies control the world's energy, so THEY are the ones who control the world. It is those oil companies that are the biggest critics of global warming, and it is they who pay "consultants" to spew their anti-global warming propaganda.
Global warming would have happened with or without Al Gore. Have you ever read about Dr. James Hansen?
I don't find an editorial from a UK newspaper to be valid scientific evidence.
No, I'm trying to tell you that is who is behind AGW. I've even pointed it out to you in web sites and articles yet you refuse to see. You have bought into the NWO kool-aid with AGW. And yes, Hansen is not righteous in this by any stretch. Understand, it is not the evil oil companies against the environment and science. It never has been. That's the NWO disinformation you are swallowing hook line and sinker. AGW is part of Agenda 21, funded and pushed by the same foundations and for the same reasons.
BTW, here's a little info on the author of that editorial you linked; From Wikipedia You can tell me martians are behind it, but that doesn't mean I have to believe you, especially when you provide ZERO evidence. You have bought into the NWO kool-aid with AGW You're the one selling the kool-aid here sweetie, and I'm not buying it.
Oh, so the kind, loving, and wonderful oil companies only wish to do good and to help the world, eh? LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They had NOTHING to do with 9/11 in terms of UNOCAL's desire to build a pipeline through Afghanistan, giving us a reason to INVADE that country and BUILD the f'ing pipeline. They had NOTHING to do with the invasion and occupation of Iraq, in order to STEAL the Iraqi oil that big bad ole Saddam Hussein was sitting on. They had NOTHING to do with bleeding us dry for bare essentials, due to the price of fuel these days. No, they are VERY nice people who just love us dearly and want to help us. And damn those people who don't see it that way, they are NWO disinfo agents. You people have found a nice trick, I must admit. I never thought people would swallow such utter crap, but sure enough, they have, and they do.
Oh, so what dirt do you have on Dr. Hansen?
Sigh. You are missing a big piece of the picture here. It is not the "oil companies" who are in control. It is the Rockefeller's et al and their foundations. You know this yet you refuse to see it when it comes to AGW. Do you honestly believe that "the oil companies" want the status quo as you have stated? No they want government regulation driving prices up so they make more profits. This is done through foundation law suits, funding of "government science" and environmentalism. Where do you think environmental and AGW funding comes from? Ford Foundation, Pew Foundations and the like. Here is a quote from Carry_Okie again that I urge you to read in full: The key to cracking the Constitutional system was international law, a loophole in Article VI Clause 2 of the Constitution, governing the adoption of treaties and the scope of their powers (IMO the rat Patrick Henry and others smelled only too clearly; if you want a good chuckle read Hamilton's defense of the manner of treaty ratification in Federalist #75). To implement the plan European investors needed a foothold in the US before they could get into the market. Until the Civil War, corporations were haltered in the US because they were not allowed to own land and were not protected under the Constitution in a manner co-equal to citizens. After the Civil War the US was deeply in debt to that very European investor class. The 14th Amendment changed that balance of power between the individual and corporate. Once the appropriate Supreme Court cases were in place interpreting persons "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" as including corporate persons, corporations then derived equal protection under the laws and could own property, the investment floodgates opened, and that not only created an American industrial colossus, it produced an American investor class owning enormously influential private tax-exempt foundations. So it isn't exactly by coincidence that it is those same colossal foundations that are making all those "charitable" donations to those icky Greens. The Environmental Grantmakers Association? That's Rockefeller. The Pew Charitable Trusts? That's Sunoco. W. Alton Jones? That's Citgo. The World Wildlife Fund? BP and Shell. You do see a pattern, don't you? These are more than investors in energy, their assets include timber, mining, banking, food production… They aren't fools. They use the same simple and ancient recipe as did their European forbears by which to manufacture a predictable return: Kill the competition with regulations, create a shortage, and cash in. It's become so common there is even an excellent book out on the topic that I suggest you read, . It's a simple process that has accelerated over the last five decades. It's been done in industry after industry: timber, energy, mining, beef, fish, agriculture, real estate development, soon water… ALL taking advantage of economies of scale in environmental compliance and sometimes selective enforcement. Tax-exempt foundations buy the research "data" they need, fund a few ideological groups trained by the same professorate that lives off their grant money, and not a word need be breathed to the companies in which they are invested. Their pet executives wail about the regulations and scream how stupid and counterproductive they are, just like you do. It makes great theater. There is virtually no way of getting caught. The taxpayers pay for NASA, and that is where Dr. James Hansen works. He is one of the early pioneers of the global warming theory, and is NOT working for those who you claim. So your premise is flawed, and you misrepresent who the Rockefellar's et al actually support. For one, the entire idea of oil companies WANTING the government to impose higher taxes on fuel is insane, as it would REDUCE the demand for their products, not increase it. Secondly, a TAX does not go to THEM, it goes to the US government. Besides all that, the REASON the tax would be imposed is to FORCE the development of alternative energy and fuels, either by existing companies or by new companies that could spring up IF viable alternate fuels and energy sources could be developed. So no, the oil companies WOULD NOT benefit from the proposed taxes on fuel. I don't see it as a good idea to impose higher taxes on fuel at this point, however. I think the oil companies should be kicked off the corporate welfare and subsidies that they've been handed by their lackeys in Washington, if anything. I also think the government should impose price control on gasoline, and not allow the obscene profits that the oil companies are currently raking in at the expense of the American People.
Those two sentences conflict with each other. It is the Rockefellars et al and their foundations WHO OWN and CONTROL the oil companies.
You mean the shill who flacks for George Soros and wants us to believe the sky is falling? That Hansen? Another member of the Al Gore posse, at least he sounds like it. And surely, global warming would happen with or without either of them or any of the people who pull their strings. The earth's climate is cyclical and goes through periods of warming and cooling. Most people knew that before all these folks started yammering about the sky falling. But don't be too alarmed, it isn't likely that any of the really big pieces will fall on you.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. I mean the Director of NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), at Columbia University. You know, the one with the following education.. You know, the guy that has a whole bunch of peer reviewed papers published in scientific journals concerning planetary science and climate change dating back to 1966, with his climate change observations first published around 1976. I don't think Al Gore even knew what climate change was back in 1976, so I don't think Al invented the idea. I don't think Soros was much interested back then either. I notice you had nothing to say about the other link I posted for you: Global Warming: A Chilling Perspective. That isn't an editorial form a UK newspaper or any other newspaper. But I have noticed something with most of the firm believers in the global warming scam, it is like a religion to them, one which must not be questioned. Of course it doesn't break my leg or pick my pocket what you believe and I say if it makes you happy to think the sky is falling just keep believing that.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. From Wikipedia uh huh. And of course all the people who claim to be scientists and front for Soros and people like him are all climatologists. Yeah, sure they are. And you do know that any of us can go on wikipedia and write any bs we want, right? At least if they haven't changed it and I haven't heard anything to that effect. Not saying I haven't used wikipedia as a source sometimes but I never take it as the last word on anything.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Oh, you mean that collection of thoughts from Monty Hieb, the Chief Engineer for West Virginia Miners Health, Safety & Training? How is he supposed to be an "expert" on global warming and planetary science?
It certainly seems to be a religion to you, and to those whose words you parrot.
All that may well be true but it is also true that global warming and cooling happened before his time. I would imagine that, all things being equal, it will continue that way.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Oh, of course. Anyone who doesn't shill for George Soros or Al Gore couldn't possibly know anything beyond the field they work in. How convenient.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. So this is bullshit, eh? How about this? From Minchin denies climate change man- made "I don't think it is the point whether or not you are paid by the coal or petroleum industry," said Professor Carter. "I will address the evidence." A former CSIRO climate scientist, and now head of a new sustainability institute at Monash University, Graeme Pearman, said Professor Carter was not a credible source on climate change. "If he has any evidence that [global warming over the past 100 years] is a natural variability he should publish through the peer review process," Dr Pearman said. "That is what the rest of us have to do." He said he was letting the fossil fuel industry off the hook. And whose words have I "parroted"?
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. You must really hate Albert Einstein, as he didn't shill for the oil companies. You must also hate Isaac Newton, as you can't say he shilled for Soros or Gore, since they weren't alive back then. Anyone that dares present facts and observations contrary to Exxon/Mobil's bottom line is a shill for Soros in your book. I didn't think you were that brain washed and gullible, but I guess I was wrong.
Those of the oil companies' henchmen, and RNC smear operatives, such as farmfriend's pal who headed the swiftboat attack on Kerry and finds dirt on political enemies for Rush Limburgh.
When one won't acknowledge the facts and continue to believe something that has no evidence to support it then you can conclude such a person is insane IMO.
God is always good!
I fail to see how a safety engineer for the West Virginia Office of Miners' Health Safety & Training can be seen as a credible source on global warming. Do you think NASA hires dummies that are less qualified than coal mine safety engineers to develop spacecraft and space missions? Do you think they'd put some idiot in charge of their planetary science division?
Exactly. That is why you need stronger meds.
You know, this is getting a bit boring. I already told you that it doesn't break my leg or pick my pocket if you want to believe the sky is falling. I doubt any of the big pieces will hit you but who knows. Be careful out there, one of them might get you.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Either of them ever run around like an escapee from a mental institution yammering about the sky falling? No? I didn't think so. I think you might need to get your meds adjusted and as soon as possible.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Either that or they are being paid to promote something.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Oh BTW, it turns out your pal Monty Hieb is a shill for the coal industry. Did you know that coal accounts for 93 percent of the CO2 emissions from the electric utility industry in the US? My, what a coincidence he'd be trying to smear those who are trying to warn the world about man-made global warming...
Eat shit bud.
Let's see, we have a shill for the coal and oil industries and a shill from the ADL posing as a Jew hater playing kissy face and swapping spit. How special.
Oh please, are you being for real here? Do you not have mirrors in your house or do you just not cast a reflection??? The whole anthropogenic global warming climate change man does bad things (we might as well lump all the names together since they change for GWers based on public acceptance and multiple reinterpretations of data regularly...) is pet theory ranting with the objective of societal power grabbing... Scientifically managed technocracy, that's what they want.
Government blows and that which governs least blows least...
FL - The... Government... Has... Our... Best... Interests... At... Heart... As for random quack, he DID create the modeling warez, you're not going to weasel oout on a "creds" arguement on this one...
Government blows and that which governs least blows least...
Yea, and they put it together and blew it up AFTER gathering enough QUANTITATIVE evidence that it would work, they didn't think up the concept, then gather a bunch of sand and try to compress it with cap gun caps to intitiate the chain reaction...
Government blows and that which governs least blows least...
The bottom line is that the oil and coal industries lose money if the world stops buying their product. They can and will fight that to the bitter end. If you don't understand that, then you need to think long and hard about what money is all about, and what a group of people who control the world's energy supply would do to maintain that control.
As for random quack, he DID create the modeling warez, you're not going to weasel oout on a "creds" arguement on this one... Actually, the government itself sides with the oil companies, as expected. Bush's people have tried to silence scientists such as Dr. Hansen. So are you now a big fan of "W" Bush and Dick Cheney, who is also on the anti-global warming bandwagon?
Dr. Hansen is a quack. Global cooling is occurring right now. More CO2 in the atmosphere is good for the Earth and all living things. Do some research and find out how very little infrared radiation from Earth actually is affected by CO2 compared to water vapor and you will then have to acknowledge that CO2 cannot cause runaway global warming on Earth.
God is always good!
God is always good!
Yes they will but that doesn't mean that CO2 causes runaway global warming. The oil and gas companies are actively blocking new breakthroughs in solar panel technologies by lobbying the government to block land use for experiments due to "environmental" concerns. Yes, the oil and gas companies don't care about cheap energy or alternate forms of energy and they are hurting us all by being so greedy. But that doesn't change the fact that more CO2 in the atmosphere is actually good for Earth and not bad and in no way can cause runaway global warming.
God is always good!
And who told you that, your mentor George Bush, or your master Dick Cheney? Report Links Cheney Office, Oil Giant to Global Warming Policy Shift
Time for YOU to do some research. By ITSELF, CO2 might not pose as much of a risk, but as there are OTHER greenhouse gases emitted by man, it DOES pose a risk when the other gases are taken into consideration. Try reading these publications, educate yourself on any science you might not understand, then after a year or more, maybe you could actually make a valid statement concerning the topic. As of late, you've posted fraudulent info concerning sunspots and a fraudulent petition with fake names posing as a real petition signed by real scientists. So I take what you post as just the ranting of someone who either doesn't know the first thing of what he's talking about, or one who is deliberately posting false information for profit and/or pleasure.
Yeah, if anyone doesn't buy into Al's bs about the sky falling they just automatically must be a shill for the coal and oil industry. Never mind the fact that I have never received a penny for my "shilling," but have paid them plenty for the gas I use. I couldn't give less than two $#it$ about the "coal and oil industries," never have derived any benefit from them. But your hero, Hansen, takes all the money Soros throws at him. And isn't that "special"?
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. I was out of line about getting your meds adjusted. I understand that you are passionate about what you believe and that is ok. I tried to tell you more than once that your beliefs are your business and if you want to believe in "global warming" have at it. But I was wrong to make it personal I guess. Just got tired of all that stuff about how people who worked for the government were so smart and how it would be almost impossible for them to be wrong (and that is the way you come across on this issue). But anyway, I apologize to you for saying what I did about getting your meds adjusted, it was uncalled for.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Soros funds NASA? That's funny, I thought it was the US taxpayers.
That isn't what I said. Soros has provided mega money to Hansen. I didn't say a word about him funding NASA. Here is an article I found about Hansen and I imagine there are more. Is Global Warming Alarmist James Hansen a Shill for George Soros? By Jake Gontesky The claims against anthropogenic global warming skeptics are often the same: they're all shills for big oil or other industry wishing to poke holes in the 'consensus theory' of global warming (which isn't a consensus at all). Under the so-called "politicization of science" program, George Soros' (the favorite fundraiser of many democrats) has reportedly given as much as $720,000 to Hansen to help package his alarmist claims and get them pushed by the mainstream media (The Soros Threat to Democracy): How many people, for instance, know that James Hansen, a man billed as a lonely "NASA whistleblower" standing up to the mighty U.S. government, was really funded by Soros' Open Society Institute , which gave him "legal and media advice"? That's right, Hansen was packaged for the media by Soros' flagship "philanthropy," by as much as $720,000, most likely under the OSI's "politicization of science" program. So he got some big paychecks from Soros - but was there a quid pro quo? The evidence certainly indicates as much: That may have meant that Hansen had media flacks help him get on the evening news to push his agenda and lawyers pressuring officials to let him spout his supposedly "censored" spiel for weeks in the name of advancing the global warming agenda. Hansen even succeeded, with public pressure from his nightly news performances, in forcing NASA to change its media policies to his advantage. Had Hansen's OSI-funding been known, the public might have viewed the whole production differently. The outcome could have been different. Did Soros' funding pay off? You be the judge. Do a quick google search on James Hansen to read any of the thousands of mainstream media stories touting Hansen's claims of censorship by the Bush administration. This wouldn't be the first time credibility questions have been raised regarding Hansen and his alarmist claims [see "When does 1,400 Media Interviews = Muzzled" (03/20/07)]. But the alarmist's favorite poster-boy James Hansen is hardly the only benefactor of Soros' funding designed to get more media play for politicized topics important to the left - check out the full article for more on the non-disclosure disclosures regarding immigration and other big topics of the day. ___________________
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Now that's a mouthful.
You are the bigger man. FL never appologizes for the personal attacks he lobs and he spends more time doing that then arguing the science. For my part, I'll continue to post science information. Anything else is just not worth it.
Thank you. I try not to make these things personal and I recognize that others can have a different idea and it doesn't make them a bad person. But everything I have read about this issue seems to indicate that the earth goes through these cycles of warming and cooling and has done so throughout all known history. And it has also been said that one volcanic eruption of any size will pump more CO2 into the atmosphere than man ever has. So unless there is some way that Al and his minions can control natural cycles and things like volcanoes I see no hope for anything much different than the regular warming and cooling cycles.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. On a more humorus note. Man contributes 3% of the CO2. Ocean outgassing is the main CO2 source. Did you read the recent study showing that the deserts are a bigger carbon sink than forests? Quite the surprise. Do you think we will see enviros calling for increasing desert size to offset carbon emissions?
The cartoonist made Al look way too smart. Good cartoon though.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. It all depends on what Al tells them to do I suppose.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. FL, you need to get over the concept of a "cabal" controlling oil interests and over the fact that whether or not their is a cabal, it's irrelevant to the climate debate. The western oil companies comprise about 15-20% of total world oil companies, with most of the rest, far bigger, being government owned. The planet is awash in hydrocarbons, they're use is not, and won't perceptibly for quite a while if ever, contribute significantly to the climate dynamics. The KEY point is that their use is widespread enough, and the conundrum posed by the government paid fear mongerers is nebulous enough, that you can force policy through it and gain greater control. Haven't you noticed that it's like the freakin' Borg lately, Ads everywhere, R's and D's laying side by side on the issue???
Government blows and that which governs least blows least...
Hey farmgirl, for one I don't spend 24/7 on Internet chat boards or forums, I actually work for a living. For two, I see you as an agent provocateur here on this forum, leading the sheep to the slaughter. You post mostly propaganda, and use that propaganda to troll for a response to it, pinging people that you know will find the material false and/or misleading. After baiting said people, you launch attacks on them and then cry that you've been personally offended. You are playing a game here, and it's a game only played by those who either collect money for their efforts, or who are quite insane.
You don't know that, and scientists with much more knowledge and experience in the matter than you or I have said the opposite. Remember, it's not the government that is warning us about global warming, it's a neutral body of scientists who are simply doing their job that are doing so. Cheney and his oil buddies are on YOUR side, where they oppose the concept of global warming. Doesn't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?
Uh uh. There is a team of Chinese scientists who have made that claim, yet they can't account for where the CO2 would go if the sand actually did absorb CO2 as they claim. The evidence is shakey at best, and it isn't for certain that the claim is valid. Of course you treat it as gospel.
I suggest the bozo.
Speaking of ad hominem attacks....
I've never bozo'd anyone here, and don't intend to. I like to know what's being said about me, especially by one as determined as her to trash me here on the 4um.
Just got tired of all that stuff about how people who worked for the government were so smart and how it would be almost impossible for them to be wrong (and that is the way you come across on this issue). I was trying to point out that dedicated scientists who work at NASA and who have the most advanced equipment available to gather and collect data are a bit more believable than some "consultant" who works for Exxon/Mobil in order to debunk the claims made by NASA scientists. That is especially true when one considers the fact that those claims WOULD negatively impact oil company and coal industry profits if they resulted in corrective measures such as alternative fuels and energy sources. But anyway, I apologize to you for saying what I did about getting your meds adjusted, it was uncalled for. If you were who I thought you were, I doubt you would have even thought of saying that since we had come to each other's defence countless times on another forum. I've never personally attacked you nor made you appear to be an idiot, which I COULD have done if I was so inclined. Anyways, apology accepted. I reacted harshly due to the surprise and betrayal I felt from your words. I apologize for those comments.
That is a claim made in an editorial, with NO supporting evidence. One link I found referred to a Soros PDF file, where if you look through it closely, there is NO reference to Hansen receiving money from Soros. Besides, from what I've seen, Soros has been a huge pain in the ass for neocons and zionists, but I don't see why people who claim to be patriots would have a problem with him. As far as Hansen, yes, he did have quite a few media interviews largely BECAUSE of NASA's former policy of censoring his remarks and articles concerning global warming. But he and his team WERE being censored for a period of time... Watchdog: NASA misled on global warming studies So are you a fan of Dick Cheney all of a sudden? Report Links Cheney Office, Oil Giant to Global Warming Policy Shift
I work as well and I don't give a shit how you see me. I have a well documented internet history. Too many people know who I am and what I do. Remember this crap was tried on me over at LP when I came out against the MCDC. People tried to lob these same accusation against me. What happened? People who knew me but were on the oppisite side of the argument came out and spoke in my favor. It didn't work there and it won't work here. *shakes head* I post interesting articles on a subject I've dealt with for many years now going back to the Klamath Basin Crisis. I ping people who have signed up for a list. I don't care what side of the argument they are on. I've maintained a similar list on FR, LP, and LF. As I recall you were the one whining about being personally attacked not me. I'm not playing any game. I take our freedoms including property and water rights very serious. AGW is just the latest issue used to take our rights from us.
Now that is just plain funny. That's even funnier.
Where exactly have I tried to trash you? As I recall you were the one trashing me in PMs to everyone. I am not the one making unfounded accusations against your character thread after thread after thread.
2. I've never personally attacked you nor made you appear to be an idiot, which I COULD have done if I was so inclined. 3. Anyways, apology accepted. I reacted harshly due to the surprise and betrayal I felt from your words. I apologize for those comments. 1. You wouldn't seriously suggest that ALL of the scientists who say that global warming is a bunch of bs work for Exxon/Mobil, would you? I find that pretty incredible. 2. I suspect that gate swings both ways. And if you think that mild comment about getting your meds adjusted, a comment I have made before to my friends who thought nothing of it, was an "attack" all I can say is that we have a different idea about what constitutes an "attack." Telling someone to "eat shit bud" probably qualifies but I could let it pass because I can see how dedicated you are to your beliefs about global warming. 3. I am glad you accepted the apology. Likewise, I accept yours. And I will refrain from posting directly to you on this issue since your mind is made up about it. I have no problem with that but have no desire to beat my head over a brick wall either.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Oh yeah, I guess that must be it. Of course I have called him just about every kind of jackass and horse's ass you can think of but I guess that makes me a big fan of his.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Sure your not. It's as I said, you bait people, then when they respond to what you post and call a spade a spade, you accuse them of personal attacks. Where exactly have I tried to trash you? The post I responded to, #82, is a glowing example. As I recall you were the one trashing me in PMs to everyone. A handful of people does not constitute "everyone", and I wasn't "trashing you", I was simply telling them of my observations. I find some of your past actions and comments "curious" at minimum.
So how neutral is your friend who works for Rush Limburgh and headed the swiftboat attack team?
I don't believe a word of what you say.
Uh huh. Who's the one that brought up the phrase "personal attack" on this thread. Check post #82 and see who posted it.
I'd say just about every one of them are either RNC backed, fossil fuel energy industry backed, or backed by governments who stand to lose if they can't burn all the oil, coal, and gas their little hearts desire, such as China and India.
I still don't think it is too credible to believe that none of the scientists who argue against this stuff are all in bed with the oil companies while all of the ones who argue for it and are financed by Soros and fronted by people like Al Gore--and I think we all know what a crooked sob he is--are all salt of the earth, honest people, who would never, ever lie for money. No, not credible at all.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. You have not proved that ANY of them are financed by Soros. Your reference to Hansen was bogus. At most, Hansen was aided by a whistleblower assistance group, who had once obtained a grant from OSI, a Soros corporation. It was rather dishonest of the authors whose articles you've read that accuse Hansen of being funded by Soros. And THAT is what raises the red flag for me, where the level of dishonesty and deception on the side of the global warming critics is absolutely blatent.
Swiftboat attack team? What the heck does that have to do with global warming or cooling? This issue really should have nothing to do with politics. I have looked at the facts only and have concluded it is utter BS. Noble peace prizes are not usually given to people who are deserving but rather the opposite. Al Gore sure the heck wasn't deserving of such an award.
God is always good!
Not responsive whatsoever to my post. And I already told you I was tired of this, it is fruitless. You have your mind made up, to you global warming is real and not part of the natural warming and cooling cycle that the earth goes through regularly. I believe differently, that the earth goes through these cycles on a more or less regular basis. I suspect it will continue to do so after Hansen and Soros are dead. And that will be my last word to you on this issue.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You ridicule people who'd rather be cautious about global warming, likening them to Al Gore and other such bullshit. BUT, when a REAL RNC shillster who executes smear campaigns for the RNC and Rush Limburgh comes along and proclaims global warming to be "junk science" and other such things, you say you can't look at the person's background, you just need to listen to what he says. In case you don't know who this individual that I'm referring to is, I'd suggest you stay out of other people's conversations. farmfriend knows who I'm talking about, she used him as a "source" for her "scientific info" at one time. I have looked at the facts only and have concluded it is utter BS. You believe some huckster who proclaimed there were only 2 sunspots this year, and that we are on our way to an ice age because of it, in fact you posted the article. Yet, you don't believe NASA scientists who have the most advanced equipment at their disposal, and who have been studying this for three decades or so. You are truly a piece of work. I don't know if you are purposely being dumb about this, or if you are just acting like yourself.
Huh? English please. If you're trying to say I didn't respond, I responded consisely with the fact that what you posted wasn't true. I challenge you to prove what you claim.
Of course there are cycles, but then there are other factors, such as man-made pollution. If you don't think it exists, then there's no hope educating you any further.
No one is trying to trash you on this forum. You continue to ignore all evidence that runaway global warming is not occurring and can't occur with the know greenhouse gasses on Earth. Why? You also fail to see that those proclaiming global warming are making tons of money off of it. They have an strong motive to keep the myth alive. Yes, air and water pollution are big issues and should be addressed, but there is no need to throw the fiction of runaway global warming into the picture to address it.
God is always good!
How is NASA making a "ton of money off of it"? I really can't understand why some people can't comprehend that those who own and control the energy industry do NOT wish to lose that control, and will say or do ANYTHING to maintain it. And that IS what it's all about, MONEY and CONTROL, and it is not NASA nor Dr. Hansen that is persuing that, it is those who own and control Exxon/Mobil, Standard Oil, British Petroleum, and so forth. Why do you give a shit if the oil tychoons lose a few of their private jets or yachts? Would it be such a terrible thing to find alternative means of powering our vehicles, and heating our homes?
It's not us who don't comprehend what is going on. Go back and read that post I did about the foundations. You know the truth yet you have fallen for the magician’s slight of hand. In an earlier post you seemed mystified that so many people you have agreed and posted with over the years take the opposite view on this issue. It's because they understand why AGW is being pushed and what the outcome will be. It is not about the environment, it never has been.
No it wouldn't but that's not what AGW is all about. Never has been. It's about control. You know that yet you still take the wrong side. I can't fathom how someone who knows so much about the game can miss one of the biggest pieces in the game. Here I'll post it again: These are more than investors in energy, their assets include timber, mining, banking, food production… They aren't fools. They use the same simple and ancient recipe as did their European forbears by which to manufacture a predictable return: Kill the competition with regulations, create a shortage, and cash in. It's become so common there is even an excellent book out on the topic that I suggest you read, . It's a simple process that has accelerated over the last five decades. It's been done in industry after industry: timber, energy, mining, beef, fish, agriculture, real estate development, soon water… ALL taking advantage of economies of scale in environmental compliance and sometimes selective enforcement. Tax-exempt foundations buy the research "data" they need, fund a few ideological groups trained by the same professorate that lives off their grant money, and not a word need be breathed to the companies in which they are invested. Their pet executives wail about the regulations and scream how stupid and counterproductive they are, just like you do. It makes great theater. There is virtually no way of getting caught. The above is the main purpose behind AGW. If you believe in AGW then help them in their agenda.
Uh huh. So the oil tychoons are the good guys, and the NASA scientists are the bad guys. Oh, you say the oil tychoons are the ones TRYING to force people NOT to buy their product? Sorry, I'm not buying your sales pitch, no matter how much agiprop you post.
Show me proof that people like Dr. Hansen will personally profit from curbing CO2 in the atmosphere. Show me proof that his team at NASA are cronies of the oil companies, where it is that team of scientists that are trying to inform people that we need to CEASE using petroleum and other fossil fuels. You try to portray the oil and gas companies as some sort of benevolent group of kind folks, yet you try to associate those who OWN AND CONTROL those companies as the ones behind a movement to END our dependence on oil and other fossil fuels. As I said, I'm not buying it.
Even IF the above is true, what is wrong with them hedging their bets IN CASE there are some new technologies that could very well replace petroleum as the major energy source on the planet? Do you have a problem with new technology? What is your issue with it? It's been done in industry after industry: timber, energy, mining, beef, fish, agriculture, real estate development, soon water… ALL taking advantage of economies of scale in environmental compliance and sometimes selective enforcement. Tax-exempt foundations buy the research "data" they need, fund a few ideological groups trained by the same professorate that lives off their grant money, and not a word need be breathed to the companies in which they are invested. Their pet executives wail about the regulations and scream how stupid and counterproductive they are, just like you do. It makes great theater. There is virtually no way of getting caught. So who wrote this piece of scaremongering garbage? It sounds like it was written by a very paranoid individual, or one who knows how to press the right buttons on people who are leery of the Establishment and believe anything and everything written that might fall into their world view. What IS a fact is that the very people this piece tries to villy ARE the ones in control of the world's energy, and it is THEY that benefit from people like you and this author. Those people you portray as so evil their very association with global warming discredits ALL global warming facts and theories, are the SAME people you wish to give free reign to continue business as usual, and allow them to reap obscene profits at our expense, as well as handing them free US taxpayer money in the form of subsidies and grants. Of course, it is not the fact that they DO control the world's energy that bothers you, it is the fact that they PRETEND to be sponsoring groups that would lead to their own demise. This is why I question your motives, especially with some of the ridiculous comments you've made, such as when you thought the figures at the bottom of the sunspot chart were the actual total number of sunspots for the month, where in fact it was the AVERAGE DAILY sunspot number of that month. Any high school, or even middle school kid would have known what those numbers meant. Yet you claim to understand things that are well beyond high school level science, and villify those who have not only mastered PhD level Physics, but who have worked at NASA for decades and published a hundred or so scientific papers. As I said earlier, I'm not buying what you're selling.
I have done no such thing.
There you go with the peronal attacks again.
Stating facts is now considered a personal attack? Here, let me help you out here. Go play out in the fucking highway and run in front of a few semis. There, now that might be called a personal attack, or maybe it could be good advice, you decide...
Then why do you side with them?
I don't but that won't stop you from twisting what I say into that now will it?
You side with them by aiding and abetting their agenda, which is to silence NASA scientists who have published scientific papers in regards to global warming. Their agenda is to continue to rob the people of the world for their daily essential needs such as transportation and heat, and to control the governments and people of this world by using the resources at their disposal, which includes just about anything. That you are so vehemently against even TRYING to scale back oil consumption is an indication of whose side you are on.
Soon government and the scientific community were working together and lots of science research jobs were created.
The Martians plan to throw a dance for all the human race
#2. To: farmfriend, FormerLurker (#0)
4. The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect. ...
#3. To: Original_Intent, *libertarians* (#2)
#4. To: Original_Intent (#2)
Source: The Australian
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#5. To: FormerLurker, farmfriend (#4)
Dr David Evans was a consultant to the Australian Greenhouse Office from 1999 to 2005.
I'd like to see a respected group of scientists make the claim that this present author makes. I don't believe the rants of those who are biased in favor of their pet theory.
#6. To: Original_Intent (#5)
Does that include the proponents of Global Warming?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#7. To: Original_Intent (#5)
So, do you dispute the evidence presented
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#8. To: farmfriend (#0)
The onus should be on those who want to change things to provide evidence for why the changes are necessary. The Australian public is eventually going to have to be told the evidence anyway, so it might as well be told before wrecking the economy.
Lord Acton
#9. To: FormerLurker, Original_Intent (#7)
Uh, WHAT evidence?
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#10. To: James Deffenbach (#8)
And the man is correct--the burden of proof is, or should be, on those who posit the theory, not those who doubt the validity
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#11. To: farmfriend, FormerLurker, all (#9)
Uh, WHAT evidence?
#12. To: farmfriend, Original_Intent (#9)
How about ice cores that show CO2 ALWAYS follows temperature?
B) We are the solar cycle MINIMUM, so cooler temperatures can be expected.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#13. To: Original_Intent (#11)
There are models and theories but nothing which proves it beyond the hypothesis level.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#14. To: farmfriend (#9)
It's the science you should be looking at, not who pays the paycheck. I know one of the scientists you disparage as having been paid by an oil company was a consultant for them in an area having nothing to do with oil or science for that matter. I guess government lackies are more trust worthy though.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#15. To: farmfriend, James Deffenbach (#10)
Sadly their "proof" is fading like sun spots.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#16. To: FormerLurker (#15)
Now what sort of person would misrepresent scientific data in order to scare people
Lord Acton
#17. To: FormerLurker, James Deffenbach, Original_Intent (#15)
And even MORE sadly people such as you try to misrepresent the current situation by claiming the sky is falling because there are fewer sunspots than usual, while failing to mention that it is NORMAL for there to be fewer at this time as we are at the MINIMUM point in the solar cycle.
The cycle 24 will start a new phase shift in the sun.
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#18. To: James Deffenbach (#16)
Al Gore. That b@$tard is making a fortune on this global warming scam.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#19. To: farmfriend (#17)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#20. To: farmfriend (#17)
What is newsworthy is that since 1913 not one minimum has lasted as long as the on-going one.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#21. To: farmfriend (#17)
Three very tiny spots lasting 1-2 days during the last half year. Normal?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#22. To: FormerLurker (#21)
That is a total and complete lie. Here's the current year's daily sunspot numbers. As anyone can see, there have been far more than just THREE. Do you really think you can pull off your scams here this easily?
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#23. To: farmfriend, FormerLurker (#0)
But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming. As Lord Keynes famously said, "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"
#24. To: farmfriend (#22)
You still don't understand the concept of cycle 23 and 24 do you?
#25. To: FormerLurker (#15)
Now what sort of person would misrepresent scientific data in order to scare people and/or pacify them with false conclusions and misleading statements, eh?
#26. To: James Deffenbach (#16)
Al Gore. That b@$tard is making a fortune on this global warming scam. And if he found out tomorrow that there would be more money in yammering about "the coming Ice Age" (which was what they were claiming in the 70's) you can bet your @$$ he would be on that bandwagon.
#27. To: FormerLurker (#18)
I'm not really sure if that is true or not, as I don't really pay Al Gore much attention. How is he making a fortune?
Gore helped found Generation Investment Management, through which he and others pay for offsets. The firm invests the money in solar, wind and other projects that reduce energy consumption around the globe...
AFLAC INC - AQUANTIVE INC - AUTODESK INC - BECTON DICKINSON & CO BLACKBAUD INC - GENERAL ELECTRIC CO - GREENHILL & CO INC - JOHNSON CTLS INC - LABORATORY CORP AMER HLDGS - METABOLIX INC - NORTHERN TR CORP - NUVEEN INVTS INC -STAPLES INC - SYSCO CORP - TECHNE CORP - UBS AG - VCA ANTECH INC - WATERS CORP - WHOLE FOODS MKT INC
Lord Acton
#28. To: RickyJ (#26)
Scientists are no more moral than any other person is.
Lord Acton
#29. To: farmfriend (#22)
You still don't understand the concept of cycle 23 and 24 do you?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#30. To: RickyJ (#24)
The guy is a troll for the global warming scam. He must be on the payroll.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#31. To: James Deffenbach (#27)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#32. To: FormerLurker (#31)
(Edited)
So what would you rather do
Lord Acton
#33. To: FormerLurker (#31)
(Edited)
When you look at exactly WHO IS behind the ANTI-global warming cabal however, you'll see those that DO stand to make enormous profits if the status quo stays the same.
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#34. To: farmfriend (#33)
If you look at who is pushing the AGW you will see the same folks who are pushing NAU and the NWO
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#35. To: farmfriend (#33)
It has everything to do with global control.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#36. To: James Deffenbach (#32)
I would rather not be taken in by Al Gore's stupid scam like so many have been.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#37. To: James Deffenbach (#32)
There IS a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#38. To: FormerLurker (#34)
So you're trying to tell us that the Rockefellar's and the other oil tychoons are NOT trying to bring us the NAU and the NWO?
What I HAVE noticed is that those who ARE involved with the NWO are painting their victims with the NWO brush, and projecting thier own crimes onto their targets.
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#39. To: James Deffenbach (#32)
Carter is a prominent global warming sceptic and has consistently opposed the consensus view on global warming [1]. A March 2007 article by Sydney Morning Herald environmental reporter Wendy Frew said that "Professor Carter, whose background is in marine geology, appears to have little, if any, standing in the Australian climate science community." [2] While Carter is a frequent commentator on climate change, he has no published peer reviewed papers providing evidence to discredit the climate change consensus.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#40. To: farmfriend (#38)
No, I'm trying to tell you that is who is behind AGW.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#41. To: farmfriend (#38)
(Edited)
Understand, it is not the evil oil companies against the environment and science. It never has been. That's the NWO disinformation you are swallowing hook line and sinker.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#42. To: farmfriend (#38)
Hansen is not righteous in this by any stretch.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#43. To: FormerLurker (#35)
And that is precisely what your pals are doing. He who controls the world's energy controls the world. The oil companies control the world's energy, so THEY are the ones who control the world.
The supply regulation game is at least as old as the Dutch East India Company's manipulation of coffee prices by controlling access to the plants. Understanding that sorry history of economic tyranny by European corporate royalty, the founders of this nation tried to design a limited government, one that didn't have the power to control private property or have control of resources. Control of access to resources is too much temptation for the wealthy to purchase corrupt influence that depresses everybody else. They Founders failed.
It's a vertically integrated racketeering system that extends over the entire planet. American investors in multinational operations are perfectly happy taking a hit on US operations destroying domestic production because their investments abroad get the business. They either convert domestic resource land to real estate or mothball it under tax exempt conservancies, Federal monuments, and such.
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#44. To: farmfriend (#43)
Where do you think environmental and AGW funding comes from?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#45. To: farmfriend (#43)
It is not the "oil companies" who are in control. It is the Rockefeller's et al and their foundations.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#46. To: FormerLurker (#36)
(Edited)
Global warming would have happened with or without Al Gore. Have you ever read about Dr. James Hansen?
Lord Acton
#47. To: James Deffenbach (#46)
(Edited)
You mean the shill who flacks for George Soros and wants us to believe the sky is falling?
Hansen was trained in physics and astronomy in the space science program of Dr. James Van Allen at the University of Iowa. He obtained a B.A. in Physics and Mathematics with highest distinction in 1963, an M.S. in Astronomy in 1965 and a Ph.D. in Physics, in 1967, all three degrees from the University of Iowa. He participated in the NASA graduate traineeship from 1962 to 1966 and, at the same time, between 1965 and 1966, he was a visiting student at the Institute of Astrophysics at the University of Kyoto and in the Department of Astronomy at the University of Tokyo.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#48. To: FormerLurker (#37)
I don't find an editorial from a UK newspaper to be valid scientific evidence.
Lord Acton
#49. To: FormerLurker (#39)
BTW, here's a little info on the author of that editorial you linked;
Lord Acton
#50. To: James Deffenbach (#48)
I notice you had nothing to say about the other link I posted for you: Global Warming: A Chilling Perspective. That isn't an editorial form a UK newspaper or any other newspaper.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#51. To: James Deffenbach (#48)
it is like a religion to them
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#52. To: FormerLurker (#47)
Lord Acton
#53. To: FormerLurker (#50)
Oh, you mean that collection of thoughts from Monty Hieb, the Chief Engineer for West Virginia Miners Health, Safety & Training?
Lord Acton
#54. To: James Deffenbach (#49)
And you do know that any of us can go on wikipedia and write any bs we want, right?
Professor Carter told the Herald yesterday the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had uncovered no evidence the warming of the planet was caused by human activity. He said the role of peer review in scientific literature was overstressed, and whether or not a scientist had been funded by the fossil fuel industry was irrelevant to the validity of research.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#55. To: FormerLurker (#51)
It certainly seems to be a religion to you, and to those whose words you parrot.
Lord Acton
#56. To: James Deffenbach (#53)
Anyone who doesn't shill for George Soros or Al Gore couldn't possibly know anything beyond the field they work in.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#57. To: James Deffenbach (#55)
And whose words have I "parroted"?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#58. To: James Deffenbach (#48)
But I have noticed something with most of the firm believers in the global warming scam, it is like a religion to them, one which must not be questioned.
#59. To: James Deffenbach (#53)
Anyone who doesn't shill for George Soros or Al Gore couldn't possibly know anything beyond the field they work in.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#60. To: RickyJ (#58)
When one won't acknowledge the facts and continue to believe something that has no evidence to support it then you can conclude such a person is insane IMO.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#61. To: FormerLurker (#54)
Lord Acton
#62. To: FormerLurker (#56)
You must really hate Albert Einstein, as he didn't shill for the oil companies. You must also hate Isaac Newton, as you can't say he shilled for Soros or Gore, since they weren't alive back then.
Lord Acton
#63. To: RickyJ (#58)
When one won't acknowledge the facts and continue to believe something that has no evidence to support it then you can conclude such a person is insane IMO.
Lord Acton
#64. To: James Deffenbach (#48)
Monty Hieb
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#65. To: James Deffenbach (#62)
I think you might need to get your meds adjusted and as soon as possible.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#66. To: James Deffenbach, RickyJ (#63)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#67. To: FormerLurker (#4)
I don't believe the rants of those who are biased in favor of their pet theory...
#68. To: FormerLurker (#6)
I'd believe a team of NASA scientists before I'd believe a random quack that collects his pay from Exxon/Mobil...
#69. To: FormerLurker (#13)
The atomic bomb was just a theory before they actually put one together and blew it up.
#70. To: Axenolith (#67)
Scientifically managed technocracy, that's what they want.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#71. To: Axenolith (#68)
FL - The... Government... Has... Our... Best... Interests... At... Heart...
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#72. To: FormerLurker (#71)
Bush's people have tried to silence scientists such as Dr. Hansen.
#73. To: FormerLurker (#70)
(Edited)
#74. To: FormerLurker (#70)
(Edited)
The bottom line is that the oil and coal industries lose money if the world stops buying their product.
#75. To: RickyJ (#72)
Dr. Hansen is a quack. Global cooling is occurring right now.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#76. To: RickyJ (#72)
Do some research and find out how very little infrared radiation from Earth actually is affected by CO2 compared to water vapor and you will then have to acknowledge that CO2 cannot cause runaway global warming on Earth.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#77. To: FormerLurker (#66)
Let's see, we have a shill for the coal and oil industries and a shill from the ADL posing as a Jew hater playing kissy face and swapping spit. How special.
Lord Acton
#78. To: FormerLurker (#65)
Eat shit bud.
Lord Acton
#79. To: James Deffenbach (#77)
But your hero, Hansen, takes all the money Soros throws at him.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#80. To: FormerLurker (#79)
Soros funds NASA?
Lord Acton
#81. To: Axenolith (#67)
Scientifically managed technocracy,
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#82. To: James Deffenbach, Axenolith (#78)
But anyway, I apologize to you for saying what I did about getting your meds adjusted, it was uncalled for.
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#83. To: farmfriend (#82)
Lord Acton
#84. To: James Deffenbach, Axenolith (#82)
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#85. To: James Deffenbach, Axenolith (#83)
And it has also been said that one volcanic eruption of any size will pump more CO2 into the atmosphere than man ever has.
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#86. To: farmfriend (#84)
Lord Acton
#87. To: farmfriend (#85)
Did you read the recent study showing that the deserts are a bigger carbon sink than forests? Quite the surprise. Do you think we will see enviros calling for increasing desert size to offset carbon emissions?
Lord Acton
#88. To: FormerLurker (#71)
#89. To: farmfriend, James Deffenbach, Axenolith, Original_Intent, wudidiz, TwentyTwelve, angle (#82)
FL never appologizes for the personal attacks he lobs and he spends more time doing that then arguing the science. For my part, I'll continue to post science information.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#90. To: Axenolith (#88)
The planet is awash in hydrocarbons, they're use is not, and won't perceptibly for quite a while if ever, contribute significantly to the climate dynamics.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#91. To: farmfriend (#85)
(Edited)
Did you read the recent study showing that the deserts are a bigger carbon sink than forests?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#92. To: FormerLurker (#89)
(Edited)
#93. To: farmfriend (#84)
http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/varv07192008a.jpg
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#94. To: angle (#92)
I suggest the bozo.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#95. To: James Deffenbach (#78)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#96. To: James Deffenbach (#80)
Under the so-called "politicization of science" program, George Soros' (the favorite fundraiser of many democrats) has reportedly given as much as $720,000 to Hansen to help package his alarmist claims and get them pushed by the mainstream media (The Soros Threat to Democracy):
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#97. To: FormerLurker (#89)
Hey farmgirl, for one I don't spend 24/7 on Internet chat boards or forums, I actually work for a living. For two, I see you as an agent provocateur here on this forum, leading the sheep to the slaughter.
You post mostly propaganda, and use that propaganda to troll for a response to it, pinging people that you know will find the material false and/or misleading. After baiting said people, you launch attacks on them and then cry that you've been personally offended.
You are playing a game here, and it's a game only played by those who either collect money for their efforts, or who are quite insane.
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#98. To: Axenolith, FormerLurker (#90)
(Edited)
You don't know that, and scientists with much more knowledge and experience in the matter than you or I have said the opposite.
Remember, it's not the government that is warning us about global warming, it's a neutral body of scientists who are simply doing their job that are doing so.
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#99. To: FormerLurker (#94)
I like to know what's being said about me, especially by one as determined as her to trash me here on the 4um.
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#100. To: FormerLurker (#95)
1. I was trying to point out that dedicated scientists who work at NASA and who have the most advanced equipment available to gather and collect data are a bit more believable than some "consultant" who works for Exxon/Mobil in order to debunk the claims made by NASA scientists.
Lord Acton
#101. To: FormerLurker (#96)
So are you a fan of Dick Cheney all of a sudden?
Lord Acton
#102. To: farmfriend (#99)
I am not the one making unfounded accusations against your character thread after thread after thread.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#103. To: farmfriend (#98)
That's even funnier.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#104. To: farmfriend (#97)
I'm not playing any game. I take our freedoms including property and water rights very serious. AGW is just the latest issue used to take our rights from us.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#105. To: farmfriend (#97)
As I recall you were the one whining about being personally attacked not me
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#106. To: James Deffenbach (#100)
You wouldn't seriously suggest that ALL of the scientists who say that global warming is a bunch of bs work for Exxon/Mobil, would you? I find that pretty incredible.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#107. To: FormerLurker (#106)
I'd say just about every one of them are either RNC backed, fossil fuel energy industry backed, or backed by governments who stand to lose if they can't burn all the oil, coal, and gas their little hearts desire, such as China and India.
Lord Acton
#108. To: James Deffenbach (#107)
ones who argue for it and are financed by Soros
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#109. To: FormerLurker (#103)
So how neutral is your friend who works for Rush Limburgh and headed the swiftboat attack team?
#110. To: FormerLurker (#108)
You have not proved that ANY of them are financed by Soros. Your reference to Hansen was bogus. At most, Hansen was aided by a whistleblower assistance group, who had once obtained a grant from OSI, a Soros corporation.
Lord Acton
#111. To: RickyJ (#109)
Swiftboat attack team? What the heck does that have to do with global warming or cooling? This issue really should have nothing to do with politics.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#112. To: James Deffenbach (#110)
Not responsive whatsoever to my post
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#113. To: James Deffenbach (#110)
I believe differently, that the earth goes through these cycles on a more or less regular basis.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#114. To: FormerLurker (#94)
(Edited)
I've never bozo'd anyone here, and don't intend to. I like to know what's being said about me, especially by one as determined as her to trash me here on the 4um.
#115. To: RickyJ (#114)
You also fail to see that those proclaiming global warming are making tons of money off of it.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#116. To: FormerLurker (#115)
I really can't understand why some people can't comprehend that those who own and control the energy industry do NOT wish to lose that control, and will say or do ANYTHING to maintain it.
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#117. To: FormerLurker (#115)
Would it be such a terrible thing to find alternative means of powering our vehicles, and heating our homes?
So it isn't exactly by coincidence that it is those same colossal foundations that are making all those "charitable" donations to those icky Greens. The Environmental Grantmakers Association? That's Rockefeller. The Pew Charitable Trusts? That's Sunoco. W. Alton Jones? That's Citgo. The World Wildlife Fund? BP and Shell. You do see a pattern, don't you?
It's a vertically integrated racketeering system that extends over the entire planet. American investors in multinational operations are perfectly happy taking a hit on US operations destroying domestic production because their investments abroad get the business. They either convert domestic resource land to real estate or mothball it under tax exempt conservancies, Federal monuments, and such.
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#118. To: farmfriend (#117)
It's about control. You know that yet you still take the wrong side.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#119. To: farmfriend (#116)
Go back and read that post I did about the foundations.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#120. To: farmfriend (#117)
So it isn't exactly by coincidence that it is those same colossal foundations that are making all those "charitable" donations to those icky Greens. The Environmental Grantmakers Association? That's Rockefeller. The Pew Charitable Trusts? That's Sunoco. W. Alton Jones? That's Citgo. The World Wildlife Fund? BP and Shell. You do see a pattern, don't you?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#121. To: FormerLurker (#119)
You try to portray the oil and gas companies as some sort of benevolent group of kind folks,
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#122. To: FormerLurker (#120)
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#123. To: farmfriend (#122)
There you go with the peronal attacks again.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#124. To: farmfriend (#121)
I have done no such thing.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#125. To: FormerLurker (#124)
Then why do you side with them?
"You have delusions of adequacy."
#126. To: farmfriend (#125)
(Edited)
I don't but that won't stop you from twisting what I say into that now will it?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest