GLOBAL Warming THE SCAM

[Splitlink]

All this furore about whether Global Warming is caused by unavoidable climate change or by humanity is, really, disguising the real truth of the matter.

If we make an effort to clean the pigsty we have grown to live in and we DO it, instead of having conferences about it, we will be doing the best we can to eliminate the human contribution to the global warming problem-

This year we have had BP's accident and Hungary's toxic waste spill, but these are so important that they get headlines. All of us are, really, guilty of what is going on, all the time, all around us. We can go on about the warming business until the cows come home and, still, a country will allow its satellites to break up and circle the planet in orbit as debris.

Our of sight, out of mind

We are great talkers.

 

[dcraig1]

The science behind it is skewed and moulded in a fashion to exhibit the tainted tones of destruction by mankind. Yet the science that proved otherwise is ignored, but why.

You can make up these fairy stories and repeat them as often as you like. It will never make them true.

Again we come back to funding. The articles that the world reads biased towards global warming is written by correspondents that are employed to focus on the subject matter. if they wrote the truth they would be out of work. The scientists that study the subject have to hide the details so that their research gives a semblance that's in-line with their funding. Lastly the large corporations\financial institutions and governments all reap rewards from this falsely created market.

Conspiracy theory trash. Very few scientists take up the career in the hope of large financial gains. Many people working in climate science are highly skilled, generally with doctorates, lots of expertise in modelling, statistics, time series analysis etc etc in addition to their knowledge of fundamental science such as physics, chemistry, biology etc. They could easily find more lucrative employment elsewhere. Scientific research is generally poorly paid compared to whats on offer elsewhere for people with similar qualifications and expertise. Your stupid insinuations do not even pass the smell test.

Studies and evidence has been brought forward about the link to the sun and it's own cycles affecting ours and the planets around us. Here is a national geographic article that discusses warming on Mars (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html).

You really think that climate researchers have not considered the possibilities in great detail, but your typical internet google jockey has in a few minutes managed to dredge up stuff to shake the foundations of established science? James Hansen was a planetary scientist working on Venus missions for NASA before he turned his attention to earth's climate.

NO IT'S NOT THE SUN: http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm

There has been research put forward regarding the lagging factor of c02 and global warming. AL Gore didn't mention the details of studying ice samples he only stated it is complex. His chart were twisted to show an exact correlation of c02 to temperature ratio when in fact this is incorrect. The research behind this leans towards a lag of around 800 years in the findings. see (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sci;299/5613/1728). Why would Al Gore disregard that information? the answer is always money.

The person who's obsessed with money is YOU.

Changes in the earths orbit triggered the end of the glaciations. It is thought that rising temperatures caused the out gassing of large amount of CO2 from the Southern ocean - which caused temperatures to rise further. Hence a lag. This is the accepted view.

There is no such orbital change currently that could account for the rise in temperature. The increase in atmospheric CO2 in the current period is known to be caused by humans as shown by isotopic studies and direct calculation of emissions. Just as increasing CO2 from the oceans caused temperature to rise at the end of the glaciations, CO2 emitted by humans is causing temperature to rise now.

If you want to understand the role of CO2 in climate, you can hardly do better than watch Dr. Richard Alley's presentation to the American Geophysical Union: "The Biggest Control Knob: Carbon Dioxide in Earth's Climate History"

http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm09/lectures/lecture_videos/A23A.shtml

Alley deals with it from a paleo perspective - let's look at the history.

New work by NASA deals with it from a modelling perspective - and reaches the same conclusion:

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/lacis_01/

What Al Gore said or did not say, whether he did or did not make a mistake is hardly the point. He is not a scientist and scientists do not form their opinions based on what Al Gore said. If he is wrong then somebody should correct him - simple as that.

 

[dcraig1]

All this furore about whether Global Warming is caused by unavoidable climate change or by humanity is, really, disguising the real truth of the matter.

If we make an effort to clean the pigsty we have grown to live in and we DO it, instead of having conferences about it, we will be doing the best we can to eliminate the human contribution to the global warming problem-

This year we have had BP's accident and Hungary's toxic waste spill, but these are so important that they get headlines. All of us are, really, guilty of what is going on, all the time, all around us. We can go on about the warming business until the cows come home and, still, a country will allow its satellites to break up and circle the planet in orbit as debris.

Split,

No doubt there are a multiplicity of environmental issues, and some of them very likely will have catastrophic consequences if left unchecked. Science must form the basis of dealing with them. Of course it's imperfect and the amount of research required is vast especially in ecology which is immensely complex. But it's the only tool we have that can possibly salvage something on a planet that will almost certainly have 10 billion humans on it.

Here's a simple example of where a little bit of knowledge is so important. In Australia, there are political shenanigans over the government's plan to buy back irrigation rights to water from the Murray Darling river system - Australia's and one of the world's great rivers. Lack of flow is causing severe environmental damage including such things as the death of the River Red Gum forests on the flood plains that require periodic flooding. Every time there is a TV segment, it is accompanied by footage of citrus orchards that are going to be lost due to the plan. I'm sure most people think that citrus is a big problem - I did until I found out otherwise. In fact citrus takes 2% of the water and dairy farming over 30% followed by rice and cotton. There is an obvious conclusion to be drawn - but it might be err ... unpalatable . It is a simple illustration that no rational policy is possible without proper scientific study.

The climate change deniers are explicitly anti-science in their activities. No distortion of the truth, no attempt to smear the reputations of leading scientists are out of bounds so long as they further their objectives which are not the furtherance of science but strictly political and ideological. We desperately need good science to deal with a multiplicity of environmental challenges.

 

[forker]

NO IT'S NOT THE SUN: http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm

lets take a look at this site of yours for a moment.

John Cook, on his website Skeptical Science, states that “the usual suspects in natural climate change – solar variations, volcanoes, Milankovitch cycles – are all conspicuous in their absence over the past three decades of warming.

Solar variations?
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/newsci_suncapture.png

Volcanoes?
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2010/06...bo-eruption-as-a-test-of-climate-sensitivity/

Milankovitch Cycles?
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/milankovitch.html


instead of putting bull**** cherry picked content by an someone who is just as big an idiot as yourself, you would do yourself more credit posting examples from reputable sources and, where blatant lies do not underpin the content.

Changes in the earths orbit triggered the end of the glaciations. It is thought that rising temperatures caused the out gassing of large amount of CO2 from the Southern ocean - which caused temperatures to rise further. Hence a lag. This is the accepted view.

so you accept there is a lag, there might be an ounce of grey matter in that head of yours after all. The fact that co2 lags temperature is a clear indication it isn't the cause of it. As you clearly pointed out the oceans released co2 as a result of the temperature increasing. let me put this to you in layman's terms. The global temperature has risen and fallen since earth came into existence. Core ice samples, which you have neatly pointed out with DR Richard Alley, show this fact. If co2 lags temperature, then what is heating the earth?
maybe its was all the cavemen starting bush fires all those hundreds of thousands of years ago. oh wait, you probably one of those Darwinism morons that think mankind just popped up out of a chimp 250 000 years ago. so the question to you again, what is heating the earth if co2 is lagging? and how do you explain similar events occurring on Mars?

There is no such orbital change currently that could account for the rise in temperature.

you really are an ausi retard, i have already addressed this fact and can source further evidence if you wish. stop pretending your a scientist, your'e too stupid to be one. how do you account for different ice ages throughout the earth's history? perhaps it was the humans all those thousands of years ago too..:whistling

CO2 emitted by humans is causing temperature to rise now.

actually the temperature has been steadily rising since the last ice age you idiot. take another look at the data before you spew that crap from your mouth again. if co2 alone was removed from the atmosphere, only 15% less infrared would be absorbed. If co2 was the only greenhouse gas, it would absorb 26% of the infrared currently absorbed by the atmosphere. a simplified summary is that about 50% of the greenhouse effect is due to water vapour, 25% due to clouds, 20% to co2, with other gases accounting for the remainder.

If you want to understand the role of CO2 in climate, you can hardly do better than watch Dr. Richard Alley's presentation to the American Geophysical Union: "The Biggest Control Knob: Carbon Dioxide in Earth's Climate History"

he is looking at the history of the earth and he has no tangible evidence that co2 is the leading factor in the rise in temperature, you have even admitted this yourself earlier with the lagging affect. nobody disputes that co2 has a link to temperature. what is incorrect is the details of that link.

What Al Gore said or did not say, whether he did or did not make a mistake is hardly the point.He is not a scientist and scientists do not form their opinions based on what Al Gore said. If he is wrong then somebody should correct him - simple as that.

and neither are you!!! he has been corrected, although it makes no difference since he is reaping riches from his lies.

You can make up these fairy stories and repeat them as often as you like. It will never make them true.

keep smoking that crack, listen to what your'e saying idiot. you are basically discrediting all those scientists around their research and evidence to discredit the lie. you are the only fool here with fairy stories fed to you by spoon from all the mainstream who have no choice but to lie or they out of work and discredited by their colleagues who are too **** scared to admit the truth.

Very few scientists take up the career in the hope of large financial gains. Many people working in climate science are highly skilled, generally with doctorates, lots of expertise in modelling, statistics, time series analysis etc etc in addition to their knowledge of fundamental science such as physics, chemistry, biology etc. They could easily find more lucrative employment elsewhere.

are you a scientist recruitment consultant? speaking for all the scientists out there as though you have a deep knowledge of their daily lives and opportunities that corporations could reward them is foolish to say the least. you should start writing children stories, you have the right imagination for it.

Your stupid insinuations do not even pass the smell test.

that's because only bull**** comes out your mouth and the the odour masks everything else. the sooner you accept that your an idiot, the sooner you can see reality for what it really is.

 

[Splitlink]

I can't be bothered to read scientific matter on a subject, the details of which, I know little. It is sufficient for me to know that if climate change is causing global warming, there is little that we can do about it, especially as we are unable to keep the place clean, anyway. If we take more care of our environment, which has become seriously contaminated and unfit, in many areas, to live in, then we will, also, be taking care of any contribution to climate change that we are causing.

This makes such common sense to me that I cannot understand what all the fuss is about.

 

[squall321]

i'm pro global warming

 

[FX Bandit]

i'm pro global warming

Me too. It's getting cold here.

 

[sqawky123]

thanks for sharing Forker.

Seconded.

I have no doubt that the everyone wants to see a cleaner world. But bottom line, what has the Global Warming Commitees done with the billions. Lets have some accountablity.

The hockey stick graph was a good one. This is 2010 and according the graph, we should have have an average temperature of 250'C by now.

One can see that craig doesn't know what he is talking about but he has great skills in bs writing. Hint: lag is an important term in any scientific equation.

 

[FX Bandit]

One can see that craig doesn't know what he is talking about but he has great skills in bs writing. Hint: lag is an important term in any scientific equation.

I suspect he's deluded, stupid or possibly hoping to gain in some way from the AGW scam.

The money to be made is indeed attractive. Al Gore has made sufficient to allow him to purchase an $8,000,000 sea-front mansion, despite the certain knowledge that it will shortly be swallowed up in the imminent 20ft rise in sea levels, the dissemination of which information via his Oscar-winning film has also served to considerably swell his bank balance.

Truly, the new enviro-saints will find their rewards in Heaven! And also on earth, thanks to useful idiots / shysters (delete as appropriate) such as Craig! How lovely to be able to spend $8,000,000 on a disposable house!

 

[spinola]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RoFbumNDu8&NR=1

 

[Splitlink]

I suspect he's deluded, stupid or possibly hoping to gain in some way from the AGW scam.

The money to be made is indeed attractive. Al Gore has made sufficient to allow him to purchase an $8,000,000 sea-front mansion, despite the certain knowledge that it will shortly be swallowed up in the imminent 20ft rise in sea levels, the dissemination of which information via his Oscar-winning film has also served to considerably swell his bank balance.

Truly, the new enviro-saints will find their rewards in Heaven! And also on earth, thanks to useful idiots / shysters (delete as appropriate) such as Craig! How lovely to be able to spend $8,000,000 on a disposable house!

There is a lot of money being made by getting onto this band waggon, I agree. Al Gore has drawn the attention of many people and I bet that many multi-national companies are also making as much as they can out of it,too. Don't forget that we, as shareholders, are hoping for big profits from these companies.

It does not mean that the problem does not exist, it means that we have found a convenient scapegoat for ignoring it and those who do raise issues are contemptiously derided as "stupid".

It doesn't matter. The majority will always believe as they wish and there is no solution. We can put the brakes on by fighting any pollution that we can---and that does not seem possible, either---

I do not agree with the notion that the majority are sensible folk who know best and that everything will come right in the end.

The majority are fighting for their existence and do whatever it takes to survive. If that is cutting down trees, they'll do it. That does not mean that they are right. It means that the fewer bright people have to pinpoint the problem and, then, find a solution to it that is politically acceptable. That last is the real obstacle, especially as this is a world-wide problem.

 

[FX Bandit]

Whatever happened to that weird bloke that claimed to believe in the AGW scam?

 

[spinola]

Saw extreme seasons program on TV not so long ago and from Ice cores they stated that extreme warming and cooling have happened repeatedly and rapidly (with years-human lifespan) many times over in last 60,000 years.

Noted that +5 degrees global temperature swings have happened within 1-3 years during that period, so that kinda makes the theory of man made warming cooling, less applicable if its known and can be seen to be a normal part of earths marco scopic climate fluctuations.

So in the words of the immortal Dr David Bellamy,

Gwapple my gwingerrly gwapenuts !

 

[dcraig1]

Saw extreme seasons program on TV not so long ago and from Ice cores they stated that extreme warming and cooling have happened repeatedly and rapidly (with years-human lifespan) many times over in last 60,000 years.

Noted that +5 degrees global temperature swings have happened within 1-3 years during that period, so that kinda makes the theory of man made warming cooling, less applicable if its known and can be seen to be a normal part of earths marco scopic climate fluctuations.

Well, that settles it then. You saw a program on TV. Lets contact the IPCC and let them know. I would be interested to read any authoritative reference, but without one is your comment worth anything?

 

[dcraig1]

SkepticGate Looms

In 2006, there was a report to the US congress known as the Wegman Report purporting to debunk the work of Michael Mann and the famous hockey stick. All other "investigations" of Mann have exonerated Mann and supporting his broad findings, including the investigation by the US National Academy of Science.

Thanks to diligent work of a computer scientist by the name of John Mashey, it seems that Wegman has been exposed as a very naughty boy indeed. Mashey has shown beyond dispute that large sections of the Wegman report were simply plagiarised. This is considered a very serious offense in the academic world and there seems no good reason that the US congress should adhere to any lesser standards.

http://deepclimate.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/strange-scholarship-v1-02-exec.pdf

Wegman is now under investigation by his university: http://deepclimate.org/2010/10/08/wegman-under-investigation-by-george-mason-university/

And the mainstream media is starting to pick up on this: http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2010-11-21-climate-report-questioned_N.htm

Expect to hear more about this. Mashey is suggesting that he has more material that he has not yet published.

 

[spinola]

Well, that settles it then. You saw a program on TV. Lets contact the IPCC and let them know. I would be interested to read any authoritative reference, but without one is your comment worth anything?

Just having a chin wag, sharing my experience of what I saw on the telly the other day,

if I come across the telly program on sky again I'll post reference but initial google might suggest it was part of this, but not sure.

In Greenland ice cores from the last ice age—between 80,000 and 30,000 years ago—have revealed climate jumps of 10 degrees Celsius within 30 to 40 years. Nobody would have believed that possible. http://knowledge.allianz.com/en/glo...warming_basics/ice_cores_wolff_interview.html

I think the telly suggested +5 within a few years etc .. But I am settled , and i think it to each to be settled with it, we do not have to all agree, I expect as many differing views on it as there are people as we do all have a unique view of the world.

And that's cool ! I think the problem can arise when Governments start to manipulate the mass body politics around the world, they must give the people their beliefs, as, for them, they are easier to control, farm, and harvest.

It is the evolution of slavery in all it's magnificent glory !


And it must be a concern with ballooning world populations and any perceived, food, energy, resource security. Controls must be brought in and if our leaders think a global carbon tax enforced by law, is enough to CONTROL the behaviour of developed and developing nations, then it's worth a punt as to new generations being born into the world, the world to them will appear as it is.

So this is a long term global control mechanism, you want 10 burgers, you'll be taxed, 5000 litres of fuel? you'll be taxed, you buy junk food that we say is bad? you'll be taxed,

as ? well all these resources the greedy consumers consume are damaging to our environment, why that lifestyle produces more carbon, and depletes resources, for we have declared in so, and you can read it in out statutes , and by golly we have revenue agents of the CROWN who will enforce this taxation of all your beastly spending and consuming habits.

Got a complain ? seek legal advice, but know this, we own them too , they work for us, they are duty bound to the courts and all courts are officers of the Crown.

" Good day citizens, enjoy the evolution of slavery ", said the King !



:cheesy:

 

[Ingot54]

The truth is beginning to emerge now.

In Australia, Bob Brown, the leader of "The Greens" who have balance-of-power privileges in Australia's Senate (upper house) had this to say:

http://www.theage.com.au/national/brown-advocates-for-one-world-parliament-20110629-1gqz1.html

Put his desire for a World Parliament alongside the GHBush "New World Order" and Australia's Carbon Tax, then you are beginning to see where this is heading, and it is not pretty.

Not many believe it, but they will.

70% of Australians do NOT want a carbon Tax because they can see it will not make any difference./ Australian need more taxation like they need a boil on the neck!

They have recently been donating to their flood appeals, but their government now wants to hit them with a "Flood Levy" on top of their voluntary donations - a double-dip. Australians have also recently been handed taxation rises - sold as tax cuts, because the minimum earnings at which taxation begins, has been raised to $18,000. But everyone else has had their brackets raised, and will be paying higher taxes.

No one blinked - all thinking they are better off for the "minimum levels" at $18,000! It is easy to fool Australians - they are lazy intellectually, and gullible and inactive on issues. They allow themselves to be manipulated and are loathe to take to the streets in protest against the real issues of our times.

Bob Brown, the de-facto Prime Minister pulling the strings of the naive and clue-less MS Gillard, is bent on destruction in the form of salvation.

http://vidcall.com/index.php/videos/show/2090/

It won't be long and the bigger agenda - that of handing corporations like Goldman Sachs et al, sovereign control of nations through this evil global-warming-carbon-tax-ETS nonsense, will be easy to spot. Once these carbon Credits are widely traded, it would be easy to punish a nation who is dissenting, regardless of the stance of their legitimate elected government.

Capitalism will kill democracy!

When everyone can see it, it will be too late.

Is Libertarianism an answer?

Not too sure there is any answer.

 

[squall321]

we need more global warming, it's been too cold this summer

 

[potshot]

No it is not. It is a fact that no scientific organization of international standing disputes the reality of AGW. If you want to contest that, then produce one that does.

In particular the national science academies of all major nations assert the reality of AGW. As do major bodies such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union and the World Meteorological Organization.

This is a matter of fact, not opinion.

It doesn't matter where you go there is a global warming nutter everywhere.

 

[the_coumiester]

It doesn't matter where you go there is a global warming nutter everywhere.

Simple science eludes simple people, y'know? It's all about the "OMFG LETS PANIC IMMEDIATELY" factor.