Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 Here we have one of your "climatologist" that doesn't buy the hoax. http://blog.heartland.org/2014/03/a-history-of-the-disastrous-global-warming-hoax/ From the link, The CRU emails revealed their growing concerns regarding a cooling cycle that had begun in the late 1990s and now, some seventeen years later, the Earth is in a widely recognized cooling cycle. So, again the question, how many years does this cooling trend need to go before the alarmists will admit that their religion is false?
thesometimesaint Posted September 11, 2014 Author Posted September 11, 2014 It was obvious propaganda. Just the way they described the Koch Brothers alone should have been a clue. The conclusion fix was in from the beginning. The Koch brothers are inheritance babies from their fathers oil company. Now from the American Petroleum Institutehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change Now lets get down to what Dr. Richard Muller said about the BEST reportSEE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_A._Muller In October 2011, Muller wrote in an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal, concerning his work with the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project: While the BEST project did not delve into the proxy data sets used in the "hockey stick", the importance of the work regarding the modern temperature record is explained on the BEST web site: When we began our study, we felt that skeptics had raised legitimate issues, and we didn't know what we'd find. Our results turned out to be close to those published by prior groups. We think that means that those groups had truly been very careful in their work, despite their inability to convince some skeptics of that. They managed to avoid bias in their data selection, homogenization and other corrections.Global warming is real. Perhaps our results will help cool this portion of the climate debate. How much of the warming is due to humans and what will be the likely effects? We made no independent assessment of that.[13]On July 28, 2012, he stated, "[G]lobal warming [is] real .... Humans are almost entirely the cause."[2] Existing data used to show global warming have met with much criticism. The Berkeley Earth project attempts to resolve current criticism of the former temperature analyses by making available an open record to enable rapid response to further criticism and suggestions. Our results include our best estimate for the global temperature change and our estimates of the uncertainties in the record.[14]Foreign Policy named Muller one of its 2012 FP Top 100 Global Thinkers "for changing their minds"
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/04/10/is_global_warming_a_hoax_117894.html This puzzles the editors, because according to the theory of anthropogenic (man-made) global warming -- which The Economist has assiduously promoted for lo these many decades -- this can't be happening, because it's emissions from our automobiles and factories that have caused the planet to warm. The long "pause" in warming doesn't mean the problem is going away, the editors said. But it does indicate computer models have exaggerated the amount of warming, they acknowledged. In fact, "global warming" has existed essentially only in computer models. Notice that last sentence above!!! So, your contention that gobull warming has nothing to do with computer models is proven false.March temperatures were just 0.18 degrees Celsius (.32 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than the average for the last 33 years, about 0.4 degrees Celsius (0.7 degrees Fahrenheit) COOLER THAN WHEN WARMING PEAKED IN 19977 -- well within the range of natural fluctuations. And this from a leftwing alarmist publication. So, how many years does this cooling trend need to go before the alarmists admit that their religion is a hoax?
Brian 2.0 Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 (edited) Man made global warming/climate change is a hoax. Here is a clue. The climate scientists are in on the hoax.I believe it is a big hoax. If it was all a hoax and the climate scientists were "in on it." It would be the most elaborate and well orchestrated hoax of all time. An impossible feat. Think about it for a second. Climate scientists dot the globe in numerous countries, completely different backgrounds, ages, etc... and there all in on it! They never went to school together and while in their dorm room came up with the hoax... but orchestrated it somehow amongst the 1000s of scientists across the globe, hiding somehow their collaboration to cook it all up. Find me one other hoax that's even remotely up to this scale! Edited September 11, 2014 by Brian 2.0
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 The Koch brothers are inheritance babies from their fathers oil company.And that makes them evil right?
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 If it was all a hoax and the climate scientists were "in on it." It would be the most elaborate and well orchestrated hoax of all time. An impossible feat. Think about it for a second. Climate scientists dot the globe in numerous countries, completely different backgrounds, ages, etc... and there all in on it! They never went to school together and while in their dorm room came up with the hoax... but orchestrated it somehow amongst the 1000s of scientist across the globe, hiding somehow their collaboration to cook it all up. Find me one other hoax that's even remotely up to this scale! Well, when you have the leftwing alarmist media involved in the hoax it makes it easier. Just not report any contrary information. And the low information crowd (and NOBODY will admit to being one) swallows it. Evidence of the hoax that you likely haven't heard about. http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php
thesometimesaint Posted September 11, 2014 Author Posted September 11, 2014 Here we have one of your "climatologist" that doesn't buy the hoax.http://blog.heartland.org/2014/03/a-history-of-the-disastrous-global-warming-hoax/From the link,So, again the question, how many years does this cooling trend need to go before the alarmists will admit that their religion is false? Your friends at Heartland Institute. CRU Vindicatedhttp://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jul2010/2010-07-08-01.html
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 Here is a summary of the purpose of the hoax. "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." H. L. Mencken So, again, I will ask the question. How many years of a cooling trend is needed BEFORE the alarmists will admit that it is a hoax?
thesometimesaint Posted September 11, 2014 Author Posted September 11, 2014 And that makes them evil right? No. What they do with that money is.
thesometimesaint Posted September 11, 2014 Author Posted September 11, 2014 Here is a summary of the purpose of the hoax."The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." H. L. MenckenSo, again, I will ask the question. How many years of a cooling trend is needed BEFORE the alarmists will admit that it is a hoax? We're not in a cooling trend. We have in a warming trend for about 150 years. How many moon landings did it take for Joseph Fielding Smith to admit they did happen?
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 Your friends at Heartland Institute. CRU Vindicated http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jul2010/2010-07-08-01.html Well duh!!! Of course the alarmists are going to make that claim. It is simply propaganda for the low information crowd to lap up. I see that it succeeded in its intent. Surprise surprise!! The alarmists investigate themselves and find no wrong doing.
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 No. What they do with that money is. Really? What evil have they done with their money? Used it to fight a political agenda they disagree with?
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 Your friends at Heartland Institute. CRU Vindicated http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jul2010/2010-07-08-01.html Oh, that is interesting. AFTER they vindicated themselves MORE emails were released showing more nefarious activities. •Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. •I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run. •Mike, The Figure you sent is very deceptive [...] there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model results by individual authors and by IPCC
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 (edited) Tin foil hat time.Are you removing it now? Or putting it back on? Edited September 11, 2014 by Vance
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 We're not in a cooling trend. We have in a warming trend for about 150 years. How many moon landings did it take for Joseph Fielding Smith to admit they did happen?So, you are afraid to answer the question? It is an important question. It is a serious question. I have heard that gobull warming is falsifiable, so I want to know what it is going to take before the alarmists will accept that it is a hoax. Just answer the question.
thesometimesaint Posted September 11, 2014 Author Posted September 11, 2014 Really? What evil have they done with their money? Used it to fight a political agenda they disagree with? SEE Libertarian Agenda of 1980.
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 We're not in a cooling trend. We have in a warming trend for about 150 years.Thank God, otherwise we would still be in the Little Ice Age of the 19th century. But we are now in a cooling trend. How long must this cooling trend be before the alarmist will admit that it was a hoax?
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 SEE Libertarian Agenda of 1980.Were they for it or against it? And, what difference does it make?
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 So, with all of this gobull warming going on, when will we be able to grow grapes in Greenland like they use to do?
thesometimesaint Posted September 11, 2014 Author Posted September 11, 2014 So, you are afraid to answer the question?It is an important question. It is a serious question. I have heard that gobull warming is falsifiable, so I want to know what it is going to take before the alarmists will accept that it is a hoax.Just answer the question. The Theory of Global Warming is falsifiable. We just haven't been able to do it, so far. Do you claim hoax on the Atomic Theory because we haven't been able to falsify it? About a 150 years. Unfortunate no one alive today will be around in 2164.
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 SEE Libertarian Agenda of 1980.Hey, I looked at that agenda. It looks quite good. A few things that I disagree with, but for the most part it looks good. So, the Koch Brothers are evil because they disagree with you politically. I suppose I am evil too then. Right?
thesometimesaint Posted September 11, 2014 Author Posted September 11, 2014 Thank God, otherwise we would still be in the Little Ice Age of the 19th century. But we are now in a cooling trend. How long must this cooling trend be before the alarmist will admit that it was a hoax? There was no global Little Ice Age in the 19th Century.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 The Theory of Global Warming is falsifiable. We just haven't been able to do it, so far.And that is because you aren't looking to. NOBODY in the alarmist crowd is being skeptical, they are swallowing the cool-aid. The point I am making and that you are studiously avoiding is that you won't put a stake in the ground, because you are afraid that when that stake is eclipsed you will have to admit to the hoax. And you will avoid doing that religiously. About a 150 years. Unfortunate no one alive today will be around in 2164.Chicken! So we (and our posterity) would have to live with this BS for 150 years before no one alive would admit that they were wrong. Again, chicken.
Vance Posted September 11, 2014 Posted September 11, 2014 (edited) There was no global Little Ice Age in the 19th Century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age From you link. Anecdotal evidence suggests expanding glaciers almost worldwide. Based on radiocarbon dating of roughly 150 samples of dead plant material with roots intact, collected from beneath ice caps on Baffin Island and Iceland, Miller et al. (2012)[12] state that cold summers and ice growth began abruptly between AD 1275 and 1300, followed by "a substantial intensification" from 1430 to 1455.[13] Oh, you have me converted with that one. I get it, half of the globe does not = global. Edited September 11, 2014 by Vance
Recommended Posts