|
Post by enquirer on Oct 1, 2010 16:25:21 GMT 1
I haven't the time or inclination to go over old ground on these well known facts. So I'll take that as a "no" then - you have no evidence to support the urban myths (to be polite) that you frequently roll out as if they are actual facts.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Oct 1, 2010 16:30:51 GMT 1
Everything I have said has been backed up with evidence and logic. Have a look at the corrupted science and ocean acidification threads. If you want to discuss childish scare stories might I suggest the childrens section of the BBC site. If you're another lazarus clone who only accepts papers from the much vaunted climatology sect as evidence, the you'll be more at home on a religous site.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 1, 2010 17:53:06 GMT 1
Good thread. principled!
There are so many aspects of Anthropogenic climate change on a local and a regional basis that the typical warmist foot soldier is just plain ignorant of - the effects of irrigation, the effects if deforestation round the world (not JUST the Amazon rain forest), the effects of agricuture altering evaporation and albedo, the effect of Urban Heat Island, the effect of urbanisation amd industrialisation in general on weather patterns.
These varieties of local and regional anthropogenic factors (that all add up to make “global” climate) have been virtually ignored by the IPCC et al so great has been the pressure to ram home the message of fossil-fuel CO2.
Prof Roger Pielke Sr, for example, is an eminent climatologist whose expertise is in precisely these measurable and understandable aspects of human-induced climate change. His reputation has been assailed by the CO2 ideologists. You will find attempted hatchet jobs on his academic work on any number of sceptic-bashing websites to which the usual suspects have recourse without ever, of course, knowing a thing about the man or his work! He is not in fact a sceptic - but any climatologist who does not pay wholehearted homage first and foremost to the CO2 hypothesis gets it in the neck willy-nilly!
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 1, 2010 17:57:18 GMT 1
There are no “predictions” Eamonn! The concept of a “prediction” comes nowhere close to the nature of the virtual reality “PROJECTIONS” of the computer generated models which the IPCC relies on in the absence of actual data that could be useful in really “predicting” stuff.
Understanding the cycles of the present and the past is the first step to understanding the future but the IPCC’s funding disbursers have not chosen to direct their largesse towards understanding the multiple sources of natural variability (both internal to the world’s mechanism as well as those from the rest of the cosmos, of which, believe it or not, we are also a part) that accounts for the greater part of the planet’s climate change. The IPCC has only been interested in pursuing evidence for CO2-induced climate change and has neglected everything else.
Thank goodness other people have not put their natural curiosity on hold and have continued to investigate the natural world as opposed to the virtual world of model “scenarios” and “projections” promoted by the IPCC’s political minders.
As for what you fondly believe are “predictions” millenia into the future, Eamonn, do you really think technology and human ingenuity are going to stand still in the meantime? Do you think YOU and YOUR ilk, Eamonn, are really the ones who should be taking the decisions rightfully belonging to the generations to come? Do you think YOU know something that they will not? What hubris to think that the measure of today’s politics is the measure for all time. Do you think global IQ is going to continue to decline as it so obviously amongst the greens who have driven the “environmental’ agenda amongst the worried well of the West to date?
Roll on a bl**dy long time, say I, to the time when people will laugh about the amazing mass hysteria and millennarianism that afflicted so many supposedly smart folk at the turn of the second millenium. Thank goodness, sanity seems to be reasserting itself.
The fact that someone is still seriously suggesting on this board that the Greenland ice-cap will melt due to a bit of extra CO2 is testimony to the brain rot that environmentalism has engendered. The very paradox that extra evaporation due to slight warming also leads to extra snow amassing on the ice-caps completely seems to have passed Eamonn by! And what is going to melt the snow and ice at these altitudes and latitudes where the temperatures never get above freezing, please explain, Eamonn?
Are we still supposed to believe that CO2-warmed air is warming the oceans when all the sensible money knows things work tother way round entirely - that the oceans determine the air temperature not vice versa and that the sun (plus a little undersea vulcanism) is what warms the oceans?
|
|
|
Post by principled on Oct 2, 2010 11:14:07 GMT 1
I am not easily shocked, but the video in the attached article made me wonder what sort of people we have running climate change organisations. I've always resisted labels from either side, but in this instance Eco-fascist seems not to be out of place. If, like me, you are truly appalled, then you may wish to contact the organisation or its sponsors. If the climate change argument has sunk to this level, then we are all doomed, regardless of which the side of the argument we sit. blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100056586/eco-fascism-jumps-the-shark-massive-epic-fail/
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Oct 2, 2010 11:23:12 GMT 1
I am not easily shocked, but the video in the attached article made me wonder what sort of people we have running climate change organisations. I've always resisted labels from either side, but in this instance Eco-fascist seems not to be out of place. If, like me, you are truly appalled, then you may wish to contact the organisation or its sponsors. If the climate change argument has sunk to this level, then we are all doomed, regardless of which the side of the argument we sit. blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100056586/eco-fascism-jumps-the-shark-massive-epic-fail/It's just an ugly satire by anti-AGWer's on the fundamentalist AGW lobby surely?
|
|
|
Post by helen on Oct 2, 2010 12:08:46 GMT 1
I thought the little film 'discovered' by that fabulously well regarded journalist James Dellingpole, well regarded for his even handed reportage over the years, was fabulously funny. Shame they blew up David Ginola though (and Gillian Anderson adds my son). Reminded me of the video by the Anglo/Sri Lankan rapper MIA, Born Free. Banned by YouTube but can be seen here www.dailymotion.com/video/xd2w3j_m-i-a-born-free-video-official-real_music This is what we call satire. And having seen some of the death threats delivered to the likes of respected climate scientist Steve Schneider before he died it's almost like the anti-AGW extremists, like Delingbole and the nut jobs who threatened Schneider and his family with death are seeing their wildest dreams made real! Lets blow the opposition up and whilst we're at it all red heads too!
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Oct 2, 2010 12:22:59 GMT 1
I thought the little film 'discovered' by that fabulously well regarded journalist James Dellingbole, well regarded for his even handed reportage over the years, was fabulously funny. Shame they blew up David Ginola though (and Gillian Anderson adds my son). Reminded me of the video by the Anglo/Sri Lankan rapper MIA, Born Free. Banned by YouTube but can be seen here vimeo.com/12082980. This is what we call satire. And having seen some of the death threats delivered to the likes of respected climate scientist Steve Schneider before he died it's almost like the anti-AGW extremists, like Delingbole and the nut jobs who threatened Schneider and his family with death are seeing their wildest dreams made real! Lets blow the opposition up and whilst we're at it all red heads too! Strange sense of humour you have -it's Delingpole by the way
|
|
|
Post by eamonnshute on Oct 2, 2010 12:51:55 GMT 1
Understanding the cycles of the present and the past is the first step to understanding the future but the IPCC’s funding disbursers have not chosen to direct their largesse towards understanding the multiple sources of natural variability (both internal to the world’s mechanism as well as those from the rest of the cosmos, of which, believe it or not, we are also a part) that accounts for the greater part of the planet’s climate change. The IPCC has only been interested in pursuing evidence for CO2-induced climate change and has neglected everything else. The evidence form the past, as well as experimental evidence, demonstrates that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. The science demonstrates beyond all reasonable doubt that recent warming is due to anthropogenic CO2. But you know that, you simply choose to ignore it. What nonsense. We do not have the technology to deal with today's problems, so what makes you think it will be different when the problems are far worse? And who is going to pay for this technology if people like you and smithy are too selfish to contribute a little towards their descendents welfare? Remember that if we do nothing then it is up to later generations to deal with the problems we give them. If we do not make the decisions then it will be too late (if it isn't already). Leaving the problems for them to deal with is is incredibly selfish. An argument from personal incredulity, which tells us nothing about the science, only about your own prejudice and mental limitations. Greenland's ice is melting at an accelerating rate, and the science shows that it may all go eventually. if you don't understand it then it is your problem. When you have finished moving the goal posts perhaps you can tell us what message you would leave to the world of 3000AD to explain to them why you wanted to give them the world they will find themselves in? "Sorry, I thought that I was right and the scientists were all idiots"?
|
|
|
Post by principled on Oct 2, 2010 13:56:53 GMT 1
Then all I can say is that you either have a warped sense of humour. As a teacher, do you condone videos showing children being blown up, regardless of their "satire" message? Have you never seen the effects of IEDs or landmines on children? THINK before you write. We're not talking about silly scenarios painted by young adolescents in the playground, we're talking about- supposedly- mature adults. What the hell people like that are doing running any organisation God only knows. This is not satire it's sick, and to cap it all it's partly made with gov money that could have been used to much better advantage in insulating someone's home or paying for a more efficient boiler for a pensioner. Which WOULD have reduced CO2. I'm pleased to say that one sponsoring company has apologised, I await an apology from 10 10. P
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Oct 2, 2010 15:13:41 GMT 1
I've got to be honest and say I didn't watch the film all the way through, after the teacher pressed the button, and I had time to take it in, I hit the red X. Well that was one thing, another was the 1010 apology, very gracious, 'to bring this critical issue back into the headlines' - well they did that. These events, and others like them are what the communists term 'bourgeois decadence', the very term that these 'progressives' would have reserved as insult in their student days, they have now become. How sad. Really and truly these people need some form of violence to happen within their own purveu, so that they might be aware of the true cost. I was lucky, all the odd blasts that happened to me made my ears ring and felt a bit 'shakey'. My favourite IRA girl, she was a 'looker', never trust Her though. [eg. www.newsletter.co.uk/news/Poignant-tribute-to-murdered-soldiers.6329649.jp ] I did get to see Her naked though, She was gorgeous, beautiful breasts, the lower half was good too, trouble was there was about five yards separating them. See what I mean. Never saw any kids blown, at least the lady knew what She was doing [23-24] but kids just don't. I am surprised and heartened a P's reaction [You on the DT blog as well?] Glad I don't watch telly. Stuart
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 2, 2010 15:58:07 GMT 1
The same people with the same mindset who produced this ad for the WWF, I suppose, principled.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 2, 2010 16:15:46 GMT 1
As for AGW material targeting the young how about this reported by Prof Robert Carter in his latest book "Climate: The Counter Consensus" (which I have just finished reading).
"ABC, Australia's public broadcaster, provides a "greenhouse gas calculator" where, by answering questions about their lifestyle, a primary school child is encouraged to work out the amount of carbon dioxide that their activities produce and thereby - and I am not making this up -'to find out what age you should die at so that you don't use more than your fair share of Earth's resources.'"
But don't expect any of the warmist prats who visit here to express any remorse for such scaremongering. They think it's great, all grist to the mill, no matter how bad the taste or the fears that are being planted in minds too young to reject these fascist overtures from "trusted" sources. The ends justify the means, after all, don't they?
Proper cadre material, Helen, Enquirer, Eamonn et al, n'est-ce pas?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 2, 2010 16:48:45 GMT 1
If We Are Not Free to Disagree, We Are Not Free nofrakkingconsensus.wordpress.com/2010/10/01/if-we-are-not-free-to-disagree-we-are-not-free/h It's OK to kill folk who don't agree with you, after all! Just another example in the recent onslaught on sceptics such as that we suffer some psychological impairement that prevents us from perceiving the “truth”. Never have I been so glad that there exists the clear blue water of "psychological impairement" to divide me from the nutters who make propaganda like this!
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Oct 2, 2010 17:07:56 GMT 1
|
|