Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Environmentalism and Global Warming Thread

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
    My apologies for not seeing this earlier.

    My apologies for getting the source of the Big Lie wrong as well.

    I said that the Pro Smoking / Anti AGW lobby was using a technique invented by Goebbels.

    I was wrong.

    It was actually Adolf Hitler who first mentioned it in Mein Kampf.

    So once again, apologies for stating certain mercenary spokesmen are using a Joseph tool rather than the correct Hitler idea.
    How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
    Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

    Comment


    • The Type 2 response...

      Comment


      • Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
        Whatever happened to the Mann lawsuits against Ball and Steyn?
        The lawsuit against Steyn has not gone to trial yet... 6 years after it was first filed. Although the latest ruling said the suit could go forward.

        Mann appears to be getting his ass kicked in the lawsuit against Tim Ball.
        Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
          The Type 2 response...
          Could be type 4...
          Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
            The lawsuit against Steyn has not gone to trial yet... 6 years after it was first filed. Although the latest ruling said the suit could go forward.

            Mann appears to be getting his ass kicked in the lawsuit against Tim Ball.
            It looks like, reading articles on this that the Gorebal Warming crowd are getting legally and scientifically stomped on when having to actually, and critically, prove their cases and data in an objective setting.

            This is the same game the EPA is playing with the US Congress, their boss...

            https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...-congressional

            Comment


            • Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
              Penguins devastated by “unseasonably extensive amounts of sea ice.”

              David Middleton / 1 day ago October 16, 2017
              Guest “drive by” by David Middleton

              Alternate Title: “Tarantino does ‘Happy Feet'”


              Is Antarctica gaining ice? 01:47

              (CNN) A penguin colony in Antarctica has suffered a massive breeding failure, with only two chicks surviving the disaster.

              Terre Adélie (Adélie Land) is home to more than 18,000 pairs of Adélie penguins, but this year almost all the seabirds’ babies starved to death, a situation one expert described as “Tarantino does Happy Feet.”

              The World Wildlife Fund said unseasonably extensive amounts of sea ice around the colony in East Antarctica had forced the adult penguins to travel further than normal to forage for food.

              “This devastating event contrasts with the image that many people might have of penguins,” said Rod Downie, Head of Polar Programmes at WWF. “It’s more like ‘Tarantino does Happy Feet’, with dead penguin chicks strewn across a beach in Adélie Land.”

              […]

              CNN
              I had to double-check both the website and my calendar to make sure this wasn’t from The Onion and that it wasn’t April Fool’s Day.
              Too much sea ice —> “Tarantino does ‘Happy Feet'”
              If RCP 8.5 doesn’t exterminate Adélie penguins by 2100, too much sea ice will. Apparently Adélie penguins lived in a Goldilocks world for the past 37,000 to 122,000 years. From the end of the Eemian interglacial stage, through the last glacial maximum, on through the Holocene Climatic Optimum, down to the coldest part of the Little Ice Age… Antarctica clearly must have had a perfect Goldilocks sea ice extent… Because penguin evolution is clearly restricted to pristine climatic conditions:



              Penguin evolution. March of the Fossil Penguins.

              Clearly penguin evolution depended on stable atmospheric CO2 levels…



              Cenozoic atmospheric CO2. Older is to the left, x-axis is in millions of calendar years AD (BC). The Mauna Loa instrumental record is depicted by the solid black line at year 0. Oligocene CO2 levels drop from about 800-1,000 ppmv to about 600 ppmv from 32.5 to 30 MYA.

              And a stable, unchanging climate…



              Cenozoic temperature anomaly. Older is to the right, x-axis is millions of years before present (1950 AD). Earth’s climate rapidly cooled about 34 million years ago.

              As usual: Any and all sarcasm was purely intentional.

              https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/10/...ts-of-sea-ice/

              So two to three times the current level of CO2 and significantly higher temperatures until "recent" times yet the Earth didn't burn up and life thrived.
              TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

              Comment


              • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                So two to three times the current level of CO2 and significantly higher temperatures until "recent" times yet the Earth didn't burn up and life thrived.
                According to the Gorebots, "Quaternary Geology is now climate “misinformation.”

                Michael Mann and a few other Gorebots called this Koch-funded climate misinformation...









                So… David Koch funded the Dinosaur Wing (really good with Buffalo sauce), the Ice Age exhibit has a plaque which says, “there is no reason to believe that another Ice Age won’t come”… And this is some sort of climate denier “misinformation on climate change” and a “breach of the firewall that is supposed to stand between the agenda of the donor and the objectivity of scientific content”???

                Do these people not understand that the Dinosaur Wing and Ice Age exhibit are two different exhibits, separated by over 60 million years of geologic time? Setting aside the fact that we are living in an interglacial stage of an ice age… How is it misinformation to state that “there is no reason to believe that another Ice Age (glacial stage) won’t come”? Maybe we’ll get lucky and anthropogenic CO2 will forestall or mitigate the onset of the next Quaternary glacial stage… But I wouldn’t bet on it.
                FORECASTING THE FUTURE. We can now try to decide if we are now in an interglacial stage, with other glacials to follow, or if the world has finally emerged from the Cenozoic Ice Age. According to the Milankovitch theory, fluctuations of radiation of the type shown in Fig. 16-18 must continue and therefore future glacial stages will continue. According to the theory just described, as long as the North and South Poles retain their present thermally isolated locations, the polar latitudes will be frigid; and as the Arctic Ocean keeps oscillating between ice-free and ice-covered states, glacial-interglacial climates will continue.

                Finally, regardless of which theory one subscribes to, as long as we see no fundamental change in the late Cenozoic climate trend, and the presence of ice on Greenland and Antarctica indicates that no change has occurred, we can expect that the fluctuations of the past million years will continue.

                Donn, William L. Meteorology. 4th Edition. McGraw-Hill 1975. pp 463-464

                Even though the plaque is supposedly 25 years old, it clearly says that “human pollutants may also have an effect on Earth’s climatic cycles”… Well, they might have an effect.

                Is their issue the phrase “recent climatic changes and extinctions”? In a layman’s sense, there is very little evidence that recent climatic changes have caused any extinctions. In a geological sense, “recent” generally refers to the Holocene. Although, more strictly, the “Cen” in Cenozoic means recent.

                It really boggles the mind that so many people frequenting the geological exhibits of the AMNH could be so ignorant of basic Quaternary geology, particularly the alleged climate scientists who chimed in on this Twitter-storm.
                Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                Comment


                • The Koch brothers are a major funder of the PBS program Nova. I'm surprised the Left hasn't forced that off the air in the name of "science."

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                    It looks like, reading articles on this that the Gorebal Warming crowd are getting legally and scientifically stomped on when having to actually, and critically, prove their cases and data in an objective setting.

                    This is the same game the EPA is playing with the US Congress, their boss...

                    https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...-congressional
                    Er, you do know that it was Margaret Thatcher, noted British Prime Minister and actual scientist, who first crusaded against AGW? She was the one who championed a safer environment, a woman I voted for.

                    This lady was not a proto Gorebot in any shape or form. If you believe Margaret Thatcher to be left wing, I believe I have the right to laugh in your face in public.
                    How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                    Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                      Er, you do know that it was Margaret Thatcher, noted British Prime Minister and actual scientist, who first crusaded against AGW? She was the one who championed a safer environment, a woman I voted for.

                      This lady was not a proto Gorebot in any shape or form. If you believe Margaret Thatcher to be left wing, I believe I have the right to laugh in your face in public.
                      Her stance was a politically expedient TOOL to bust the coal-miner's strike. A real champion of the working class, eh komrade Nicky?
                      TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                        It really boggles the mind that so many people frequenting the geological exhibits of the AMNH could be so ignorant of basic Quaternary geology, particularly the alleged climate scientists who chimed in on this Twitter-storm.
                        The same climate "scientists" that are intellectually lazy enough to make up stuff that gets them more free money?

                        Scientists (in general) of today are a far cry from what they used to be...the greats of the past are probably spinning in their graves at this time.
                        The First Amendment applies to SMS, Emails, Blogs, online news, the Fourth applies to your cell phone, computer, and your car, but the Second only applies to muskets?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Hida Akechi View Post
                          The same climate "scientists" that are intellectually lazy enough to make up stuff that gets them more free money?

                          Scientists (in general) of today are a far cry from what they used to be...the greats of the past are probably spinning in their graves at this time.
                          No, in general scientists today are the same schlock meisters they were in centuries past. They got their ticket punched and know the right people in the right circles and nobody particularly cares if they do crap research so long as somebody's paying for it.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                            No, in general scientists today are the same schlock meisters they were in centuries past. They got their ticket punched and know the right people in the right circles and nobody particularly cares if they do crap research so long as somebody's paying for it.
                            Ok, you're right. I guess my notion that scientists were better people "back then" than they are now is just a romantic/nostalgic one.
                            The First Amendment applies to SMS, Emails, Blogs, online news, the Fourth applies to your cell phone, computer, and your car, but the Second only applies to muskets?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                              Her stance was a politically expedient TOOL to bust the coal-miner's strike. A real champion of the working class, eh komrade Nicky?
                              Moronic reply at best .

                              Miners strike was 1984-85.
                              Speech to the UN about AGW was in 1989.

                              A few seconds on google could have revealed why your answer is ludicrously wrong.

                              Made me laugh out loud though .
                              +1 for that .
                              How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                              Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                                Moronic reply at best .
                                And some might find your "indirect" ad-homenum use of "moronic" as equally unacceptable as your objections to use of any term ending in "-tard". But then, hypocrisy is a hallmark of the Leftist-Socialist mindset.

                                Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                                Miners strike was 1984-85.
                                Speech to the UN about AGW was in 1989.
                                My baad for brevity. Should have said; "strike-socialist agenda".
                                QUOTE:
                                "...
                                What was behind Thatcher’s “conversion experience” to climate alarmism in 1988? Part of the answer was the pressure she received from her advisors John Houghton and Sir Crispin Tickell, who were in step with the emerging environmental movement. Also, global warming was an issue that provided her with enhanced international prestige.

                                But perhaps most important was her vigorous battle against the nationalized, unionized coal-mining sector, the leadership of which was socialistic at heart and determined to break her reform agenda.


                                The memories of Arthur Scargill of the National Union of Mineworkers using thuggery against strike breakers in the long months of 1984–85
                                , and her preference for nuclear power to generate electricity, undoubtedly made her welcome an environmental issue that would help cut coal down to size.
                                ..."
                                https://www.masterresource.org/clima...st-to-skeptic/

                                Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                                A few seconds on google could have revealed why your answer is ludicrously wrong.
                                I usually prefer "Bing", but a few more seconds on web-searching would show that your response is even more "ludicrously wrong"; largely due to exclusion of the other half of the story;
                                QUOTES:
                                "...
                                Mugged by Reality: Nonalarmism
                                In Statecraft: Strategies for a Changing World (2002), Thatcher declared war on “the doomsters’ favorite subject … climate change.”
                                Here is her full reconsideration (pp. 449–50):
                                The doomsters’ favorite subject today is climate change. This has a number of attractions for them. First, the science is extremely obscure so they cannot easily be proved wrong. Second, we all have ideas about the weather: traditionally, the English on first acquaintance talk of little else.
                                Third, since clearly no plan to alter climate could be considered on anything but a global scale, it provides a marvelous excuse for worldwide, supra-national socialism. All this suggests a degree of calculation. Yet perhaps that is to miss half the point. Rather, as it was said of Hamlet that there was method in his madness, so one feels that in the case of some of the gloomier alarmists there is a large amount of madness in their method.

                                Indeed, the lack of any sense of proportion is what characterizes many pronouncements on the matter by otherwise sensible people.
                                Thus President Clinton on a visit to China, which poses a serious strategic challenge to the US, confided to his host, President Jiang Zemin, that his greatest concern was the prospect that “your people may get rich like our people, and instead of riding bicycles, they will drive automobiles, and the increase in greenhouse gases will make the planet more dangerous for all.”

                                It would, though, be difficult to beat for apocalyptic hyperbole former Vice President Gore.
                                Mr Gore believes: ‘The cleavage in the modern world between mind and body, man and nature, has created a new kind of addiction: I believe that our civilisation is, in effect, addicted to the consumption of the earth itself.’

                                And he warns: “Unless we find a way to dramatically change our civilisation and our way of thinking about the relationship between humankind and the earth, our children will inherit a wasteland.”

                                But why pick on the Americans? Britain’s then Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, has observed: “There is no greater national duty than the defense of our shoreline. But the most immediate threat to it today is the encroaching sea.” Britain has found, it seems, a worthy successor to King Canute.
                                The fact that seasoned politicians can say such ridiculous things – and get away with it – illustrates the degree to which the new dogma about climate change has swept through the left-of-centre governing classes….
                                What had changed for Thatcher in less than a decade? First, she found climate science less alarming than before. Secondly, an “ugly … anti-growth, anti-capitalistic, anti-American” political agenda had emerged around the issue. [9] Harking back to her free-market roots, Thatcher forwarded her own version of the precautionary principle: “Government interventions are problematic, so intervene only when the case is fully proven.” [10]
                                ...
                                Thatcher praised the free and open economy as a worthy ideal in stark contrast to Britain’s tradition of democratic socialism. One of her greatest tests was the British coal strike of 1984–85, which was broken after a year. Electricity generation and distribution were privatized in 1990, and the coal industry, which had been nationalized back in 1946, soon followed in the new light of the free market.

                                But in the process, Margaret Thatcher jumped too quickly on the climate issue for short-run gain. The good news is that she quickly and completely corrected herself. She got “mugged by reality,” as they say.

                                ... "
                                https://www.masterresource.org/clima...st-to-skeptic/

                                Similar observations and facts can be found at this article as well;Was Margaret Thatcher the first climate sceptic?
                                Margaret Thatcher was the first leader to warn of global warming - but also the first to see the flaws in the climate change orthodoxy
                                http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...e-sceptic.html

                                Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                                Made me laugh out loud though .
                                +1 for that .
                                Unfortunately, the rabid fanaticism of the GreenTard, enviro-nazi pro-ACC/AGW supporters and agenda is too much anti-life, psuedo-science, and a serious threat to human existence and prosperity to be anywhere near a laughing matter.

                                See the red highlights of the above quote-excerpts should the major points elude you.

                                While I appreciate you once again displaying your lack of objective and rational thought on this issue, I can't give you a rep, + or -, at this time, but do thank you for the one passed my way.


                                P.S. I doubt this post will change your mind/position on this issue, but it does provide a more factual and complete examination of the facts, offsetting your distorted, selectively mis-representative post quoted, and may be of use to the more objective readers here.
                                TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X