Man made global warming and ocean acidification thoroughly and scientifically discredited.

originally posted by: ISawItFirst
a reply to: amazing

Ive seen the 1 guy vs 1000 guys argument for about 1000 different 1 guys at this point.

Waitng for someone to say, well its just these 2 guys...

I was thinking the exact same thing.

But we don't want to hear that now do we? It goes against the establishment, and we can't have people thinking for themselves. We all know that the "un altered data" regurgitating over and over from the establishment is gospel. (sarcastic as hell).

The same members/players coming in and attacking anything that goes against the status quo.

It's really predictible but sadly entertaining coming from a bunch of conspiracy junkies saying we cant trust the establishment, but trust them on this issue.

It really doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

originally posted by: liejunkie01

originally posted by: ISawItFirst
a reply to: amazing

Ive seen the 1 guy vs 1000 guys argument for about 1000 different 1 guys at this point.

Waitng for someone to say, well its just these 2 guys...

I was thinking the exact same thing.

But we don't want to hear that now do we? It goes against the establishment, and we can't have people thinking for themselves. We all know that the "un altered data" regurgitating over and over from the establishment is gospel. (sarcastic as hell).

The same members/players coming in and attacking anything that goes against the status quo.

It's really predictible but sadly entertaining coming from a bunch of conspiracy junkies saying we cant trust the establishment, but trust them on this issue.

It really doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

But it's not really the establishment though. If it was just government telling me about Global warming and Man's contribution, I'd tell em to get lost. But it's thousands upon thousands of scientists.

You can see how I'd believe them, right? I think they're also right about evolution and other things. Tell me why I shouldn't believe them. You may give me some charts and say a few things, but who's to say you know anything? I need more than a few guys insulting Al Gore to change my mind when I read a lot of scientific papers and articles and blogs and interviews with Scientists.

originally posted by: imd12c4funn
Man made global warming and ocean acidification thoroughly and scientifically

discredited.

3/26/2013 Presentation by Dr Don Easterbrook to Washington State Senate

Committee on Climate Change -- In addition to evidence contrary to IPCC, Dr.

Easterbrook alleges media bias and manipulation of data by East Anglia, NASA, NOAA

and NSF.

Although this presentation was in 2013, it is refreshing to know that in my state, Dr.

Don Easterbrook, Professor emeritus of geology, Western WA University has gone

before the Washington State Senate Committee on Climate Change to present the real

facts on global warming. It is mind-blowing that some on the committee seem

unimpressed as they refer to their peer reviewed publications that are contrary to Dr.

Don Easterbrook's claims. They seem to be reluctant to accept the raw data that is

presented and in my opinion, they seem to be going through the motions of the

committee's purpose with disingenuous interest. As if their minds are made up prior to weighing the real evidence that proves manipulation of data and the climate change global warming hoax.
At the end of the presentation, one member requests the Doctor to provide peer reviewed publications that support his claims, as if he was just presenting non-peer reviewed data. He tells them that everything he presented is peer reviewed, but the committee seems confident that their biased data is true.

I thank Dr. Easterbrook for his efforts, but the committee seems like they just want to make law to tax the people more using the hoax as precedence.

This presentation is very interesting and informative regarding the hoax and the governments unwarranted stand on climate change.

I really don't care to watch his 1.5hr presentation. I would rather you explain it.

How, exactly, does it 'thoroughly and scientifically discredit man made global warming and ocean acidification' ?

a reply to: namelesss

Here is a question I've always wanted to ask you fanatics...Say global warming isn't myth (which it isn't since the earth has been warming for 12000 years) but it turns out man had f all to do with it.
Would you still try to stop it?
And if that's an affirmative, why do you have such arrogance as to tell nature how it should be?
Also, how will we be doomed if some icecaos melt?
Greenland was not a name steeped in irony by the Vikings 1000 years ago to encourage immigration, it was relatively warmer than now, and the world didn't screech to a halt then, why not?
And how did it get so warm back then without us gwtting our human on everywhere?
I have asked some fanatics i know in person, and of course they immediately stomped off muttering about holocaust denial or some other slight at my heresy, so I trust you'll have a more sane response...

a reply to: amazing

Not the establishment huh?

So democrats using climate change to push energy agendas, and the EPA using data to make strict laws, is not an establishment using this so called irrefutable "evidence" to control a populace through legislation, this is just the work of scientists?

Tell that to the thousands of unemployed coal workers and other positions in the energy sector.

originally posted by: namelesss

originally posted by: imd12c4funnMan made global warming and ocean acidification thoroughly and scientifically discredited.

From what crackpot did you get such trash!
Every CREDIBLE scientist in the field knows better.
Why is it that you need to ignore the 99.99999% and focus on the 'anomaly'?
You can always find some freak to validate one's own ignorance and belief infestation!
Does your pet monkey also discredit 'evolution'?

"Nothing is easier than self-deceit. For what each man wishes, that he also believes to be true." - Demosthenes
(And can find some 'freak website' to 'validate' it!)

You call a WSU Professor crackpot. If you think the Wa State Gov TV channel where this presentation was originally aired a freak site, I hope you are in Florida or somewhere far away so you can live happily without freak government TV and I can live happily without more brainwashed banter.

I'm still waiting for the "new ice age" predicted by expert climate scientists.

Gee they were wrong then, what makes them right now?

Seems that non-anthropogenic activety keeps intruding on the pet theory.

Actually Dr. Eastbrook has been thoroughly debunked for a number of factual errors in his presentations, and not by his opponents either. An opponent to anthro centric global warming had this to say about the good Doctor.

It is painful to read how my opponents—those who believe that man is causing the earth to warm—are able to catch such errors among purported experts on my side. Can those on my side of the fence not police their own? From the skeptics on my side I have yet to see anything critical being written about this man.

The post this is take from is Here. Other more critical articles are found Here -- accusation of Fraud and other sources, you know how to google them. One closing comment from the article cited.

Looking through Easterbrook’s slides, it seems he has taken a graph of Holocene temperature variations prepared by Global Warming Art (used at Wikipedia), and altered it to fraudulently bolster his case. … Easterbrook has quite deliberately altered the graph to reduce “current temperatures” by 0.75ºC and make the curve fit his storyline. The original suggests that current temperatures are comparable to, perhaps higher than the warmest period of the Holocene, the post-glacial climatic optimum 8000 years ago. Easterbrook’s version gives the impression that for most of the last 10,000 years temperature has been warmer than today.

WE didn't do it,we can't change it IT 'S A NATURAL cycle and ALL of the solarsystem is heating up.
PAYING CARBON TAXES is the scam.

a reply to: imd12c4funn

Thats like drinking whiskey every single say all day and telling myself I won't have liver damage.

If i keep telling myself the same thing over and over again it becomes true and then i die of liver damage

a reply to: cavtrooper7

I don't give stars, but if I had a cigar, I'd give you 2.
Pollution bad.
Let's deal with that.
No need for the other made up crap to justify bilking taxpayers for what amounts to nothing that will affect, the climate, pollution, or even our behavior.
More taxes have never changed a damn thing in the history of taxes, except how much disposable income the poor suckers who pay it have at the end of the fleecing.
Whatever the frak disposable income is.

a reply to: liejunkie01

The usual suspects come in, ask the talking point question : "did YOU read the peer reviewed papers?!?!**#?!...Gaaaawwed!"
When I guarantee they not only didn't read it either, they wouldn't bloody understand it anyway.

a reply to: JDmOKI

Except when it turns out that whiskey you were drinking everyday was actually tobacco juice, and all it gave you was the trots.
That's about as accurate as your analogy.

a reply to: VictorBloodworth

We need to fix China or their pollution could cause a problem.
FUNNY how the left seems to deny US enemies and how they act.

Alaska is now getting record snow fall www.dailymail.co.uk...

Global warming huh....

Global warming or no global warming what I would like to know is how a carbon tax is going to stop it? The world population is surging and the amount of nations becoming industrialized is also surging. I don't see how any tax on the developed world who only make up a tiny faction of the world population can offset those trends. We need to find solutions far beyond a tax and only technological solutions could solve it and benefits us all but we can't have a carbon trading scheme where the money is syphoned off to the banks.

a reply to: cavtrooper7

Unfortunately it's not just a lefty delusion.
I'm Canadian and our left/right paradigm is a lot more gray..its more far right, left, far left, and even farther left.
Ok, never mind it is a left delusion, lol...
Except I don't consider myself even remotely right wing conservative.
My ideolgy is based on truthiness, as it were.
There are plenty of things from every angle I agree with and disagree with...
This "my party love it or leave it" is what's wrong with both of our political systems.

a reply to: Danton

It won't.
What needs to be done is tech being introduced from here to speed up their modernisation process.
Taxing me does sweet f.a.

a reply to: cavtrooper7
I think china will fix themselves, sort of.
.with stolen US tech, lol...
But I think the US could go along way towards laying off the imperial talk, and start acting like a global citizen instead of the world cop...especially since your actual cops are such a complete clusterf**k.
You probably won't dug that, but that's OK, agree to disagree.

originally posted by: metamagic
Actually Dr. Eastbrook has been thoroughly debunked for a number of factual errors in his presentations, and not by his opponents either. An opponent to anthro centric global warming had this to say about the good Doctor.

It is painful to read how my opponents—those who believe that man is causing the earth to warm—are able to catch such errors among purported experts on my side. Can those on my side of the fence not police their own? From the skeptics on my side I have yet to see anything critical being written about this man.

The post this is take from is Here. Other more critical articles are found Here -- accusation of Fraud and other sources, you know how to google them. One closing comment from the article cited.

Looking through Easterbrook’s slides, it seems he has taken a graph of Holocene temperature variations prepared by Global Warming Art (used at Wikipedia), and altered it to fraudulently bolster his case. … Easterbrook has quite deliberately altered the graph to reduce “current temperatures” by 0.75ºC and make the curve fit his storyline. The original suggests that current temperatures are comparable to, perhaps higher than the warmest period of the Holocene, the post-glacial climatic optimum 8000 years ago. Easterbrook’s version gives the impression that for most of the last 10,000 years temperature has been warmer than today.

Climategate debunked. It's true!
I am aching to pay a carbon tax to save the world