Climate Change Deniers: step forward and be counted.

reply to post by SquirrelNutz


Welll.....lol It very well could be. I'm not saying it was invented but it's absolutely being used. Used to the point where everything everywhere has something to do with climate change, saving the planet, going green, "think globally, act locally," and the multi-billion dollar "green living" industry. Towns everywhere in every state are coming up with "sustainable development" plans to completely redo entire communities to this standard. Every aspect of human life is being impacted all over the world, not just in America, and I don't for a second buy that the entire planet agreed that's what we needed to do. I think we have been highly influenced to believe that's what we needed to do. And, yes, I do believe it's a very big conspiracy--but it's certainly not a theory because it's so obvious, it's all but slapping you in the face.

SquirrelNutz
So, what I'm gathering from all of this... ergo, the handful of people that have decided to participate in this thread...

Is that, more than 9/11, JFK, the Moon Landing, Area 51, Flouride in the water, the Easter bunny, Santa, and Jesus... Global Warming is the biggest conspiracy to ever hit mankind. Ever.

That about right?

Hardly a conspiracy, more of a religious zealotry at best.

Outright mental derangement at worse.

Again: A fraction of a single degree of 'warming' over a period of 150 years is, geologically speaking - unusual climate stability.

To even consider for more than a moment that a naturally occurring molecule, which is gravely vital for all life on Earth (carbon dioxide) could be a pollutant seems like a symptom of an unhealthy condition of some sort.

reply to post by talklikeapirat

The John Cook et al study is close to retraction due to major methodology errors. Before you link the study or cite form it make sure you understand exactly what they did, how they did it and why.

It's not close to retraction, not even in the ballpark lol. A few paid deniers are simply mad they got caught endorsing AGW otherwise their papers wouldn't have passed peer review.

About 12,800 years ago we plunged into the Younger Dryas. When we came out of the Younger Dryas, temperatures again shot upward, rising 15 degrees in just 40 years. Then, from about 10,000 years ago to 3,000 years ago, temperatures were warmer than today according to any graph I have looked at.

Numerous, abrupt, short-lived warming and cooling episodes much more intense than recent warming/cooling occurred during the late Pleistocene.

The second half of the 13th century had the most volcanism of any period of the past 1,500 years. Polar ice samples have revealed a series of eruptions: an especially big explosion somewhere in the world in 1258, and three smaller ones in 1268, 1275 and 1284.
Anyone seen all the volcanic eruptions going on lately and that is but a fraction of the undersea activity..
Instead of C02 the last two periods of cooling occurred in sync with low sunspot activity....HELLO!... Those two periods of low sunspot activity are known respectively as the Wolf Minimum and the Sporer Minimum. Might answer why there has not been a forecasted temp rise these last 15 years, No?
news.yahoo.com...

Even Greenland's coldest and highest place, Summit station, showed melting. Ice core records show that last happened in 1889 and occurs about once every 150 years.

Coincidence? With the jet stream doing crazy things; swinging wildly north-south around the globe could solar activity be an influence. Solar activity is very low right now, volcanic activity is high an this combination sets us for the a new ice age if history repeats and maybe quicker than any model I have seen has predicted.

a Side-By-Side Comparison of Draft and Final IPCC AR5 SPM on Warming Plateau and Attribution from the final draft (7Jun2013) and the approved final version (27Sep2013) of the IPCC’s AR5 Summary for Policymakers. Looks like the politicians deleted the attribution discussion for the warming plateau.'

Quote:Final Draft 7Jun2013 Approved 27Sep2013

From page SPM-9:There is very high confidence that models reproduce the more rapid warming in the second half of the 20th century, and the cooling immediately following large volcanic eruptions. Models do not generally reproduce the observed reduction in surface warming trend over the last 10–15 years. There is medium confidence that this difference between models and observations is to a substantial degree caused by unpredictable climate variability, with possible contributions from inadequacies in the solar, volcanic, and aerosol forcings used by the models and, in some models, from too strong a response to increasing greenhouse-gas forcing. [9.4.1, 10.3.1, 11.3.2; Box 9.2]

Compare:

From page SPM-10:The observed reduction in surface warming trend over the period 1998–2012 as compared to the period 1951–2012, is due in roughly equal measaure to a reduced trend in radiative forcing and a cooling contribution from internal variability, which includes a possible redistribution of heat within the ocean (medium confidence). The reduced trend in radiative forcing is primarily due to volcanic eruptions and the timing of the downward phase of the 11-year solar cycle. However, there is low confidence in quantifying the role of changes in radiative forcing in causing the reduced warming trend. There is medium confidence that internal decadal variability causes to a substantial degree the difference between observations and the simulations; the latter are not expected to reproduce the timing of internal variability. There may also be a contribution from forcing inadequacies and, in some models, an overestimate of the response to increasing greenhouse gas and other anthropogenic forcing (dominated by the effects of aerosols). [9.4, Box 9.2, 10.3, Box 10.2, 11.3]

I did read someplace that before the report was released there were many outside proof readers who were sent to insure the report was worded properly and that their message was understood in the strongest terms. The science should be able to speak for itself....IMO.... all they have managed to do is entrench both sides with hanky panky and slight of hand models that both sides can punch holes in...

www.climatescienceinternational.org...

Ottawa, Canada, September 27, 2013: "No one should trust the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] report issued today in Stockholm," said Professor Bob Carter, Chief Science Advisor of the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC) and former head of the School of Earth Sciences at James Cook University, Australia. "The IPCC has a history of malfeasance that even includes rewording recommendations of expert science advisors to fit the alarmist agenda of participating governments."

I hope it is global warming for then we can grow crops; if it is another ice age there will be millions if not billions who will perish due to the cold. .... Either way it appears the fix is in and the agenda must be carried out.. Some of the Greenies are already saying we must tax gasoline or increase the price so that it is at least 3 to 4 times the current cost to save the children and mother earth; they are just getting started... wait and see.

reply to post by Kali74

It's not close to retraction, not even in the ballpark lol.

Hope dies last. But i don't really care. For the fun of it, let's make a bet that the thing gets retracted in the next six month. You can set the condition what either of us has to do when he looses.

0p... it's a scam, it's a scam, it's a scam. At least the part about blaming humans for climate change is a scam. Sure CO2 and pollution are a problem and need to be dealt with, but using hack job science to push a political agenda does solve anything. All we need it national governments to regulate pollution. We do not need global solutions, global carbon markets, or carbon taxes. Anyway I broke it down for you in three parts, the purpose of the scam, why the climate modeling is failing to prove anything and what is actually happening.

THE PURPOSE OF THE SCAM
It's a scam that is bought and paid for by TPTB who want to own the very building blocks of life itself namely water, carbon and DNA. While we may already be slaves to the monetary system, that is not enough for these people who want you and I to pay them for the very privilege of living. The whole carbon credit trading is another scam unto itself, that would function as an inverse energy market. And water carbon, DNA and energy are definitely going to be the cornerstones for the basket of goods used to anchor a new global world currency after the dollar fails. Anyway those topics are far too involved to discuss in this thread.

THE SCIENCE? FAILURES IN ECONOMETRICS
The statistical modeling that these scientists do is called econometric or statistical modeling. the problem with econometrics is that it cannot account for natural ebb and flow of nature, that when graphed looks like a sine wave. What is happening is that the "scientists" enter their data and the last few data points dictates the direction of the forecast. The result is that the graph continues in one direction forever. The real problem for this science is that that we know that the earth is a living system that does not behave according to the rules of a linear model. If the last few data points entered by the scientist show an upward trend then you are going to get graph pointing to increasing temperatures and in the worst cases you will get an Al Gore hockey stick graph going up up up. And if you have the last few data points showing a downward trend then the model is going to show a cooling trend and in the worst cases, it will show an impending ice age. Neither is correct because the "science" is flawed. Its probably one of the reasons for the "hide the decline" statements because the last few data points will dictate the trend for the model. It should alarm everyone when these scientists refuse to release raw data and their models because anyone who has worked with econometrics knows its limitations. The fact is that these "scientists" are hacks living off of grant money and trying to make it to retirement before the lies come crashing down on them. They are selling out humanity so that TPTB can own us.


THE TRUTH
Now what is the truth. Just look up, the sun is appearing to be whiter, brighter and bluer than in the past. Not because of significant changes in the sun radiance, but because the sun's magnetism is weakening and the earth's magnetosphere is weakening. The earth atmosphere depends on solar faring to warm it up. The lack of flares is causing the earths atmosphere to shrink. Less atmosphere for sun light to travel through equals a shift from yellow to white/blue. Its there for everyone to see, you only have to look up. More energy is reaching the earth's surface from the sun and the cosmos because the earth's magnetosphere has weakened by 10%. Watch this video and the others, they are well documented. www.youtube.com...

These links provide an explanation that is far more precise and poignant than I could every be on the subject. I suggest you look at them because it discusses what the IPCC completely ignores. I suggest you fully inform yourself before jumping on the bandwagon. I did and I now know that the IPCC and the MSM cannot be trusted to educate you with anything more than propaganda.


MUST SEE
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.suspicious0bservers.org...

SquirrelNutz
So, what I'm gathering from all of this... ergo, the handful of people that have decided to participate in this thread...

Is that, more than 9/11, JFK, the Moon Landing, Area 51, Flouride in the water, the Easter bunny, Santa, and Jesus... Global Warming is the biggest conspiracy to ever hit mankind. Ever.

That about right?

Man caused Global Warming?

Yeah, I'd say you summed it up pretty well. Just about the biggest scam known to man. Instead of millions spent on cleaning up Superfund sites or a polluted Canal right in NYC that ranks among the worst known? It's spent on social experiments, or ...on this? Making a big elaborate carbon exchange.

How about the nuke dumps around the world, in the ocean depths? Multiple nations have had multiple dump areas as I saw a map years ago about it. Just little bundles of joy ..corroding in Sea water...ready to remind us they exist some day. Clean up that? nawww..... That's barely even noted as existing to be a problem. (Crazy logic).

It's far more profitable to set up this world wide taxation system to chase a global climate change our own planet's history clearly shows happens on a routine basis. Unfortunately not cyclical in a predictable way, but routine over the long term. We chase this....while standing in radioactive and toxic goo at our feet, uncaring that IT is there.

Is makes no sense... none. Man made global warming isn't just a scam, it's the worst distraction ever from addressing the real pollution of nations and that nations are responsible for.

reply to post by SquirrelNutz


Don't you know deniers will never stop denieing especially here they think they are smarter than the international community of scientists that actually work in that field.

reply to post by talklikeapirat


Being correct is reward enough.

Well now, You tell us American's why it's not just Earth but all planets in our solar system that are experiancing change? Pluto went from a White Cue ball to a beautiful Sky blue... Must be climate change, huh?

Arrogance comes in many different facets, but YOU sir can sign me up as one of these "Dumb Americans" that doesn't buy into the "Climate Change" money making garbage.

Just so we are clear MR. OP these are planetary changes that is affecting every planet in our solar system.

reply to post by SquirrelNutz


The IPCC report refutes it saying estimates were minimally 30% overestimated and that temps have plateaued for 17 years now..

Yes that is obvious but what does is prove? Have you ever seen the Mr. Wizard Melting Ice Caps? Video

Again it does not have a point to the issue...and as others have pointed out England for one has a higher "denial" rate...

That is also debatable certainly some are shrinking....growing glaciers

All I am saying is we don't know for sure.

Hey Mr Nutz!

I would be one of those non-American Brits you would be talking about.

I live in the U.K and i can tell you for nothing, it isn't exclusive to Americans.

In fact we have a particulary fantastic Brit in my opinion over here, who is actually predicting a mini ice age.

His name is Piers Corbyn, he makes weather predictions....he isn't half bad at it either.

He uses historical data from the sun and moon, as well as weather data from the past to predict weather patterns.

Not to say he isn't infalliable, because he can be wrong, but against the Met office here in the UK, he is the one I trust to give me the most accurate account, especailly with regards to snow.

Anyway, Piers Corbyn is an avid denier, riddiculed by the scientific community for his stance on global warming and laughed at for his belief in an upcoming mini ice age.

But just as we see in many a Hollywood blockbuster, sometimes it pays to accept the viewpoint of the "crazy" scientist....it might just save your life!

Well, ok maybe not quite life saving, but you get the idea.

Here is a link to his website

What you have to remember above all OP, you might think the deniers are crazy in the face of evidence provided to you by the financially organised, just remember, the deniers think your crazy for having so much evidence without relying on instinct.

Instinct is a powerful thing

Funny.

First of all I do not deny or confirm anything as I'm not a scientist (sighing while rolling eyes) that claims my data is actual and confirming and not an assumption.

But let's exaggerate (

reply to post by BABYBULL24


Here there be monsters...

Once upon a time - we had to go with the easy answer

Now we know stuff

reply to post by SquirrelNutz


You'd think we'd like to err on the side of caution

Here you go - thought this was interesting:
Why the World Won’t Listen

Consider, for example, the finding that people with politically conservative beliefs are more likely to doubt the reality or seriousness of climate change. Accurate information about climate change is no less readily available to these people than anybody else. But climate policies such as the regulation of industrial emissions often seem to clash with conservative political views. And people work backward from their values, filtering the facts according to their pre-existing beliefs.

The entire article is interesting - and doesn't just harp on conservatives - but, since they seem to be the ones who are least likely to believe in this - that's the quote I pulled

:-)

InTheFlesh1980
reply to post by SquirrelNutz

 

There is simply not enough data to support claims on either side.

The earth is estimated to be over 4.5 billion years old. We have *accurate* climate data for perhaps a few hundred years, probably less. In fact, the data gets far too vague the further back you go.

This means that "scientists" are drawing a conclusion based on having less than 0.000006 percent of the data set. They have absolutely no idea about the natural cycles of climate over the course of millions and millions of years.

This is the scientific equivalent of saying "It rained today, therefore every day is rainy". It is scientifically ridiculous, which helps clue us in that there is clearly another agenda.

I think that the Dinosaurs argued over this same issue. One constipated dinosaur was jealous that the other ones had regular movements and started saying that if they poop too much that is was bad for the environment, and thus the division began. Weather patterns changed, the earth heated up, the oceans warmed and dinosaurs held it all in afraid to poop and cause a catastrophic event that could alter the world forever.
Over time it was discovered that the constipated dinosaur who started it all was a climate change researcher funded by the Dinocrats and that the data was all wrong, skewed if you will, all in favor of increased and continued funding in order to spread an agenda to make more money and try to unify the herbivores, omnivores and carnivores under one government while at the same time oppressing them of basic needs, raising their taxes and killing the jobs they so loved in mining and timber.
It was really too bad that it came to light so late for them because all of their colon's ruptured,,,, each and every one of them.. and now we have no more dinosaurs.


I guess I am saying that I agree with you. Judging what our climate has been doing over the last few hundred years is a joke, not to mention that the majority of the scientists receive their funding through government grants or corporations whose best interest lies in spreading their agenda in return for more money. A lot of people say the oil companies are doing this as well, personally I don't think so they have no need to they know that we have no other viable means of energy right now and probably won't for quite some time.

I hate this topic.. no one is ever going to agree on it and TPTB know that. We are all being used...... as if it was ever any other way.

sulaw
Well now, You tell us American's why it's not just Earth but all planets in our solar system that are experiencing change? Pluto went from a White Cue ball to a beautiful Sky blue... Must be climate change, huh?

Arrogance comes in many different facets, but YOU sir can sign me up as one of these "Dumb Americans" that doesn't buy into the "Climate Change" money making garbage.

Just so we are clear MR. OP these are planetary changes that is affecting every planet in our solar system.

Yes Sulaw.. but as I am sure the OP will state "the scientists who are receiving grants from the world governments and interested private parties attribute extra-planetary warming as being caused by anthropomorphic sources."
Well the OP will probably leave out the part where the scientists receive their funds.
I mean we are shipping oil and coal to Venus, Mars, Uranus, Neptune, Jupiter, Saturn and Pluto aren't we? So we must be responsible. Those damn aliens are still using dirty coal!!!! They also are driving SUV's.... BASTARDS!!

Well, now there are people with letters after their names on both sides of that one at this stage. If technology is applied to attempt artificial control of the climate to "correct" something and we get it wrong?

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


A thought crept in when I read this part above.

Supposedly Tesla had enough information and evidence of high tech that could "destroy the earth". This was a long time ago. If people do not think "they" can AND DO manipulate weather then its naive kind of thinking.

Trying to correct climate "problems" that are not real problems is only an excuse so they can manipulate weather/ionosphere and so on. Like kids with a new toy.

We are going through a "change" and we will forever go through change though. Its the only constant.

Today I read.. www.spaceweather.com...

The weakest Solar Max in 100 years continues today with another 24 hours of quiet.

I already knew our Sun is in a slumber but I also feel like it is the calm before the storm. Whatever they are doing to combat "climate" is like a little kid playing with fire. Stupid, at best!

reply to post by MamaJ

Supposedly Tesla had enough information and evidence of high tech that could "destroy the earth".

Sure he did.

I already knew our Sun is in a slumber but I also feel like it is the calm before the storm.

Why? Was there a "storm" after the previous period of very low activity?

Whatever they are doing to combat "climate" is like a little kid playing with fire.

The claim that someone is combating climate is pretty stupid. Climate is not something that can be "combated".

The concern is rapid climate change. And what is being done to combat it is reducing the production of pollution. Do you think reducing pollution is playing with fire?

reply to post by SquirrelNutz

I would deny that any climate change at present is driven by anthropogenic means. Consider that the entire human population would fit in Rhode Island. Consider that the total amount of water on earth is a sphere roughly 900 miles in diameter which is considerably larger than the human population by 10's of thousands of times. Consider that the Earth is roughly 1/50th the size of the nuclear furnace at the centre of our solar system. Consider that areas of space that have increased molecular density (more molecules per parsec like nebula which you can't see up close or when you are inside of them) would produce the requisite increase in thermal conductivity to drive global heating. Consider that NASA announced that we are going into a "nebula-like" structure as far back as 2004.

Anthropogenic climate change promoters remind me of the history concerning the roman catholic church, but rather than the Earth being the centre of the universe, ACCP's tend to think that their opinions are the centre of the universe. Personally I don't believe we are sufficiently advanced enough technologically to make a huge leap of faith that we are so awesome and powerful, more than even the Sun, that we and we alone drive climate change. To promote such a belief would be the height of ignorance, narcissism and egocentricity.

Why worry anyway, we live in a virtual reality, nothing is real LOL.

Cheers - Dave