Author Topic: Global Warming Fail  (Read 26766 times)

tbombz

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19350
  • Psalms 150
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #125 on: January 05, 2011, 11:07:52 AM »
STFU kid.  If you seriously believe this drivel then, clearly, you are on the outside.

Based on the above gem (and the obvious inability of this idiot 'necrosis' to determine that I was referring to AGW skepticism) we're all shaking in our boots.  ::)

http://www.drroyspencer.com/
"A fourth problem with determining whether AGW theory is true or not is closely related to a similar problem medical research has — the source of funding. This has got to be one of the least appreciated sources of bias in global warming research. In pharmaceutical research, experimentally demonstrating the efficacy of some new drug might be influenced by the fact that the money for the research came from the company that developed the drug in the first place. This is partly why double-blind studies involving many participants (we have only one: Earth) were developed.

But in global warming research, there is a popular misconception that oil industry-funded climate research actually exists, and has skewed the science. I can’t think of a single scientific study that has been funded by an oil or coal company.

But what DOES exist is a large organization that has a virtual monopoly on global warming research in the U.S., and that has a vested interest in AGW theory being true: the U.S. Government. The idea that government-funded climate research is unbiased is laughable. The push for ever increasing levels of government regulation and legislation, the desire of government managers to grow their programs, the dependence of congressional funding of a problem on the existence of a “problem” to begin with, and the U.N.’s desire to find reasons to move toward global governance, all lead to inherent bias in climate research.

At least with medical research, there will always be funding because disease will always exist. But human-caused warming could end up to be little more than a false alarm…as well as a black eye for the climate research community. And lest we forget, possibly the biggest funding-related source of bias in climate research is that research community of scientists. Everyone knows that if the AGW “problem” is no longer a problem, their source of research funding will disappear."


because you put something in blue writing means it is worth its weight in shit?  ::)

yes, the evil scientists, their evil plan to to spend a quarter of their lives getting an education in a field so they can spend another decade doing research in that field all so they could look credible enough to society so that they could con them into thinking that the research they have been doing/been educated about is conlcusive, thus they can make their evil plan come true... more funding for the same research!!! dum dum dum!!! these research-happy scientists who spend their entrie lives getting educated only so they can turn around and lie to the people in order to keep on doing research!!. yes, yes i think thats it.

 ::)

if you had any clue, any education on the topic of climate science, even in the lsightest, you would not be debating this issue.  there is not only correlational evidence but a descriptive cause and effect all backed up with verifiable facts.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #126 on: June 17, 2011, 02:09:09 PM »
Changing Tides: Research Center Under Fire for 'Adjusted' Sea-Level Data
By Maxim Lott

Published June 17, 2011
| FoxNews.com
NASA



In a NASA "what-if" animation, light-blue areas in southern Florida and Louisiana indicate regions that may be underwater should sea levels rise dramatically.

Is climate change raising sea levels, as Al Gore has argued -- or are climate scientists doctoring the data?

The University of Colorado’s Sea Level Research Group decided in May to add 0.3 millimeters -- or about the thickness of a fingernail -- every year to its actual measurements of sea levels, sparking criticism from experts who called it an attempt to exaggerate the effects of global warming.

"Gatekeepers of our sea level data are manufacturing a fictitious sea level rise that is not occurring," said James M. Taylor, a lawyer who focuses on environmental issues for the Heartland Institute.

Steve Nerem, the director of the widely relied-upon research center, told FoxNews.com that his group added the 0.3 millimeters per year to the actual sea level measurements because land masses, still rebounding from the ice age, are rising and increasing the amount of water that oceans can hold.

"We have to account for the fact that the ocean basins are actually getting slightly bigger... water volume is expanding," he said, a phenomenon they call glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA).

Taylor calls it tomfoolery.

"There really is no reason to do this other than to advance a political agenda," he said.

Climate scientist John Christy, a professor at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, said that the amount of water in the ocean and sea level were two different things.

"To me… sea level rise is what's measured against the actual coast," he told FoxNews.com. "That's what tells us the impact of rising oceans."

Taylor agreed.

"Many global warming alarmists say that vast stretches of coastline are going to be swallowed up by the sea. Well, that means we should be talking about sea level, not about global water volume."

In e-mails with FoxNews.com, Nerem indicated that he considered "sea level rise" to be the same thing as the amount of water in the ocean.

"If we correct our data to remove [the effect of rising land], it actually does cause the rate of sea level (a.k.a. ocean water volume change) rise to be bigger," Nerem wrote. The adjustment is trivial, and not worth public attention, he added.

"For the layperson, this correction is a non-issue and certainly not newsworthy… [The] effect is tiny -- only 1 inch over 100 years, whereas we expect sea level to rise 2-4 feet."

But Taylor said that the correction seemed bigger when compared with actual sea level increases.

"We’ve seen only 7 inches of sea level rise in the past century and it hasn’t sped up this century. Compared to that, this would add nearly 20 percent to the sea level rise. That's not insignificant," he told FoxNews.com.

Nerem said that the research center is considering compromising on the adjustment.

"We are considering putting both data sets on our website -- a GIA-corrected dataset, as well as one without the GIA correction," he said.

Christy said that would be a welcome change.

"I would encourage CU to put the sea level rate [with] no adjustment at the top of the website," he said.

Taylor’s takeaway: Be wary of sea level rise estimates.

"When Al Gore talks about Manhattan flooding this century, and 20 feet of sea level rise, that’s simply not going to happen. If it were going to happen, he wouldn’t have bought his multi-million dollar mansion along the coast in California."


http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/06/17/research-center-under-fire-for-adjusted-sea-level-data


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #127 on: March 05, 2012, 01:08:15 PM »
http://reason.com/archives/2012/03/02/saving-the-earth-one-fraud-at-a-time


Reason Magazine 

Saving the Earth, One Fraud at a Time

The latest embarrassment for global warming activists

Steven Greenhut | March 2, 2012




If the theory of man-made global warming were such a self-obvious truth, the result of scientific consensus, then why do advocates for this idea keep committing frauds to advance it? Even more disturbing, why are some writers willing to defend this behavior?

The latest embarrassment for global-warming activists came on Feb. 20 after Peter Gleick, founder of the Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment and Security in Oakland, admitted that he committed fraud to obtain documents he thought would embarrass a conservative think tank that has been a leading debunker of some of the overheated claims of the climate-change Chicken Littles.

The memos, which reveal the group’s political and fund-raising strategies, provided little to embarrass the Chicago-based Heartland Institute, but it has damaged the reputation of a man who was a respected intellectual in the environmental world. Gleick, a MacArthur Foundation “genius” fellow, doesn’t seem brilliant now, as he takes a leave of absence from the institute, faces public embarrassment and possible prosecution. (Heartland claims that one memo was fabricated, although Gleick denies that charge, but the scandal could get uglier.)

But even after Gleick admitted and apologized for his action, Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik defended him: “It’s a sign of the emotions wrapped up in the global warming debate that Gleick should be apologizing for his actions today while the Heartland Institute stakes out the moral high ground.”

“Peter Gleick lied, but was it justified by the wider good?” asked James Garvey of the British Guardian newspaper. He compared Gleick’s action to that of a man who lied to keep his friend from driving home drunk. “What Heartland is doing is harmful, because it gets in the way of public consensus and action,” he argued. “If his lie has good effects overall—if those who take Heartland’s money to push skepticism are dismissed as shills, if donors pull funding after being exposed in the press—then perhaps on balance he did the right thing. … It depends on how this plays out.”

In his view, anything that gets in the way of “consensus”—i.e., everyone agreeing with Garvey—is dangerous, so why not cheat, as long as it “has good effects”? Let’s reserve judgment based on how it plays out.

What would these people argue if a conservative who argues that, say, public-sector unions are bankrupting the state, pulled a similar fraud to get his hands on documents from union officials? Would they be defending that? Of course not. These writers are advancing a Machiavellian political agenda, not advancing a consistent ethical principle.

When it comes to global warming, the ends apparently justify the means. People from all political persuasions do stupid things to advance their cause, but what bothers me most are respectable people who justify behavior they would never tolerate from their foes. That type of ideological fanaticism is corrosive of our democratic society.

It’s easy to chide the hypocrisy of Gleick. He had been the chairman of an ethics committee for a scientific association. His column blasting dishonesty still sits on his institute’s Web site. It’s harder to explain away his deceit as a mere aberration in the climate-change drama.

In the “Climategate” scandal in 2009, “Hundreds of private email messages and documents hacked from a computer server at a British university are causing a stir among global warming skeptics, who say they show that climate scientists conspired to overstate the case for a human influence on climate change,” according to a New York Times report from the time. The emails showed that the scientific community is so invested in this climate-change ideology for financial and ideological reasons that it rather cook the numbers than level with the public about the reality of the threat. A follow-up release of emails in 2011 provided even more evidence supporting skeptics’ claims.

In this scandal, Gleick created a bogus email account in which he pretended to be a Heartland board member. Then he contacted the organization and asked for documents from a recent board meeting. He released them on the Internet anonymously and to journalists while claiming to be a Heartland insider, according to the institute’s explanation.

Although he offered his regrets, Gleick’s mea culpa was laden with excuses: “I only note that the scientific understanding of the reality and risks of climate change is strong, compelling, and increasingly disturbing, and a rational public debate is desperately needed. My judgment was blinded by my frustration with the ongoing efforts—often anonymous, well-funded, and coordinated—to attack climate science and scientists and prevent this debate, and by the lack of transparency of the organizations involved.”

How do you base a “rational public debate” on deceit?

It’s not as if the documents added anything to the debate. They didn’t show any enormous investment by big corporations. They proved, as one writer noted, that donors give money to organizations whose work they endorse. What a revelation. Isn’t that what happens on the environmental side, also?

Marc Gunther of The Energy Collective admitted that “the leaked Heartland documents didn’t prove very much.” He slammed allies in the global-warming movement for praising Gleick and comparing him to a whistleblower. Clearly, not all believers in man-made global warming defend the indefensible.

But there is something about global warming that attracts the “ends justify the means” crowd. It’s the same fraudulent ideology that California’s state government has embraced as it implements a first-in-the-nation cap-and-trade program that won’t do a thing to cool our state, but will raise taxes on businesses and drive many of them elsewhere. Advocates of AB32 were hardly fonts of honesty and rational debate.

Hey, if Planet Earth is in danger, then anything goes in the political realm also. That ideology is far scarier to me than a little warmer weather.

Steven Greenhut is vice president of the Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity.




King Shizzo

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 34432
  • Ron crowned me King because I always deliver.
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #128 on: March 05, 2012, 01:11:02 PM »
Global warming is not about it being too hot or cold for a couple days/season, it is rapid changes in temperature in a quick timespan
Shouldn't you be on the weather channel forums?

tbombz

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19350
  • Psalms 150
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #129 on: March 05, 2012, 01:13:48 PM »
 http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010/jan/HQ_10-017_Warmest_temps.html


 NASA Research Finds Last Decade was Warmest on Record, 2009 One of Warmest Years   WASHINGTON -- A new analysis of global surface temperatures by NASA scientists finds the past year was tied for the second warmest since 1880. In the Southern Hemisphere, 2009 was the warmest year on record.

Although 2008 was the coolest year of the decade because of a strong La Nina that cooled the tropical Pacific Ocean, 2009 saw a return to a near-record global temperatures as the La Nina diminished, according to the new analysis by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York. The past year was a small fraction of a degree cooler than 2005, the warmest on record, putting 2009 in a virtual tie with a cluster of other years --1998, 2002, 2003, 2006, and 2007 -- for the second warmest on record.

"There's always interest in the annual temperature numbers and a given year's ranking, but the ranking often misses the point," said James Hansen, GISS director. "There's substantial year-to-year variability of global temperature caused by the tropical El Nino-La Nina cycle. When we average temperature over five or ten years to minimize that variability, we find global warming is continuing unabated."

January 2000 to December 2009 was the warmest decade on record. Looking back to 1880, when modern scientific instrumentation became available to monitor temperatures precisely, a clear warming trend is present, although there was a leveling off between the 1940s and 1970s.

In the past three decades, the GISS surface temperature record shows an upward trend of about 0.36 degrees F (0.2 degrees C) per decade. In total, average global temperatures have increased by about 1.5 degrees F (0.8 degrees C) since 1880.

"That's the important number to keep in mind," said GISS climatologist Gavin Schmidt. "The difference between the second and sixth warmest years is trivial because the known uncertainty in the temperature measurement is larger than some of the differences between the warmest years."

The near-record global temperatures of 2009 occurred despite an unseasonably cool December in much of North America. High air pressures from the Arctic decreased the east-west flow of the jet stream, while increasing its tendency to blow from north to south. The result was an unusual effect that caused frigid air from the Arctic to rush into North America and warmer mid-latitude air to shift toward the north. This left North America cooler than normal, while the Arctic was warmer than normal.

"The contiguous 48 states cover only 1.5 percent of the world area, so the United States' temperature does not affect the global temperature much," Hansen said.

GISS uses publicly available data from three sources to conduct its temperature analysis. The sources are weather data from more than a thousand meteorological stations around the world, satellite observations of sea surface temperatures, and Antarctic research station measurements.

Other research groups also track global temperature trends but use different analysis techniques. The Met Office Hadley Centre in the United Kingdom uses similar input measurements as GISS, for example, but it omits large areas of the Arctic and Antarctic where monitoring stations are sparse.

Although the two methods produce slightly differing results in the annual rankings, the decadal trends in the two records are essentially identical.

"There's a contradiction between the results shown here and popular perceptions about climate trends," Hansen said. "In the last decade, global warming has not stopped."

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #130 on: March 05, 2012, 01:15:39 PM »
Hansen?   LMFAO!   Why not quote Al gore for all that matter? 

tbombz

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19350
  • Psalms 150
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #131 on: March 05, 2012, 01:18:59 PM »
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100728_stateoftheclimate.html

The 2009 State of the Climate report released today draws on data for 10 key climate indicators that all point to the same finding: the scientific evidence that our world is warming is unmistakable. More than 300 scientists from 160 research groups in 48 countries contributed to the report, which confirms that the past decade was the warmest on record and that the Earth has been growing warmer over the last 50 years.

Based on comprehensive data from multiple sources, the report defines 10 measurable planet-wide features used to gauge global temperature changes. The relative movement of each of these indicators proves consistent with a warming world. Seven indicators are rising: air temperature over land, sea-surface temperature, air temperature over oceans, sea level, ocean heat, humidity and tropospheric temperature in the “active-weather” layer of the atmosphere closest to the Earth’s surface. Three indicators are declining: Arctic sea ice, glaciers and spring snow cover in the Northern hemisphere.

“For the first time, and in a single compelling comparison, the analysis brings together multiple observational records from the top of the atmosphere to the depths of the ocean,” said Jane Lubchenco, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator. “The records come from many institutions worldwide. They use data collected from diverse sources, including satellites, weather balloons, weather stations, ships, buoys and field surveys. These independently produced lines of evidence all point to the same conclusion: our planet is warming,”

The report emphasizes that human society has developed for thousands of years under one climatic state, and now a new set of climatic conditions are taking shape. These conditions are consistently warmer, and some areas are likely to see more extreme events like severe drought, torrential rain and violent storms.

“Despite the variability caused by short-term changes, the analysis conducted for this report illustrates why we are so confident the world is warming,” said Peter Stott, Ph.D., contributor to the report and head of Climate Monitoring and Attribution of the United Kingdom Met Office Hadley Centre. “When we look at air temperature and other indicators of climate, we see highs and lows in the data from year to year because of natural variability. Understanding climate change requires looking at the longer-term record. When we follow decade-to-decade trends using multiple data sets and independent analyses from around the world, we see clear and unmistakable signs of a warming world.”

While year-to-year changes in temperature often reflect natural climatic variations such as El Nińo/La Nińa events, changes in average temperature from decade-to-decade reveal long-term trends such as global warming. Each of the last three decades has been much warmer than the decade before. At the time, the 1980s was the hottest decade on record. In the 1990s, every year was warmer than the average of the previous decade. The 2000s were warmer still.

“The temperature increase of one degree Fahrenheit over the past 50 years may seem small, but it has already altered our planet,” said Deke Arndt, co-editor of the report and chief of the Climate Monitoring Branch of NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center. “Glaciers and sea ice are melting, heavy rainfall is intensifying and heat waves are more common. And, as the new report tells us, there is now evidence that over 90 percent of warming over the past 50 years has gone into our ocean.”

More and more, Americans are witnessing the impacts of climate change in their own backyards, including sea-level rise, longer growing seasons, changes in river flows, increases in heavy downpours, earlier snowmelt and extended ice-free seasons in our waters. People are searching for relevant and timely information about these changes to inform decision-making about virtually all aspects of their lives. To help keep citizens and businesses informed about climate, NOAA created the Climate Portal at http://www.climate.gov. The portal features a short video that summarizes some of the highlights of the State of the Climate Report.

dr.chimps

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 28635
  • Chimpus ergo sum
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #132 on: March 05, 2012, 01:21:58 PM »
 ::)

Nomad

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3457
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #133 on: March 05, 2012, 01:22:17 PM »
human caused global warming is just a theory, not a fact!
all drugs - TPPIIP

tbombz

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19350
  • Psalms 150
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #134 on: March 05, 2012, 01:25:13 PM »
human caused global warming is just a theory, not a fact!
theres no such thing as a scientific fact. there are only theories. as far as theories go global warming is just about as proven as the theory that the earth orbits the sun.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #135 on: March 05, 2012, 01:27:10 PM »
theres no such thing as a scientific fact. there are only theories. as far as theories go global warming is just about as proven as the theory that the earth orbits the sun.

So lets run out and spend trillions of dollars on bogus green products, stop driving, cut off the lights, live in tents, and sign kumbaya around a camp fire every night right?


BTW - can you tell me the year the earth had the so called "perfect climate" to which we need to go back to and how the present proposals of al gore will get us back to that?   

dr.chimps

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 28635
  • Chimpus ergo sum
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #136 on: March 05, 2012, 01:32:23 PM »
So lets run out and spend trillions of dollars on bogus green products, stop driving, cut off the lights, live in tents, and sign kumbaya around a camp fire every night right?


BTW - can you tell me the year the earth had the so called "perfect climate" to which we need to go back to and how the present proposals of al gore will get us back to that?    
If you had any self-awareness, you'd be embarrassed by your willful ignorance.

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
― Isaac Asimov  

tommywishbone

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 20507
  • Biscuit
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #137 on: March 05, 2012, 01:33:26 PM »
My grits always stay really hot for a long time. I suspect someone of something.
a

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #138 on: March 05, 2012, 01:34:49 PM »
If you had any self-awareness, you'd be embarrassed by your willful ignorance.

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
― Isaac Asimov  

Oh go Fluke yourself.   You can't answer my question because it completly destroys every aspect and facet of this nonsensical issue.  

"Climate Change" and "Global Warming" are little more than a nother contrived "crisis" by far leftist special interest groups seeking control over the population and a way to suck more $$$$ out of hard working people.    

The Showstoppa

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26879
  • Call the vet, cause these pythons are sick!
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #139 on: March 05, 2012, 01:36:15 PM »
I'm emptying some aerosol cans out the front door as we speak....

lovemonkey

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7750
  • Two kinds of people; Those that can extrapolate
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #140 on: March 05, 2012, 01:36:37 PM »
So lets run out and spend trillions of dollars on bogus green products, stop driving, cut off the lights, live in tents, and sign kumbaya around a camp fire every night right?


BTW - can you tell me the year the earth had the so called "perfect climate" to which we need to go back to and how the present proposals of al gore will get us back to that?   

Climate change or not, we need to start adapting to our planets limited resources. We most likely already hit peak oil and with the exponential growth of the population and the economy of the world we're headed towards nothing less than disaster. The system is going to collapse when our beloved growth comes to a halt most of which is dependent on our fossil fuel consumption.

Even if this whole climate debacle turns out to be a hoax(which I seriously doubt at this point) it still serves as a good motivator to change our ways.
from incomplete data

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #141 on: March 05, 2012, 01:39:14 PM »
Climate change or not, we need to start adapting to our planets limited resources. We most likely already hit peak oil and with the exponential growth of the population and the economy of the world we're headed towards nothing less than disaster. The system is going to collapse when our beloved growth comes to a halt most of which is dependent on our fossil fuel consumption.

Even if this whole climate debacle turns out to be a hoax(which I seriously doubt at this point) it still serves as a good motivator to change our ways.

So taxing ourselves more and giving the money to corrupt govt thugs like Obama, Al Gore, Pelosi, Clinton, Bush, Newt, Putin, Merkel, Dragi, Monti, Chavez, et al is going to do anything but make those thugs and their friends rich? 

Do you seriously believe that placing more power into the hands of the govt is going to fix this make believe "crisis"? 

tbombz

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19350
  • Psalms 150
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #142 on: March 05, 2012, 01:40:16 PM »
i see you have a very strong emotional rejection to the idea that modern technologies can be harmful to the environment

nobody is saying we need to revert to the stone age, dont worry champ

what we are saying is that the science is very clear, the earth is getting warmer, along with many other potentially harmful things, and all of it is being caused by increasing levels of greenhouse gases.

what the solution is, what the potential damage will be... these are after thoughts. first we just want the world and its rulers to understand this, to understand what is happening and why its happening.

but the extinction rate has increased more than 1,000 fold in the past century. ice caps are melting. the oceans are turning more acidic. ect.

what climate should we go back to? ummmm... the climate we had 500 years ago maybe ??  :-X

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #143 on: March 05, 2012, 01:42:57 PM »
i see you have a very strong emotional rejection to the idea that modern technologies can be harmful to the environment

nobody is saying we need to revert to the stone age, dont worry champ

what we are saying is that the science is very clear, the earth is getting warmer, along with many other potentially harmful things, and all of it is being caused by increasing levels of greenhouse gases.

what the solution is, what the potential damage will be... these are after thoughts. first we just want the world and its rulers to understand this, to understand what is happening and why its happening.

but the extinction rate has increased more than 1,000 fold in the past century. ice caps are melting. the oceans are turning more acidic. ect.

what climate should we go back to? ummmm... the climate we had 500 years ago maybe ??  :-X


So far, every single policy advocated by people involved in the global warming nonsense is:

1.  higher taxes

2.  less freedom

3.  less choice

4.  less privacy

5.  more regulation

6.  more crony corruption




Etc etc.   No thanks.   I'll take my chances while the rest of you build your green communist utopia     

lovemonkey

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7750
  • Two kinds of people; Those that can extrapolate
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #144 on: March 05, 2012, 01:43:50 PM »
So taxing ourselves more and giving the money to corrupt govt thugs like Obama, Al Gore, Pelosi, Clinton, Bush, Newt, Putin, Merkel, Dragi, Monti, Chavez, et al is going to do anything but make those thugs and their friends rich? 

Do you seriously believe that placing more power into the hands of the govt is going to fix this make believe "crisis"? 

wtf are you talking about? I said nothing about taxes or governments. Epic strawman. I don't claim to know the solution to the climate issues we've got but I say it's wise to at least acknowledge them and not stick your head up your own ass.

If you know anything about exponential growth then you'd know that we're headed for very turbulent times, climate change or not.
from incomplete data

lovemonkey

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7750
  • Two kinds of people; Those that can extrapolate
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #145 on: March 05, 2012, 01:45:00 PM »

So far, every single policy advocated by people involved in the global warming nonsense is:

1.  higher taxes

2.  less freedom

3.  less choice

4.  less privacy

5.  more regulation

6.  more crony corruption




Etc etc.   No thanks.   I'll take my chances while the rest of you build your green communist utopia     

I guess the ozone layer doesn't matter to you either? Or widespread led poisoning? If only governments had stayed outta our way  ::)
from incomplete data

tbombz

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19350
  • Psalms 150
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #146 on: March 05, 2012, 01:46:24 PM »

So far, every single policy advocated by people involved in the global warming nonsense is:

1.  higher taxes
no
2.  less freedom
sure. but laws against murder also cause less freedom.
3.  less choice
sure. but laws against child pornography also cause less choice.
4.  less privacy
no
5.  more regulation
yes
6.  more crony corruption
no



Etc etc.   No thanks.   I'll take my chances while the rest of you build your green communist utopia     

dr.chimps

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 28635
  • Chimpus ergo sum
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #147 on: March 05, 2012, 01:47:21 PM »
Oh go Fluke yourself.   You can't answer my question because it completly destroys every aspect and facet of this nonsensical issue.  

"Climate Change" and "Global Warming" are little more than a nother contrived "crisis" by far leftist special interest groups seeking control over the population and a way to suck more $$$$ out of hard working people.    
There is no one answer to your idiotic question. But, if there could be a way of determining it, it would be through science, not by the ridiculous deflective/evasive derp you spew. Oh brother.

dr.chimps

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 28635
  • Chimpus ergo sum
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #148 on: March 05, 2012, 01:50:06 PM »
wtf are you talking about? I said nothing about taxes or governments. Epic strawman. I don't claim to know the solution to the climate issues we've got but I say it's wise to at least acknowledge them and not stick your head up your own ass.

If you know anything about exponential growth then you'd know that we're headed for very turbulent times, climate change or not.
These are all points held dear by the GOP, the corporate party of invasive big business. 3.14 has no real ideas about them per se, he's just parroting/cutting-and-pasting the party line.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Global Warming Fail
« Reply #149 on: March 05, 2012, 01:50:14 PM »
There is no one answer to your idiotic question. But, if there could be a way of determining it, it would be through science, not by the ridiculous deflective/evasive derp you spew. Oh brother.

Again - very simple  - tell me the so called "solution" to the so called "crisis", what it will cost and what impact it will have in solving the so called "crisis"  

Save your high minded bullshit for others too stupid to see through that nonsense and give me a straight answer.  

Cap n Trade?  

Carbon tax?  

Driving restrictions?  

Flying restrictions?  



hhhmmmm?????