Climate Alarmists Are So Uneducated

[John F Kennedy III]

I am talking in a thread on another forum about climate change. If you want to laugh or educate:

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/76676-climate-change-and-all-those-environmental-issues-never-mentioned-in-us-politics/

Some gems:

"We need a technocracy"

"For once i would like the economy to be secondary issue to some of the biggest problems of our time. The degradation of the environment, the warming planet and over population."


" Eat more people. It's a win-win."

Edit: My name on there is King Tyrion I

[alucard13mmfmj]

From what I learn from my liberal college is.. climate change is a regular cycle. The issue was that the rate of change is occuring faster than ever before. Climate cycles usually take tens of thousands of years to occur, but it seems to be accelerating from the start of the industrial revolution.
I dont know if it is true or not.

Also, trees do take in carbon dioxide.. but when trees die, they re-release it back into the atmosphere through decomposition.

[youngbuck]

I don't argue with those people.. you have to stoop down to their level, and I find that to be quite agonizing.

[John F Kennedy III]

I don't argue with those people.. you have to stoop down to their level, and I find that to be quite agonizing.

Yeah I do it once in awhile for shits and giggles :)

[Dr.3D]

Sort of reminds me of this.....
http://www.geekologie.com/2012/03/21/daylight-savings-drought.jpg
http://www.geekologie.com/2012/03/ahahaha-daylight-savings-time-to-blame-f.php

[awake]

Is a sad indicator of decline: the politicization of the weather. Yet another crises for the knaves, habitual immoralists and ninnies to pretend they are supermen - saving you from the enjoyment of your property.

[Travlyr]

Colorado is going to debunk the climate change crap with hemp. Industrial hemp is the greenest plant known to humankind. Even the plastics made from the hemp plant are compostable.

[KCIndy]

Sort of reminds me of this.....
http://www.geekologie.com/2012/03/21/daylight-savings-drought.jpg
http://www.geekologie.com/2012/03/ahahaha-daylight-savings-time-to-blame-f.php

Oh, man..... please, please someone tell me this isn't for real.....

[Dr.3D]

Oh, man..... please, please someone tell me this isn't for real.....
I'm pretty sure the person who wrote that, actually believes changing the time on ones clock can cause problems with the weather.

[KCIndy]

Colorado is going to debunk the climate change crap with hemp. Industrial hemp is the greenest plant known to humankind. Even the plastics made from the hemp plant are compostable.

I'm waiting for the Feds to come in and put down the Big Boots on Colorado's hemp initiatives. :(

[Travlyr]

Sort of reminds me of this.....
http://www.geekologie.com/2012/03/21/daylight-savings-drought.jpg
http://www.geekologie.com/2012/03/ahahaha-daylight-savings-time-to-blame-f.php

Lol... Chris Hill of Albury. I'm not sure why anyone would sign that.

[Travlyr]

I'm waiting for the Feds to come in and put down the Big Boots on Colorado's hemp initiatives. :(

We are going to sic our sheriffs on the Feds if they try to arrest law abiding citizens.

[John F Kennedy III]

Colorado is going to debunk the climate change crap with hemp. Industrial hemp is the greenest plant known to humankind. Even the plastics made from the hemp plant are compostable.

Can you get me some hemp links to post in that thread?

[Restore America Now]

http://www.geekologie.com/2012/03/21/daylight-savings-drought.jpgWe definitely should do away with daylight saving time, but this man is clueless. :eek:

[Travlyr]

Can you get me some hemp links to post in that thread?
Sure.

http://www.thehia.org/index.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mA4v_XBEk6A&feature=related
http://www.internationalhempbuilding.org/
http://www.hempplastic.com/

[Henry Rogue]

Professor Christopher Hill United Nations leading Climatologist of Albury University.

[Travlyr]

Professor Christopher Hill United Nations leading Climatologist of Albury University.

Indeed. He should be president.

[ShaneEnochs]

The more I read about climate change, the more I believe that it might actually be true. Now, that being said, I think man plays a very, very minimal role in it since every chart I've ever seen that spans over the past million years ago clearly outlines a cyclical pattern of warming and cooling. I do believe there is a need to be careful of what we put into the air, water, and ground, though, simply due to health concerns.

Give me a second guys. *dons helmet*

Alright, flame away.

[awake]

The more I read about climate change, the more I believe that it might actually be true. Now, that being said, I think man plays a very, very minimal role in it since every chart I've ever seen that spans over the past million years ago clearly outlines a cyclical pattern of warming and cooling. I do believe there is a need to be careful of what we put into the air, water, and ground, though, simply due to health concerns.

Give me a second guys. *dons helmet*

Alright, flame away.

I Agree, the air, earth and water need protecting, but under strict property rights, not by attacking or weakining them as the greens are advocating with tax and scam and co2 taxes. Greens have a great and noble intention, but under all that they are advocating theft and violence to "save the Earth" and prosecute man for daring to be free..

[John F Kennedy III]

Sure.

http://www.thehia.org/index.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mA4v_XBEk6A&feature=related
http://www.internationalhempbuilding.org/
http://www.hempplastic.com/

Thanks :)

[Carson]

I kind of liked this link;

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100019671/climategate-the-video-everyone-should-see/

It has a video that runs through pretty fast covering 10,000 a half a million years of climate change in a minute?

[carclinic]

I'm pretty sure the person who wrote that, actually believes changing the time on ones clock can cause problems with the weather.
Sarcasm eludes some people.

[Kodaddy]

It always rains after a dry spell.....

[Origanalist]

I am talking in a thread on another forum about climate change. If you want to laugh or educate:

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/76676-climate-change-and-all-those-environmental-issues-never-mentioned-in-us-politics/

Some gems:

"We need a technocracy"

"For once i would like the economy to be secondary issue to some of the biggest problems of our time. The degradation of the environment, the warming planet and over population."


" Eat more people. It's a win-win."

Edit: My name on there is King Tyrion I

Just went there. I feel like the gecko in that commercial with the roadrunner and wile-e coyote . What a strange place.........

[NewRightLibertarian]

JFK III, make the argument that the federal government is the #1 polluter on the planet. Get rid of them, replace them with nothing and you've already made a dent without impeding on anyone's freedom:

http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/2-us-department-of-defense-is-the-worst-polluter-on-the-planet/

[Tpoints]

Colorado is going to debunk the climate change crap with hemp. Industrial hemp is the greenest plant known to humankind. Even the plastics made from the hemp plant are compostable.

did somebody just confuse industrial hemp with recreational THC marijuana?

[SewrRatt]

did somebody just confuse industrial hemp with recreational THC marijuana?

I don't know any specifics, but I certainly hope they also decriminalized hemp. Having it illegal is moronic in the first place, much less keeping it illegal while marijuana is legal.

[QuickZ06]

Just went there. I feel like the gecko in that commercial with the roadrunner and wile-e coyote . What a strange place.........

Haha I flet the exact same way, place has some different types for sure. They are leaning hard left for sure. Keep giving them hell JFK!

[The Free Hornet]

I'm pretty sure the person who wrote that, actually believes changing the time on ones clock can cause problems with the weather.

But sadder still are the statists that believe changing the time on ones clock can solve problems.

[Occam's Banana]

The more I read about climate change, the more I believe that it might actually be true. Now, that being said, I think man plays a very, very minimal role in it since every chart I've ever seen that spans over the past million years ago clearly outlines a cyclical pattern of warming and cooling. I do believe there is a need to be careful of what we put into the air, water, and ground, though, simply due to health concerns.

Give me a second guys. *dons helmet*

Alright, flame away.

Of course it's true. That's why you haven't been flamed - and probably won't be (at least, not by anyone with a lick of sense).

Change is a defining characteristic of climates. The only places that don't have climate change are places that don't have climates (like the Moon).

[PaulConventionWV]

Sort of reminds me of this.....
http://www.geekologie.com/2012/03/21/daylight-savings-drought.jpg
http://www.geekologie.com/2012/03/ahahaha-daylight-savings-time-to-blame-f.php

That is one stupid man.

[truelies]

....................I dont know if it is true or not.

......................................

Its not- rapid climate change has often occurred in the past. Change so rapid that large critters with summer plants in their gut froze rock solid in siberian winter cold.

[Travlyr]

did somebody just confuse industrial hemp with recreational THC marijuana?

No, you just have bad reading skills. As a farmer, I know exactly what the difference is. Industrial hemp and recreational hemp both became legal in Colorado this year.

[Dr.3D]

Sarcasm eludes some people.
And some people see everything as sarcasm.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

It doesn't matter because the alarmists won't give up their modern day conveniences in the name of the environment. I think obviously the climate is affected by all the crap that is exhausted into the atmosphere. I don't think there's any argument the o-zone layer is damaged. A lot of people get skin cancer now.

Why I don't accept the climate change crap is because there is an ulterior motive, and that's to control and tax people even more to death. How the fuck is giving Al Gore our money going to fix the environment? It's not. The same interests who suddenly give a shit about the environment are the people who deliberately hold back technology in order to keep raking in that oil money, so fuck them.

[seraphson]

I don't argue with those people.. you have to stoop down to their level, and I find that to be quite agonizing.

Indeed, but it can be fun to explain stuff to no audience to feel better.

Example:"For once i would like the economy to be secondary issue to some of the biggest problems of our time. The degradation of the environment, the warming planet and over population."
(okay so I guess there's an audience here but if you see some guy seemingly yelling at no one on his way to work that's me)

This one's actually super easy. If this person understood the slightest sense of how our debt-based monetary system works with the perpetual and exponential need for higher levels of price, inflation, production, and consumption they would see that a corrected economy/monetary system would systemically reverberate throughout everything else in a healing manner. Savings would flourish, mass scale consumerism would reign in, solid non-bubbly sectors of production would grow, population would grow/shrink as the market calls, etc.

[Tpoints]

Colorado is going to debunk the climate change crap with hemp. Industrial hemp is the greenest plant known to humankind. Even the plastics made from the hemp plant are compostable.

so legalizing industrial hemp will debunk climate change?

[Travlyr]

so legalizing industrial hemp will debunk climate change?

Yes. Legalizing industrial hemp is a huge step forward to greening the planet.

[Tpoints]

Yes. Legalizing industrial hemp is a huge step forward to greening the planet.

what does greening the planet mean, and what does that have to do with whether climate change is true?

[Travlyr]

what does greening the planet mean, and what does that have to do with whether climate change is true?
Climate change is true. There is a 4 billion year history of it. Man made climate change is the bullshit story. Sure, humans impact the climate, but much less than other factors.

Industrial hemp is a green plant. It is green in color. It needs no pesticides or herbicides to grow. Industrial hemp grows roots 12 inches deep into the soil so it naturally protects the Earth from erosion. When it dies each year, it replenishes the soil with nutrients. The fibers that it grows are long fibers which make it conducive to high quality industrial products such as panels, paper, rope, canvas, insulation, plastics, reinforcement, food, medicine and many more. The plastics and paper made from Industrial hemp are compostable so they don't have to get thrown into a landfill. And there is a lot more good about industrial hemp. Too much good to post in this thread.

[QuickZ06]

Climate change is true. There is a 4 billion year history of it. Man made climate change is the bullshit story. Sure, humans impact the climate, but much less than other factors.

Industrial hemp is a green plant. It is green in color. It needs no pesticides or herbicides to grow. Industrial hemp grows roots 12 inches deep into the soil so it naturally protects the Earth from erosion. When it dies each year, it replenishes the soil with nutrients. The fibers that it grows are long fibers which make it conducive to high quality industrial products such as panels, paper, rope, canvas, insulation, plastics, reinforcement, food, medicine and many more. The plastics and paper made from Industrial hemp are compostable so they don't have to get thrown into a landfill. And there is a lot more good about industrial hemp. Too much good to post in this thread.

Good stuff, I did a report once on it and found out so many awesome things about hemp. Question, how safe is the plastic from hemp? 100% safe? No other outside products are needed to make plastic out of hemp and its oil?

[Tpoints]

Climate change is true. There is a 4 billion year history of it. Man made climate change is the bullshit story. Sure, humans impact the climate, but much less than other factors.

Industrial hemp is a green plant. It is green in color. It needs no pesticides or herbicides to grow. Industrial hemp grows roots 12 inches deep into the soil so it naturally protects the Earth from erosion. When it dies each year, it replenishes the soil with nutrients. The fibers that it grows are long fibers which make it conducive to high quality industrial products such as panels, paper, rope, canvas, insulation, plastics, reinforcement, food, medicine and many more. The plastics and paper made from Industrial hemp are compostable so they don't have to get thrown into a landfill. And there is a lot more good about industrial hemp. Too much good to post in this thread.

Climate change is true and man made climate change is bullshit....what does industrial hemp do to debunk either of these?

[Travlyr]

Good stuff, I did a report once on it and found out so many awesome things about hemp. Question, how safe is the plastic from hemp? 100% safe? No other outside products are needed to make plastic out of hemp and its oil?
Here is more information on hemp plastic.
Hemp Plastic. (http://www.hempplastic.com/index.html)

[Tpoints]

Good stuff, I did a report once on it and found out so many awesome things about hemp. Question, how safe is the plastic from hemp? 100% safe? No other outside products are needed to make plastic out of hemp and its oil?

what do you mean by safe? toxic to humans? or ability to insulate water and electricity?

[Travlyr]

Climate change is true and man made climate change is bullshit....what does industrial hemp do to debunk either of these?

Hemp is a good plant for the Earth. It has been illegal to grow for nearly 100 years. When it is grown again around the Earth, you will learn that the climate change alarmists were full of shit so that they could profit off of ignorance. They are lying to you while keeping the most green plant known to man illegal to grow.

[QuickZ06]

what do you mean by safe? toxic to humans? or ability to insulate water and electricity?

Certain plastics have certain things in them that is bad for us to be using.

[Natural Citizen]

No, you just have bad reading skills. As a farmer, I know exactly what the difference is. Industrial hemp and recreational hemp both became legal in Colorado this year.

Let's just remember why some want to keep it illegal. http://blog.world-mysteries.com/science/the-marijuana-conspiracy/

POT IS ILLEGAL BECAUSE BILLIONAIRES WANT TO REMAIN BILLIONAIRES.

http://blog.world-mysteries.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/marijuana_sql.gif

[Tpoints]

Let's just remember why some want to keep it illegal. http://blog.world-mysteries.com/science/the-marijuana-conspiracy/

POT IS ILLEGAL BECAUSE BILLIONAIRES WANT TO REMAIN BILLIONAIRES.

http://blog.world-mysteries.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/marijuana_sql.gif

wouldn't banning oil be even better?

[Tpoints]

Hemp is a good plant for the Earth. It has been illegal to grow for nearly 100 years. When it is grown again around the Earth, you will learn that the climate change alarmists were full of shit so that they could profit off of ignorance. They are lying to you while keeping the most green plant known to man illegal to grow.

"debunk the climate change crap", "Climate change is true.", "climate change alarmists were full of shit". what's the alarmists lying about?

[Travlyr]

"debunk the climate change crap", "Climate change is true.", "climate change alarmists were full of shit". what's the alarmists lying about?

That it is man made and there is nothing anyone can do about it except tax carbon footprints.

[Tpoints]

That it is man made and there is nothing anyone can do about it except tax carbon footprints.

Cite me one person who says there is nothing anyone can do about it except tax carbon footprints.

[Travlyr]

Al Gore

[Tod]

That is one stupid man.


Surely that was a sarcastic letter to the editor. Sounds like a blonde joke.

[Tpoints]

Al Gore

Quote? Also, would you say anybody who says there is something you can do about it, isn't full of shit?

[Occam's Banana]

Surely that was a sarcastic letter to the editor. Sounds like a blonde joke.

I dunno. If you ask me, the whole idea of Daylight Savings Time sounds like a blonde joke.

[John F Kennedy III]

Quote? Also, would you say anybody who says there is something you can do about it, isn't full of shit?

Why are you trolling bro?

[Henry Rogue]

Why are you trolling bro? s/he is an aggressive one. I guess some people think every post must be scrutinised.

[Natural Citizen]

wouldn't banning oil be even better?

Well. I'm of the idea that oil is abiotic. Which changes discussion a bit. In fact it changes discussion dramatically when we get into things like foreign policy, military spending versus defense spending....education. A few other hot topics as well.

For what it's worth though be assured that if Mother Earth ever gets tired of us she'll shake us off like a bad case of the fleas. ;)

[Natural Citizen]

Quote? Also, would you say anybody who says there is something you can do about it, isn't full of shit?
Here's the thing. Al Gore controversy is catered to a different demographic. And while they spin themselves six ways from Tuesday you have a completely different generation removed from that particular clusterfudge. Is brilliant, really, how they are pulling it off. Make no mistake about it. Your politicians are being asked of their view on the science ofthe matter even if we don't see that they are. And...not being asked by the politicos that folks think are asking. They are being asked by people who know what the heck they are talking about in scope.

Generational gap. Information gap. Threading the needle. Is brilliant.

Here's a good example. Even if Bill jumps around like a dweeb consider the demographic as well as education agenda moving forward. I always say it's all in the frequency. Folks are on different ones. That's a fact. The sheer number of views on this kind of information blows away the numbers viewing any Ron Paul video you can put up. Nothing against Ron, just using the stuff folks put up relative to him as an example.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHP9Rh-ooh0&list=UUR9sFzaG9Ia_kXJhfxtFMBA&index=5&feature =plcp

[Hiki]

Wow, it must be a HUUUGE conspiracy if every climate scientist.. You know, the "professors", are all lying about climate change.

[Travlyr]

Wow, it must be a HUUUGE conspiracy if every climate scientist.. You know, the "professors", are all lying about climate change.
The devil is in the details. If the climate scientists were really serious about climate change, then those "professors" would be petitioning heavily for legalizing industrial hemp. Growing industrial hemp lowers CO2 levels and delivers more oxygen per acre than trees.

http://hemp-technologies.com/page33/page33.html

Consider a few more facts about hemp:
• Hemp does not require herbicides or pesticides.
• Hemp can be grown in a wide range of latitudes and altitudes.
• Hemp replenishes soil with nutrients and nitrogen, making it an excellent rotational crop.
• Hemp controls erosion of the topsoil.
• Hemp converts CO2 to oxygen better than trees.
• Hemp produces more oil than any other crop, which can be used for food, fuel, lubricants, soaps, etc.
• Hemp nut is a very healthy food, being the highest protein crop (after soybean) and high in omega oils.
• Hemp can be used for making plastics, including car parts.
• Hemp makes paper more efficiently and ecologically than wood, requiring no chemical glues.
• Hemp can be used to make fiberboard.
• Hemp can be used to make paint.
• Hemp can produce bio-fuel and ethanol (better than corn).
• Hemp can be grown more than once per year.
• Hemp fibers can make very strong rope and textiles.

The "climate scientist professionals" either need to get serious about real solutions or quit lying.

[Dr.3D]

Wow, it must be a HUUUGE conspiracy if every climate scientist.. You know, the "professors", are all lying about climate change.
You need to know who is funding their research in order to know why they would lie to keep that funding.

[Hiki]

So it's a conspiracy because climatescientists are not advocating pot? You've got to be kidding me.

[thoughtomator]

So it's a conspiracy because climatescientists are not advocating pot? You've got to be kidding me.

No, it's a conspiracy because they were caught red-handed with scientific fraud in the key underlying work that allegedly supports global warming theory.

[Zippyjuan]

One should perhaps be aware that anti- warming funding is coming from the Koch Brothers and energy companies. http://www.businessinsider.com/koch-brothers-funded-study-proves-climate-change-2012-7

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/09/10/316176/exxon-climate-change-deniers/?mobile=nc


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/5720655/ExxonMobil-funds-climate-change-sceptics.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/24/tea-party-climate-change-deniers

[Hiki]

No, it's a conspiracy because they were caught red-handed with scientific fraud in the key underlying work that allegedly supports global warming theory.

You talking about Climategate? It's been debunked already http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/08/science/earth/08climate.html?hp

[Travlyr]

So it's a conspiracy because climatescientists are not advocating pot? You've got to be kidding me.

Industrial hemp is not pot.

[Hiki]

One should perhaps be aware that anti- warming funding is coming from the Koch Brothers and energy companies. http://www.businessinsider.com/koch-brothers-funded-study-proves-climate-change-2012-7

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/09/10/316176/exxon-climate-change-deniers/?mobile=nc


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/5720655/ExxonMobil-funds-climate-change-sceptics.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/24/tea-party-climate-change-deniers

Exactly. When I was a "climate-change-denier" I remember getting my information from some thinkthank, only to find out it was being funded by an oil company.

[Hiki]

Industrial hemp is not pot.

For crying out loud yes I know that I just used the word "pot" because I found it to be more striking and "funnier" but fine... Still doesn't change the point I was making.

[John F Kennedy III]

You talking about Climategate? It's been debunked already http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/08/science/earth/08climate.html?hp

http://newsjunkiepost.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Glenn-Beck-Joker.png

[Travlyr]

For crying out loud yes I know that I just used the word "pot" because I found it to be more striking and "funnier" but fine... Still doesn't change the point I was making.

It does not change my point either. Growing industrial hemp is a proven way to reduce CO2 and increase oxygen while delivering high quality Earth friendly products. If the climate alarmists were serious, then they would be all over greening the planet for real with the greenest plant known to humankind.

Do you believe the climate has been changing back and forth since the beginning?

[thoughtomator]

You talking about Climategate? It's been debunked already http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/08/science/earth/08climate.html?hp

If you think Climategate (I or II) has been debunked, you clearly have not gone to the source documents yourself, but rather are getting opinions spoon-fed to you by highly interested parties (such as the NYT, which LOVES "green" socialism).

[Danke]

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/climategate.html

[Hiki]

http://newsjunkiepost.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Glenn-Beck-Joker.png

http://gifwall.net/gif/gw-thejewsdidthis.gif

[Origanalist]

You talking about Climategate? It's been debunked already http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/08/science/earth/08climate.html?hp

"A British panel on Wednesday exonerated the scientists caught up in the controversy known as Climategate of charges that they had manipulated their research to support preconceived ideas about global warming. "

Well, that settles it then doesn't it? (busts out laughing)

[Hiki]

It does not change my point either. Growing industrial hemp is a proven way to reduce CO2 and increase oxygen while delivering high quality Earth friendly products. If the climate alarmists were serious, then they would be all over greening the planet for real with the greenest plant known to humankind.

Do you believe the climate has been changing back and forth since the beginning?

Well I'm sure that the majority of climate scientists have a very good reason to not be shouting "Legalize hemp!" into bullhorns as the first thing. I cant speak for them, ask them, send a letter to a scientific institute.

Yes I know that the climate has changed, but the fact is that pollution is having an effect on it, otherwise the whole scientific community wouldn't be running around talking about this problem.


If you think Climategate (I or II) has been debunked, you clearly have not gone to the source documents yourself, but rather are getting opinions spoon-fed to you by highly interested parties (such as the NYT, which LOVES "green" socialism).

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/global_warming_contrarians/debunking-misinformation-stolen-emails-climategate.html Not the NYT.

[NewRightLibertarian]

The experts say that we need more government controls to protect us from the big bad weather, and everyone who disagrees is a big bad racist holocaust denying extremist neanderthal.


Well I'm sure that the majority of climate scientists have a very good reason to not be shouting "Legalize hemp!" into bullhorns as the first thing.

Yep, and that very good reason is that they are in the pocket of the state.

[Tpoints]

The experts say that we need more government controls to protect us from the big bad weather, and everyone who disagrees is a big bad racist holocaust denying extremist neanderthal.

Yep, and that very good reason is that they are in the pocket of the state.

who are these experts?

[Danke]

http://www.climategate.com/

[NewRightLibertarian]

who are these experts?

The 'scientific consensus' that people like you get a hard on for.

[Tpoints]

No, it's a conspiracy because they were caught red-handed with scientific fraud in the key underlying work that allegedly supports global warming theory.

No, they were not. Climategate is not key underlying work that supports global warming theory, as people spoon fed by mainstream media and conspiracy theorists would like to believe.

[Hiki]

The 'scientific consensus' that people like you get a hard on for.

Yea, because, like, they're just some stupid "scientists" who went to college and shit, what do they know pfft http://gifwall.net/gif/gw-tumblrm3pjymTNbX1rpn610o3400.gif

It's funny how supposedly the scientists are "in the pocket of the state" but the "state" doesn't really do anything for it. Even Obama is talking about increasing coal- and oilproduction, when he's supposed to be in bed with the "bought-for" scientists.

[NewRightLibertarian]

It's funny how supposedly the scientists are "in the pocket of the state" but the "state" doesn't really do anything for it. Even Obama is talking about increasing coal- and oilproduction, when he's supposed to be in bed with the "bought-for" scientists.

He is, is he?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpTIhyMa-Nw

Your ignorance and confusion is immense. I suggest you quit while you're behind.

[thoughtomator]

Well I'm sure that the majority of climate scientists have a very good reason to not be shouting "Legalize hemp!" into bullhorns as the first thing. I cant speak for them, ask them, send a letter to a scientific institute.

Yes I know that the climate has changed, but the fact is that pollution is having an effect on it, otherwise the whole scientific community wouldn't be running around talking about this problem.


http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/global_warming_contrarians/debunking-misinformation-stolen-emails-climategate.html Not the NYT.

If you are truly that gullible - or worse, think we are - then you are going to have a rough time over here in this corner of the Internet.

[Origanalist]

Hmmm, Jews and hot dogs.......Hebrew National salesman?

[Tpoints]

Yea, because, like, they're just some stupid "scientists" who went to college and shit, what do they know pfft http://gifwall.net/gif/gw-tumblrm3pjymTNbX1rpn610o3400.gif

It's funny how supposedly the scientists are "in the pocket of the state" but the "state" doesn't really do anything for it. Even Obama is talking about increasing coal- and oilproduction, when he's supposed to be in bed with the "bought-for" scientists.

yeah, but that's because you don't understand how the REAL conspiracy works, see? Like they explained to you in the prop 37 thread, Monsanto pretends to be behind the labeling law, but they're in fact for it because they can use it in their favor. Obama is pretending to be pro-oil, pro-coal because he wants to keep American jobs, but he also wants to tax it more.

[Tpoints]

Yea, because, like, they're just some stupid "scientists" who went to college and shit, what do they know pfft

irony of this thread titled "climate alarmists are so uneducated".

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Yea, because, like, they're just some stupid "scientists" who went to college and shit, what do they know pfft http://gifwall.net/gif/gw-tumblrm3pjymTNbX1rpn610o3400.gif

It's funny how supposedly the scientists are "in the pocket of the state" but the "state" doesn't really do anything for it. Even Obama is talking about increasing coal- and oilproduction, when he's supposed to be in bed with the "bought-for" scientists.I need to know where this is from I can't stop laughing lol

[Dr.3D]

snip
It's funny how supposedly the scientists are "in the pocket of the state" but the "state" doesn't really do anything for it. Even Obama is talking about increasing coal- and oilproduction, when he's supposed to be in bed with the "bought-for" scientists.
So exactly who is funding these scientists? Check and you will find out the government has been doing a lot of the funding. The state doesn't really do anything for it? LOL....
These people don't want to lose their government funding.

[NewRightLibertarian]

So exactly who is funding these scientists? Check and you will find out the government has been doing a lot of the funding. The state doesn't really do anything for it? LOL....
These people don't want to lose their government funding.

Not to mention that they would be blackballed and have their careers ruined if they went against the state-approved consensus. Science is just as tainted by state influence as anything else.

[Henry Rogue]

Wow, it must be a HUUUGE conspiracy if every climate scientist.. You know, the "professors", are all lying about climate change.
Not a conspiracy per say, the science community and educational community is affected by financial and political actions. If you review history, the history of money, the history of science, the history of politics, even the history of how history is interpreted. Everything is interconnected. Everything affects everything else. Human action is evident in all. Science does not exist in a bubble. It is folly to accept the general consensus of scientist without some repudiation. It is folly to view anything in a bubble. An example, while An-Cap Principles make sense when viewed in a bubble, it is fanciful to think such a utopia is possible. It ignores the inherent human desire of some to control others and I am afraid the desire of some who want to be controlled. The actions of these will always work to undermine any attempt at implementation or even acceptance. The same can be said for communism. The implementation of communism will always be undermined by the human desire of some to be free of control. Even an economy of free markets is untenable we can only work to make markets as free as possible. Does theory follow evidence or does evidence follow theory? One thing in IMO is for sure the very human desires of the scientist and educators affects their actions.

[Hiki]

He is, is he?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpTIhyMa-Nw

Your ignorance and confusion is immense. I suggest you quit while you're behind.

Well I was meaning the debates where he talked a lot about "cleancoal" which is an impressive comment from a green-guy. But anyway if he tries to get rid of coal then good, I couldn't think of anything better.

[Travlyr]

So exactly who is funding these scientists? Check and you will find out the government has been doing a lot of the funding. The state doesn't really do anything for it? LOL....
These people don't want to lose their government funding.

These guys... among plenty of others.


August 30, 2012

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has selected the University of Colorado Boulder to continue a federal/academic partnership that extends NOAA’s ability to study climate change, improve weather models and better predict how solar storms can disrupt communication and navigation technologies.

The selection means that NOAA will continue funding the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, or CIRES, for at least five years and up to 10 more years. CIRES was established at CU-Boulder in 1967.

The amount of the award is contingent on the availability of funding in the federal budget, but NOAA anticipates that up to $32 million may be available annually. Total NOAA funding is variable from year to year and is based on the number of projects the university proposes and NOAA approves.

Following a competitive process, NOAA selected CU-Boulder to administer the CIRES partnership which leverages university resources to expand understanding of the “Earth system” -- the interrelationships among the atmosphere, oceans, land, living things and the sun’s energy.

“Improving our understanding of the Earth system is critically important as the build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is forcing changes in all of its processes,” said Robert Detrick, assistant administrator of the NOAA Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research and chairman of the NOAA Research Council. “The University of Colorado has been an excellent partner to NOAA in pursuing this mission.”

NOAA’s first cooperative institute, CIRES is marking its 45th anniversary this year and is now one of 18 NOAA cooperative institutes nationwide. NOAA competitively funds cooperative institutes at universities with strong research programs relevant to NOAA’s mission. These institutes provide resources and opportunities that extend beyond the agency’s own research capacity.

“Partnership in environmental research with the NOAA Boulder laboratories is the keystone of CIRES research,” said CIRES Interim Director William Lewis Jr. “We have great ambitions in joint research with NOAA over the next five years.”

The partnership allows researchers at CU-Boulder to receive support for research projects that may involve NOAA scientists, primarily at the Earth System Research Laboratory in Boulder as well as other NOAA cooperative institutes.

The CIRES partnership will focus on nine research themes:


Air quality in a changing environment
Climate forcing feedbacks and analysis
Earth systems dynamics, variability and change
Management and exploitation of geophysical data
Regional science and applications
Scientific outreach and education
Space weather understanding and predictability
Stratospheric processes and trends
Systems and prediction models development


“With pressing issues like air quality, climate change and space weather now at the forefront globally, the University of Colorado Boulder is eager to continue this crucial partnership with NOAA,” said CU-Boulder Vice Chancellor for Research Stein Sture. “CIRES is known around the world for advancing our understanding of the complex Earth system and as a premier institution in educating the next generation of environmental scientists.”

NOAA supports cooperative institutes to conduct research, education, training and outreach aligned with its mission. Cooperative institutes also promote the involvement of students and postdoctoral scientists in NOAA-funded research. This unique setting provides NOAA the benefit of working with the complementary capabilities of a research institution that contribute to NOAA-related sciences ranging from satellite climatology and fisheries biology to atmospheric chemistry and coastal ecology.

For more information on CIRES visit http://cires.colorado.edu/. For more information on NOAA Cooperative Institutes visit http://www.nrc.noaa.gov/ci.

William Lewis Jr., 303-492-6378
William.Lewis@colorado.edu
Stein Sture, 303-492-2890
Stein.Sture@colorado.edu
Jane Palmer, CIRES media relations, 303-492-6289
Jane.Palmer@colorado.edu

[Origanalist]

Well I was meaning the debates where he talked a lot about "cleancoal" which is an impressive comment from a green-guy. But anyway if he tries to get rid of coal then good, I couldn't think of anything better.

How does one "get rid of coal"? Bury it in the ground?

[Tpoints]

So exactly who is funding these scientists? Check and you will find out the government has been doing a lot of the funding. The state doesn't really do anything for it? LOL....
These people don't want to lose their government funding.

Climate research isn't the only scientific research that depends on government or public funding, but it's the only time people will say "therefore they must be wrong". I bet if they were funded privately, the same people will complain "they're just funding it so they can sell you solutions". These people NEVER provide a better researched alternative. And before you spout "I can find you those scientists", read and note : 1) they are no more independent than the alleged alarmist ones 2) they do not have independent data or alternative conclusions, they just say they doubt the conclusions other people have come to.

[Tpoints]

How does one "get rid of coal"? Bury it in the ground?

make it illegal. Or tax it to death.

[Dr.3D]

How does one "get rid of coal"? Bury it in the ground?
Na, dig it up and ship it to China. They will burn it anyway.

[Travlyr]

How does one "get rid of coal"? Bury it in the ground?

Lolz... either that or burn it all up.

[Origanalist]

make it illegal. Or tax it to death.

Nice, now I know what I'm dealing with here.

[Hiki]

So exactly who is funding these scientists? Check and you will find out the government has been doing a lot of the funding. The state doesn't really do anything for it? LOL....
These people don't want to lose their government funding.

You could make the same argument about cancer researchers. All that propaganda about cigarettes and cancer? That's just a scare tactic to generate work for medical researchers.

See how silly that sounds? And it's no less silly when applied to climate-scientists.

[Tpoints]

Nice, now I know what I'm dealing with here.

I didn't say I wanted it, I was just telling you how it can be done.

[Origanalist]

Na, dig it up and ship it to China. They will burn it anyway.

And maybe we could pay off the national debt........

[Tpoints]

You could make the same argument about cancer researchers. All that propaganda about cigarettes and cancer? That's just a scare tactic to generate work for medical researchers.

See how silly that sounds? And it's no less silly when applied to climate-scientists.

Exactly! Except they won't see how silly it sounds. People who hold such beliefs eventually have to choose one of two routes

1. Everything government funded is a conspiracy (or any research is, since if no government only the rich corporations would do it)
2. Not everything is, but they can tell you why climate is (or of their choosing, cancer, AIDS, space exploration...etc)

[Hiki]

How does one "get rid of coal"? Bury it in the ground?

Like this: http://gifwall.net/gif/gw-70sshowredpajoiss.gif

[Origanalist]

I didn't say I wanted it, I was just telling you how it can be done.

Really?


But anyway if he tries to get rid of coal then good, I couldn't think of anything better.

[Origanalist]

//

[Tpoints]

Really?

I didn't say that. did I?

[Origanalist]

Circle jerk time.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Circle jerk time.I brought tissues http://i1011.photobucket.com/albums/af236/XANOLOXPWNSU/-rlv_zazzle_com-awesome_smiley_phot.jpg

[Hiki]

Really?

Yes. Coal is an ancient and polluting/dirty form of energy for the planet and humans. It's about time we move on in technology. It's like instead of electric-trains we still had Thomas and the Tank running the show.

[Dr.3D]

Climate research isn't the only scientific research that depends on government or public funding, but it's the only time people will say "therefore they must be wrong". I bet if they were funded privately, the same people will complain "they're just funding it so they can sell you solutions". These people NEVER provide a better researched alternative. And before you spout "I can find you those scientists", read and note : 1) they are no more independent than the alleged alarmist ones 2) they do not have independent data or alternative conclusions, they just say they doubt the conclusions other people have come to.
Oh come on now.... Cancer research is more publicly funded. Now do you suppose if they found a cure for cancer they would actually publish it? No... if they did that, they would lose their funding and their jobs.

[Origanalist]

Are you two sure you didn't stumble out of the Al Gore Statist Forest and ended up here by mistake?

[Hiki]

Oh come on now.... Cancer research is more publicly funded. Now do you suppose if they found a cure for cancer they would actually publish it? No... if they did that, they would lose their funding and their jobs.

Oh my god...

And there is a cure for cancer, pot.

[Zippyjuan]

So exactly who is funding these scientists? Check and you will find out the government has been doing a lot of the funding. The state doesn't really do anything for it? LOL....
These people don't want to lose their government funding.

As I posted earlier, who is funding the anti- climate change side? Exon Mobile. BP. Royal Dutch Shell. The Koch Brothers.

[Danke]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/forumdisplay.php?127-Stop-Global-Warming-Fraud

[Tpoints]

Are you two sure you didn't stumble out of the Al Gore Statist Forest and ended up here by mistake?

yep. have you realized that I never said I wanted to get rid of coal, and the quote you put about "can't think of anything better" isn't from me?

[Tpoints]

As I posted earlier, who is funding the anti- climate change side? Exon Mobile. BP. Royal Dutch Shell. The Koch Brothers.

yeah, but they don't want to tax or control us, so they're good guys and they're not lying.

[Hiki]

Are you two sure you didn't stumble out of the Al Gore Statist Forest and ended up here by mistake?

No. If you look closely you can see that I joined in 2008 and have been a fan of Ron Paul ever since, although I have drifted a bit away from some of his positions.

And Al Gore is a greedy politician, no doubt about that (as P&T showed). He's still right though.

[Tpoints]

Oh come on now.... Cancer research is more publicly funded. Now do you suppose if they found a cure for cancer they would actually publish it? No... if they did that, they would lose their funding and their jobs.

I see. So the medications we have today just popped out of nowhere. Because they couldn't have come from public funding, that killed the researcher's jobs, and it couldn't have come from private for profit research, because people would quickly realize they're a scam. Your claim that publishing a cure will lose their jobs depends on another assumption : that publishing a scientifically sound cure doesn't offer better rewards than the research funding. This is like saying a plumber or repairman doesn't want to fix your problem, because that'll take away his job, but what if he was paid more to fix the problem permanently and yanked out of the profession if he was incompetent?

[Origanalist]

yep. have you realized that I never said I wanted to get rid of coal, and the quote you put about "can't think of anything better" isn't from me?

Sorry 'bout that.....

[Dr.3D]

As I posted earlier, who is funding the anti- climate change side? Exon Mobile. BP. Royal Dutch Shell. The Koch Brothers.
So you would expect them to just sit on their hands while the government attempts to tax them out of business?

[Hiki]

So you would expect them to just sit on their hands while the government attempts to tax them out of business?

A business that isn't good for anyones health nor the environment, not to mention that they are just wrong based on their publications.

There isn't two sides to every coin on every issue.

If oil companies go out of business and they're replaced with something better and sustainable, I'd call that a win-win.

[Dr.3D]

A business that isn't good for anyones health nor the environment, not to mention that they are just wrong based on their publications.

There isn't two sides to every coin on every issue.
I'd say, you better buy a horse.

[Hiki]

I'd say, you better buy a horse.

I'll buy myself a Tesla Model S as soon as I can afford one.

[Danke]

Are you two sure you didn't stumble out of the Al Gore Statist Forest and ended up here by mistake?


Sea Level Rising? Gore Buys Multi-Million Dollar Oceanfront Mansion

James M. Taylor, J.D. –
James M. Taylor –
April 30, 2010

One of the benefits of federalism is citizens can vote with their feet in choosing a state whose governance matches their world view. One of the benefits for Al Gore earning countless millions of dollars selling global warming alarm is Gore’s ability to buy property anywhere, and vote on what is and isn’t an imminent environmental crisis based on his real estate selection.

Al Gore may tell gullible followers that rising sea level threatens to swamp global coastlines, but his recent purchase of an $8 million oceanfront mansion in tony Montecito, California, tells another story altogether. Prudent property investors do not purchase multi-million dollar oceanfront mansions if they truly expect them to be underwater soon.

But Gore’s choice of oceanfront property is just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak. According to the Montecito Journal, Gore’s new mansion sprawls over 1.5 acres (“we all need to reduce our ecological footprint”); contains fountains, a spa, and a swimming pool (even though Southern California is water starved, and alarmists tell us global warming will cause more severe drought and water restrictions); and contains six – count them, six – fireplaces (because burning carbon-intensive wood in only five fire places at once simply won’t do when entertaining Hollywood friends).

When Enron executives touted their climate-friendly energy production while simultaneously bailing out of the company on golden parachutes, people should have taken notice. When Al Gore tells Americans we must stave off climate catastrophe by purchasing renewable power and carbon offset credits from companies he owns, and at the same time Gore purchases an oceanfront mansion with over-the-top water usage and half a dozen fireplaces, people should again take notice.

[Tpoints]

Sea Level Rising? Gore Buys Multi-Million Dollar Oceanfront Mansion

James M. Taylor, J.D. –
James M. Taylor –
April 30, 2010

One of the benefits of federalism is citizens can vote with their feet in choosing a state whose governance matches their world view. One of the benefits for Al Gore earning countless millions of dollars selling global warming alarm is Gore’s ability to buy property anywhere, and vote on what is and isn’t an imminent environmental crisis based on his real estate selection.

Al Gore may tell gullible followers that rising sea level threatens to swamp global coastlines, but his recent purchase of an $8 million oceanfront mansion in tony Montecito, California, tells another story altogether. Prudent property investors do not purchase multi-million dollar oceanfront mansions if they truly expect them to be underwater soon.

But Gore’s choice of oceanfront property is just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak. According to the Montecito Journal, Gore’s new mansion sprawls over 1.5 acres (“we all need to reduce our ecological footprint”); contains fountains, a spa, and a swimming pool (even though Southern California is water starved, and alarmists tell us global warming will cause more severe drought and water restrictions); and contains six – count them, six – fireplaces (because burning carbon-intensive wood in only five fire places at once simply won’t do when entertaining Hollywood friends).

When Enron executives touted their climate-friendly energy production while simultaneously bailing out of the company on golden parachutes, people should have taken notice. When Al Gore tells Americans we must stave off climate catastrophe by purchasing renewable power and carbon offset credits from companies he owns, and at the same time Gore purchases an oceanfront mansion with over-the-top water usage and half a dozen fireplaces, people should again take notice.

could he have bought it with an expensive insurance policy to scam them for profit like Silverstein did with WTC?

[Danke]

http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html

[Dr.3D]

I'll buy myself a Tesla Model S as soon as I can afford one.
Yeah.... like the majority of people are going to be able to afford one of those.

[Zippyjuan]

So you would expect them to just sit on their hands while the government attempts to tax them out of business?

Just indicating that they have their biases as well.

As a side note, I don't own a car myself. No horse either.

[Tpoints]

Yeah.... like the majority of people are going to be able to afford one of those.

Like I care about the majority of the people.

[Dr.3D]

Just indicating that they have their biases as well.

As a side note, I don't own a car myself. No horse either.
So would I if I were being slandered.

[Dr.3D]

Like I care about the majority of the people.
figures

Suppose you would charge it with sunshine and rainbows too.

[Natural Citizen]

There are some rather brilliant folks in various fields of science who do make some logical points. And as far as any of them supporting pot, well...some do. Some whom I highly respect in their respective fields. And they don't yap about industrializing it they squawk about schmokin it. Is a hoot.

[Hiki]

Sea Level Rising? Gore Buys Multi-Million Dollar Oceanfront Mansion

James M. Taylor, J.D. –
James M. Taylor –
April 30, 2010

One of the benefits of federalism is citizens can vote with their feet in choosing a state whose governance matches their world view. One of the benefits for Al Gore earning countless millions of dollars selling global warming alarm is Gore’s ability to buy property anywhere, and vote on what is and isn’t an imminent environmental crisis based on his real estate selection.

Al Gore may tell gullible followers that rising sea level threatens to swamp global coastlines, but his recent purchase of an $8 million oceanfront mansion in tony Montecito, California, tells another story altogether. Prudent property investors do not purchase multi-million dollar oceanfront mansions if they truly expect them to be underwater soon.

But Gore’s choice of oceanfront property is just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak. According to the Montecito Journal, Gore’s new mansion sprawls over 1.5 acres (“we all need to reduce our ecological footprint”); contains fountains, a spa, and a swimming pool (even though Southern California is water starved, and alarmists tell us global warming will cause more severe drought and water restrictions); and contains six – count them, six – fireplaces (because burning carbon-intensive wood in only five fire places at once simply won’t do when entertaining Hollywood friends).

When Enron executives touted their climate-friendly energy production while simultaneously bailing out of the company on golden parachutes, people should have taken notice. When Al Gore tells Americans we must stave off climate catastrophe by purchasing renewable power and carbon offset credits from companies he owns, and at the same time Gore purchases an oceanfront mansion with over-the-top water usage and half a dozen fireplaces, people should again take notice.

Like I said, he's a rich douche. And also, the mansion isn't on the shoreline, it's on the hills...

[vienna]

i guess it's out of question that the earth is warming.
there is a question whether this effect was caused (in parts) by humans.
and what science tells us is that there is strong evidence.
you can reproduce the greenhouse effect of co2 in the atmosphere in a laboratory.

[Natural Citizen]

i guess it's out of question that the earth is warming.

Nope. Not at all. In fact, I'm a firm believer that our shenanigans are helping it along. The problem is that average joe's just can't get passed the political spew pertaining to the discussion and on to the actual science of the matter. Is why I'm profoundly sincere in my belief that genuine science must remain separate from politics.

The correct talking points can never become part of practical discussion as long as we're yapping about the illusion of the issue as opposed to the actual issue and the actual science it involves..

[vienna]

measuring the temperature and calculating the average temperature over a given periode has nothing to do with politics.
it's just like it is. it's not even rocket science.

[vienna]

here's a useful discussion to watch:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hCRafyV0zI

[Tpoints]

measuring the temperature and calculating the average temperature over a given periode has nothing to do with politics.
it's just like it is. it's not even rocket science.

you've never been arrested for drug possession and the police puts their finger on the scale to up your alleged quantity?

[Natural Citizen]

measuring the temperature and calculating the average temperature over a given periode has nothing to do with politics.
it's just like it is. it's not even rocket science.

Meh. Rocket science is easy. It's just so...yesterday. Don't know why everyone always equates what is perceived to be difficult discussion with rocket science. Yer talking linkin logs with the rocket science speak.

[Natural Citizen]

Not a conspiracy per say, the science community and educational community is affected by financial and political actions. If you review history, the history of money, the history of science, the history of politics, even the history of how history is interpreted. Everything is interconnected. Everything affects everything else. Human action is evident in all. Science does not exist in a bubble. It is folly to accept the general consensus of scientist without some repudiation. It is folly to view anything in a bubble. An example, while An-Cap Principles make sense when viewed in a bubble, it is fanciful to think such a utopia is possible. It ignores the inherent human desire of some to control others and I am afraid the desire of some who want to be controlled. The actions of these will always work to undermine any attempt at implementation or even acceptance. The same can be said for communism. The implementation of communism will always be undermined by the human desire of some to be free of control. Even an economy of free markets is untenable we can only work to make markets as free as possible. Does theory follow evidence or does evidence follow theory? One thing in IMO is for sure the very human desires of the scientist and educators affects their actions.

Speaking of rocket science, what did you ever come up with on those two white papers I shared with you, Henry? You never did get back with anything on it.

[Danke]

measuring the temperature and calculating the average temperature over a given periode has nothing to do with politics.
it's just like it is. it's not even rocket science.

Depends how the measurements have been taken. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/29/press-release-2/

[Danke]

http://www.theboywhocriedwarming.com/

[vienna]

well. the us is not the only country which measures it's temperatures.
the ways of measuring are of course taken into account.
the people on the max planck institute or wherever they do this stuff aren't beginners and of course their thesis are out there being constantly discussed by other scientists.
anyway ... if you measure the temperature constantly with the same satellite or on the ground with the same instruments you'll get the result of a warming atmosphere.

[thoughtomator]

measuring the temperature and calculating the average temperature over a given periode has nothing to do with politics.
it's just like it is. it's not even rocket science.

You would think so, but it turns out there's trillions of dollars in coming out with the politically correct answer.

Government-funded science is rarely actual science (unless you consider "securing continuous and/or perpetual funding" to be a science) and can never be trusted.

[Natural Citizen]

well. the us is not the only country which measures it's temperatures.
the ways of measuring are of course taken into account.
the people on the max planck institute or wherever they do this stuff aren't beginners and of course their thesis are out there being constantly discussed by other scientists.
anyway ... if you measure the temperature constantly with the same satellite or on the ground with the same instruments you'll get the result of a warming atmosphere.

Yes but I heard Bill O'reilly say he debunked that model because they put the sensors on the ground next to industrial air conditioners in the city. Seriously. He said that. :rolleyes:

[vienna]

there are also trillions of dollars for comming out with the politically incorrect answer.

but scienetists have to prove their theories with arguments. which later are discussed within a huge comunity all over the world.
not just in the us.
some of einsteins theories have been dismissed. and the same happened to other theories.

but the best explanation is the one which wins the argument. and that's where we are right now.
and measuring the temperature is not as hard as finding the higgs boson.

this thing here reminds me a bit of the evolution discussion in the us.

maybe not everything is known yet. but that doesn't mean that nothing is known.

[Danke]

http://howcanpeoplebesostupid.com/the-skeptics-handbook-ii-global-bullies-want-your-money-991

[Origanalist]

http://howcanpeoplebesostupid.com/the-skeptics-handbook-ii-global-bullies-want-your-money-991

No,no,you don't understand. It's only us unedumacated rubes that don't go along with giving ever more control to teh gubmint to save the planet.

[Natural Citizen]

there are also trillions of dollars for comming out with the politically incorrect answer.

but scienetists have to prove their theories with arguments. which later are discussed within a huge comunity all over the world.
not just in the us.
some of einsteins theories have been dismissed. and the same happened to other theories.

but the best explanation is the one which wins the argument. and that's where we are right now.
and measuring the temperature is not as hard as finding the higgs boson.

this thing here reminds me a bit of the evolution discussion in the us.

maybe not everything is known yet. but that doesn't mean that nothing is known.

Vienna...I like your persistence. Is a rare thing.

So...here...have a good once over on what we really might oughtta be figgerin on. Start at 17:40 mark. Don't worry...it's not long. In fact the relevance lasts only a few minutes. Just up to about the 25:00 mark will do.Of course, you may even want to watch the whole thing too so...bookmark it. Who Speaks For Earth is the episode.

17:40...;) Some of us have been doing this for a looowng time, me lad. Progress is a slow maneuver.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6C9taivF40

[vienna]

whatever ... it's one thing to acknowledge the most accurate explanation for the increase of the average temperature on the planet.
it's another thing to draw political conclusions of it.

anyway ... i'm not into fatalism ... being pragmatic seems to me a way to deal with this issue.
that doesn't mean of course to ignore it.

[Henry Rogue]

Nope. Not at all. In fact, I'm a firm believer that our shenanigans are helping it along. The problem is that average joe's just can't get passed the political spew pertaining to the discussion and on to the actual science of the matter. Is why I'm profoundly sincere in my belief that genuine science must remain separate from politics.

The correct talking points can never become part of practical discussion as long as we're yapping about the illusion of the issue as opposed to the actual issue and the actual science it involves..
I don't believe a pure separation is attainable, but I'm willing to try, along with seperation of economy and state and education and state.

[Travlyr]

It is one thing to claim climate change is anthropologic without scientific proof of it or that the change is even abnormal. It is quite another to claim that raising taxes and/or basing an entire world economy and global control over people will fix it.

That is especially true if growing CO2 levels are claimed to be the culprit and legalizing the most Earth friendly CO2 consuming plant known to humankind is not one of the offered solutions.

Something is shady there. However, perhaps Al Gore has it right. An oceanside estate would be fun. Scheming the people seems to be the way of the modern world.

[Hiki]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReNUJ3c1k68

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OwFSLm4pII&feature=related

[vienna]

It is one thing to claim climate change is anthropologic without scientific proof of it or that the change is even abnormal. It is quite another to claim that raising taxes and/or basing an entire world economy and global control over people will fix it.

That is especially true if growing CO2 levels are claimed to be the culprit and legalizing the most Earth friendly CO2 consuming plant known to humankind is not one of the offered solutions.

Something is shady there. However, perhaps Al Gore has it right. An oceanside estate would be fun. Scheming the people seems to be the way of the modern world.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hCRafyV0zI

[Travlyr]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hCRafyV0zI

I just watched that and Steven Snyder was not very convincing. Legalizing industrial hemp farming might quite easily consume 3% CO2. He never offered it as a solution at all.

[Hiki]

It is one thing to claim climate change is anthropologic without scientific proof of it or that the change is even abnormal. It is quite another to claim that raising taxes and/or basing an entire world economy and global control over people will fix it.

That is especially true if growing CO2 levels are claimed to be the culprit and legalizing the most Earth friendly CO2 consuming plant known to humankind is not one of the offered solutions.

Something is shady there. However, perhaps Al Gore has it right. An oceanside estate would be fun. Scheming the people seems to be the way of the modern world.

If your whole argument against climatechange is based on scientists not advocating pot, then seriously... Send email to a notable climate scientist and ask him/her why he doesn't speak for pot.

e. Send email to Steven Snyder and ask him about pot.

[Natural Citizen]

I don't believe a pure separation is attainable, but I'm willing to try, along with seperation of economy and state and education and state.

Ah, man. The separation exists now, Henry. That's the beauty of it. I'd like to keep it that way for the time being while all of this other speak is going on as if it were actually relevant to science...which it isn't. More relevant to popular opinion or some politically correct illusion of what science should be understood to be.The rest of your scribble will work itself out. It must by default understanding the fact that the previous separation does actually exist for the time being.

[Travlyr]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReNUJ3c1k68

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OwFSLm4pII&feature=related
Bill Maher is not a credible source of information.

[vienna]

I just watched that and Steven Snyder was not very convincing. Legalizing industrial hemp farming might quite easily consume 3% CO2. He never offered it as a solution at all.
not very convincing on what basis? on your gut feeling on hemp?

[Travlyr]

If your whole argument against climatechange is based on scientists not advocating pot, then seriously... Send email to a notable climate scientist and ask him/her why he doesn't speak for pot.

e. Send email to Steven Snyder and ask him about pot.

Industrial hemp is not pot. See thread title.

[Hiki]

Industrial hemp is not pot. See thread title.

For the 2nd time I like using the word "pot".

[vienna]

look ... if you feel that strongly about hemp then do your research and publish a paper. you'll be famous and rich.

[Natural Citizen]

It is one thing to claim climate change is anthropologic without scientific proof of it or that the change is even abnormal. It is quite another to claim that raising taxes and/or basing an entire world economy and global control over people will fix it.

That is especially true if growing CO2 levels are claimed to be the culprit and legalizing the most Earth friendly CO2 consuming plant known to humankind is not one of the offered solutions.

Something is shady there. However, perhaps Al Gore has it right. An oceanside estate would be fun. Scheming the people seems to be the way of the modern world.

By controlling the terms of controversy themselves and by means of legalizing it under the control of the pharmaceutical industry alone, this ensures that patents will be developed to undermine it's industrialization elsewhere. MSM has been supporting this aspect of legalization but it isn't so much legalization as it is opening up the door for the monsantos of the world to reconfigger it's very being, change the rules to accomadate and then legally and forever without a word otherwise refer to it as a drug.

[Travlyr]

not very convincing on what basis? on your gut feeling on hemp?

Not a gut feeling; he didn't have the facts. All he presented was a talk. Talk is cheap. I have researched industrial hemp for years. It consumes more CO2 per acre than trees and it would most certainly help the environment in multiple ways. To ignore it as a solution is completely disingenuous.

http://hemp-technologies.com/

[Travlyr]

For the 2nd time I like using the word "pot".

Yeah, because it is funny and cute and distorts the argument.

[Hiki]

Not a gut feeling; he didn't have the facts. All he presented was a talk. Talk is cheap. I have researched industrial hemp for years. It consumes more CO2 per acre than trees and it would most certainly help the environment in multiple ways. To ignore it as a solution is complete disingenuous.

http://hemp-technologies.com/

Like vienna said, take your researches to the univerisites and scientific institutes, I'm sure you'll get credit for this world-saving fact.

[Hiki]

Yeah, because it is funny and cute and distorts the argument.

I'm not arguing against pot, believe me. I know of its benefits from CO2 to medical use and from personal experience the great recreational aspect.

[Natural Citizen]

look ... if you feel that strongly about hemp then do your research and publish a paper. you'll be famous and rich.

Yes, but that's not how folks do things around here. They try to share ideas with others in a manner that would perhaps help along a common notion. Divided at times, for sure, but he makes some excellent points. At least I think so. Sometimes you just have to agree to disagree, I guess.

[vienna]

it consumes more co2 per what? per plant or per square meter of it's surface or ...?

and how much hemp would you need to balance the output of man made co2? and how much woods/greenland/... would you have to cut down to grow all that hemp?
and what happens if the hemp decomposes ... and sets the co2 free again ...

anyway ... i don't think mr. schneider ever touched that sort of argument. which has really not much of a point in my opinion. he talks about the things we can measure and nothing else.

[Travlyr]

it consumes more co2 per what? per plant or per square meter of it's surface or ...?

and how much hemp would you need to balance the output of man made co2? and how much woods/greenland/... would you have to cut down to grow all that hemp?
and what happens if the hemp decomposes ... and sets the co2 free again ...

anyway ... i don't think mr. schneider ever touched that sort of argument. which has really not much of a point in my opinion. he talks about the things we can measure and nothing else.

Commercial hemp is a very Earth friendly plant. No trees would have to be cut down ... it will save trees.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZvFE53JzDk&feature=related
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZvFE53JzDk&feature=related

[Zippyjuan]

When you burn a plant or it decays, it releases all of the CO2 it absorbed while it was living so that is not really any significant number to use for anything. And they also release CO2 at night.
http://tiee.esa.org/vol/v6/experiment/soil_respiration/description.html

Decomposition is also important because it is part of the global carbon cycle. The carbon cycle is the cyclical movement of carbon atoms from the atmosphere to the biosphere/lithosphere and back to the atmosphere (Figure 1). In the atmosphere, carbon is in the form of carbon dioxide gas. Through the process of photosynthesis, some of that carbon is converted into organic carbon which makes up organic matter or biomass. Plants and animals perform cellular respiration and convert a small percentage of that organic carbon back to CO2.


A larger portion of that organic carbon in plants is transferred to the soil when plants shed their leaves or when they die. Decomposers then begin their work of breaking down the organic matter. Some of the organic carbon in the organic matter is converted into CO2 which is released into the soil pore spaces leading to relatively high concentrations of CO2 compared to the atmosphere. This difference in concentration causes CO2 to diffuse from the soil to the atmosphere. This movement or flux of CO2 is known as CO2 emission (Figure 1).


Decomposition is not the only source of CO2 in soil. In a forest or grassland ecosystem, plant roots are abundant in the soil and root cells perform cellular respiration, metabolizing carbohydrates that are sent down from the leaves. This CO2 is released to the soil and can be responsible for anywhere between 0 and 60% of a soil’s CO2 emission. Note that CO2 emission is the movement of CO2 from soil to the atmosphere, whereas decomposition and root respiration are processes that produce CO2 in the soil (Figure 2).




Over its lifespan, it is carbon neutral- absorbing it while alive, releasing it after it dies. This is true for all plants.

[vienna]

i don't know about hemp and it's relative and absolute amount of consumption of co2. or an oak tree or whatever ...
but i know that an average tree has much more surface than hemp and therefore, without having it checked, i'm quite sure that in absolute terms it'll consume more co2. allthough hemp may consume in relative terms more of it.

but if you are sure about your thesis then do the maths and throw your arguments into the arena of scientific discussion.

[Occam's Banana]

Wow, it must be a HUUUGE conspiracy if every climate scientist.. You know, the "professors", are all lying about climate change.

No recourse to "consipracy" is needed to understand why it is in the interest of court intellectuals to push the State's desired understanding or interpretation of things.

That is their job: push the current pro-State party line "consensus" - or concoct new ones that redound to the advantage of their benefactor & paymaster, the State.

It's not consipiracy - it's just the intelligentsia doing what the intelligentsia has always done - and always will do.

[Danke]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100058265/us-physics-professor-global-warming-is-the-greatest-and-most-successful-pseudoscientific-fraud-i-have-seen-in-my-long-life/

[Travlyr]

i don't know about hemp and it's relative and absolute amount of consumption of co2. or an oak tree or whatever ...
but i know that an average tree has much more surface than hemp and therefore, without having it checked, i'm quite sure that in absolute terms it'll consume more co2. allthough hemp may consume in relative terms more of it.

but if you are sure about your thesis then do the maths and throw your arguments into the arena of scientific discussion.

I'll leave that up to them. I figure that the scientific community is smarter than just some guy on the Internet, so I don't have any faith that they are being honest. They fool the people in order to tax them more and keep the research funds flowing.

When you do find the time to study hemp, you will learn that industrial hemp reduces the building industries carbon footprint dramatically. Hemp textile makes more durable clothes than cotton and more comfortable too so hemp clothes are of higher quality. The plastic panels that are made from hemp for cars don't dent like metal so fender benders become a thing of the past. The plastics made from hemp for food storage and product wrapping are non toxic and biodegradable resulting in less landfill pollution. Hemp grows without the need for pesticides or insecticides and uses less water than cotton or corn to produce a crop. The roots hold the soil together which helps prevent soil erosion. The nutrients it places back into the soil make it great for a rotation crop. It is a food, a medicine, a building material, industrial materials, clothes, and very Earth friendly. I am sure the scientific community knows all that.

That is why the title of this thread is, "Climate Alarmists Are So Uneducated" The alarmists fear monger for taxes and government research grants. Education is the key.

[Origanalist]

No recourse to "consipracy" is needed to understand why it is in the interest of court intellectuals to push the State's desired understanding or interpretation of things.

That is their job: push the current pro-State party line "consensus" - or concoct new ones that redound to the advantage of their benefactor & paymaster, the State.

It's not consipiracy - it's just the intelligentsia doing what the intelligentsia has always done - and always will do.

Bingo.

[Origanalist]

Not to mention that they would be blackballed and have their careers ruined if they went against the state-approved consensus. Science is just as tainted by state influence as anything else.

I do remember reading about this kind of thing more than a couple of times. Go with the flow, don't rock the boat or else.

[Dr.3D]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROGTV7GkWAE

[Danke]

Climate Change Is Interplanetary - Earth Not Only Planet Heating Up!

Our space probes must be emitting Global Warming gases...

[Dr.3D]

Our space probes must be emitting Global Warming gases...
Another reason to stop funding NASA.

[HOLLYWOOD]

Will the Nations stop launching rockets? I knew all those space shuttle launches would cook our atmosphere!

Al Gore for Carbon ManBearPig lifeform of the last 11,000 years!

[Origanalist]

Will the Nations stop launching rockets? I knew all those space shuttle launches would cook our atmosphere!

Al Gore for Carbon ManBearPig lifeform of the last 11,000 years!

http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs14/f/2007/115/8/4/Manbearpig_by_dizzia.jpg

[Henry Rogue]

LOL What the he!! is that? I should make that my avatar.^

[Origanalist]

LOL What the he!! is that? I should make that my avatar.^

It's the dreaded Manbearpig.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xf69EEL3WBk

Full episode.......http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s10e06-manbearpig

[Occam's Banana]

http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs14/f/2007/115/8/4/Manbearpig_by_dizzia.jpg (http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs14/f/2007/115/8/4/Manbearpig_by_dizzia.jpg])
I should probably have neg-repped you for that instead ... considering the bolt-upright, screaming nightmares I'm going to be having now ...

[Origanalist]

I should probably have neg-repped you for that instead ... considering the bolt-upright, screaming nightmares I'm going to be having now ...

:D

[Tpoints]

If your whole argument against climatechange is based on scientists not advocating pot, then seriously... Send email to a notable climate scientist and ask him/her why he doesn't speak for pot.

e. Send email to Steven Snyder and ask him about pot.

hate to break it to you, but Stephen Schneider has been dead for 2 years.

[John F Kennedy III]

Well I was meaning the debates where he talked a lot about "cleancoal" which is an impressive comment from a green-guy. But anyway if he tries to get rid of coal then good, I couldn't think of anything better.

Why do we need to get rid of coal?

[John F Kennedy III]

make it illegal. Or tax it to death.

In Communist Amerika...

[Tpoints]

In Communist Amerika...

I was just answering how it can be done, never said I wanted it.

[John F Kennedy III]

Exactly! Except they won't see how silly it sounds. People who hold such beliefs eventually have to choose one of two routes

1. Everything government funded is a conspiracy (or any research is, since if no government only the rich corporations would do it)
2. Not everything is, but they can tell you why climate is (or of their choosing, cancer, AIDS, space exploration...etc)

What about poor corporations?

[Tpoints]

What about poor corporations?

Poor corporations fund quacks and conspiracy theories, if you had to ask.

[John F Kennedy III]

Yes. Coal is an ancient and polluting/dirty form of energy for the planet and humans. It's about time we move on in technology. It's like instead of electric-trains we still had Thomas and the Tank running the show.

I'd rather have coal and George Carlin. Thank you very much.

[John F Kennedy III]

Sorry 'bout that.....

You're getting old sir. We should probably start a chip in and have you put in an old folks home.

(Hey, at least we kept Bill Gates away from you.)

[John F Kennedy III]

Sea Level Rising? Gore Buys Multi-Million Dollar Oceanfront Mansion

James M. Taylor, J.D. –
James M. Taylor –
April 30, 2010

One of the benefits of federalism is citizens can vote with their feet in choosing a state whose governance matches their world view. One of the benefits for Al Gore earning countless millions of dollars selling global warming alarm is Gore’s ability to buy property anywhere, and vote on what is and isn’t an imminent environmental crisis based on his real estate selection.

Al Gore may tell gullible followers that rising sea level threatens to swamp global coastlines, but his recent purchase of an $8 million oceanfront mansion in tony Montecito, California, tells another story altogether. Prudent property investors do not purchase multi-million dollar oceanfront mansions if they truly expect them to be underwater soon.

But Gore’s choice of oceanfront property is just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak. According to the Montecito Journal, Gore’s new mansion sprawls over 1.5 acres (“we all need to reduce our ecological footprint”); contains fountains, a spa, and a swimming pool (even though Southern California is water starved, and alarmists tell us global warming will cause more severe drought and water restrictions); and contains six – count them, six – fireplaces (because burning carbon-intensive wood in only five fire places at once simply won’t do when entertaining Hollywood friends).

When Enron executives touted their climate-friendly energy production while simultaneously bailing out of the company on golden parachutes, people should have taken notice. When Al Gore tells Americans we must stave off climate catastrophe by purchasing renewable power and carbon offset credits from companies he owns, and at the same time Gore purchases an oceanfront mansion with over-the-top water usage and half a dozen fireplaces, people should again take notice.

Thank you Danke. Reality is fiction.

[John F Kennedy III]

hate to break it to you, but Stephen Schneider has been dead for 2 years.

Lol ouch.

[lancer13]

Oh, man..... please, please someone tell me this isn't for real.....

I would lay pretty good odds that it isn't. Chris Hill is engaging in satire. (I hope)

[Henry Rogue]

It's the dreaded Manbearpig.
Full episode.......http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s10e06-manbearpig
Oh, I never watched South Park. I use to watch The Simpsons going back to The Tracy Ullman Show. Lost interest years ago.

[Henry Rogue]

Speaking of rocket science, what did you ever come up with on those two white papers I shared with you, Henry? You never did get back with anything on it. I bookmarked the link. To much on my plate right now, following to many threads.

[Origanalist]

You're getting old sir. We should probably start a chip in and have you put in an old folks home.

(Hey, at least we kept Bill Gates away from you.)

Nice of you to notice......

[wrestlingwes_8]

and what happens if the hemp decomposes ... and sets the co2 free again ...

Sounds like most people here don't understand the Carbon cycle very well.

When a plant intakes C02, it uses the CO2 along with H20, O2 and sunlight to produce starch and sugar compounds. These compounds are used for a variety of things, such as building the structural cells of the plant. When a plant dies, a small amount of O2 and much of the H20 are the first molecules to be released. Followed soon after by nitrogen and the last remaining H2O. When you look at a tree trunk that has been laying on the forest floor for over 10 years, what specifically are you looking at? You are looking at a big block of carbon. And where did all those carbon molecules that make up the wood and bark come from? It came from the orginal CO2 molecule!

If all the C02 (but more specifically carbon) as released back into the air as soon as a plant died, we would have no soil to grow plants in! What constitutes really good soil? Besides for a host of other things, the main ingredient is a lot of organic matter. This organic matter is made up of mostly carbon based compounds that have their origins from CO2. Sure, EVENTUALLY the same amount of carbon that a plant took in will be released back into the air BUT this would take decades. When a plant community is in equilibrium with it's surroundings it will accumulate FAR more carbon in the soil than it releases back to the atmosphere.

Planting trees will do way more for the regulation and reduction of carbon than trying to curb CO2 emissions ever will

[Dr.3D]

Now I'm trying to figure out why there are some still saying humans and carbon dioxide are causing climate change.
Climate Change Is Interplanetary - Earth Not Only Planet Heating Up! (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?395381-Climate-Alarmists-Are-So-Uneducated&p=4732651&viewfull=1#post4732651)
Obviously it's not something man has done or it wouldn't be affecting the other planets in our system.
Seems the obvious reason would be the Sun is causing it and there is absolutely nothing man is going to be able to do to change that.

[Tpoints]

Now I'm trying to figure out why there are some still saying humans and carbon dioxide are causing climate change.
Climate Change Is Interplanetary - Earth Not Only Planet Heating Up! (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?395381-Climate-Alarmists-Are-So-Uneducated&p=4732651&viewfull=1#post4732651)
Obviously it's not something man has done or it wouldn't be affecting the other planets in our system.
Seems the obvious reason would be the Sun is causing it and there is absolutely nothing man is going to be able to do to change that.

1. No, not every planet is warming
http://grist.org/climate-energy/mars-and-pluto-are-warming-too/

2. No, it's not the sun.
http://grist.org/climate-energy/its-the-sun-stupid/

also, saying that there's nothing you can do about it is not the same as saying growing hemp will help or that it's not happening.

[Travlyr]

1. No, not every planet is warming
http://grist.org/climate-energy/mars-and-pluto-are-warming-too/

2. No, it's not the sun.
http://grist.org/climate-energy/its-the-sun-stupid/

also, saying that there's nothing you can do about it is not the same as saying growing hemp will help or that it's not happening.

How do you propose to fix your claim of global warming?

[Tpoints]

How do you propose to fix your claim of global warming?

You asked for my opinion, so here goes

1. Acknowledge that it's actually happening and will continue to happen (without this, whatever you do will be faced by people pulling your leg)
2. Prepare for it if nothing can be done (this includes not just hotter temperatures, but also extreme hurricanes, droughts and the like)
3. Replace CO2 emitting energy with non CO2 emitting energy (only if it would make a difference)
4. If there is nothing that can be done with climate instability and overall temperature rising, sea level rising, prepare for it.

If your response is "do nothing", don't complain when you're the next Sandy victim. I'm sure those people will all tell you "there was nothing they could do about the hurricane".

[Natural Citizen]

Now I'm trying to figure out why there are some still saying humans and carbon dioxide are causing climate change.
Climate Change Is Interplanetary - Earth Not Only Planet Heating Up! (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?395381-Climate-Alarmists-Are-So-Uneducated&p=4732651&viewfull=1#post4732651)
Obviously it's not something man has done or it wouldn't be affecting the other planets in our system.
Seems the obvious reason would be the Sun is causing it and there is absolutely nothing man is going to be able to do to change that.

And interestingly enough, nobody ever mentions that fact. Undeniable.

Speaking of interplanetary shenanigans....and physics...because that's why things are heating up.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4dhvm9ivGQ&hd=1

If something like this were to happen...and it will...and one were privy to it...well...would be convenient to have a stack of funds stockpiled someplace to pay for the great escape. Carbon tax might oughtta cover it. Maybe a few others. You get the point, I guess. Mars or bust. Doesn't have to be this specific scenario, per se.

[Danke]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtevF4B4RtQ

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

2. No, it's not the sun.
http://grist.org/climate-energy/its-the-sun-stupid/

Actually, it is the sun and it has nothing to do with the brightness but with the electrically charged particles thrown out (the misnamed "solar wind"). Its all about plasma.

[John F Kennedy III]

1. No, not every planet is warming
http://grist.org/climate-energy/mars-and-pluto-are-warming-too/

2. No, it's not the sun.
http://grist.org/climate-energy/its-the-sun-stupid/

also, saying that there's nothing you can do about it is not the same as saying growing hemp will help or that it's not happening.

You're funny.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

people are not talking about the real issues, global oxygen levels decreasing, damage to the o-zone layer

[John F Kennedy III]

people are not talking about the real issues, global oxygen levels decreasing, damage to the o-zone layer

You start. I'm pretty ignorant about those except I remember hearing there is a giant whole in the ozone.

[Travlyr]

people are not talking about the real issues, global oxygen levels decreasing, damage to the o-zone layer

If global oxygen levels are decreasing and CO2 levels are increasing, then planting the world with industrial hemp will at least be a good start because it will eat CO2 and produce Oxygen.

[Lymeade-Lady]

Sort of reminds me of this.....
http://www.geekologie.com/2012/03/21/daylight-savings-drought.jpg
http://www.geekologie.com/2012/03/ahahaha-daylight-savings-time-to-blame-f.php
Would someone please tell that guy they will fix the daylight savings-caused drought right after they move the dangerous deer crossing signs.

[liberty2897]

If global oxygen levels are decreasing and CO2 levels are increasing, then planting the world with industrial hemp will at least be a good start because it will eat CO2 and produce Oxygen.

Save the planet. Smoke more weed!

[Travlyr]

Save the planet. Smoke more weed!
Lol... at least grow it. Hemp has been around for 8000 years or more. Let it grow.

[John F Kennedy III]

Save the planet. Smoke more weed!

I'm trying!

[John F Kennedy III]

Lol... at least grow it. Hemp has been around for 8000 years or more. Let it grow.

Weed= Legalize It!

Hemp= Let it grow!

I love it :)

[Origanalist]

I'm trying!

Too baked?

[adisongrace]

One issue these whack scientists never touch on is weather testing, chemtrails or geo-engineering.

It's like telling one side of the whole story. We will never know the truth until we touch on
these non-sexy topics.

[John F Kennedy III]

Too baked?

No, I'm out :(

http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2010/05/03/BigAl2k6-KoiKitsuneRanOutOfWeed492.png


Runner ups:

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/19814107.jpg

http://memecrunch.com/meme/8UEP/i-ran-out-of-weed/image.png

[John F Kennedy III]

One issue these whack scientists never touch on is weather testing, chemtrails or geo-engineering.

It's like telling one side of the whole story. We will never know the truth until we touch on
these non-sexy topics.

True. I'm thinking about putting together a post about this tomorrow.

[Origanalist]

[QUOTE=John F Kennedy III;4735310]No, I'm out :(

Dammit Jim.

[Tpoints]

If global oxygen levels are decreasing and CO2 levels are increasing, then planting the world with industrial hemp will at least be a good start because it will eat CO2 and produce Oxygen.

any plant could do it.

So tell us, how much more or faster does hemp do it compared to other plants? And how much would we grow to have a noticeable effect?

[Tpoints]

Actually, it is the sun and it has nothing to do with the brightness but with the electrically charged particles thrown out (the misnamed "solar wind"). Its all about plasma.

Source? Specifically, I am asking for a source that attributes every warming trend to your plasma claim. (if you cannot provide that, show me your best).

[John F Kennedy III]

Source? Specifically, I am asking for a source that attributes every warming trend to your plasma claim. (if you cannot provide that, show me your best).

He has to prove something he didn't say?

[Tpoints]

He has to prove something he didn't say?

He didn't say all warming is attributable to plasma? Ok then, so he must be able to tell me which ones are not, and what they are attributable to.

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

Source? Specifically, I am asking for a source that attributes every warming trend to your plasma claim. (if you cannot provide that, show me your best).


With the researchers’ new knowledge, it is now clear that here is a correlation between the Sun’s varying activity and the formation of aerosols in the Earth’s atmosphere. Initially, the researchers have demonstrated that there is a correlation, and they will therefore now carry out systematic measurements and modellings to determine how important it is to the climate.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/05/17/new-study-links-cosmic-rays-to-aerosolscloud-formation-via-solar-magnetic-activity-modulation/

[Tpoints]

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/05/17/new-study-links-cosmic-rays-to-aerosolscloud-formation-via-solar-magnetic-activity-modulation/

I don't see anywhere in this that says "the sun is more responsible for global warming than CO2" or "because it's the sun, reducing CO2 will never have any effect". (Tell me that wasn't what you were suggesting)

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

I don't see anywhere in this that says "the sun is more responsible for global warming than CO2" or "because it's the sun, reducing CO2 will never have any effect". (Tell me that wasn't what you were suggesting)

:rolleyes:

Are you fucking serious? Have you, in all this time, not been told that water vapor is the primary "greenhouse gas"?

[Tpoints]

:rolleyes:

Are you fucking serious? Have you, in all this time, not been told that water vapor is the primary "greenhouse gas"?

Primary in what way? Abundance by volume? abundance by weight? Contribution to warming? Sure, I've HEARD people say it, I never heard somebody who knows what they are talking about when I ask what they mean by "primary" (I hear it for methane too).

[John F Kennedy III]

The title of this thread gets proven on every single page. Let's aim for 100 pages. Somebody is bound to learn something.

[adisongrace]

As I have always said I'm not discounting that climate change exists nor am I saying we don't contribute
to holes in the ozone. However, we will never know the primary cause without testing all variables. That's just
freaking elementary scientific method.

[Antischism]

This is one of those topics that I disagree with the majority of the board on. It's easy to cherry-pick specific people with uneducated opinions and paint an entire group of people as being uneducated as a result, huh? I believe global warming/climate change is naturally occurring and happens in cycles, but I'm also not going to dismiss humans and industrialization as a contributing factor like so many seem to enjoy doing. Instead of taking an extreme left or right position, I'd rather keep an open mind and do the research. Al Gore is so 2006 and I'm so over the complete dismissals. Forget about Al Gore; this isn't about him.

Sometimes it feels like people just adopt these unwavering beliefs because it's a talking point/position brought up by whichever group or person they currently follow. It's like they have to adopt it and find ways to argue against logic in order to be more "pure." I'm not specifically calling anyone in this thread out, but it's something I've noticed in many camps including the Marxists, L/libertarians and conservatives.

[Origanalist]

This is one of those topics that I disagree with the majority of the board on. It's easy to cherry-pick specific people with uneducated opinions and paint an entire group of people as being uneducated as a result, huh? I believe global warming/climate change is naturally occurring and happens in cycles, but I'm also not going to dismiss humans and industrialization as a contributing factor like so many seem to enjoy doing. Instead of taking an extreme left or right position, I'd rather keep an open mind and do the research. Al Gore is so 2006 and I'm so over the complete dismissals. Forget about Al Gore; this isn't about him.

Sometimes it feels like people just adopt these unwavering beliefs because it's a talking point/position brought up by whichever group or person they currently follow. It's like they have to adopt it and find ways to argue against logic in order to be more "pure." I'm not specifically calling anyone in this thread out, but it's something I've noticed in many camps including the Marxists, L/libertarians and conservatives.

It would be a lot easier to do minus the hysterics and calls for quantum leaps in government control held up as the solution. Red flags pop up all over the place.

[Antischism]

It would be a lot easier to do minus the hysterics and calls for quantum leaps in government control held up as the solution. Red flags pop up all over the place.

That, I can definitely agree with.

[Origanalist]

That, I can definitely agree with.

That and the fact that it has been debated for a long time with many cries of impending doom. Does anybody recall the 70's and predictions of impending global catastrophy?

This has been debated here since 1799.........

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/Americas-First-Great-Global-Warming-Debate.html

[Antischism]

That and the fact that it has been debated for a long time with many cries of impending doom. Does anybody recall the 70's and predictions of impending global catastrophy?

This has been debated here since 1799.........

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/Americas-First-Great-Global-Warming-Debate.html

That's all well and good, but if you're going to make any sort of argument for or against global warming whether it's a naturally occurring cycle or predominantly caused by man (or more logically, only exacerbated by mankind to a certain extent), you have to look at years of data and current scientific studies. At worst, it's still too inconclusive to say how big of an impact we've had through the continuous and increased burning of fossil fuels and deforestation.

[Origanalist]

That's all well and good, but if you're going to make any sort of argument for or against global warming whether it's a naturally occurring cycle or predominantly caused by man (or more logically, only exacerbated by mankind to a certain extent), you have to look at years of data and current scientific studies. At worst, it's still too inconclusive to say how big of an impact we've had through the continuous and increased burning of fossil fuels and deforestation.

I don't entirely write the whole thing off, let's just say I'm a little jaded by the boys who cried wolf.

[vienna]

Sounds like most people here don't understand the Carbon cycle very well.

When a plant intakes C02, it uses the CO2 along with H20, O2 and sunlight to produce starch and sugar compounds. These compounds are used for a variety of things, such as building the structural cells of the plant. When a plant dies, a small amount of O2 and much of the H20 are the first molecules to be released. Followed soon after by nitrogen and the last remaining H2O. When you look at a tree trunk that has been laying on the forest floor for over 10 years, what specifically are you looking at? You are looking at a big block of carbon. And where did all those carbon molecules that make up the wood and bark come from? It came from the orginal CO2 molecule!

If all the C02 (but more specifically carbon) as released back into the air as soon as a plant died, we would have no soil to grow plants in! What constitutes really good soil? Besides for a host of other things, the main ingredient is a lot of organic matter. This organic matter is made up of mostly carbon based compounds that have their origins from CO2. Sure, EVENTUALLY the same amount of carbon that a plant took in will be released back into the air BUT this would take decades. When a plant community is in equilibrium with it's surroundings it will accumulate FAR more carbon in the soil than it releases back to the atmosphere.

Planting trees will do way more for the regulation and reduction of carbon than trying to curb CO2 emissions ever will
in the end you just confirmed what was said initially. that the system is in balance.
so whether there is a time delay of releasing the co2 or not wont change the fundamental principal of the system.

[vienna]

I'll leave that up to them. I figure that the scientific community is smarter than just some guy on the Internet, so I don't have any faith that they are being honest. They fool the people in order to tax them more and keep the research funds flowing.

When you do find the time to study hemp, you will learn that industrial hemp reduces the building industries carbon footprint dramatically. Hemp textile makes more durable clothes than cotton and more comfortable too so hemp clothes are of higher quality. The plastic panels that are made from hemp for cars don't dent like metal so fender benders become a thing of the past. The plastics made from hemp for food storage and product wrapping are non toxic and biodegradable resulting in less landfill pollution. Hemp grows without the need for pesticides or insecticides and uses less water than cotton or corn to produce a crop. The roots hold the soil together which helps prevent soil erosion. The nutrients it places back into the soil make it great for a rotation crop. It is a food, a medicine, a building material, industrial materials, clothes, and very Earth friendly. I am sure the scientific community knows all that.

That is why the title of this thread is, "Climate Alarmists Are So Uneducated" The alarmists fear monger for taxes and government research grants. Education is the key.
i'm an architect, and here in austria you have to insulate buildings. with hemp or something else. so i do understand those things.
there are a lot of ways to reduce energy consumption. but still ... those things wont stop the cause of global warming.

[Occam's Banana]

That and the fact that it has been debated for a long time with many cries of impending doom. Does anybody recall the 70's and predictions of impending global catastrophy?

This has been debated here since 1799.........

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/Americas-First-Great-Global-Warming-Debate.html

Not to mention that global "cooling" was once the problem the so-called "experts" were alaruming & excursioning about.

The same "experts" who are to be considered "objective" because they get paid by governments & "NGOs" (rather than "big oil" or "big coal" or whatever).

[Origanalist]

Not to mention that global "cooling" was once the problem the so-called "experts" were alaruming & excursioning about.

The same "experts" who are to be considered "objective" because they get paid by governments & "NGOs" (rather than "big oil" or "big coal" or whatever).

Any doom'l do?

[presence]

here in austria you have to insulate buildings. with hemp or something else.

^^

[presence]

Documents illegally leaked (http://www.desmogblog.com/heartland-insider-exposes-institute-s-budget-and-strategy) from the Heartland Institute (http://www.heartland.org</a), one of the most active groups engaged in attacking the science of climate change, provide an unprecedented look into how these groups operate. The story was broken Tuesday by DeSmogBlog (http://www.desmogblog.com/), a website dedicated to exposing false claims about climate change science. The documents reveal that donors to Heartland included oil billionaire Charles Koch (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer#ixzz1mZ3wKF8K), and Heartland has spent several million dollars over the past five years to undermine climate science. Tens of thousands of dollars are slated to go this year to well-known climate contrarians S.Fred Singer, Craig Idso, and Anthony Watts of the Watts Up With That? (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/15/notes-on-the-fake-heartland-document/#more-56736) website. Naturally, the leaked documents have lit up the blogosphere (http://getenergysmartnow.com/2012/02/15/breaking-heartless-news-for-valentines-day-dissuading-teachers-from-teaching-science/), but none of the revelations are particularly surprising. The U.S. has a very successful and well-funded climate change denial industry, primarily funded by fossil fuel companies, that has spent hundreds of millions of dollars over the past few decades on a PR campaign against climate change science. I made a lengthy post on the subject in 2009 called, The Manufactured Doubt industry and the hacked email controversy (http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=1389). I won't say more here, but getenergysmartnow.com (http://getenergysmartnow.com/2012/02/15/breaking-heartless-news-for-valentines-day-dissuading-teachers-from-teaching-science/) has compiled a long list of blogs that have interesting posts on the Heartland Institute affair for those interested in following this story.

http://icons.wxug.com/hurricane/2012/books_of_doubt.jpg

Eight books challenging the Manufactured Doubt industry
Important scientific findings should always be challenged with the goal of finding flaws and improving our scientific understanding. But there's nothing a scientist hates more than to see good science attacked and the reputations of good scientists smeared in name of protecting corporate profits or ideology. A number of scientists have fought back against the recent unfounded assaults on climate change science by publishing books calling attention to the Manufactured Doubt industry's tactics and goals. Anyone priding themselves on being a open-minded skeptic of human-caused global warming should challenge their skepticism by reading one of these works. I thought so highly of Unscientific America, Merchants of Doubt, and Climate Coverup, that I donated 50 copies of these books to undergraduates at the University of Michigan last year. Here's a short synopsis of eight books published in the past three years defending climate change science against the attacks of the Manufactured Doubt industry:

Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming (http://www.amazon.com/Merchants-Doubt-Handful-Scientists-Obscured/dp/1608193942/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1329418774&sr=1-1), by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway. If you're going to read one book on the attacks on climate science, this should probably be the one--Dr. Oreskes, a history professor at UC San Diego, was voted climate change communicator of the year in 2011. A review of Merchants of Doubt and a video of her defending her book against skeptics is at climateprogress.org (http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2010/03/07/205608/naomi-oreskes-book-talk-merchants-of-doubt-how-a-handful-of-scientists-obscure-the-truth-about-climate-change/), my favorite website for staying current on the politics of climate change. From the review: "Make the journey with them, and you’ll see renowned scientists abandon science, you’ll see environmentalism equated with communism, and you’ll discover the connection between the Cold War and climate denial. And for the most part, you’ll be entertained along the way."

Climate Cover-up: The Crusade to Deny Global Warming (http://www.amazon.com/Climate-Cover-Up-Crusade-Global-Warming/dp/1553654854/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1329427577&sr=8-1), by desmogblog.com (http://www.desmogblog.com) co-founders James Hoggan and Richard Littlemore. The main author, James Hoggan, owns a Canadian public relations firm, and is intimately familiar with how public relations campaigns work. It's another fascinating and very readable book.

Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens our Future (http://www.amazon.com/Unscientific-America-Scientific-Illiteracy-Threatens/dp/0465013058), by science writer Chris Mooney. He writes a blog focusing on science communication called the intersection. (http://scienceprogressaction.org/intersection/) This is a fantastic book, and should be required reading for all college science majors.

Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand (http://www.amazon.com/Climate-Change-Denial-Heads-Sand/dp/1849713367/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1329402709&sr=8-1), by Haydn Washington and John Cook. John Cook writes for one of my favorite climate science blogs, skepticalscience.com (http://www.skepticalscience.com/Climate-Change-Denial-book.html), which focuses on debunking false skeptic claims about climate science. The book does a great job debunking all the classic climate change denial arguments.

Doubt is Their Product: How Industry's Assault on Science Threatens Your Health, (http://www.defendingscience.org/Doubt_is_Their_Product.cfm) by George Washington University epidemiologist David Michaels, who now heads the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA). This meticulously-researched book has just one chapter on climate change, and focuses more on tobacco and hazardous chemicals. About the the tobacco industry's Manufactured Doubt campaigns, Michaels wrote: "the industry understood that the public is in no position to distinguish good science from bad. Create doubt, uncertainty, and confusion. Throw mud at the anti-smoking research under the assumption that some of it is bound to stick. And buy time, lots of it, in the bargain". The title of Michaels' book comes from a 1969 memo from a tobacco company executive: "Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the 'body of fact' that exists in the minds of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy".

The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines (http://www.amazon.com/Hockey-Stick-Climate-Wars-Dispatches/dp/023115254X), by climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann. Dr. Mann is the originator of the much-debated "hockey stick" graph of global temperatures over the past 1,000 years, which looks like a hockey stick due to the sharp increase in temperatures in recent decades. This book just came out last week, and I hope to write a review on it this spring. Dr. Mann is one of the main contributors to my favorite web site for staying current on climate change research, realclimate.org. (http://www.realclimate.org) John Cook of skepticalscience.com wrote a review (http://www.skepticalscience.com/Book-review-Michael-Mann-The-Hockey-Stick-and-Climate-Wars.html), calling it "an eye-opening account of the lengths the opponents of climate science will go to in their campaign to slander climate scientists and distract the public from the realities of human caused global warming."

Fool Me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America (http://www.amazon.com/Fool-Me-Twice-Fighting-Assault/dp/1605292176) by Shawn Lawrence Otto. I haven't had a chance to read this one yet, but it looks interesting. A review by Katherine O’Konski of Climate Science Watch (http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2011/12/07/fool-me-twice-fighting-the-assault-on-science-in-america/) called the book "a fascinating look at the status of science in American society."

The Inquisition of Climate Science (http://www.amazon.com/Inquisition-Climate-Science-Lawrence-Powell/dp/0231157185/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1329428049&sr=8-1), by Dr. James Lawrence Powell, a geochemist with a distinguished career as a college teacher, college president, museum director, and author of books on earth science for general audiences. I haven't read it, but John Cook of skepticalscience.com wrote a review (http://www.skepticalscience.com/Book-review-Inquisition-of-Climate-Science.html), calling it "a must-read for anyone who wishes to understand the full scope of the denial industry and their modern day persecution of climate science."

Have a great weekend, everyone! I'll be taking a few vacation days next week, and wunderground meteorologist Angela Fritz will probably be doing most of the blogging for me during the coming week.

Jeff Masters

I know this board is generally "anti global warming" "anti climate change":

Climate Alarmists Are So Uneducated (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?395381-Climate-Alarmists-Are-So-Uneducated/page25)

I challenge all of you "well educated" anti climate science folks to peruse through the past seven years of Jeff Master's Blog:

http://classic.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/archive.html

[John F Kennedy III]

This is one of those topics that I disagree with the majority of the board on. It's easy to cherry-pick specific people with uneducated opinions and paint an entire group of people as being uneducated as a result, huh? I believe global warming/climate change is naturally occurring and happens in cycles, but I'm also not going to dismiss humans and industrialization as a contributing factor like so many seem to enjoy doing. Instead of taking an extreme left or right position, I'd rather keep an open mind and do the research. Al Gore is so 2006 and I'm so over the complete dismissals. Forget about Al Gore; this isn't about him.

Sometimes it feels like people just adopt these unwavering beliefs because it's a talking point/position brought up by whichever group or person they currently follow. It's like they have to adopt it and find ways to argue against logic in order to be more "pure." I'm not specifically calling anyone in this thread out, but it's something I've noticed in many camps including the Marxists, L/libertarians and conservatives.

I like your post and appreciate that you are willing to have a rational discussion :)

Humans certainly have contributed since the Industrial Revolution. However I believe our factor is negligible compared to Mother Nature and HAARP/geo-engineering/weather weapons. Speaking for myself, I arrive at my viewpoints after sometimes UNGODLY amounts of research. I'm so all over the place politically I can piss off MULTIPLE factions of libertarians, democrats AND republicans in the SAME sentence :)

I am not trying to convert you to anything. But you seem like a reasonable open minded person, so there are a few videos I would like to show you. I believe they are all over an hour, so feel free to bookmark each and gradually watch them at your leisure. All I ask is that you watch and consider everything with an open mind. And research anything you question.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtevF4B4RtQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0khstYDLA&feature=youtube_gdata_player



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-IO-QtHYt4&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[Origanalist]

I know this board is generally "anti global warming" "anti climate change":

Climate Alarmists Are So Uneducated (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?395381-Climate-Alarmists-Are-So-Uneducated/page25)

I challenge all of you "well educated" anti climate science folks to peruse through the past seven years of Jeff Master's Blog:

http://classic.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/archive.html

Point taken, and yes, there are competing outside influences on both sides.

[Occam's Banana]

I know this board is generally "anti global warming" "anti climate change":

Climate Alarmists Are So Uneducated (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?395381-Climate-Alarmists-Are-So-Uneducated/page25)

I challenge all of you "well educated" anti climate science folks to peruse through the past seven years of Jeff Master's Blog:

http://classic.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/archive.html

Meh. More fodder for the merry-go-round. (And, yeah, I know that metaphor doesn't make any sense. :p But you get the idea ...)

anti-global-warming, pro-global-warming, anti-climate-change, pro-climate-change, anti-science, pro-science, anti-this, pro-that, anti-yada-blah, pro-yada-blah, etc. etc. ad infinitum et nauseum.

The very use of prefixes such as "pro" and "anti" ought to tell us that the issue has absolutely NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with science of any kind.

It's ALL politics. On both sides.

A pox on both their houses!

[vienna]

I like your post and appreciate that you are willing to have a rational discussion :)

Humans certainly have contributed since the Industrial Revolution. However I believe our factor is negligible compared to Mother Nature and HAARP/geo-engineering/weather weapons. ...
the amount of manmade co2 is tiny. there is no discussion about that. it's about 3% of the co2 circle.
but the point is that the rest is in balance. and those 3% are added on top of it and can't be consumed by nature and is accumulating in the atmosphere.

[vienna]

...
It's ALL politics. On both sides.

A pox on both their houses!
well there are scientists working on that subject. all over the world.