Global Warming

“T*lt is that dumb.”

“http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/16/pruden-the-red-hot-scam-begins-to-unravel/

You can fool some of the people some of the time, as Abraham Lincoln observed, and you even can fool all the people some of the time. But you can't fool all the people all the time. Al Gore and his friends got so excited about points one and especially point two that they forgot point three.

Not everybody is on to the global-warming scam, not yet, but all the people � or enough of them � are getting there. "Global warming," or even "climate change" as Al's marketing men now insist that it be called, is becoming the stuff of jests and jokes. Sen. James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma, a Republican, built an igloo of that hot stuff that buried Washington last week on the Capitol lawn and dubbed it "Al Gore's new home."

Across the Potomac, the Republicans in Virginia filmed a television commercial called "12 inches of global warming" and invited two Virginia congressmen, both Democrats who voted for the infamous cap-and-trade legislation, to help with the shovel that will become the official state tool before the streets thaw.


When will the Congress begin a Federal Investigation into these scammers? I say sieze every asset ALGROAN has sell it at auction and stick him in prison. This was a Ponzi Scheme that siphoned TRILLIONS off our economy.”

“Guys, as tilt so clearly shows, having a discussion with leftists is like talking to a religious monkey.

Once the dogma has been dispensed from on high, there is no amount of scientific, or logical, fact that can change their faith.

And we can expect no rational arguments; only sarcasm and name-calling.


Over many years, and many discussions of opposing viewpoints, I have observed that "born-again," "Christian fundamentalists" are more open-minded than 95 percent of leftists.”

“To be fair they'd have to arrest all the execs of corporations that have funded the Coolio side of this equation also. Though Gore is wrong doesn't mean that the side buying any negative info isn't just as bad , unless of course, one has others bones to pick with all non righties .”

“tilt only will listen if you have tenure”

“I have observed that "born-again," "Christian fundamentalists" are more open-minded than 95 percent of leftists.

Yep, pretty much. They're open minded to liberal ideas, but anything that is "obviously wrong" is not open to consideration.”

“Funny how they can only manage to scrape up guys like that --- former weather readers and the like.

During the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, the best one news service could find to represent the power companies' side was some lawyer who had a webpage where he collected industry talking points (kinda like trolltalk...).

Odd how that seems to be the case time and time again.

Some unqualified flake comes out with a fresh-sounding soundbite and the wingnut "news" parades it around for a couple of cycles until it's inevitably debunked ---- the same formula the clowns followed when they started their fake war.

Isn't it odd that the stories of how this junk is debunked over and over again doesn't get reported on that sort of "news" outlet? People who only consume the wingnut "news" never hear what becomes of their favorite soundbites ---- They just disappear after a while.

Maybe the Ex Aquarium Expert can look up some of his old tropical fish poaching buddies and ask them how climate change is affecting coral reefs worldwide.

Just ask them.... "How's 'business'?"

”

“Dude. New material is free if you think it up yourself, otherwise I'm sure there are some pretty cheap sources out there who can help.”

““so Tilt, after years of you telling us "it's all peeted reviewed", and laughing at us because we pooh-poohed the peer review process due to it's inherent built in biases, and now knowing that a great amount of that peer reviewed process has been ADMITTADLY flawed abd broken all this time ... you're still cool with using that as the cornerstone of your argument? You're cool with how "science" has handled the collection, analysis, storage, release, and peer-reviewed processes of the data?””

“HPD...Tilty lives in a city that is so corrupt the lost some major companies. Heck a Computer 'tech" firm from Texas was looking here and took one look at the loons in the City Council and didn't even think about going somewhere else.

Please don't be mistaken, Tilty pretty much knows this is all crap. He is like a middle ages 'priest" he knows as soon as we learn he is full of crap he will be gone.”

“Why are you guys talking to the religious monkey after he throws poop at the crowd?”

“LOL..go back and look at the early years of the Scam on TT...the lines being used are great.

I must say that Nigal was one of the first to voice skepticisim.”

“please XL, some of us were voicing skepticism in the 90s.
last edited: 2/16/10 12:25:41 PM”

“(psst) HPD...I am and was referencing...and I quote "go back and look at the early years of the Scam on TT.”

“TT is just a microcosm of America”

“Winter records so far...

http://www.weather.com/outlook/weather-news/news/articles/0216-winter-records_2010-02-16”

“LOL at the guys asking T*lt questions. The mere fact that he will not answer any questions here is proof positive that he is nothing more than a troll---I've said so many times.


Protecting our environment should be part of our way of life but perpetuating a fraud like this that unnecessarily costs taxpayers millions of dollars is a disgrace. The ends do NOT justify the means. Sure there are many useful idiots on the bandwagon and I believe that Al Gore was one of them at first---until his millions started pouring in due to the fear and fraud.

Do your part, assist others with their part, just keep the lies, fraud, and scare tactics out of it.”

“http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1661844120100216

DALLAS, Feb 16 (Reuters) - Texas and several national industry groups on Tuesday filed separate petitions in federal court challenging the government's authority to regulate U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

Texas, which leads U.S. states in carbon dioxide emissions due to its heavy concentration of oil refining and other industries, will see a major impact if U.S. mandatory emissions reductions take effect.

In December, the Environmental Protection Agency ruled that greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide endanger human health, opening the door for the agency to issue mandatory regulations to reduce them.

Texas said it had filed a petition for review challenging the EPA's "endangerment finding" with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Texas has also asked the EPA to reconsider its ruling.

"The EPA's misguided plan paints a big target on the backs of Texas agriculture and energy producers and the hundreds of thousands of Texans they employ," Texas Gov. Rick Perry said.

The National Association of Manufacturers, the American Petroleum Institute, and the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association also said on Tuesday they filed a petition challenging the EPA in federal appeals court.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and U.S. iron and steel makers have also signaled they would file lawsuits.

Environmental groups said Texas should focus on building cleaner energy sources instead of filing lawsuits.

WHen they win...and they will, they should continue this into a lawsuit against all the enviro groups and ALGROAN. And up settling to take the copyrights to the names....LOL set up an oil and gas exploration company called the National Wildlife Fund or Greenpeace.....”

“This is kinda like all that global warming talk. They got all this evidence that it is happening, but few really believe.�
Wounded Knee

Yeah just look at those Olympics!”

“Nimrod...please explain?”

“do any of you rabid deniers and rabid alarmists have ANYTHING other than "the other side is poopy"?”

“What else is there?”

“Sorry Crash all our side has is "facts" that show the other side is making stuff up. Sorry but I thought someone in education would want to rely on actual...oh wait I see the mistake, my bad.”

“XL, leftists need "crisis" to implement "change."

Questioning the faith in their own moral superiority would mean an "open-minded" examination of ideas.

XL, when have you ever known a leftist to take a scientific examination questioning their own ideas? One of the major tenets of fascism is anti-intellectualism. With fascists its all about passion, emotion, feelings, and will.

Leftists need to create "crisis" as an excuse to implement yet ever more government control over our lives.

The whole "Global Warming" debate is about how much more government needs to control how we live.”

“Well that goes without saying, or as one of the PrezBO advisors is so want to say, "Never let a good crisis go to waste".”

“XL. to you and me it does, but to society as a whole, the real "issue" often seems to get lost.


“George Clooney expresses a common sentiment among liberals when he says, “Yes, I’m a liberal, and I’m sick of it being a bad word. I don’t know at what time in history liberals have stood on the wrong side of social issues.”

Liberal Fascism. Jonah Goldberg; NY 2008. (p 317)


“The simple fact of the matter is this: liberals are the aggressors in the culture wars. Why this should seem a controversial point is somewhat baffling. It is manifestly clear that traditionalists are d3efending their way of life against the so-called forces of progress. When feminist groups finally persuaded the courts to force the Virginia Military Institute to accept women, who was the aggressor? Whose values were being imposed? Which side’s activists boast of being agents of change? My point is not that the forces of change are always wrong. Far from it. My point is that the left is dishonest when it pretends that it is not in the business of imposing its values on others.”

Liberal Fascism. Jonah Goldberg; NY 2008. (p 360)


When you have a person who has an unshakable faith in the moral “rightness” of their position, a strong anti-intellectual tendency to dismiss all facts that question their faith, combined with a will to impose, by force, their world-view on others, you’ve got leftist philosophy/theology.

And no clearer message can be seen than the difference between the “tea party” protests vs. the G8 Summit protests. When Leftists cannot force their views through democratic means, or sympathetic judicial activists, they often resort to violence to impose their will.


Much of the philosophical “battle” between “new liberals” and “classical liberals” stems from the desire of “new liberals” to enforce their collectivist world-view on others through force of central government planning, and the resistance of “classical liberals” to increased government control over their lives.

The individual “crisis” appears to be front-and-center but the real philosophical “battle” is often ignored as a side issue.”

“Wow, you're right, look what that 'Bad Airline Passenger Crisis' brought out the best of the PNAC, take over two countries and occupy them forever.”

“The UN would like you to know that Climategate has not damaged the IPCC credibility in the least.

In totally unrelated news, the UN climate chief is resigning”

“Top UN climate official resigning

Feb 18, 9:03 AM (ET)

By ARTHUR MAX




AMSTERDAM (AP) - Top U.N. climate change official Yvo de Boer told The Associated Press on Thursday that he was resigning after nearly four years, a period when governments struggled without success to agree on a new global warming deal.

His departure takes effect July 1, five months before 193 nations are due to reconvene in Mexico for another attempt to reach a binding worldwide accord on controlling greenhouse gases. De Boer's resignation adds to the uncertainty that a full treaty can be finalized there.

De Boer is known to be deeply disappointed with the outcome of the last summit in Copenhagen, which drew 120 world leaders but failed to reach more than a vague promise by several countries to limit carbon emissions - and even that deal fell short of consensus.

But he denied to the AP that his decision to quit was a result of frustration with Copenhagen.

"Copenhagen wasn't what I had hoped it would be," he acknowledged, but the summit nonetheless prompted governments to submit plans and targets for reigning in the emissions primarily blamed for global warming. "I think that's a pretty solid foundation for the global response that many are looking for," he said.

De Boer told the AP he believes talks "are on track."

He recommended the next talks take a different tack. Rather than convene several negotiating sessions involving nearly 200 countries, Mexico, which is chairing the negotiations throughout this year, should prepare the November conference to work in smaller groups to lay the groundwork of a deal.

The Mexicans should "engage more intensively early in the process, so that you don't only rely on formal meetings but through bilateral contacts and frequent meetings in a smaller setting and an earlier understanding of how the process can be advanced," he told AP.

"At the moment, it tends to be very much a stop-and-start affair with everything concentrated in the formal negotiations, where I think a much more continuous engagement by (Mexico) is needed."

The partial agreement reached in Copenhagen, brokered by Obama, "was very significant," he said. But he acknowledged frustration that the deal was merely "noted" rather than formally adopted by all countries.

"We were about an inch away from a formal agreement. It was basically in our grasp, but it didn't happen," he said. "So that was a pity."

The media-savvy former Dutch civil servant and climate negotiator was widely credited with raising the profile of climate issues through his frequent press encounters and his backstage lobbying of world leaders.

But his constant travel and frenetic diplomacy failed to bridge the suspicions and distrust between developing and industrial countries that barred the way to a final agreement at the climate change summit in Copenhagen in December.

People who know de Boer say he was more disheartened by the snail-paced negotiations than he was ready to admit.

"I saw him at the airport after Copenhagen," said Jake Schmidt, a climate expert for the U.S.-based Natural Resources Defense Council. "He was tired, worn out." The summit "clearly took a toll on him."

Schmidt, speaking from Washington, said the Dutch diplomat was "very effective in pushing the envelope" and winning attention for climate change. "He's done a powerful job ... in getting the world to focus on this."

During de Boer's tenure, climate talks rose "to a standing item on the agenda of political leaders," said Oxfam International, a nonprofit group that monitors the talks and advises delegations. World leaders "could learn much from de Boer's perseverance as well as his uncompromising commitment to do what's necessary - not just what's easy."

The German Green Party said de Boer's departure presented a chance for a strategic reorientation of his U.N. office.

"The failure of the Copenhagen climate conference was due partly to bad preparation and organization," the Greens' climate change specialist Hermann Ott said in a statement. "Now a credible and experienced successor has to be found to make sure the international process to combat climate change continues without delay."

De Boer, 55, was appointed in 2006 to shepherd through an agreement to succeed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which required industrial countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions an average 5 percent.

He said the high point of his efforts was the agreement by developing countries, reached at the 2007 conference in Bali, Indonesia, to join in efforts to contain global warming in return for financial and technical help from the wealthy nations.

The Bali meeting was so intense that during its final meeting, when he was accused of mishandling negotiating arrangements, de Boer walked off the podium in tears. He came back later to an ovation from the thousands of delegates.

His assertiveness sometimes led to accusations that he was overstepping the bounds of a neutral U.N. facilitator.

"They are absolutely right. I did that because I felt the process needed that extra push," he told the AP.

When he was hired, he said, he told U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, "If you want someone to sit in Bonn and keep his mouth shut then I'm not the right person for the job."

Yet De Boer habitually put a positive spin on events. Though he occasionally chastised governments, he did it in diplomatic tones. At times when his aides were describing him as "furious" - especially with the administration of George W. Bush - de Boer kept his public comments so modulated that it sounded like praise.

De Boer said he will be a consultant on climate and sustainability issues for KPMG, a global accounting firm, and will be associated with several universities.

"I have always maintained that while governments provide the necessary policy framework, the real solutions must come from business," he said in a statement released later Thursday. "Copenhagen did not provide us with a clear agreement in legal terms, but the political commitment and sense of direction toward a low-emissions world are overwhelming. This calls for new partnerships with the business sector and I now have the chance to help make this happen," he said.

De Boer, who comes from a diplomatic family, was born in Vienna and traveled the world before attending a British boarding school. He studied social work at university in The Hague, and one of his early jobs was as a parole officer. He worked for the United Nations in Canada and Kenya, then joined the Dutch housing ministry. He has been involved in climate change issues since 1994, and three years later became the chief climate delegate for the Netherlands.

Associated Press Writer Verena Schmitt contributed to this report from Berlin.



And the walls come tumbling down....”

“Sure are a lot of Al Gore wannabees on this site, why don't you make a movie named 'The Coolest Heat since Al'.”

“Climate scientists withdraw journal claims of rising sea levels

Study claimed in 2009 that sea levels would rise by up to 82cm by the end of century – but the report's author now says true estimate is still unknown

The Maldives is likely to become submerged if the current pace of climate change continues to raise sea levels. Photograph: Reinhard Krause/Reuters

Scientists have been forced to withdraw a study on projected sea level rise due to global warming after finding mistakes that undermined the findings.

The study, published in 2009 in Nature Geoscience, one of the top journals in its field, confirmed the conclusions of the 2007 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It used data over the last 22,000 years to predict that sea level would rise by between 7cm and 82cm by the end of the century.

At the time, Mark Siddall, from the Earth Sciences Department at the University of Bristol, said the study "strengthens the confidence with which one may interpret the IPCC results". The IPCC said that sea level would probably rise by 18cm-59cm by 2100, though stressed this was based on incomplete information about ice sheet melting and that the true rise could be higher.

Many scientists criticised the IPCC approach as too conservative, and several papers since have suggested that sea level could rise more. Martin Vermeer of the Helsinki University of Technology, Finland and Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany published a study in December that projected a rise of 0.75m to 1.9m by 2100.

Siddall said that he did not know whether the retracted paper's estimate of sea level rise was an overestimate or an underestimate.

Announcing the formal retraction of the paper from the journal, Siddall said: "It's one of those things that happens. People make mistakes and mistakes happen in science." He said there were two separate technical mistakes in the paper, which were pointed out by other scientists after it was published. A formal retraction was required, rather than a correction, because the errors undermined the study's conclusion.

"Retraction is a regular part of the publication process," he said. "Science is a complicated game and there are set procedures in place that act as checks and balances."

Nature Publishing Group, which publishes Nature Geoscience, said this was the first paper retracted from the journal since it was launched in 2007.

The paper – entitled "Constraints on future sea-level rise from past sea-level change" – used fossil coral data and temperature records derived from ice-core measurements to reconstruct how sea level has fluctuated with temperature since the peak of the last ice age, and to project how it would rise with warming over the next few decades.

In a statement the authors of the paper said: "Since publication of our paper we have become aware of two mistakes which impact the detailed estimation of future sea level rise. This means that we can no longer draw firm conclusions regarding 21st century sea level rise from this study without further work.

"One mistake was a miscalculation; the other was not to allow fully for temperature change over the past 2,000 years. Because of these issues we have retracted the paper and will now invest in the further work needed to correct these mistakes."

In the Nature Geoscience retraction, in which Siddall and his colleagues explain their errors, Vermeer and Rahmstorf are thanked for "bringing these issues to our attention".”

“Okay...its getting wierd..but WHAT evidence do we have left that IS still current?

If I had this many pieces of evidence in a case become worthless I would drop the case like a hot potato.”

“Man is a capable creature, but no match for the complex weather and lobby money. LMAO”

“Climategate: The World’s Biggest Story, Everywhere but Here


http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/climategate-the-worlds-biggest-story-everywhere-but-here/”

“LOL...liberals are seeing their last great hope at Income Redistribution melt like an ice cube on a busty woman's bosom.”

“They hate it when that happens”

“WOW...and so it starts.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/climategate-and-the-law-senator-inhofe-to-ask-for-congressional-criminal-investigation-pajamas-mediapjtv-exclusive/

Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) today asked the Obama administration to investigate what he called �the greatest scientific scandal of our generation� � the actions of climate scientists revealed by the Climategate Files, and the subsequent admissions by the editors of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report (AR4).

Senator Inhofe also called for former Vice President Al Gore to be called back to the Senate to testify.

�In [Gore's] science fiction movie, every assertion has been rebutted,� Inhofe said. He believes Vice President Gore should defend himself and his movie before Congress.

Just prior to a hearing at 10:00 a.m. EST, Senator Inhofe released a minority staff report from the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, of which he is ranking member. Senator Inhofe is asking the Department of Justice to investigate whether there has been research misconduct or criminal actions by the scientists involved, including Dr. Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University and Dr. James Hansen of Columbia University and the NASA Goddard Institute of Space Science.


I swear if AlGROAN got convicted of lying and went to prison I would find a way to get the rumor started that HE was personally responsible for Smoking being outlawed.”

“I haven't stuck my head in this battle yet since my own feelings on the topic are not settled. However, I would like to better understand where the diverging options are coming from. If you would be so kind, reply to the following questions without a lot of rhetoric. I understand that you would want to qualify your answers, but please lay off the political garbage and focus on science:
- is the planet experiencing a significant warming trend?
- are any climate changes the result of humans actions?
- is climate change a �bad� thing?
- should we apply resources to the mitigation of climate change?”

“LOL!!!”

“sarge - are you saying that i'm not going to get any worthwhile answers?”

“No. I'm saying that you presented that in such a limiting way that if somebody follows your "rules", they will only give you answers that you will be free to interpret however your preconceived notions allow you.”

“I'm saying your veil of peace is a Trojan horse.”

“-is the planet experiencing a significant warming trend?
There have been at least 5 Ice Ages recorded in Earth's History. In each case there was cooling followed by warming followed by cooling. In addition the Earth has shrugged off Multiple Volcano Eruptions and Comet Strikes which produced more devestating events that all of mankind together could do.





- are any climate changes the result of humans actions?
The very fact that the Global Smarming bunch ignores all evidence except that which supports their theory (ignoring Sun Spots, cyclical changes that effected earth MUCH longer than the Human Species) as well as viciously attacking any "heretic" to their plan makes the validity of their ideas as questionable as the people who believed burning human sacrifice would bring good crops.


- is climate change a �bad� thing?

Seems like a NATURAL thing. InFACT in the 1970 we were being warned about a GLOBAL COOLING cycle.

- should we apply resources to the mitigation of climate change?�
And here we hit the "crux" of the Global Smarming crowd's problem. They are even stating now that NO MATTER WHAT WE DO, "IT WILL HAPPEN". But they offer no other option than to destroy human freedom, their plans include only successful nations (while excluding the true polluters). It is a massive Redistribution of Wealth Scheme.”

“ok sarge - if you would like - please re-phrase my questions so that the answers can be applied to the questions as I posed them?

What I am sensing is that the true answers are too complex to be boiled down to the right and wrong that is enspoused here.
last edited: 2/23/10 8:03:13 AM”

“Thanks XL - I think I agree with you on all counts. Though #2 wasn't really an answer and that is the one I am most uncertain about.”

“hubcab, Why do you find it necessary to call me 'Sarge'? Clearly I'm using the name HighPlainsDrifter. You must be on the defensive.”

“I stuck the sarge in there as an edit to emphasize that I was replying to your post and not the XL's. I will refer to you as HighPlainsDrifter from now on if that is what you would prefer. I have no reason to be defensive.”

“'What I am sensing is that the true answers are too complex to be boiled down to the right and wrong that is enspoused here.' hubcap
last edited: 2/23/10 8:03:13 AM

The real concern is so far from how we affect the weather, It's way more about own wallets than weather, because that has become all that counts and the counting is only done to count the dollars, all else just sux. Capitalism puts the dollar in front of even our health, your bibles and guns are second fiddle to the almighty buck.”

“ITS ON~!
�http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1661844120100216

DALLAS, Feb 16 (Reuters) - Texas and several national industry groups on Tuesday filed separate petitions in federal court challenging the government's authority to regulate U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

Texas, which leads U.S. states in carbon dioxide emissions due to its heavy concentration of oil refining and other industries, will see a major impact if U.S. mandatory emissions reductions take effect.

In December, the Environmental Protection Agency ruled that greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide endanger human health, opening the door for the agency to issue mandatory regulations to reduce them.

Texas said it had filed a petition for review challenging the EPA's "endangerment finding" with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Texas has also asked the EPA to reconsider its ruling.

"The EPA's misguided plan paints a big target on the backs of Texas agriculture and energy producers and the hundreds of thousands of Texans they employ," Texas Gov. Rick Perry said.

The National Association of Manufacturers, the American Petroleum Institute, and the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association also said on Tuesday they filed a petition challenging the EPA in federal appeals court.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and U.S. iron and steel makers have also signaled they would file lawsuits.

Environmental groups said Texas should focus on building cleaner energy sources instead of filing lawsuits.

WHen they win...and they will, they should continue this into a lawsuit against all the enviro groups and ALGROAN. And up settling to take the copyrights to the names....LOL set up an oil and gas exploration company called the National Wildlife Fund or Greenpeace.....�
theXL400
6:02:08 AM
2/17/10


Starting to look back through this thread a little and noticed XL's comment. I wonder why you think these suits will be successful? The EPA puts forth their endangerment finding based on what they claim is science. Challenges to their authority in this regard just about never pan out.

The law suits may cause EPA to ultimately give in a little when the rules are completed, but I fear they will primarily line the pockets of the attorneys.”