Global Warming

“I think he went to his mom's MarkO - not that I want to belittle his property loss and the effort he's had to make to rebuild - I just don't think he should be throwing [his turds] in someone else's face who has had nothing to do with the incident.
last edited: 2/06/07 11:53:14 AM”

“Of course I sent that hurricane.

I used my sub-human powers.

We'll never hear the end of it.”

“Hmmm... I wonder why Stanford's webpage that Y2 links too picks up on one press release from Goddard, and completely ignores other Goddard studies that show that the suns output can significantly increase global temperatures? (Oh, wait we do have the explanation for that, they're financially invested in the theory of man-made global warming)

"This trend is important because, if sustained over many decades, it could cause significant climate change," said Richard Willson, a researcher affiliated with NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University's Earth Institute, New York. He is the lead author of the study recently published in Geophysical Research Letters."

"Historical records of solar activity indicate that solar radiation has been increasing since the late 19th century. If a trend, comparable to the one found in this study, persisted throughout the 20th century, it would have provided a significant component of the global warming the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports to have occurred over the past 100 years," he said."


http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2003/0313irradiance.html
last edited: 2/06/07 11:59:47 AM”

“Hey Bison - I don't think anyone is suggesting that this stuff isn't an issue, but that it has been and is constantly being facotred into the conclusions.
Natural cycles like solar variability play a part, but the latest International Climate panel has concluded that human influence is likely to be (90% probability) the major cause.

I'm not a climate expert - but to me it seems stupid to be taking risks when finding alternative forms of energy benefits everyone in America and on the planet apart from big oil.
last edited: 2/06/07 12:12:50 PM”

“It's called Lunch. LOL

EnS makes his living from an industry that's cheats the very people they claim to serve.
Very simple.”

“I'm not against reducing use of fossil fuels at all, I'm all for investing as much as we can in alternative energy.

I just want the arguments for doing so to be real, not bs like man-made global warming.

Imagine how far ahead of the curve we could be now on alternative and renewable fuels if we took all that money being wasted on a theory which has no real firm grounding in reality (no one's even proven that CO2 is in fact a "greenhouse" gas, it's a theory, an assumption, that these scientists will defend to the death because without that assumption the whole thing falls apart), and put all of that money into alternative or renewable fuels.

Think about this - All of these scientist say that they are certain that the warming is man-made, yet they keep applying for grants to study whether or not it is man-made. This isn't science, it's an industry. Let's shift that money to something that matters, alternative and renewable fuels.

Lets concentrate on the things that we KNOW are bad about fossils fuels, their affect on air and water quality, and their economic affect. Things that are based on direct evidence, not theory. We can fix that. There's nothing we can do about warming, the earth is going to go through it's warming/cooling cycle regardless of what we're putting into the atmosphere.”

“Stove Stomper's favourite store is one that exploits immigrant works and is activily helping build the Chinese economy at the expense of American workers.
It's ok for Walmart to exploit people, that's just business - but Allsate trying to work use the courts in their favor, that's cheating.

So what was it they did, they claimed the damade was water damage and not wind SS?

And what does this have to do with what we are talking about?”

“Very Little.
Dance! Puppets Dance!
LOL”

“Bison, did you see my post from 11:00 AM? The root cause of our problems are our fossil fuel use (coal/oil). GW is only one of the effects. The CO2 is destroying the oceans, and the particulates our lungs...”

“Asthma has become an issue for me and it is worse on bad air days.

In Maryland we are receiving pollution from coal-burning power plants to the west.......particulate?”

“Is it some desperate cry for attention then SS?”

“I tell you simple guys up front I'm just throwing turds and then you act all surprised and angry.
I love you guys.”

“Bison, do you draw a parallel between the global warming scientists and evolution scientists? That they're both promoting a scientifically unsound theory to get $$$?”

“No, I don't see that Evolution theory is an industry in the manner that Global Warming theory is.

Evolution has a much better grounding as a theory than man-made global warming does. My only problem is that it is presented as fact when it should be presented as what it is, theory. A theory with plenty of holes in it, not necessarily wrong, but when it's taught it should be taught warts and all.

But I see Evolution's problem as being that it is institutionalized (which Global Warming is unfortuneatly becoming) in the sense that for some reason it's not ok to question it academically, I don't see money driving that in the same way I see it driving global warming theory. I believe it's driven by the fact that so much other theory is derived from Evolution, and it's been taught as fact for so long.”

“WOW...thats a lot of signatures

http://oism.org/pproject/s33p37.htm



Global Warming Petition


We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

Or this



Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide
Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?
By Timothy Ball

Monday, February 5, 2007

Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg. For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening. Here is why.


What would happen if tomorrow we were told that, after all, the Earth is flat? It would probably be the most important piece of news in the media and would generate a lot of debate. So why is it that when scientists who have studied the Global Warming phenomenon for years say that humans are not the cause nobody listens? Why does no one acknowledge that the Emperor has no clothes on?

Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification. For example, Environment Canada brags about spending $3.7 billion in the last five years dealing with climate change almost all on propaganda trying to defend an indefensible scientific position while at the same time closing weather stations and failing to meet legislated pollution targets.

No sensible person seeks conflict, especially with governments, but if we don't pursue the truth, we are lost as individuals and as a society. That is why I insist on saying that there is no evidence that we are, or could ever cause global climate change. And, recently, Yuri A. Izrael, Vice President of the United Nations sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirmed this statement. So how has the world come to believe that something is wrong?

Maybe for the same reason we believed, 30 years ago, that global cooling was the biggest threat: a matter of faith. "It is a cold fact: the Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with for ten thousand years. Your stake in the decisions we make concerning it is of ultimate importance; the survival of ourselves, our children, our species," wrote Lowell Ponte in 1976.

I was as opposed to the threats of impending doom global cooling engendered as I am to the threats made about Global Warming. Let me stress I am not denying the phenomenon has occurred. The world has warmed since 1680, the nadir of a cool period called the Little Ice Age (LIA) that has generally continued to the present. These climate changes are well within natural variability and explained quite easily by changes in the sun. But there is nothing unusual going on.

Since I obtained my doctorate in climatology from the University of London, Queen Mary College, England my career has spanned two climate cycles. Temperatures declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970's global cooling became the consensus. This proves that consensus is not a scientific fact. By the 1990's temperatures appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus. It appears I'll witness another cycle before retiring, as the major mechanisms and the global temperature trends now indicate a cooling.

No doubt passive acceptance yields less stress, fewer personal attacks and makes career progress easier. What I have experienced in my personal life during the last years makes me understand why most people choose not to speak out; job security and fear of reprisals. Even in University, where free speech and challenge to prevailing wisdoms are supposedly encouraged, academics remain silent.

I once received a three page letter that my lawyer defined as libellous, from an academic colleague, saying I had no right to say what I was saying, especially in public lectures. Sadly, my experience is that universities are the most dogmatic and oppressive places in our society. This becomes progressively worse as they receive more and more funding from governments that demand a particular viewpoint.

In another instance, I was accused by Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki of being paid by oil companies. That is a lie. Apparently he thinks if the fossil fuel companies pay you have an agenda. So if Greenpeace, Sierra Club or governments pay there is no agenda and only truth and enlightenment?

Personal attacks are difficult and shouldn't occur in a debate in a civilized society. I can only consider them from what they imply. They usually indicate a person or group is losing the debate. In this case, they also indicate how political the entire Global Warming debate has become. Both underline the lack of or even contradictory nature of the evidence.

I am not alone in this journey against the prevalent myth. Several well-known names have also raised their voices. Michael Crichton, the scientist, writer and filmmaker is one of them. In his latest book, "State of Fear" he takes time to explain, often in surprising detail, the flawed science behind Global Warming and other imagined environmental crises.

Another cry in the wildenerness is Richard Lindzen's. He is an atmospheric physicist and a professor of meteorology at MIT, renowned for his research in dynamic meteorology - especially atmospheric waves. He is also a member of the National Academy of Sciences and has held positions at the University of Chicago, Harvard University and MIT. Linzen frequently speaks out against the notion that significant Global Warming is caused by humans. Yet nobody seems to listen.

I think it may be because most people don't understand the scientific method which Thomas Kuhn so skilfully and briefly set out in his book "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions." A scientist makes certain assumptions and then produces a theory which is only as valid as the assumptions. The theory of Global Warming assumes that CO2 is an atmospheric greenhouse gas and as it increases temperatures rise. It was then theorized that since humans were producing more CO2 than before, the temperature would inevitably rise. The theory was accepted before testing had started, and effectively became a law.

As Lindzen said many years ago: "the consensus was reached before the research had even begun." Now, any scientist who dares to question the prevailing wisdom is marginalized and called a sceptic, when in fact they are simply being good scientists. This has reached frightening levels with these scientists now being called climate change denier with all the holocaust connotations of that word. The normal scientific method is effectively being thwarted.

Meanwhile, politicians are being listened to, even though most of them have no knowledge or understanding of science, especially the science of climate and climate change. Hence, they are in no position to question a policy on climate change when it threatens the entire planet. Moreover, using fear and creating hysteria makes it very difficult to make calm rational decisions about issues needing attention.

Until you have challenged the prevailing wisdom you have no idea how nasty people can be. Until you have re-examined any issue in an attempt to find out all the information, you cannot know how much misinformation exists in the supposed age of information.

I was greatly influenced several years ago by Aaron Wildavsky's book "Yes, but is it true?" The author taught political science at a New York University and realized how science was being influenced by and apparently misused by politics. He gave his graduate students an assignment to pursue the science behind a policy generated by a highly publicised environmental concern. To his and their surprise they found there was little scientific evidence, consensus and justification for the policy. You only realize the extent to which Wildavsky's findings occur when you ask the question he posed. Wildavsky's students did it in the safety of academia and with the excuse that it was an assignment. I have learned it is a difficult question to ask in the real world, however I firmly believe it is the most important question to ask if we are to advance in the right direction.


Dr. Tim Ball, Chairman of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (www.nrsp.com), is a Victoria-based environmental consultant and former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg. He can be reached at letters@canadafreepress.coma”

“oh...and then

http://newsbusters.org/node/10606”

“stove, I hope you have coverage for flood damage. If not, it's your own fault, not allstate's. that's my stand.

live where the waters rise, rise where the waters fall.
last edited: 2/06/07 4:32:23 PM”

“hes like the smart ass kid in the back of the class in 6th grade who made fart noises while the class was trying to take a test.
hikerboy
8:43:51 AM
2/06/07

Wow.”

“



”

“cartoons








figures”

“There's that little coward again.
LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!”

“There's that little coward again.
LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!”

“Boy George Hiker...(LOL)...anyone want any better examples of the Envrio Wacko crowd's comparison to the Islamic Fascists? If you do not follow the party line mindlessly...YOU VILL BE REMOFED! YA!

If Vile had the guts he would post under his own name...but you know most of the "brotherhood of the Broken Cross" are cowards they are real tough when they are armed and have power...but face them with truth...LOL”

“XL, you just know me having the coward on ignore is just killing it.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!
The cowardly trolls really HATE that.”

“translation please



someone?




does anyone here speak xlax?”

“meanwhhile everyone laughs at you and you have no idea why


LOL!!!!





oh wait, not all laugh. some just pity you





LOL!!!!!”

“Yes hikerboy, XL needs English lessons...”

“Hikerboy, I think you need to be whacked-up on Oxy and Meth to understand XLaxese.”

“Bison - as I read your chart, it suggests that over the past 70 years the global temperature has been diverging from and exceeding the temperatures which would be expected based on the solar cycle. Seems gloriously consistent with the global warming due to human activity view point.”

“Ha Ha Ha!

.....the criminal investigation of State Farm took on new life after the company failed to reach a settlement with Wesley and Rosemary McFarland about a year ago through state-sponsored mediation. The McFarlands presented extensive evidence of wind damage.....



http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/16639995.htm

State Farm pays Scruggs' clients
After 17 months, a check
By ANITA LEE
calee@sunherald.com
BAY ST. LOUIS - After more than 17 months, Dr. Wesley McFarland said State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. has at last compensated him for his Hurricane Katrina losses as part of a settlement reached for 640 clients of attorney Richard "Dickie" Scruggs and his Scruggs Katrina Group.

"I was quite satisfied with the settlement," McFarland said. "I accepted it and State Farm accepted it. We're not buddies. We have culminated a settlement, that's all.

"It's kind of like the monkey making love to the skunk. I've had about as much of this wonderful stuff as I can stand."

Scruggs Katrina Group attorney Zach Scruggs said the firm handed out 100 checks Monday in the Moss Point office alone. He said all the checks should be handed out by the end of next week.

After months of negotiations, State Farm agreed to set aside $80 million to settle the Scruggs claims. Policyholders whose property Katrina reduced to slabs or pilings were expected to receive 100 percent of policy limits for their structure and contents, less payments already made.

"The bell curve on the settlement, in terms of what's been offered, in terms of what we're going to present to the clients, runs from low four figures, that is several thousand dollars, to over $2 million in one case, but most of them will be in excess of $100,000," Dickie Scruggs said in a recent interview.

State Farm maintains that its policies cover wind damage, but only if the excluded peril of storm surge did not contribute to the loss. The company settled the Scruggs cases, and agreed to the proposed settlement for other policyholders, only after Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood ended a criminal investigation into the company's claims practices.

Coincidentally, the criminal investigation of State Farm took on new life after the company failed to reach a settlement with Wesley and Rosemary McFarland about a year ago through state-sponsored mediation. The McFarlands presented extensive evidence of wind damage.

An adjuster for State Farm who was in the mediation, Kerri Rigsby, said it was the last straw that drove her and her sister, also an adjuster, to contact Scruggs.

The sisters copied more than 15,000 pages of documents, turning them over to state and federal investigators.

They believe the company ignored or minimized wind damage to avoid paying claims, which State Farm denies.

The Rigsbys were on hand when McFarland received his check. His wife died in June without seeing their claim resolved. He still lives in the FEMA trailer where their waterfront home in Bay St. Louis stood before Katrina, but now plans to rent a house and move on with his life.

"It was just a great day," Cori Rigsby said. "I'm sorry his wife has passed and wasn't able to be with him."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where settlement stands

State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. and the Scruggs Katrina Group plan to return to U.S. District Judge L.T. Senter Jr. with a proposed settlement agreement for policyholders who have not sued the company.

State Farm spokesman Fraser Engerman said a previously proposed settlement took months to reach, so a revised agreement can't be expected overnight. He said the company is not currently in negotiations.

A federal judge rejected the first proposed settlement, questioning whether it protected the rights of policyholders.

A settlement would apply mainly to about 8,000 State Farm policyholders on the Coast whose properties were subjected to wind and surge. In cases where the two types of damage could not be separated, State Farm's policy was to deny the claims.

The Scruggs group has said it also hopes to reach settlements for hundreds of clients insured by other companies.”

“".....extensive evidence of wind damage....."

There sure is some hot air goin' around here.

Cry me a river and let's go boating.”

“Maybe build an _ARK_?”

“Or go wind surfing on a sailboard?”

“You'd need a two masted square rigged schooner that looks like this; TT”

“Well think of the payments from the last horrible Hurricane Season (2006)

Stovie....you know when I read Markie Marks posts all I can hear is the Jagger's Mother's Little Helper...all I can see is this frumpy guy with his hair in curlers wearing a flowery housecoat typing furiously as he recounts that his wife took the check book and his Nads to work in her briefcase....(LOL)

In their world Vile and marky mark cannot accept the logic of counter evidence... it is easier to dismiss it because it does not agree with their feelings.”

“How's the supply of pain-killers, OXYLax??
I reckon Rush can hook ya up if your inside connection runs dry.
Knees....back.....neck.....
How does a guy bugger himself up that bad at such a young age?
Maybe you just ain't all that durable to begin with and were cut out to be a desk jockey bossy-boss from the git-go.

What is it about Mick Jagger that turns you on so much?
I never really did like that prancing fop or his music very much.”

“LOL

”

“Stovie...betcha he's calling the wifey..."HONEY they are PICKING ON ME...can I have my nads back tomorrow so I can respond?"”

“Many of you give your credit too much self.”

“Polar bears are losing their territory - which was originally grizzly territory! Chock (a well deserved) one up for our grizzled buddy!


(Actually, the polar evolved from the grizzly [brown]. They'll simply return to the brown. Global Warmers do believe in evolution, natural selection, etc, don't they?)”

“


”

“LOL...here are some neat stories that I am sure will be greeted by the Enviorwackos with the same open mind as the Muslims looking at a cartoon of the "Prophet"...(LOL)

http://www.tv7-4.com/Global/category.asp?C=8549&nav=menu129_4

Michigan suffering coldest start in last 100 years.


http://www.terradaily.com/2006/070207171633.474eyhua.html

Emergency relief for Sweden's starving reindeer

STOCKHOLM, Feb 7 (AFP) Feb 07, 2007
Sweden said Wednesday it would give its reindeer herders millions of euros (dollars) in emergency aid to help them feed their animals, which are starving because of thick ice that is preventing them from reaching the lichen they eat.

But its ALL DUE TO MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING (LOL)!!!!!”

“Yup.”

“Actually - for Bison's graph, a clearer way of saying what I see is a combination of a cycle in which he sun drives cycles of warming and cooling combined with a long long term up trend in temperatures unrelated to the solar fluctuations. In other words, there is both a natural cycle manifest and some other longer trend which may or may not be related to human activities.”

“It is an incorrect statement to claim that humans are the sole cause of global warming.”

“Um MATT...I think someone hacked Laqtis password.....”

“No, blissninny, it's called being consistent. Perhaps if you were not so quick to try and snap my ass with your towel, you'd understand what my position is on global warming.”