PDA

View Full Version : Top scienitist - GW a scam



SolMiester
14-10-2010, 12:07 PM
WOW.....wont be long now, will be fun to see all the red faces....

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100058598/global-warming-fraud-the-tide-begins-to-turn/

SolMiester
14-10-2010, 12:13 PM
LOL....

"No surprise here. Don’t know if any of you are scientists but climate change is a bit of a standing joke in the science community. Want funding for a study of, say, UK swan populations? Sorry old boy, no money. Well, in that case I would like to conduct a study into the effect of climate change on UK swan populations. Certainly, how much would you like? Trouble is it distorts the research. The scientist’s objective is to stay in a job, publish papers and run a research team. Process takes precedent over results, a bit like modern policing and medicine really."

Here, here. The amount of funding for fraudulent "science" is indicative of the guilt of fraud which lies therein. The inverse proportion which one notes regarding the funding in question is a veritable smoking gun. Witness such similar travesties brought upon researchers in other fields. Those who study evolutionary biology enjoy access to billions if not trillions of dollars in readily available funds, while scientists who follow the abundant trail of creationism must toil with but a few pennies in their pockets. What other proof of how this insidious system works does one require? Simply outrageous!

wratterus
14-10-2010, 12:15 PM
We all know it's a scam anyway don't we? It's good having a well known scientist publicly refuting it. Kyoto/carbon credits/ets, all makes my blood boil! :angry Massive load of bullshit.

Speedy Gonzales
14-10-2010, 12:27 PM
Wouldnt be surprised if the money (for Kyoto) is going towards nuclear weapons. A nice way to get rid of it / fix it NOT :p Of course Kyoto is BS. Always has been. The ones who cause it arent even paying for it

johcar
14-10-2010, 12:49 PM
Wouldnt be surprised if the money (for Kyoto) is going towards nuclear weapons. A nice way to get rid of it / fix it NOT :p Of course Kyoto is BS. Always has been. The ones who allegedly cause it aren't even paying for it

Fixed that for you Speedy...

B.M.
14-10-2010, 12:59 PM
The letter of resignation I believe:

Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
Here is his letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan Jr, Princeton University, President of the
American Physical Society.
Anthony Watts
describes it thus:
This is an important moment in science history. I would describe it as a letter on the scale of
Martin Luther,
nailing his 95 theses to the Wittenburg church door
. It is worthy of repeating
this letter in entirety on every blog that discusses science.
Itís so utterly damning that Iím going to run it in full without further comment. (H/T
GWPF
,
Richard Brearley).
Dear Curt:
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller,
much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight
Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was
then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence it was World War II that changed all
that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago,
when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety
Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate
pressure on us as physicists. We were ther efore able to produce what I believe was and is an
honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an
oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all
towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In
the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete
independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from
both sides. What greater tribute could there be?
How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has
become the raison díÍtre of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it
provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon
become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into
shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.
It is of course, the global warming scam, with the ( literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that
has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the
greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist.
Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the
ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montfordís book organizes the facts very well.) I
donít believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I
would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted
the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:
1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership.
APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation
of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of

important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more.
Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate
2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a
hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS
members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it.
One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word
incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response
APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet
endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but
amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position
supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but
approved a far longer ďexplanator yĒ screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but
brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which
still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to
all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am
embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious
matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as
a scientific society is at stake.
3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the
principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen,
and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Eff ect on the APS position: none. None at all.
This is not science; other forces are at work.
4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic
purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a
proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the
scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a
contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you
denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in ever y way with the
requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind
simply to bring the subject into the open.<
5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but
instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the membersí interest in a
TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition
to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of
affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions
of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the
Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot
collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose
of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the
Council.
6. As of now you have formed still another secr et and stacked committee to organize your
own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.

APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious
conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost
confidence in the organization?
I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss
other peopleís motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple
explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to
be, but I donít think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned
about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the
fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club.
Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the
global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wr ongdoing, and the
University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the
financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you donít have to be a
weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, Iím not
going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption,
but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic
question.
I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope
we are still friends.
Hal
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara,
former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel;
Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisor y Committee on Reactor
Safeguards; Former member, Presidentís Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman
APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety
Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON;
Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books:
Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision
making)

pctek
14-10-2010, 01:12 PM
What, you guys didn't know everything is about money?

Take Lipid drugs. The two biggest money makers in the US are cholresteril pills and Prozac.

Therefore you will be both mental and susceptible to death.
Nothing to do with real science.

Oil. Arab nations. Ditto.
Israel - they were given a home because of the bad things that happened? No, it was to keep up the fighting. Which is good for oil looting.

And so on.

Wonder if the dinosaurs had science budgets? They were so busy talking crap they missed the real problem.

prefect
14-10-2010, 01:39 PM
WOW.....wont be long now, will be fun to see all the red faces....

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100058598/global-warming-fraud-the-tide-begins-to-turn/
Blardy hell I was right all along GW is a gigantic fraud.

1101
14-10-2010, 04:28 PM
No no no no
They keep telling us that ALL the top scientists believe GW.
And those that dont believe arnt climatologists

Scientists who do believe dont need to be a climatologists

Metla
14-10-2010, 05:34 PM
More taxes, that will fix it.

ubergeek85
14-10-2010, 05:45 PM
Not at all surprised.

gary67
14-10-2010, 05:56 PM
Why am I a scam? My initials are GW and last time I looked in the mirror I was real

qazwsxokmijn
14-10-2010, 06:19 PM
It's not global warming, it's being widely accepted the it isn't the case and climate change is a more fitting description.

Though I agree the whole carbon tax thing is just about a bunch of vampires legitimising their sinking of their teeth into the necks of taxpayers. Very little actually goes into combating the problem (which DOES exist, people just get too sentimental about their money and refute facts), and is probably a bigger problem than climate change itself (human greed and selfishness that is).

Metla
14-10-2010, 06:25 PM
Why am I a scam? My initials are GW and last time I looked in the mirror I was real

A scienitist said so, and not just any scienitist, a top scienitist.

pctek
14-10-2010, 07:04 PM
It's not global warming, it's being widely accepted the it isn't the case and climate change is a more fitting description.
.

Of course. Keep saying we're all going to cook long enough and you have to start messing with the wording.

Then the dates.

Kind of like those religious people...........

The planet has had ice ages. It's had warm periods too. And?

gary67
14-10-2010, 07:20 PM
A scienitist said so, and not just any scienitist, a top scienitist.

Oh my gosh it must be true then better warn you all encase I try scamming the forum members :lol::lol: but then again it is only a toop scientist and not an eminent scientist

qazwsxokmijn
14-10-2010, 07:57 PM
The planet has had ice ages. It's had warm periods too. And?
That's been happening throughout the planet's lifetime yes, but that's not the problem. The problem is our own lifestyle which has become too sensitive to changes a changing climate will bring. These days too many people are looking to halt something that's been happening for ages, rather than stop wasting money on the inevitable people should look into ways to mitigate the effects and see what we can take advantages of.

Denying that the climate can change noticeably even over a few years is denying the facts. The whole problem is also probably exacerbated by degrading soil quality (especially in Aussie where salinisation is a huge problem), introduced pests etc that some people seem to scapegoat using climate change. Probably driven by some money-laundering fraudsters no doubt.

Snorkbox
14-10-2010, 08:21 PM
It matters not as the world will end in 2012 anyway.

Metla
14-10-2010, 08:51 PM
That's been happening throughout the planet's lifetime yes, but that's not the problem. The problem is our own lifestyle which has become too sensitive to changes a changing climate will bring.

Jesus man, Look outside the bubble, all species have been massively affected by the constantly changing climate since the dawn of time, over and over and over again species have risen to dominate the food-chain and increase in numbers only to die back once the conditions change.

Mankind has only risen to its current position because the climate has suited us and our food for the tiny blink of an eye over the last few thousand years, The worm was always going to turn, conditions are not going to suit us for very long.

qazwsxokmijn
14-10-2010, 09:47 PM
Jesus man, Look outside the bubble, all species have been massively affected by the constantly changing climate since the dawn of time, over and over and over again species have risen to dominate the food-chain and increase in numbers only to die back once the conditions change.

Mankind has only risen to its current position because the climate has suited us and our food for the tiny blink of an eye over the last few thousand years, The worm was always going to turn, conditions are not going to suit us for very long.
I know....but we are probably the most resilient species out there (apart from many, many insects of course). I doubt very much that even an extreme climate change would wipe out the entire human race in a few decades, centuries are more like it.

But then again, we humans will most likely kill each other first before the climate change really takes its toll over water, food and land in that order.

KenESmith
15-10-2010, 01:17 AM
One example of global waring given was that in the Tundra in Canada that permanent ice had retreated to reveal a system of man-made stone fences that were centuries old.
It did not seem to occur to the "scientist" who had heralded this important discovery that at some time in the past there was no ice there for the then resident early tribes to have made them.
The other part of the scare tactics is to refer to carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere as a pollutant, when it is a natural constituent necessary for plant life through photo synthesis.
Water vapour, another natural part of the atmosphere conributes to greenhouse effect.

Cicero
15-10-2010, 08:14 AM
One example of global waring given was that in the Tundra in Canada that permanent ice had retreated to reveal a system of man-made stone fences that were centuries old.
It did not seem to occur to the "scientist" who had heralded this important discovery that at some time in the past there was no ice there for the then resident early tribes to have made them.
The other part of the scare tactics is to refer to carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere as a pollutant, when it is a natural constituent necessary for plant life through photo synthesis.
Water vapour, another natural part of the atmosphere conributes to greenhouse effect.

If all this is so obvious,why do our masters go along with the charade?

Gobe1
15-10-2010, 08:33 AM
If all this is so obvious,why do our masters go along with the charade?

Because all of us anti GW constituents are made to look like Mel Gibson in conspiracy theory - wackos

EDIT: and like the article said, you have to be a scientist to refute the evidence, but you dont have to be a scientist to claim GW is happening

Cicero
15-10-2010, 08:55 AM
Because all of us anti GW constituents are made to look like Mel Gibson in conspiracy theory - wackos

EDIT: and like the article said, you have to be a scientist to refute the evidence, but you dont have to be a scientist to claim GW is happening

Quite so Gobel,but does that justify our masters being taken in?

SolMiester
15-10-2010, 09:05 AM
No no no no
They keep telling us that ALL the top scientists believe GW.
And those that dont believe arnt climatologists

Scientists who do believe dont need to be a climatologists

Yes, the forums are full of it, 1000s they say, nay, hundreds of thousands..!!!

The stickler for me, is if we have indeed accelerated climate change, what on earth do they think we can do to stablise, stop or even reverse it. The biggest contributors are not involved in ETS and fossil fuels are most definitely required to keep man and economy alive in this day and age!

Money transfer is going to do diddly swat!, if anything we should be working on solution to combat rising tides, etc.....now I read something very interesting about volcanoes some month back about how they reverse CO2 emissions! Anyone up with this?

Gobe1
15-10-2010, 09:10 AM
Quite so Gobel,but does that justify our masters being taken in?

No it doesnt

Cicero
15-10-2010, 09:21 AM
Diddly Squat = A small or worthless amount.

KenESmith
15-10-2010, 10:17 AM
If man had somehow managed to drastically cut his carbon emmissions to within the unrealistic utopian targets set, then it was all undone by that vulcano in Iceland with the unpronoucable name, that threw more pollutants into the atmosphere in a few months than all man's activities do in two years.

F*rting against thunder!!

B.M.
15-10-2010, 10:37 AM
The problem with Global Warming/Climate Change/Global Climatic Disruption, :groan:call it what you wish, is that the theories were kept secret and never laid open to scrutiny.

Clearly this is against all principles of "Scientific Endeavour" and could only be because they simply wouldnít stand up to scrutiny.

However, now the chickens are coming home to roost and the protagonists must be held accountable for the biggest scam ever.

Given that the perpetrators of the all the pandemics (Aids Ė Bird Flu Ė Swine Flu etc.) and the Y2K hoax were never held to account I think itís time for the Empire to Fight Back.

Dare I suggest "Public Floggings"? :devil

SolMiester
15-10-2010, 10:41 AM
Diddly Squat = A small or worthless amount.

Haha, cheers mate..farkin spelling is atrocious..:thumbs:

pctek
15-10-2010, 10:52 AM
I know....but we are probably the most resilient species out there .

Hah, resilient...........whatever gave you that idea?
We're the feeblest, weakest and most temperature sensitive thing on the planet.
Take our tools away and we're catmeat.The rpoblem with the tools is we are now so specialised that most of us couldn't cope for 5 minutes if left in the wilderness for a day or two.

Show me another animal wearing clothes to keep warm in the snow. Or using air con in summer.
Any drastic changes will kill us off in no time.

DeSade
15-10-2010, 11:13 AM
Hah, resilient...........whatever gave you that idea?
We're the feeblest, weakest and most temperature sensitive thing on the planet.
Take our tools away and we're catmeat.The rpoblem with the tools is we are now so specialised that most of us couldn't cope for 5 minutes if left in the wilderness for a day or two.

Show me another animal wearing clothes to keep warm in the snow. Or using air con in summer.
Any drastic changes will kill us off in no time.

Maybe thats not a bad idea, survival of the fittest, smartest, and ruthless.

Snorkbox
15-10-2010, 11:49 AM
Maybe thats not a bad idea, survival of the fittest, smartest, and ruthless.

May I ask what makes you think life isn't like that now?

DeSade
15-10-2010, 11:52 AM
May I ask what makes you think life isn't like that now?

Sorry I can't answer that, my views on that score are unpopular enough to have me virtually lynched.

Chilling_Silence
15-10-2010, 11:59 AM
The thing is if you're a PM, and you've been taken for a ride by the likes of ETS / GW, then you're in a real pickle:

1) Do you save face and admit you were wrong, and save your constituents money?
Or:
2) Do you blindly and ignorantly carry on, so you look as though you're a strong leader who knows what they're doing?

Snorkbox
15-10-2010, 12:02 PM
With a bit of luck you get voted out if you make choice No 2.

pctek
15-10-2010, 12:42 PM
May I ask what makes you think life isn't like that now?
Cars. Clothes. Houses. Governments. Social Services.

Snorkbox
15-10-2010, 12:52 PM
Bosses, Civil servants, Criminals, etc.. They all want to be at the top of the heap and will walk over others to get there.

B.M.
15-10-2010, 01:29 PM
The thing is if you're a PM, and you've been taken for a ride by the likes of ETS / GW, then you're in a real pickle:

1) Do you save face and admit you were wrong, and save your constituents money?
Or:
2) Do you blindly and ignorantly carry on, so you look as though you're a strong leader who knows what they're doing?

Exactly Chill.

Heís pretty much snookered because reversing the ETS would take some doing given the millions of dollars now tied up in the trading scheme.

What do you say to a company that has purchased millions of dollars worth of credits at the Governments insistence and they then become valueless? :eek:

However, given that Key made his millions clipping the ticket in commodity and currency trading, he may just not want to pull the pin. ;)

Chilling_Silence
15-10-2010, 01:44 PM
Well are they actually worthless, or is there still value in planting more trees or whatever still?

SolMiester
15-10-2010, 02:47 PM
The thing is if you're a PM, and you've been taken for a ride by the likes of ETS / GW, then you're in a real pickle:

1) Do you save face and admit you were wrong, and save your constituents money?
Or:
2) Do you blindly and ignorantly carry on, so you look as though you're a strong leader who knows what they're doing?

You could also look at #1 as being a strong leader for correctly mistakes.

Gobe1
15-10-2010, 03:22 PM
The thing is if you're a PM, and you've been taken for a ride by the likes of ETS / GW, then you're in a real pickle:

1) Do you save face and admit you were wrong, and save your constituents money?
Or:
2) Do you blindly and ignorantly carry on, so you look as though you're a strong leader who knows what they're doing?

So what would number 1 look like? That would mean an honest politician????

Chilling_Silence
15-10-2010, 04:15 PM
I'd like 1), but lets be honest it ain't likely ... Gobe1 is right, those politicians are far and few between :p

Jayess64
15-10-2010, 04:58 PM
Interesting comments...

Let's see - a scientist has said global warming is a 'scam', and we all believe him because he is a scientist, and a scientist would know, wouldn't he?

Several hundred scientists have said that global warming is real, and potentially dangerous, but what the heck would they know?

Snorkbox
15-10-2010, 06:44 PM
A very long time ago most people insisted the world was flat. That belief did not make them right though did it?

Or to put it another way. Some people insist that Nortons is a very good AV and they get paid to say that. Others who don't get paid say different.

Chilling_Silence
15-10-2010, 09:52 PM
Haha excellent points Snorkbox :D

prefect
15-10-2010, 10:12 PM
My theory is god created so many carbon atoms and at one time I guess before the Carboniferous age most of the carbon atoms were on the surface.
We are just bringing a few more back into circulation

Cicero
16-10-2010, 08:05 AM
My theory is god created so many carbon atoms and at one time I guess before the Carboniferous age most of the carbon atoms were on the surface.
We are just bringing a few more back into circulation

Now that makes sense!

Lurking
16-10-2010, 03:47 PM
Interesting comments...

Several hundred scientists have said that global warming is real, and potentially dangerous, but what the heck would they know?

Like this link from "Saturdays Joke" on an earlier post:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/arts/4239839/Artist-paints-noble-picture-of-dole

In it for the grants no doubt.

Lurking.

mikebartnz
17-10-2010, 12:00 PM
Haha excellent points Snorkbox :D
He's starting to show some talent.:banana

Jayess64
17-10-2010, 04:15 PM
A very long time ago most people insisted the world was flat. That belief did not make them right though did it?

Or to put it another way. Some people insist that Nortons is a very good AV and they get paid to say that. Others who don't get paid say different.

You're absolutely correct - questions like this don't get settled by democratic votes, and my brevity let me down.

The scientists I was referring to are the ones who who go out on glaciers and the polar regions and drill ice cores, measure temperatures, study satellite data, monitor sea-levels and generally get dirt under their finger-nails. These are the guys (and gals) who are trying to tell us that something is going on and we should pay attention.

Against this, a retired physicist who got grumpy because hardly anyone signed his petition to have the American Physical Union change its position on global warming is pretty small cheese.

SolMiester
18-10-2010, 08:33 AM
Missing the point Jayess64, the data for one was tampered with from some area as it didnt fit in with the results they were trying to show, the the grumpy physicist?, sigh...
No one is refuting climate change, its whether man has 1, caused it and 2, if we can do anything about it....
1, doesnt matter now, and 2, I dont see them doing anything but tax and throw money to 3rd worlds....

Jayess64
18-10-2010, 10:07 AM
Missing the point Jayess64, the data for one was tampered with from some area as it didnt fit in with the results they were trying to show, the the grumpy physicist?, sigh...
No one is refuting climate change, its whether man has 1, caused it and 2, if we can do anything about it....
1, doesnt matter now, and 2, I dont see them doing anything but tax and throw money to 3rd worlds....

Sorry, have to disagree on each point. Data were not 'tampered' with - I presume you refer to the East Anglia emails affair. That has been investigated in at least three different enquiries, and the science has not been faulted.

On your point 1: lot's of people dispute (and think they can refute) climate change, but the evidence is against them. It is global warming that is grudgingly being accepted by many skeptics, and it needs a high degree of perversity to deny that the global temperature is rising. Climate change is one of the effects of global warming, and that is the focus of the arguments.

The current global warming is definitely the result of human activity, and the responsibility for any climate change resulting from the warming will be on us.

Your point 2: Given that we have caused the problem and the consequences will be as serious as many think they will, then it is not good enough to shrug it off and say "there's nothing we can do". We're more clever than that.

Bozo
18-10-2010, 10:18 AM
And just to think, that after everything we do, carefully turning off lights, using 'eco-friendly' cars etc etc, we get 1 volcano like the one in Iceland earlier this year, and it dumps more carbon + crap into the atmosphere than man has probably produced in the past (x ?) years? (no idea, just taking guesses here)

Seeing as there are currently 169+ active volcanoes in the USA alone today (active but not necessarily erupting), who gives a toss?

Clearly out of our control, get a few of those to blast every year or so and they do far more 'damage' to our atmosphere.

Conclusion: Mother nature is more than capable of screwing itself over, and taking care of itself in the same stride.

Gobe1
18-10-2010, 10:23 AM
I doubt weather the tax will go to 3rd worlds
The tax doesnt bother me (sort of), what bothers me is what are they going to do with the tax. We will never know. Like i said in a previous post somwhere, if they gave a detailed report on what the money was being spent on ie subsidising hybrid cars, free insulation on houses etc people might be a bit more accepting on the tax. the fact we will probably never know what it is being spent on really boils my blood

B.M.
18-10-2010, 10:33 AM
Well the point is that Real scientists table their findings for their peers to review.

These guys fiddled the books and then refused to allow anyone to scrutinise their findings.

Now their supporters are left red faced and trying desperately to wriggle out of the situation they have found themselves in.

As SolMiester has already pointed out, no one is denying Climate Change as such. Most of us accept it has been going on for millions of years and nearly every day the temperature rises and falls, often over 10 degrees and some days it rains and some days it doesnít. Nothing to be alarmed about is there?

I suppose when the streams and lakes in central Australia, that have been dry for years, fill up again, the alarmists will try and attribute the event to insufficient Carbon Tax?

The really alarming thing for me is that the leaders of so many countries have allowed themselves to be conned. :rolleyes:

KenESmith
18-10-2010, 11:26 AM
Why are some Governments so dedicated to Carbon Taxes, when the case for man made global warming is at best not proven?

The answer is very simple - it self righteously allows them to access a very large revenue flow, that they can either spend pork barrelling to keep themselves permanently in power, or it provides the funds to clean up their previous profligate spending and debt, which is catching up with them (The latter particularly applies to the Gillard Labour Government in Australia)

The idealist misguidedly believes politicians act in the best interest of the country - the realist knows that politics is really about power, firstly attaining it, and then retaining it for such altruistic reasons as self interest.

SolMiester
18-10-2010, 11:29 AM
There has been NO global warming since the 90's, thats why the data was tampered with....its climate change Jay, and its been happening since year dot!

Strommer
18-10-2010, 11:32 AM
There has been NO global warming since the 90's, thats why the data was tampered with....its climate change Jay, and its been happening since year dot!

Read post #53 above.

SolMiester
18-10-2010, 11:39 AM
Read post #53 above.

??, I have read plenty that refute #53, and that's what I accept!

Chilling_Silence
18-10-2010, 01:00 PM
Climate change is something that's always been going on, yet as one side of the earth gets warmer, the other gets cooler to compensate.

I'm with DemonHunter on this one...

B.M.
18-10-2010, 01:30 PM
Don't forget this from Time Magazine 1974. :lol:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,944914-1,00.html

SolMiester
18-10-2010, 01:38 PM
Don't forget this from Time Magazine 1974. :lol:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,944914-1,00.html

Yeah...change the story as they go along...

Scientists have found other indications of global cooling.


Someone with a lot of money is behind this....A ETS scheme would be a great start to fund a New World Order dont you think?

Chilling_Silence
18-10-2010, 02:12 PM
Well if you think about it, the likes of Carbon Credits could well be the first step towards a global currency ;)

qazwsxokmijn
18-10-2010, 02:46 PM
Well if you think about it, the likes of Carbon Credits could well be the first step towards a global currency ;)
It is a currency, one that lets a rich country release as much pollution they can before the taxes start hurting their profits, at the cost of poorer countries and the environment in general.

It's nothing but a scam, a scam that benefits very select few cunning vampires and gullible subordinates.

The best thing to do with all the money is to spend it on is protection of endangered species and mitigation measures such as water conservation etc. But no, most of that money is simply going into the teeth of said cunning vampires and their subordinates.

Jayess64
18-10-2010, 03:12 PM
Jeeze, I'm outnumbered! How did I get into this?

At least Putin is on my side. Russia is claiming the seafloor at the North Pole. As the ice melts it gets easier to drill for oil.

Which is rather ironic when you think about it.

B.M.
18-10-2010, 03:23 PM
At least Putin is on my side. Russia is claiming the seafloor at the North Pole. As the ice melts it gets easier to drill for oil.

Don't forget Roald Amundsen managed to sail through the North West passage over a hundred years ago. ;)

Must have had global warming then too. :lol:

SolMiester
18-10-2010, 03:33 PM
Don't forget Roald Amundsen managed to sail through the North West passage over a hundred years ago. ;)

Must have had global warming then too. :lol:

So, we have had a global cooling in the 70s, then warming to the 90s and cooling down again....!?...LOL

Gobe1
18-10-2010, 03:46 PM
Pretty much nailed it Sol. The temperature goes up and down

qazwsxokmijn
18-10-2010, 03:52 PM
Jeeze, I'm outnumbered! How did I get into this?

At least Putin is on my side. Russia is claiming the seafloor at the North Pole. As the ice melts it gets easier to drill for oil.

Which is rather ironic when you think about it.
Could say I'm on one half of your side. Call me indecisive, but there are too many scientists and reports concluding to both sides of the spectrum, probably equally fuelled by rich people with vested interest in their chosen (note I used the word chosen) conclusion.

If the past temp data as far back as the 1800s are accurate then arguably you can conclude the world is warming - whether or not it is just a short warming stint or the start of a hot and dry spell that will last for millennia we just couldn't tell as we cannot see into the future. But even the term 'warming' is highly disputed, these days the focus is on the increasing frequency and intensity of weather anomalies (such as the 2003 European heatwave, tropical cyclones, abnormally massive snowfall etc).

Just to give you an image of where my stance is, I despise utter pollocks like Jeremy Clarkson (though I love cars and his show) and his shallow, narrow-minded intellect and irritative personality; on the same scale but opposite end however is the likes of Al Gore (though personality-wise I find him much better than Clarkson).

Chilling_Silence
18-10-2010, 04:06 PM
qazwsxokmijn, you're right, that's why they call it "climate change", coz it doesn't really bear much relevance if it increases or decreases over a year / decade / millennium, it'll even itself out eventually ;)

qazwsxokmijn
18-10-2010, 07:30 PM
qazwsxokmijn, you're right, that's why they call it "climate change", coz it doesn't really bear much relevance if it increases or decreases over a year / decade / millennium, it'll even itself out eventually ;)
The term climate change is part temperature change, and that's where the common misconception lies - people have been desensitised to 'global warming' and now 'climate change' means the same, although it is not entirely the same thing.

Climate change involves a whole lot more than just temperatures, it's changes in atmospheric content, movement of energy (fancy term for wind), precipitation levels and patterns, global energy circulation (both in air and water), and of course, temperature. I admit I'm no expert in this field but I know enough to be able to distinguish global warming from climate change.

EDIT: This article puts my argument in far better words :p:

http://www.grinningplanet.com/2007/01-02/global-warming-vs-climate-change.htm

mikebartnz
18-10-2010, 08:30 PM
Sorry, have to disagree on each point. Data were not 'tampered' with - I presume you refer to the East Anglia emails affair. That has been investigated in at least three different enquiries, and the science has not been faulted.
Data has been tampered with and that is something you can not deny unless you are an ostrich.


On your point 1: lot's of people dispute (and think they can refute) climate change, but the evidence is against them. It is global warming that is grudgingly being accepted by many skeptics, and it needs a high degree of perversity to deny that the global temperature is rising. Climate change is one of the effects of global warming, and that is the focus of the arguments.
There is just as much evidence refuting MMGW. I'm afraid you have missed the bus as the tide has turned totally against you.


The current global warming is definitely the result of human activity, and the responsibility for any climate change resulting from the warming will be on us.
Out voted.


Your point 2: Given that we have caused the problem and the consequences will be as serious as many think they will, then it is not good enough to shrug it off and say "there's nothing we can do". We're more clever than that.
The human race might be clever in some ways but bloody dumb in others and are not unlike sheep at times.

mikebartnz
18-10-2010, 08:34 PM
on the same scale but opposite end however is the likes of Al Gore (though personality-wise I find him much better than Clarkson).
Al Gore was out to make money out of the flu caper and is out to make money out of carbon credits so how you can think he is better than Clarkson who is just an entertainer dumbfounds me.

qazwsxokmijn
18-10-2010, 08:56 PM
Al Gore was out to make money out of the flu caper and is out to make money out of carbon credits so how you can think he is better than Clarkson who is just an entertainer dumbfounds me.
Don't get me wrong, I think both are complete *******s and would trust neither.

Chilling_Silence
18-10-2010, 09:59 PM
I think the carbon tax should be optional for those who believe in global warming. It would be like christians trying to force people of all religions to tithe 10% of their wage, it just doesn't happen

:pf1mobmini:

ubergeek85
19-10-2010, 12:10 AM
It would be like christians trying to force people of all religions to tithe 10% of their wage, it just doesn't happen

:pf1mobmini:

Or forcing shops to close on Easter.

Wait...

zqwerty
19-10-2010, 01:06 AM
Largest most intense typhoon ever crossing Indonesia at the moment.

mikebartnz
19-10-2010, 01:16 AM
Largest most intense typhoon ever crossing Indonesia at the moment.
Quote "becoming the strongest cyclone to hit the country in years." does not equate to ever.

B.M.
19-10-2010, 07:19 AM
Largest most intense typhoon ever crossing Indonesia at the moment.

Haven't they paid their Carbon Tax? :eek:

B.M.
19-10-2010, 07:35 AM
The term climate change is part temperature change, and that's where the common misconception lies - people have been desensitised to 'global warming' and now 'climate change' means the same, although it is not entirely the same thing.

Well what about the re-branding of both these phenomena to "Climatic Disruption" as reported in the Telegraph. :lol:

zqwerty
19-10-2010, 08:44 AM
"A typhoon that is so strong it is now classed as a "super typhoon" is roaring into the Philippines today with winds gusting to an incredible 354km/h and sustained at 290km/h."

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10681411

These are some of the strongest winds ever recorded or so I read yesterday, but you can keep the comforting right wing echo chamber going here until one day you wake up to reality.

Cicero
19-10-2010, 08:57 AM
"These are some of the strongest winds ever recorded or so I read yesterday, but you can keep the comforting right wing echo chamber going here until one day you wake up to reality.

So,it's the National Party's fault.

Thanks zqwert,wondered what the cause was!

mikebartnz
19-10-2010, 09:22 AM
"A typhoon that is so strong it is now classed as a "super typhoon" is roaring into the Philippines today with winds gusting to an incredible 354km/h and sustained at 290km/h."
Typical exaggeration from your type. 225km to 265km does not equal 290km to 354km.

qazwsxokmijn
19-10-2010, 10:41 AM
Well what about the re-branding of both these phenomena to "Climatic Disruption" as reported in the Telegraph. :lol:
Screw the media, they always make up new words and use global warming and climate change interchangeably.

Chilling_Silence
19-10-2010, 10:54 AM
Screw the media, they always make up new words and use global warming and climate change interchangeably.

Too right!

Tomato / Tomatoe ....

qazwsxokmijn
19-10-2010, 11:09 AM
Too right!

Tomato / Tomatoe ....
Potato, fritata....

B.M.
19-10-2010, 03:27 PM
These are some of the strongest winds ever recorded or so I read yesterday, but you can keep the comforting right wing echo chamber going here until one day you wake up to reality.

I think you got it in one zqwerty.

The strength of the wind and thickness of the ice has more to do with politics than it has with science. ;)

Snorkbox
19-10-2010, 04:38 PM
Carbon credits?

= reprice Petrol

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/4249096/Call-for-higher-petrol-prices

Cicero
19-10-2010, 05:46 PM
Carbon credits?


petrol-prices[/url]

The dosh will disappear into the ether.

Jayess64
19-10-2010, 09:16 PM
The term climate change is part temperature change, and that's where the common misconception lies - people have been desensitised to 'global warming' and now 'climate change' means the same, although it is not entirely the same thing.

Climate change involves a whole lot more than just temperatures, it's changes in atmospheric content, movement of energy (fancy term for wind), precipitation levels and patterns, global energy circulation (both in air and water), and of course, temperature. I admit I'm no expert in this field but I know enough to be able to distinguish global warming from climate change.

EDIT: This article puts my argument in far better words :p:

http://www.grinningplanet.com/2007/01-02/global-warming-vs-climate-change.htm

That's quite a good reference that gives a fair summary of the situation. The thing to remember about 'global warming' and 'climate change' is that they are linked by a cause and effect relationship. Lots of things can change the climate but global warming is the one we need to watch.

Before I retire from this discussion let me recommend two books to anyone who is really interested in finding out more about this topic:

Poles Apart by Gareth Morgan and John McCrystal (Random House)

Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway (Bloomsbury Press)

Now I must rush to catch that bus I missed when the tide turned. Hope they will let an ostrich on board.

mikebartnz
19-10-2010, 11:24 PM
Before I retire from this discussion let me recommend two books to anyone who is really interested in finding out more about this topic:

Poles Apart by Gareth Morgan and John McCrystal (Random House)

Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway (Bloomsbury Press)

Gareth Morgan should stick to riding motorcycles and investing money. He is one that will love the carbon tax that will do nothing to reduce it.
As for Merchants of doubt their message works both ways.

Gobe1
20-10-2010, 08:44 AM
Agreed Mikebartnz
Gareth Morgan asking for more carbon tax has as much respect from me as that toyata manager asking for more petrol tax = less than zero

Cicero
20-10-2010, 09:03 AM
Ever since coming into millions,he has taken up the mantle of the all knowing.

With ref to G Morgan.

prefect
20-10-2010, 11:34 AM
The **** will hit the fan in a few months when fuel prices rise. When shown how much of the price is taxes will enrage a few people and its going to get political.

Gobe1
20-10-2010, 12:00 PM
Take note in Venezuela price of fuel is 12 cents a gallon
They say "petrol is cheaper than water": (same in nz)

Cicero
20-10-2010, 01:19 PM
The **** will hit the fan in a few months when fuel prices rise. When shown how much of the price is taxes will enrage a few people and its going to get political.

I have yet to see any complaints apart from wingeing,about prices.

We tend to just grin and bare it.