Page 105 of 111 FirstFirst ... 55595100101102103104105106107108109110 ... LastLast
Results 2,081 to 2,100 of 2209
  1. #2081  
    There are so many studies out there showing this and that. However, if one does a bit of Googling, there is so much out there stating that the Antarctic ice cap is growing and that the last 5 years have been cooling down.

    So global whatever is natural, it happens. Mars is uninhabited and it is experiencing the same. As for man's involvement? Probably not - this has been going for millions of years. Take a look at volcanoes and Al Gore - what do they have in common?
  2. #2082  
    false and i blame Democrats.
  3. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #2083  
    Glacier scientists says he knew data had not been verified | Mail Online

    The scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning UN report that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 last night admitted it was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.

    Read more: Glacier scientists says he knew data had not been verified | Mail Online
    ...
    In an interview with The Mail on Sunday, Dr Lal, the co-ordinating lead author of the report’s chapter on Asia, said: ‘It related to several countries in this region and their water sources. We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy-makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action.
    Damn the truth, full speed ahead!
  4. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #2084  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    Amazing... simply amazing. Why isn't there more press on this? I mean really, this "science" has been thoroughly debunked now. And Obama is still saying we have to "control climate change" just two days ago.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  5. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #2085  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Amazing... simply amazing. Why isn't there more press on this? I mean really, this "science" has been thoroughly debunked now. And Obama is still saying we have to "control climate change" just two days ago.
    But it has to be true, Osama said so... Osama bin Laden enters global warming debate - Telegraph
  6. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #2086  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Amazing... simply amazing. Why isn't there more press on this? I mean really, this "science" has been thoroughly debunked now. And Obama is still saying we have to "control climate change" just two days ago.
    Well, these various incidents don't in themselves invalidate any "science." What it does it reveals the fraudulent nature of SOME of the "Science" that these people claim.

    At a minimum it seems to me that any objective observer--even one who has totally bought into the AGW theory should have reason for pause. However, that doesn't seem to be the case with some people who are eagerly maintaining that none of this means anything at all, whatsoever. They maintain that THEY represent science, and anyone who has questions or skepticism is a "flat earther."

    It has become very clear (something many of us already knew) that politics have shaped this process, and created this false "consensus" as much as any scientific data.

    KAM
  7. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #2087  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    Well, these various incidents don't in themselves invalidate any "science." What it does it reveals the fraudulent nature of SOME of the "Science" that these people claim.

    At a minimum it seems to me that any objective observer--even one who has totally bought into the AGW theory should have reason for pause. However, that doesn't seem to be the case with some people who are eagerly maintaining that none of this means anything at all, whatsoever. They maintain that THEY represent science, and anyone who has questions or skepticism is a "flat earther."

    It has become very clear (something many of us already knew) that politics have shaped this process, and created this false "consensus" as much as any scientific data.

    KAM
    Good clarification. Nicely put.
  8. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #2088  
    What? You mean the earth isn't flat?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  9. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #2089  
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  10. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #2090  
    Funny that they risked breaking the law by hiding something that was so "inconsequential".
  11. #2091  
    I am particularly happy to see the US formally recognize the Copenhagen agreement today. It's going to be nice to see the US as a leader setting the example on fighting global warming to the rest of the world. I sympathize to those here who still deny it's a problem as you must be feeling disenfranchised to say the least. But at least you still have this forum to air your concerns. and I think it's good to be skeptical. Definitely I am an advocate of questioning authority. I am not going to be around much here anymore as I am using an iPhone now. But it's good to see the active discussion here. For those who are interested in mainstrem scientific views on the subject, including the four leading scientific journals and all scientific organizations, I refer people to the links in my signature. In particular there Is an editorial from nature, which comments on the recent email controversy while still taking into account the overwhelming scientific data.

    ----------------------------------------------------------
    National Geographic,
    Scientific American,
    National Academies of Science,
    American Assn for the Advancement of Science,
    'Nature',
    'Science',
    all other scientific bodies on Global warming
    Last edited by cellmatrix; 02/20/2010 at 10:05 AM. Reason: it seems my signature was not included
  12. #2092  
    Climate chief was told of false glacier claims before Copenhagen - Times Online

    Well, here's another example of how "global warming" is more political than scientific. This climate scientist allowed world leaders to believe a lie. Probably, in part, to keep his grant money flowing in.
  13. #2093  
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  14. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #2094  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof View Post
    Good catch. More from that article:

    Georg Kaser, a glaciologist who was a lead author on the last IPCC report, said: “Groups like WWF are not scientists and they are not professionally trained to manage data. They may have good intentions but it opens the way to mistakes.”
    Good intentions? Like the intent to push bogus claims in order to enact legislation that would cost hundreds of billions of dollars and untold numbers of jobs? In what world is that a good intention?
  15. #2095  
    [QUOTE=Woof;2194279]The collapse continues.


    Collapse of what? Preserving the rainforest is a critical future resource that needs protection. How we go about preserving the rainforest is a real hard subject that needs more than one paragraph to explain but basically rainforests have a lot of plant and animal diversity that mankind may one day depend upon for more solutions in medicine, bioenergy, water quality and air quality.

    Quote from Groovy:"Good intentions? Like the intent to push bogus claims in order to enact legislation that would cost hundreds of billions of dollars and untold numbers of jobs? In what world is that a good intention?"
    Brazil has made harvesting of hardwood more difficult for the "poachers". In a sane and logical approach regulation of hardwood resources is a good thing for everyone except the greedy or the cheapskates.

    It is interesting how the greedy and the cheapskates are destroying the middle class. Cut out the middle man and you cut out the middle class.
  16. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #2096  
    Quote Originally Posted by philpalm View Post
    Collapse of what? Preserving the rainforest is a critical future resource that needs protection. How we go about preserving the rainforest is a real hard subject that needs more than one paragraph to explain but basically rainforests have a lot of plant and animal diversity that mankind may one day depend upon for more solutions in medicine, bioenergy, water quality and air quality.

    Quote from Groovy:"Good intentions? Like the intent to push bogus claims in order to enact legislation that would cost hundreds of billions of dollars and untold numbers of jobs? In what world is that a good intention?"
    Brazil has made harvesting of hardwood more difficult for the "poachers". In a sane and logical approach regulation of hardwood resources is a good thing for everyone except the greedy or the cheapskates.

    It is interesting how the greedy and the cheapskates are destroying the middle class. Cut out the middle man and you cut out the middle class.
    I was talking about the climate change subject. Regulation of logging and deforestation are different subjects. The WWF purposely conflated the two issues to make the situation look more dire.
    Last edited by groovy; 02/01/2010 at 09:12 PM.
  17. #2097  
    [QUOTE=philpalm;2195402]
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof View Post
    The collapse continues.


    Collapse of what? Preserving the rainforest is a critical future resource that needs protection. How we go about preserving the rainforest is a real hard subject that needs more than one paragraph to explain but basically rainforests have a lot of plant and animal diversity that mankind may one day depend upon for more solutions in medicine, bioenergy, water quality and air quality.

    Quote from Groovy:"Good intentions? Like the intent to push bogus claims in order to enact legislation that would cost hundreds of billions of dollars and untold numbers of jobs? In what world is that a good intention?"
    Brazil has made harvesting of hardwood more difficult for the "poachers". In a sane and logical approach regulation of hardwood resources is a good thing for everyone except the greedy or the cheapskates.

    It is interesting how the greedy and the cheapskates are destroying the middle class. Cut out the middle man and you cut out the middle class.
    Uh the topic of this thread. That global warming is false. The collapse of the left's position that man is responsible for global warming etc. Try reading the thread, then you'll know what we're talking about here.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  18. #2098  
    Suppose Global warming is caused more by deforestation? Then more of the people who blame CO2 can switch over to less deforesting of the earth.

    "The WWF purposely conflated the two issues to make the situation look more dire." by Groovy I suppose since the US and Britian wasn't really effected by loss of forests you are not too concerned about it? Well what about the dustbowls of the 30's? Or do you consider that occurance not manmade?

    I didn't start the subject of deforestation, but Global warming involes the topic of Earth devastation which deforestation will play a part in earth's (present conditions may be effected by man) future destruction.

    (Yeah reading the 100 pages about global warming here at Treo central is something that I'm sure everyone did...)
  19. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #2099  
    Quote Originally Posted by philpalm View Post
    I suppose since the US and Britian wasn't really effected by loss of forests you are not too concerned about it? Well what about the dustbowls of the 30's? Or do you consider that occurance not manmade?
    That's really not the point. The point is that the IPCC report is supposed to be based on science. If the report is not correct then we should not make legislation that will cost billions to combat a non-existent threat. Any other environmental problems caused by deforestation should be addressed based on those facts alone--so that any required legislation can be aimed at addressing that specific problem.
  20. #2100  
    Another article about how the IPCC is being viewed with even MORE skepticism.

    The great global warming collapse - The Globe and Mail

    It's interesting how, once people started paying attention to what the IPCC report actually said and how flawed it's procedures were, the whole matter seems to be snowballing. (no pun intended...)

Posting Permissions