Jump to content

Setting up the Global Warming lies to come


OCinBuffalo

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

LOL................you can't even parody this,

 

Washington Post hires Chris Mooney, author of ‘The Republican War on Science,’ to cover global warming

 

Chris Mooney joins Business staff

He will create and lead a new blog on the environment.

 

 

Well.............................he does know his walruses

 

 

7b1701e11b119e43026863940b977466_normal.jpeg Chris Mooney @chriscmooney · 23h 23 hours ago

 

If these 35,000 walruses can't convince you climate change is real, I don't know what to tell you

 

 

 

 

 

 

"The (Narrative) Science is settled"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stop. It's time to call a truce. When, as VP Jokin' Joe Biden says "One hundred sixty one thousand" people were lost in the Joplin, Missouri tornado in 2011 it must be due to global warming. I had no idea that many people perished in that holocaust that was clearly made possible by an anthropomorphic weather abnormality. The thirty thousand lives lost on 911 and the 22,000 lives lost at Pearl Harbor when the Germans attacked us using Italian war planes simply pales in comparison. The Left weeps for the billions and billions of unmated sperm that will never have the chance to realize the American dream - falling just short by becoming the glue that sticks the pages of untold numbers of Playboy magazines together. Such a tragic lost opportunity to register them as Democrats. :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Cost of Carbon Reductions

 

By Kevin D. Williamson

 

One of the problems with the global-warming conversation is that it is a political and economic debate masquerading as a scientific debate.

 

Even when one takes as given the consensus view of how and why global warming operates, the policies do not flow inevitably and plainly from the science. The main obstacle to adopting an effective global-warming policy in the United States is not, contra Neil deGrasse Tyson et al., skepticism about scientific claims. Rather, the main obstacle to our adopting an effective global-warming policy is that the warming globe has upon it China, India, etc. Global warming is a global issue, and even radical cuts in the U.S. emissions would have little practical effect in the absence of similarly serious commitments in the rest of the world. And it is here that Tyson and his acolytes refuse to deal with reality.

 

Forget about getting China to agree to artificially lower its future standard of living; here in the real world, even progressives in rich countries are backing away from modest global-warming policies.

 

Data point: Even Australia’s Labor leader feels obliged to swear that the carbon tax his party is running on isn’t a carbon tax, as pointed out by the Sydney Morning Herald (via Watts Up With That). Australia, a rich country, had a carbon tax and, after feeling its effects, repealed it. Australian Labor has pledged its opposition to reinstating a carbon tax, even if that pledge is something less than convincing.

 

If you cannot get rich countries to adhere to relatively modest emissions controls, good luck getting poor countries to back the radical ones that would be required to satisfy the scientific consensus target for preventing the expected warming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.spiked-on...33#.VC_wjpm3OSy

 

Environmentalism has become a religion.

 

' I have always been left in terms of social issues and right in terms of economic policy. Environmental protection cannot be classified in this simplistic left-right scheme, because I position it in the centre, between those fronts. I think the absence of scientifically justifiable demands, combined with a left, anti-American and anti-market attitude, led the environmental movement into the ideological impasse in which it lies today.'

 

thanks for linking that article. I find his approach to environmentalism to be much, much more sensible than what we hear from Al Gore & company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Not coincidently, the researchers note, their research showed that when plants were exposed to the same higher levels of CO2 as actually occurred over the past century, they were able to absorb on average 16 percent more CO2, which very nearly coincides with the 17 percent error difference earth scientists have found with their climate models.

 

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-10-co2-atmosphere.html#jCp

 

 

I don't believe in coincidence, especially from people who profit from their "findings".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

walruses are just happily unpredictable creatures that do thing like inhabit an island en masse just for a good picture?

are you stating that you don't believe that the ice flow in alaska is significantly decreased.

actually, yes

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2738653/Stunning-satellite-images-summer-ice-cap-thicker-covers-1-7million-square-kilometres-MORE-2-years-ago-despite-Al-Gore-s-prediction-ICE-FREE-now.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
×
×
  • Create New...