Global warming err Climate change HOAX

[Azalin]

You want fascism? Here's your fascism.

 

 

They're heading down a very dangerous path with that crap.

[boyst]

Totally !@#$ Stevie Wonder. Just seconds after saying the night isn't about politics he proclaims climate change to be a factor in weather. !@#$ing moron

 

Fat Beyonce can go !@#$ herself too

[B-Man]

So you're saying that retreating glaciers reveal previous human habitat ?

 

You're saying, in fact, that glaciers were smaller than this very recently, in geological terms?

 

You’re saying the entire Anthropogenic Global Warming boondoggle is a scam?

 

It’s okay we knew it all along.

 

Reindeer hunter stumbles upon 1,100-year-old Viking sword.

[TakeYouToTasker]

Totally !@#$ Stevie Wonder. Just seconds after saying the night isn't about politics he proclaims climate change to be a factor in weather. !@#$ing moron

 

Fat Beyonce can go !@#$ herself too

That's the left excusing their own bad behavior.

 

What he's really saying is that his preferred politics are facts that shouldn't be disputed, and therefor are acceptable to push in moments of crisis, while opposing view points need to shut up because it's impolite to talk politics during times of crisis.

[OCinBuffalo]

A lot of this is correct and a lot of it is crap.

In other words, you have no idea if there is anything good or bad in it, so the best you have is throw FUD at it.

 

God, I want the old crayonz back.

[OCinBuffalo]

Actually, many of the auto companies just went bankrupt. I owned whole foods and they were bought out by Amazon. I got a decent little bonus but nothing out of the world.

 

And I do own some GE

 

But the government should do much more

Yeah, because they didn't compete well enough or innovate. Henry Ford was called a lunatic for paying his workers so much. Some industrialists even tried to drive him out of business because of it. Then, he was called a genius when he specifically designed and made a car that his own workers could afford to buy.

 

So, am I supposed to be feel bad for the other auto companies that didn't have Ford's talent/vision? Am I supposed to feel bad for the buggy-whip makers who lost their jobs due to the car?

 

F No. The government cannot create talent/vision, no matter how much $ it spends.

 

If you find somebody with real talent, who has applied it to solar panels, or algae, (forget wind, that's over), or cold fusion, or whatever: invest.

 

The biggest lie that Global Warming people tell is that there's a pretend "desert" in 2nd round financing, and if only more 2nd rounds were approved, we'd have tons of alternative energy.

 

Here's the truth: almost all of the alternative energy startup fails occur because they fail to prove their concept, or show their model isn't feasible. Thus, nobody will finance a 2nd round. 9/10 times there is no real talent/vision involved. What there was, under Bush and Obama, was corporate welfare, via matching funds for alternative energy startups, which massively reduced risk, but kept reward the same.

 

What there was: a bunch of opportunists who knew they'd get paid either way, fail or no fail, for launching a "green energy" startup, and enough idiot movie stars to throw their $/D congress people from 2006-2010 to throw the taxpayer's $, at them, with no due diligence at all.

[B-Man]

THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED — OR ELSE:

 

Calls to punish skeptics rise with links to climate change, hurricanes.

 

Calls to punish global warming skepticism as a criminal offense have surged in the aftermath of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, but it hasn’t discouraged climate scientists like Judith Curry.

 

A retired Georgia Tech professor, she argued on her Climate Etc. website that Irma, which hit Florida as a Category 4 hurricane on Saturday, was fueled in large part by “very weak” wind shear and that the hurricane intensified despite Atlantic Ocean temperatures that weren’t unusually warm.

 

That is the kind of talk that could get policymakers who heed her research hauled before the justice system, if some of those in the climate change movement have their way.

 

“Climate change denial should be a crime,” declared the Sept. 1 headline in the Outline. Mark Hertsgaard argued in a Sept. 7 article in the Nation, titled “C

limate Denialism Is Literally Killing Us,” that “murder is murder” and “we should punish it as such

.”

 

 

 

 

Shut up, they explained.

[Tiberius]

Yeah, because they didn't compete well enough or innovate. Henry Ford was called a lunatic for paying his workers so much. Some industrialists even tried to drive him out of business because of it. Then, he was called a genius when he specifically designed and made a car that his own workers could afford to buy.

 

So, am I supposed to be feel bad for the other auto companies that didn't have Ford's talent/vision? Am I supposed to feel bad for the buggy-whip makers who lost their jobs due to the car?

 

F No. The government cannot create talent/vision, no matter how much $ it spends.

 

If you find somebody with real talent, who has applied it to solar panels, or algae, (forget wind, that's over), or cold fusion, or whatever: invest.

 

The biggest lie that Global Warming people tell is that there's a pretend "desert" in 2nd round financing, and if only more 2nd rounds were approved, we'd have tons of alternative energy.

 

Here's the truth: almost all of the alternative energy startup fails occur because they fail to prove their concept, or show their model isn't feasible. Thus, nobody will finance a 2nd round. 9/10 times there is no real talent/vision involved. What there was, under Bush and Obama, was corporate welfare, via matching funds for alternative energy startups, which massively reduced risk, but kept reward the same.

 

What there was: a bunch of opportunists who knew they'd get paid either way, fail or no fail, for launching a "green energy" startup, and enough idiot movie stars to throw their $/D congress people from 2006-2010 to throw the taxpayer's $, at them, with no due diligence at all.

 

no. The energy companies with gas, coal etc. just have the advantage now because they are scaled up to production. Solar, wind and a few others would work--are working--once they get a bigger market share and when a few more technologies make them even better, like more battery storage. The government could absolutely give the industry another boost and it would help. You think all those advances in avionics in the 40's and 50's were done alone with private industry? Nope. It was the government that got us to the moon.

THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED — OR ELSE:

 

Calls to punish skeptics rise with links to climate change, hurricanes.

 

 

 

Calls to punish global warming skepticism as a criminal offense have surged in the aftermath of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, but it hasn’t discouraged climate scientists like Judith Curry.

 

A retired Georgia Tech professor, she argued on her Climate Etc. website that Irma, which hit Florida as a Category 4 hurricane on Saturday, was fueled in large part by “very weak” wind shear and that the hurricane intensified despite Atlantic Ocean temperatures that weren’t unusually warm.

 

That is the kind of talk that could get policymakers who heed her research hauled before the justice system, if some of those in the climate change movement have their way.

 

“Climate change denial should be a crime,” declared the Sept. 1 headline in the Outline. Mark Hertsgaard argued in a Sept. 7 article in the Nation, titled “Climate Denialism Is Literally Killing Us,” that “murder is murder” and “we should punish it as such.”

 

 

 

 

Shut up, they explained.

Oh man!

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

They're heading down a very dangerous path with that crap.

It's the natural logical extension of a governing philosophy which holds the freedom of speech with contempt.

[4merper4mer]

no. The energy companies with gas, coal etc. just have the advantage now because they are scaled up to production. Solar, wind and a few others would work--are working--once they get a bigger market share and when a few more technologies make them even better, like more battery storage. The government could absolutely give the industry another boost and it would help. You think all those advances in avionics in the 40's and 50's were done alone with private industry? Nope. It was the government that got us to the moon.

 

 

Most disruptive technologies that succeed end up succeeding because there are disruptive, not because they are whiny. I haven't researched it but I think that is why they are called disruptive technologies and not whiny technologies.

[B-Man]

CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL, AND IT’S VERY, VERY OLD: Himalayan glaciers melting for 400 years, finds BSIP study.

[DC Tom]

CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL, AND IT’S VERY, VERY OLD: Himalayan glaciers melting for 400 years, finds BSIP study.

 

Ever since the "Little Ice Age."

[row_33]

 

Most disruptive technologies that succeed end up succeeding because there are disruptive, not because they are whiny. I haven't researched it but I think that is why they are called disruptive technologies and not whiny technologies.

 

No....

 

You go and find a winning horse and then create bogus reasons why it won, never considering the winner had better people, more $$$$ backing the idea, they merely improved something already invented without giving credit.

 

Then spin it so that 1000 to 1 shots win all the time, look at these 2 examples!!!

 

you can too!!!!

[B-Man]

Climate change not as threatening to planet as previously thought, new research suggests

by Henry Bodkin

 

Original Article

 

Climate change poses less of an immediate threat to the planet than previously thought because scientists got their modelling wrong, a new study has found. New research by British scientists reveals the world is being polluted and warming up less quickly than 10-year-old forecasts predicted, giving countries more time to get a grip on their carbon output.

[boyst]

Climate change not as threatening to planet as previously thought, new research suggests

by Henry Bodkin

Original Article

Climate change poses less of an immediate threat to the planet than previously thought because scientists got their modelling wrong, a new study has found. New research by British scientists reveals the world is being polluted and warming up less quickly than 10-year-old forecasts predicted, giving countries more time to get a grip on their carbon output.

there was a great headline I saw this morning for the wapo maybe. "planet not in dangerous to climate change as much as thought - if study is correct"

[Tiberius]

Climate change not as threatening to planet as previously thought, new research suggests

by Henry Bodkin

 

Original Article

 

Climate change poses less of an immediate threat to the planet than previously thought because scientists got their modelling wrong, a new study has found. New research by British scientists reveals the world is being polluted and warming up less quickly than 10-year-old forecasts predicted, giving countries more time to get a grip on their carbon output.

 

From your article:

 

An unexpected “revolution” in affordable renewable energy has also contributed to the more positive outlook.

 

But if we want our children and grand children to have a decent planet we need to act

[row_33]

we are just a nanosecond of time in the universe of billions of years and countless galaxies

 

we aren't doing anything that will effect the forces of nature as they happen on us

 

but recycling and cutting down on waste can help somewhat make it a better place to live

[Tiberius]

we are just a nanosecond of time in the universe of billions of years and countless galaxies

 

we aren't doing anything that will effect the forces of nature as they happen on us

 

but recycling and cutting down on waste can help somewhat make it a better place to live

Oh no, human activity is causing the climate to warm with many negative affects ahead

[row_33]

Oh no, human activity is causing the climate to warm with many negative affects ahead

 

okay..... the models keep failing, it's a religion for which modern liberals have twice the unbased superstitions of medieval peasants

 

but whatever...

[Tiberius]

 

okay..... the models keep failing, it's a religion for which modern liberals have twice the unbased superstitions of medieval peasants

 

but whatever...

Its science

[keepthefaith]

no. The energy companies with gas, coal etc. just have the advantage now because they are scaled up to production. Solar, wind and a few others would work--are working--once they get a bigger market share and when a few more technologies make them even better, like more battery storage. The government could absolutely give the industry another boost and it would help. You think all those advances in avionics in the 40's and 50's were done alone with private industry? Nope. It was the government that got us to the moon.

 

 

 

Tell you what would give the industry a boost....

 

Give people the option to pay double their electric bill and apply the overage to the higher cost per kWh to wind/solar production. No need for the government to get in between renewable energy production and the will of the people.

[row_33]

nuclear is the option for energy, not even second place

 

but there are obvious problems, exacerbated by the same folks screaming about how a smokestack is changing the weather on Mars.

[B-Man]

GLOBAL WARMING? NO SO FAST SAY SCIENTISTS!

 

The climatistas really are a fun and lovable bunch to watch. Also pathetic.

They are victims of their own doomsday scenarios of inexorably rising greenhouse gas levels and the parade of horribles soon to follow. The Paris Accord, even if fully implemented, will barely slow any future warming accord to the standard climate orthodoxy (better known as “The Consensus”). That’s why the former NASA chief climatista James Hansen called the Paris Accord “a fraud.”

What do you do when, having told us for more than 20 years that “we only have ten years left” to act, the deadline passes and we haven’t got anywhere close to a pathway to stabilize (let alone reduce) carbon emissions? You change the scenario is what you do.

{SNIP}

What’s really going on here, of course, is that slowing the rate of predicted global warming is necessary to keep the climate cargo cult going, especially the alternative energy racket, not to mention the climate diplomacy circus. That’s what the actual Nature Geoscience article really says if you want to suffer through the whole thing. The very last sentence gives the whole game away:

Our analysis suggests that ‘pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5◦C’ is not chasing a geophysical impossibility, but is likely to require a significant strengthening of the NDCs

[Nationally Determined Contributions]

at the first opportunity in 2020 to hedge against the risks of a higher-than expected climate response and/or economic, technical or political impediments to sustained reductions at historically unprecedented rates after 2030.

Translation: Global warming models have overestimated warming, so we need to double down on global climate policy! Yeah, that’s the ticket.

 

[row_33]

man is just a fluke that will soon disappear, which is well encouraged by many writers on the left, big deal, nature will go on

 

embrace it climate folk

[Tiberius]

 

Tell you what would give the industry a boost....

 

Give people the option to pay double their electric bill and apply the overage to the higher cost per kWh to wind/solar production. No need for the government to get in between renewable energy production and the will of the people.

That would go against human nature and wouldn't work

[DC Tom]

That would go against human nature and wouldn't work

 

:lol: :lol:

[grinreaper]

That would go against human nature and wouldn't work

So in other words, we need the government to tell us what is best for us?

[B-Man]

[Gary M]

That would go against human nature and wouldn't work

 

Resistance is futile, you must assimilate.

[IDBillzFan]

I got a laugh in the thread at TBD about the near record warmth in Buffalo for the games, and someone wrote "Buy a hybrid."

 

Yep. That'll fix it.

 

You get a hybrid. And YOU get a hybrid. And EVERYONE gets a hybrid! And together we'll bring down the summer temperatures in Buffalo.

[row_33]

and pray in front of volcanoes so that they won't erupt

 

in the name of the liberal goddess Hillary

[unbillievable]

So a liberal friend told me that he doesn't care if the models keep getting the timeline wrong, it only matters that they are showing us the direction it's going, which is total global apocalypse; even if it takes 1000 years.

 

So I asked him if he was willing to go back to the stone age to stop it. He said "it's better than doing nothing."

 

Can't really argue further than that.

 

Some people want to live like cave-men and others do not. That's the real difference in this debate.

[/dev/null]

So a liberal friend told me that he doesn't care if the models keep getting the timeline wrong, it only matters that they are showing us the direction it's going, which is total global apocalypse; even if it takes 1000 years.

 

So I asked him if he was willing to go back to the stone age to stop it. He said "it's better than doing nothing."

 

Can't really argue further than that.

 

Some people want to live like cave-men and others do not. That's the real difference in this debate.

 

It's not so much that they want to live like cave-men. I'd say it's more accurate they want to live like serfs

[DC Tom]

So a liberal friend told me that he doesn't care if the models keep getting the timeline wrong, it only matters that they are showing us the direction it's going, which is total global apocalypse; even if it takes 1000 years.

 

So I asked him if he was willing to go back to the stone age to stop it. He said "it's better than doing nothing."

 

Can't really argue further than that.

 

Some people want to live like cave-men and others do not. That's the real difference in this debate.

 

No, they want others to live like cave-men. If they wanted to live like cave-men, they would be already.

 

Or they just want others to die. Most radical environmentalists advocate policies that would ultimately kill a couple billion people.

[Taro T]

No, they want others to live like cave-men. If they wanted to live like cave-men, they would be already.

 

Or they just want others to die. Most radical environmentalists advocate policies that would ultimately kill a couple billion people.

But, it reeaaaly isn't fair that better farming practices, a reduction in wars, GMO's etc. made 'The Population Bomb' so inaccurate. Ehrlich was a visionary & his vision should come to be.

 

It's far more important that patron saints be proven to be righteous than 3rd world citizens lead full lives. Non-organically farmed foods will kill EVERYONE.

Edited September 19, 2017 by Taro T

[row_33]

Libs want to boss everyone around, amusing as they rarely are leaders in any capacity in life.

[keepthefaith]

I got a laugh in the thread at TBD about the near record warmth in Buffalo for the games, and someone wrote "Buy a hybrid."

 

Yep. That'll fix it.

 

You get a hybrid. And YOU get a hybrid. And EVERYONE gets a hybrid! And together we'll bring down the summer temperatures in Buffalo.

Yes and if we go to all electric cars we won't have hurricanes any longer.

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..............Left think.

[B-Man]

Settled ?

 

 

Alarm as study reveals world’s tropical forests are huge carbon emission source
Guardian [uK], by Jonathan Watts

 

Original Article

 

The world’s tropical forests are so degraded they have become a source rather than a sink of carbon emissions, according to a new study that highlights the urgent need to protect and restore the Amazon and similar regions. Researchers found that forest areas in South America, Africa and Asia – which have until recently played a key role in absorbing greenhouse gases – are now releasing 425 teragrams of carbon annually, which is more than all the traffic in the United States.

 

(Snip)

 

“This shows that we can’t just sit back. The forest is not doing what we thought it was doing,”

 

 

 

 

[row_33]

Fox is the only network that at least gives the opposing side, a legit speaker for the liberal view, to say their dizzle.

Edited September 29, 2017 by row_33