Sunday, November 15, 2009

'Global Warming' Ecotard-Scientismists caught falsifying data.

'Global Warming' Ecotard-Scientismists caught falsifying data.

Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:12:39 -0500
R402526
1 month ago
SunTzu

There’s a kind of warm, glowing IRONY to be got from the FACT that the Global Warming Scientismist idiots had to cut short their ‘expedition’ due to having underestimated the severe cold temperatures to be found in the Arctic at that time of year.

Due to the extreme cold conditions they were not fully prepared for, they completed less than half of the planned trip.

That’s what comes from believing your own lies, I guess

These are the type of people Global Warming alarmist lying idiots like GNNer Livingston and SS (shitshaper) look up to and rely upon to supply them with an endless stream of ‘Global Warming’ lies and alarmism.


R402528
1 month ago
ill_logik

kay what about deforestation? desertification? soil erosion? species extinction? clean drinking water?

taking away the “maybe” of global warming, or climate change (lets just assume and stop burning stupid amounts of oil, umkay?), there still is a massive environmental catastrophe going down.

can you agree with that?


R402527
1 month ago
ill_logik

dbl

Post Modified: 10/16/09 14:55:54

R402534
1 month ago
SunTzu

kay what about deforestation? desertification? soil erosion? species extinction? clean drinking water?

What about them?

I have said nothing about these things. For some reason you seem to think it vitally important to act as if I had questioned the existance any of those things. Which is very strange behaviour in my opinion.

It’s kinda funny that whenever evidence is presented that Clima-tard ‘Scientists’ are caught telling lies, or whenever evidence is presented which negates the whole foundation of the ridiculous Global warming theories, someone feels they have to pop up with a:

YEAH, but what about . . . .

and then go on to talk about something not related to the subject matter of ‘Global Warming’.

Why do you ecotards always think it is somehow a good idea to try to erect strawman arguments when people start to question the whole BS surrounding the subject of Global Warming?

‘kay what about the:
lies?
falsification of data?
so-called ‘homogenisation’ of raw-data?
‘Global warming’ alarmism?
refusal to allow peer-review of the raw-data upon which all the Global Warming theories are based?
refusal to acknowledge that, according to the latest data, ‘Global Warming ceased in 2000?
refusal to even pretend to notice that the Sun is probably responsible for what warming did occur?

What about all those things?

Can we not all agree that the ecotards, Clima-tards and Scientismists have seriously damaged their credibility by engaging in those tactics?

Can we not all agree that the ecotards and Scientismists have seriously damaged their prospects for agreement and action on the environmental issues facing us through their constant lying and alarmism about Climatalogical issues?

Can we not all agree that due to their very obvious lies, gullibility and now proven to be false tales of ‘global warming’ alarmism, any future statments of those self-same ecotards, Clima-tards and Scientismists could, and probably should, be treated with the utmost suspicion?

taking away the “maybe” of global warming, or climate change – lets just assume and stop burning stupid amounts of oil, umkay?

no actually, we can’t agree that there is no ‘maybe’ of ‘Global Warming’, especally when gov’ts all over the world are starting to enact laws which sriously effect th lives of billions of people all based on an discredited idea supported by bad science, incorrect data, ridiculous alarmism and outright lies.

Frankly I’m astounded that you’d even think for a second that anyone should agree with such stupidity.

It seems you have a need to believe fictions and fairytales, but why you insist that everyone else also has to believe these fictions and fairytales is something I cannot understand. Perhaps you should take up religion.

if you want to make an argument that ‘OIL is teh bad!” go ahead and make that argument. But if you want to come out and lie that ‘CO2 causes Global Warming’ you have no right to expect me to do anything other than ridicule you for your obvious stupidity, kay?

there still is a massive environmental catastrophe going down.

Again – what does that have to do with me pointing out that Clima-tards such as GNNer Livingston and Scientismists such as GNNer SS (Shitshaper) are a bunch of idiotic liars or gullible fools?

Since I have made no statements regarding the environment I really cannot understand why you think it intelligent to repeatedly act as if I were claiming that there are no environmental issues. Your behaviour in this regard is quite ridiculous.

Post Modified: 10/16/09 18:48:12

R402535
1 month ago
ill_logik

i never said i agree with global warming alarmists, i think most of the “ecotards” should be focused on the easily provable crisis mentioned above. i think instead of harping on the global warming peoples, we should acknowledge the possibility (i still think we should act out of caution), and put our energy into those previously mentioned crisis.

i wasn’t trying to build teh strawman, i honestly think global warming is a huge red herring. i think the combative tone most people take in the debate, pro or con, adds to the stupidity and lack of clarity about what the true problems are.


R402538
1 month ago
FloydAnderson

teh solution teh control freak elites have for teh problem of man-made global warming sure seems to be more taxation and control over people’s lives. this will not somehow magically solve real environmental problems. global warming alarmism coming from the sources Livingston links to over and over is designed to get people to accept global warming legislation and policies, similar to how teh 9/11 inside job was used to erode people’s rights and keep them afraid of a perceived dangerous threat.

so yes it is very important to distinguish between global warming and other environmental issues.


R402539
1 month ago
Trainspotter

Floyd – You make sense sometimes and that scares me, but no matter…. Here’s a question. If the elite want global warming hysteria, and the warming is actually a fiction, and the US is a center of power for same said elite, then how do you explain the position taken by the last however many years of US administration to fight any acknowledgment let alone action so far as climate change?


R402542
1 month ago
FloydAnderson

that was when teh nwo was taking its right foot forward, now it’s taking its left foot forward. they had little pig devil george w. bush not give a shit about the environment or teh global warming which frustrated people and now lord obama is all like, hey i’ll do whatever i can to fight teh war on climate change and people are like, oh yeah man, obama wants to clean up the environmental problems. perhaps it is a well-thought out long term scam like i think it is. :)


R402544
1 month ago
Trainspotter

Has Obama made any indications of a genuine shift in such regard? Aside from “hope for a better world” blah blah blah talk?


R402545
1 month ago
FloydAnderson

U.S. President Barack Obama at the UN Summit on Climate Change 9/22/2009


R402546
1 month ago
FloydAnderson

R402550
1 month ago
SunTzu

If the elite want global warming hysteria, and the warming is actually a fiction, and the US is a center of power for same said elite, then how do you explain the position taken by the last however many years of US administration to fight any acknowledgment let alone action so far as climate change?

divide and conquer.

Governance and enslavement through distraction and alarmism.

Attempting to control both sides of an argument about an imaginary ‘Threat to teh Climate!!!’ so as to distract from other important issues such as the deliberate implosion of the economy to create mass-unemployment, or the illegal agressive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, or the threat of an unprovoked attack on yet another innocent country

possibly a disagreement between various of the Elite as to how best to convince the ignorant fearful western masses of the need for mass cull of the human population – do they control/frighten/kill all through weapons/war/fear-of-terrorism, or through fear of the future and the implementation of draconian laws suppossedly necessitated by the imminent and alarmist ‘Threat to the CLIMATE!!!!’ – why not use both?

Either way they appear determined to implement a Police State in the West and permanent war in the 3rd World

Orwell’s 1984 writ large, along with a large serving of Huxley’s Brave New world


R402551
1 month ago
SunTzu

i wasn’t trying to build teh strawman, i honestly think global warming is a huge red herring.

yet for some reason you neglected to mention that in your original post

adds to the stupidity and lack of clarity about what the true problems are.

and I think the blog above, lifted from Watts Up With That? very definitely adds some much needed clarity about what the problem is, what the problem is not, and who is telling lies.

WHY Ecotards, Clima-tards and Scientismists feel the need to peddle such lies is a matter of some importance and much debate.

The actions being taken by Gov’ts all over the world to combat what appears to be a non-existant ‘threat’ is also a matter of some importance and not nearly enough debate.

Why you felt the need to ignore it and attempt to switch subject, whether intentional or not, is still a mystery. Why even bother to comment at all if all you had to say was just more

YEAH, but what about [insert some random Eco-sounding CRISIS here] . . .”

Post Modified: 10/16/09 21:01:16

R402559
1 month ago
SunTzu

i honestly think global warming is a huge red herring.

well so far ive not so much as once seen you make that argument1 to the Clima-tards such as GNNer Livingston and Scientismists such as GNNer SS (Shitshaper).

Curious that.

very curious that you make that argument now, to me, rather than to the ‘global warming’ Clima-tards such as GNNer Livingston and ‘global warming’ Scientismists such as GNNer SS (Shitshaper).

Wouldn’t it actually make much more sense to argue that

i honestly think global warming is a huge red herring.

in a blog by a ‘global warming’ Clima-tard such as GNNer Livingston or a blog by a ‘global warming’ Scientismist-idiot such as GNNer SS (Shitshaper), rather than using it as an argument against ‘global warming’-skepticism, in a blog by a ‘global warming’ skeptic such as myself?

Just a thought . . .

1 NOW woud be a opportune moment to prove me wrong on that statement by providing a link to evidence that you in fact already have made that argument to Clima-tards such as GNNer Livingston and Scientismists such as GNNer SS (Shitshaper) prior to me pointing out that I’ve never yet seen you do it.

Post Modified: 10/16/09 22:08:00

R402560
1 month ago
FloydAnderson

SS is giving me a bit of lolz


R402563
1 month ago
SunTzu

i just got tired of typing so many letters

typing ‘SS’ was much more succinct and therefore marginally decreases the risk of keyboard-induced-RSI, which as we all know is an ever-present cyber-sword-of-damocles

the fact that you find it lulz-worthy is merely an unintended consequence of my cronic laziness

Post Modified: 10/17/09 00:06:52

R402565
1 month ago
FloydAnderson

hmmm…so I’ve been looking back over this blog and i’m thinking that it kinda seems like when obama says he wants a reduction of CO2 emissions, what he’s really saying is that he wants to further restrict the energy access and consumption of the middle classes in the industrialized world and prevent the global poor from ever having sufficient access to lift themselves from poverty , or at least that’s what obama’s masters are getting him to say, because from what i keep hearing these motherfuckers are suppressing energy technology!

Post Modified: 10/16/09 23:07:49

R402575
1 month ago
FloydAnderson

R402577
1 month ago
SunTzu

Post Modified: 10/17/09 00:00:54

R402583
1 month ago
SaryshaganTiger

five


R402594
1 month ago
Trainspotter

Floyd, Sun – I hear what you guys are saying but I’m not convinced that what we’ve seen so far from Obama is anything other than so much hot air, excuse the pun. He speaks to the importance of change but makes no promises and is always careful to throw weight of responsibility to the developing world; all as one might expect given the climate of the debate (hard to avoid puns on this one).

We’ve witnessed a massive transfer of wealth without so much as a blink of the eye, these folks have all the gall in the world. If carbon based repression were part of a larger plan would it not be making itself apparent by now?


R402604
1 month ago
FloydAnderson

fail

The Climate Change Bill has already passed the House.

H.R. 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2454/show

OpenCongress Summary
This is the Waxman-Markley comprehensive energy bill, known for short as “ACES,” that includes a cap-and-trade global warming reduction plan designed to reduce economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions 17 percent by 2020. Other provisions include new renewable requirements for utilities, studies and incentives regarding new carbon capture and sequestration technologies, energy efficiency incentives for homes and buildings, and grants for green jobs, among other things.

Banksters Love Cap-and-Trade: The Well-Placed and Well-Connected are Set to Make Trillions Off New Climate Bill

Teleprompter-Reader-in-Chief Praises Tyrannical Climate Bill

Bureaucrats Will Carry Out Mandatory Home Inspections Under Climate Bill


R402605
1 month ago
Trainspotter

Ok then! My bad. So I have some reading to do. Thanks for the links, I’m gonna try and get away from this damned machine and enjoy the sunshine while it lasts, I’ll follow up on that info later.


R402607
1 month ago
Truthcansuk

Floyd – global warming alarmism coming from the sources Livingston links to over and over is designed to get people to accept global warming legislation and policies…

Yes. Scientists are trying to get you to accept their data, and the logical remedies to fight the problem that their data reveals. Fuckers…

Floyd – similar to how teh 9/11 inside job was used to erode people’s rights and keep them afraid of a perceived dangerous threat.

A bucket of fail in an ocean of stupid… Hardly even makes a ripple anymore, you knwo?


R402608
1 month ago
Dilated_Rebel

“and then go on to talk about something not related to the subject matter of ‘Global Warming”

I dont think deforestation, dead-zones in the ocean, desertification, soil erosion, acidification of the occean, the ongoing holocene extinction, scarcity of potable water, global warming, etc are unrelated.

They’ve been caused.


R402610
1 month ago
Biondello

Perhaps you should rely on peer-reviewed data presented in journals like Nature instead of public relations fiascoes? The only thing you’ve proven here is that a group of people value career advancement over scientific advancement, not really a new phenomenon. You haven’t ‘questioned’ anything that could even be remotely considered real science, you’ve just debunked something that was a PR stunt.

Even in scientific journals there is plenty of falsified data, which is generally found and proven false very quickly by other scientists.

What exactly is the purpose of childish name-calling? Do you think that makes you seem more or less credible?


R402638
1 month ago
FloydAnderson

Perhaps you should rely on peer-reviewed data presented in journals like Nature instead of public relations fiascoes?

Do you have evidence that mankind is to blame for a supposed catastrophic change in the climate.


R402653
1 month ago
SaryshaganTiger

Yes. Scientists are trying to get you to accept their data, and the logical remedies to fight the problem that their data reveals. Fuckers…

No, they’re fear-mongering using falsified data.
There’s a difference if you allow yourself to see it.

What was your problem with the statement about 9/11?
It wasn’t used to scare people and erode liberties?


R402654
1 month ago
SaryshaganTiger

I dont think deforestation, dead-zones in the ocean, desertification, soil erosion, acidification of the occean, the ongoing holocene extinction, scarcity of potable water, global warming, etc are unrelated.

The point was that whenever the science behind supposed GW is challenged the other subjects are kicked up as a smoke screen.
The debate isn’t over. You lot just refuse to have it.

They’ve been caused.

Genius.
Prove human activity is warming the planet.
Strawman one-liners don’t cut it anymore in case you haven’t noticed.


R402655
1 month ago
SaryshaganTiger

The only thing you’ve proven here is that a group of people value career advancement over scientific advancement,

A group called the global warming movement.
This is far from an isolated incident.

You haven’t ‘questioned’ anything that could even be remotely considered real science

That’s pretty hard when there is none to question.
The made-to-order computer models are wrong.
You are white-knuckling a load of shit.

What exactly is the purpose of childish name-calling? Do you think that makes you seem more or less credible?

There is history behind this debate on this site.
Your side is far from holding the high ground as far as name-calling is concerned.

So fuck the blatant lying hucksters and the drool-dispensing sycophants who follow them.


R402754
1 month ago
Dilated_Rebel

“Prove human activity is warming the planet”

Ummm, lets go over what I had posted previously:

“deforestation, dead-zones in the ocean, desertification, soil erosion, acidification of the occean, the ongoing holocene extinction, scarcity of potable water, global warming…”

Hmmm, it seems I only mentioned global warming, right?

And of course, nothing from that list finds its origins in human civilization.

You’re right, that was a straw man arguement.


R402758
1 month ago
SaryshaganTiger

Hmmm, it seems I only mentioned global warming, right?

What the fuck?
You lumped global warming in with things that are obviously our fault.
Prove it belongs there.

And of course, nothing from that list finds its origins in human civilization.

Nothing from that list proves the anthropogenic global warming theory.
That is the point.


R402776
1 month ago
microdot

The climate change threat that you just KNOW Obama’s talking about is the change in climate wrought by the new, non-corporate-centric, information environment.

There’s no question, it’s clearly cocking up their plans for the future of The Empire.

We know Obama & Co are seriously concerned about Global Warming and Climate Change because they’re cutting WAY back on their use of Dinosaur Bone fuels and creating lots of new jobs in the United States to create and market a whole new kind of tranportation and HVAC model.


R402777
1 month ago
microdot

U.S. military reduces dependency on fossil fuels

WASHINGTON, April 16, 2009 — The U.S. defense department on Wednesday announced that it has reduced dependency on fossil fuels, especially foreign oil, becoming the “greenest” of federal agencies in the country.

The Pentagon said in a press release that the U.S. military operations worldwide have derived a full 10 percent of their power from sources other than fossil fuels. [undoubtedly a euphemism for biofuels, the corporate scam to drive up the price of food so naive economies have to “borrow” from the IMF, again]

“As the planet’s single largest energy consumer, the U.S. military is increasing its reliance on alternative and renewable energy sources [biofuels] to provide power to everything from soldiers in the field to bases and installations around the world,” it said.

The defense department made the announcement as a way to mark the Earth Day 2009 that falls on April 22.

According to the Pentagon’s statistics, the department’s total energy costs for fiscal 2006 and 2007 were above 13 billion dollars, and reached 20 billion dollars in 2008 due to the spike in oil prices [which Wall Street also fabricated out of thin air.

Pentagon officials noted that the reduction of dependence on fossil fuels is becoming increasingly critical to national security and saving lives “at a time when the amount of energy consumed by U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan has surpassed that of all other wars in U.S. history.”

As one of the “green” initiatives, all of the four U.S. military services have established energy task forces and the Pentagon also plans to appoint a Defense Department “energy czar” to oversee conservation efforts.

In addition, a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency program is developing jet fuel from algae, bacteria and rapeseed, according to the military. (PNA/Xinhua) ALM


R402778
1 month ago
microdot

Saving “Eisdicken” to disk, LOL.


R402802
1 month ago
Dilated_Rebel

“You lumped global warming in with things that are obviously our fault.”

Oh, so you’ve noticed the common thread?

“Prove it belongs there.”

Whats the point? Science isnt supposed to be a prophetic tool we can all use to determine our fate. Science is best used in hindsight to determine what happened, not whats going to happen.

That being said, human civilization is fucked. If you want to belive that mankinds main source of fuel (fossil fuels) have had no effect on our ‘climate,’ go right ahead.

I just think its queer how you dont deny humans negative effect(s) on our planet, yet think that all those negative effects dont add up to something bigger.


R402806
1 month ago
FloydAnderson

Whats the point?

The point is that there is an agenda to greatly cut carbon emissions based on the lie that CO2 is primarily responsible for changes in the climate.

That being said, human civilization is fucked.

Fucked because of global warming or fucked because of the power-down being implemented in the name of fighting global warming, combined with top-down population reduction and eugenics policies, intentionally orchestrated economic collapses, more governmental control over people’s lives, and ever-expanding wars based on the lie of 9/11?


R402809
1 month ago
FloydAnderson

Do you think the method these folks have in mind for greatly cutting carbon emissions will be some great and loving process?


R402815
1 month ago
Trainspotter

Elite control and intentions are on one side of the debate. For my part I have no problem entertaining much of what you put forward in this regard Floyd. That said, what of the possibility that the warming is real and merely being taken advantage of by said elite?

Anthropogenic global warming via massive input into the atmosphere of greenhouse gases just hasn’t been effectively proven – from the Alex Jones point of view (if I may generalise it that way), or debunked; from the more mainstream perspective which pretty much takes it for granted. Heads in sand? Maybe. There’s a lot of fear wrapped up in this as well it should be pointed out. People don’t abandon ideas easily when there is fear involved, regardless of whether they fear what they are running from, or towards.

Floyd, I hope you are right about warming, I really do. I pray you are wrong about a whole pile of other issues. Ahhh prayer….. Phuck.


R402818
1 month ago
FloydAnderson

That said, what of the possibility that the warming is real and merely being taken advantage of by said elite?

Climate change is real and being taken advantage of by the elite. The climate goes through changes. It’s a matter of what the cause is. Seems to me that the cycles of the sun is what overwhelmingly drives the climate of the planets in our solar system. But there is a huge propaganda campaign going on that aims to convince people that humanity is to blame for changes in the climate and that those changes are very dangerous.


R402835
1 month ago
Dilated_Rebel

“Fucked because of global warming or fucked because of the power-down being implemented in the name of fighting global warming, combined with top-down population reduction and eugenics policies, intentionally orchestrated economic collapses, more governmental control over people’s lives, and ever-expanding wars based on the lie of 9/11?”

Neither. We’re fucked because our current model of economics, kapitalism, is anti-life. As long as kapital is involved in our lives, our lives will continue to tread along between fascism and servitude. The idea of both private-run kapital and state-run kapital, must end.

The idea of green fascism is definitely a possibility, but so to is a green/social revolution, from the bottom-up.

Orchestrated economic collapse? Is everything a conspiracy to you? You dont think that when you gamble, and gamble greedily and stupidly, you will lose? What ever the cause, Im all for ridding ourselves of private conglomerate banks.

“The climate goes through changes”

So you acknowledge this?

Im sure you also acknowledge the time frames for ‘natural’ and cyclical warming are in the tens of thousands of years, not merely 2 centuries.

“But there is a huge propaganda campaign going on that aims to convince people that humanity is to blame for changes in the climate and that those changes are very dangerous.”

Right, it’s all a propaganda campaign. Humans have actually been beneficial to earth.

Try pouring oil in your vegetable garden plots, I heard hydrocarbons do wonders for tomatos!


R402836
1 month ago
Dilated_Rebel

“Anthropogenic global warming via massive input into the atmosphere of greenhouse gases just hasn’t been effectively proven”

Nor has it been effectively disproven. Also, there is waaaaaaay more evidence in favor of. Like the Arctic icesheets melting away in summer, allowing for a great northwest passage, but thats probably a propaganda campaign.


R402839
1 month ago
Trainspotter

Hi DR,

I believe in anthropogenic climate change. I would very much like to believe in the impact that sun cycles might have in the last 200 years, but I’m unconvinced by the conspiracy theories proffered up thus far.

I think Floyd is right regards the engineering of the economic collapse though. Cui bono? C’est plus simple je pense.


R402844
1 month ago
lday

Proving human activity is increasing the planet’s temperature is elementary. Consider nuclear energy. There are about 250 nuke plants using atomic energy. The process heats up the downstream water of the rivers they are located on. This disperses the new heat but it is clearly new: it would not occur without human activity.

This proof is easy. A more pertinent question is if we can adapt to the changes we obviously create. The “red herring” is equating carbon dioxide emissions with “global warming”. This is very convenient for nuclear energy proponents and may possibly be true because of the “greenhouse effect”. Has that been “proven”?

btw, it has been proven that oil is not a “fossil fuel”. Sensible researchers should stop using that 18th-century misnomer because it makes them look like fools who have been brainwashed by the Rockefeller Bible.


R402845
1 month ago
Trainspotter

I may be misreading you lday, but if you are questioning the validity of what is termed the “greenhouse effect”...

The greenhouse effect has been understood for a very long time. It is simply the name given to the machinations which, taken together, govern the temperature here on earth. So much energy in, so much insulation, so much heat retention capacity, so much radiation back into space…etc.. Add it all up and we get what we get – an average range of temperatures that make life, here, as we know it, possible. Mess with any of the variables and you throw things out of whack. The debate about “out of whack” and/or the variable in question is new, the consensus on what we think of as the greenhouse effect is not.

btw, it has been proven that oil is not a “fossil fuel”. Sensible researchers should stop using that 18th-century misnomer because it makes them look like fools who have been brainwashed by the Rockefeller Bible.

Care to clarify?


R402846
1 month ago
FloydAnderson

We’re fucked because our current model of economics, kapitalism, is anti-life.

oh ok. well, I don’t think we are fucked. i think the nwo agenda is fucked. it is becoming so obvious and tyrannical and people are figuring out what’s up.

Orchestrated economic collapse? Is everything a conspiracy to you?

no

Im sure you also acknowledge the time frames for ‘natural’ and cyclical warming are in the tens of thousands of years, not merely 2 centuries.

I don’t even understand what that means, much less acknowledge it.

Right, it’s all a propaganda campaign. Humans have actually been beneficial to earth.

that’s a pretty weak argument for man-made climate change.

Nor has it been effectively disproven. Also, there is waaaaaaay more evidence in favor of.

Like what?


R402859
4 weeks ago
lday

Well, it’s great to have an atmosphere to moderate our temperature, and they do seem to have been spraying some extra added ingredients, but the ‘greenhouse’ doesn’t create the heat directly. Human activity is increasing heat. Whether it is serious or not is a separate issue.

re: abiotic oil, I won’t be the one to make
box of rocks jokes
but it did seem that the astronomers
clobbered the geologists in the great “origin of oil” debate.

“...The astronomers have been able to find that hydrocarbons, as oil, gas and coal are called, occur on many other planetary bodies. They are a common substance in the universe. You find it in the kind of gas clouds that made systems like our solar system. You find large quantities of hydrocarbons in them. Is it reasonable to think that our little Earth, one of the planets, contains oil and gas for reasons that are all its own and that these other bodies have it because it was built into them when they were born? “

http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/thread6640.html&sid=2e7d97c8e3789aa64f5f4e81d45be954

If you like the greenhouse metaphor that site is way into atmosphere.

(It was Fletcher Prouty’s joke that modern U.S. geologists
were brainwashed by “Rockefeller’s Bible”.
It’s googlible.
Oil is a ‘fossil fuel’ in the same legalistic way a tomato in the U.S. is a ‘vegetable’.
In reality oil is abiotic, an ordinary hydrocarbon,
not a ‘fossil fuel’ :)

There is a lot of economic edifice built on the error:
U.S. oil depletion allowance, Canada’s ‘non-renewable resource’ category, etc.,
but rectifying the language enables the truth movement
to morph into the solutions movement.


R402860
4 weeks ago
Dilated_Rebel

“that’s a pretty weak argument for man-made climate change.”

Lulz, that wasnt arguement for anthropogenic climate change. That was mere sarcasm after your golden comment:

Floyd- “there is a huge propaganda campaign going on that aims to convince people that humanity is to blame for changes in the climate and that those changes are very dangerous”


R402944
4 weeks ago
Livingston

and the source of the blog is…. drum roll… a bumpkin weatherman and contributor to the anit-environmental, pro-fossil fuel agenda of the Heartland Institute... funded by EXXON!

Greenpeace’s ExxonSecrets website lists Heartland as having received $676,500 (unadjusted for inflation) from ExxonMobil between 1998 and 2006.[39]

Contributions include:

* $30,000 in 1998; * $115,000 in 2000; * $90,000 in 2001; * $15,000 in 2002; * $85,000 for General Operating Support and $7,500 for their 19th Anniversary Benefit Dinner in 2003; * $85,000 for General Operating Support and $15,000 for Climate Change Efforts in 2004; and * $119,000 in 2005; and * $115,000 in 2006.

Anthony Watts is an American broadcast meteorologist, editor of the weather and climate blog, Watts Up With That?, owner of the weather graphics company ItWorks, and founder of the SurfaceStations.org project that documents the quality of weather stations across the United States. He is currently meteorologist for KPAY-AM radio.

great investigative journalism as always gang!


R402946
4 weeks ago
Dilated_Rebel

^ What a surprise!!!


R402972
4 weeks ago
jonbray

Livingston you are a one trick pony.

They took the oil money. And that proves that they take money from companies to fund research. Just like any other research is usually funded by a third party. But it is only when that research comes with different results than what you dogmatically believe that is called to question.

What you are unwilling telling use is that research that is funded by a third party (ei: the state, oil corp’s, or Santa Clause) will undoubtedly favor that third party’s position and intention for the said research.

So when a oil company pays group A to research “Global Warming”. Group A finds that there is no “Global Warming”. It was all just a big circle jerk exchange of funds for bullshit science. Obviously Group A wanted more oil money so they told there supporters what they wanted to hear. Wash rinse repeat….

When the State pays group B to research “Global Warming” and group B finds there is “Global Warming” and Co2 is the cause. It was all good science and you can’t argue with science cuz itz da trooth.

What is the fucking difference between group A & B!
One you agree with so its true and the other is just in it for teh oil money.

All research is biased. Anyone can cherry pick data and come to what ever conclusion some fuck is willing to pay for.

So use some fucking logic and read some fucking history and you will see that the State is the machine in which the few in-slave the many. IT IS NOT CAPITALISM, BIG OIL, or WEATHER that will bring us to our knees. It is the STATE.


R402974
4 weeks ago
charlie

If group a is exxon mobile, if fucking matters if they’re researching global warming. just like the tobacco companies researching tobacco.

If you’re going to claim livingston does those things (and i’m not saying he doesn’t), you should probably provide some examples, because at this point, you haven’t said anything that backs up anything (ei? you sound like you’re full of shit).


R402976
4 weeks ago
Livingston

jonbray, you’re understanding of the functioning of business, science, and peer-reviewed academics is naive and suggests to me that you, like most of the other reptile-fearing conspiritards, live in your moms basement still and have never interacted with people in business, science, or academics.

seriously, are you guys teenagers or have you just never worked at all in your lives?

All research is biased actually, science as practiced in the academic world is subjected to a very rigorous system of peer review and scrutiny. instead of being funded to find a certain outcome, experiments and investigations are funded. that’s why something as simple as greenhouse warming which was first understood in 1896 is still being investigated thoroughly. the funding that has been allocated by fossil fuel industry is orders of magnitude higher than that given to actual scientists. watts – the writer of the blog is a weatherman, not a scientist. try checking on the salaries of the scientists you claim are in it for the “funding.” they make shit for money.

the state isn’t paying for climate science – they’re trying to suppress it. for example:

I was told for probably the first time in I don’t know how many years exactly what I was to work on, said Carlin, a 38-year veteran of the EPA. And it was not to work on climate change. One e-mail orders him to update a grants database instead.

Carlin has an undergraduate degree in physics from CalTech and a PhD in economics from MIT. His Web site lists papers about the environment and public policy dating back to 1964, spanning topics from pollution control to environmentally-responsible energy pricing.

and the scientists are not calling for taxes – that’s what is so funny and pathetic about all your arguments at this point – you don’t just deny the evidence of global warming, but you’re actually in denial of what is constantly being written and published by mainstream science: that industry and emissions must end ASAP.

if you haven’t figured your way out of escaping the state you’re already on your knees. and you likely deserve to be there.


R402977
4 weeks ago
Trainspotter

jonbray – You are correct insofar as all research should be treated with doubt, on the basis of the potential for bias, and be subject to thorough review. But to conclude two opposing possibilities A and B is gross oversimplification.

You’ve totally overlooked the scientific method and the peer review process for a start. There is no single “state” funding science. Studies originate from all over the world, from all manner of institution; good ones get published and subsequently others have ample opportunity to tear them apart. Good theories move forward, garbage is swept away.

Aside: Unless all scientists are hatched it is a tough case to make for a conspiracy on such a scale that could possibly unite the perspectives of all non-industry (or non government for that matter) scientists.

To claim that industry can never fund effective science is obviously a wash. But history has many lessons on this front, many of them extremely unfortunate. Assuming good science for the moment, industry often owns the research and thus controls it. Where they don’t own the research outright they deal in contracts, which typically speak to all issues of disclosure. They put out what works for them, they bury anything else, even if the public good is at stake.

History also shows that industry is perfectly willing to fund whack science and let the media have at it in order to influence public opinion. These studies may get called out quite quickly; but being ignored by a journal doesn’t make the news. Maybe someone with a conscious sees to it that a short column on page 16 of any respectable publication results. Meanwhile the Infotainment Machine continues to churn and churn on and on and for the most part the public at large is utterly misinformed. Confronted down the road the funders, if they can be tracked through their front organisations at all, will deny and/or shrug. They don’t care about the truth, it isn’t important to them. Only perception. And they won that battle. Calling them out after the fact means nothing.

Anyone with knowledge of the history of science issues so far as lead, pesticides, cigarettes, pharma of all types, on and on and on the list goes, is absolutely justified in being cynical about industrial science. It’s called intellectual self defense.


R402979
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

If group a is exxon mobile, if fucking matters if they’re researching global warming. just like the tobacco companies researching tobacco.

It is something to consider for sure, but from what I see from Livingston’s links, Anthony Watts was not funded by Exxon.

Looks like the Heartland Institute received funding from Exxon, but not Watts. The connection Admiral Livingston is making here is that Watts spoke at two conferences that the Heartland Institute organized, and therefore Livingston throws that in our faces as some kind of proof that Anthony Watts should be dismissed.


R402980
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

So Livingston, do you think the Catlin Arctic Ice Survey data can be trusted or not?


R402983
4 weeks ago
charlie

I suppose someone should post this… For those of you who haven’t seen it.

God damn textile. No matter how confident I am going into it, I can never figure out how to imbed video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_0-gX7aUKk&feature=player_embedded#at=206

Someone care to help me out?

:D

Post Modified: 10/19/09 15:02:32

R402984
4 weeks ago
Livingston

Anthony Watts is a meteorologist at KPAY 1290 AM radio in Chico, California and a climate change skeptic. In 1987, he founded ItWorks, which “supplies custom weather stations, Internet servers, weather graphics content, and broadcast video equipment.” [1]

Watts was a speaker at the International Conference on Climate Change (2009) organized by the Heartland Institute think tank. [2] Watts is also listed as a speaker for the Heartland Institute’s June 2009 Third International Conference on Climate Change.[3]

Watts? Fox news? wha? wait, did watts just talk for Heartland or was HIS BOOK AND RESEARCH FUNDED BY THE HEARTLAND INSTITUTE? cuz that’s what it says on paper… whoops!

Watts -the video climate denierstried to ban

Post Modified: 10/19/09 15:05:33

R402987
4 weeks ago
Namaste_Rich

The conclusions from this work and from other measurements that have been done, and from new models, are that the summer ice will disappear within twenty to thirty years, and a lot of it will be gone within 10 years.

Prof. Peter Wadhams – Cambridge

As ice melts, species will die and new territorial fights emerge


R402989
4 weeks ago
Trainspotter

Charlie,

Take the part of the youtube code from the vary end, everything after the equal (=) sign. For example… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fpc5vgi9zbM

embed(colon)youtube(colon)Fpc5vgi9zbM

Use an actual colon symbol (:), no brackets. Use “preview” to test.


R402991
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

Watts? Fox news? wha? wait, did watts just talk for Heartland or was HIS BOOK AND RESEARCH FUNDED BY THE HEARTLAND INSTITUTE? cuz that’s what it says on paper… whoops!

Where does it say he was funded by them?


R402994
4 weeks ago
Livingston

are you fucking joking now froid? did you forget how to click the RED TEXT AND READ YOU FUCKING DOLT?

click HERE and READ

you poor dumb bastards… you guys don’t even bother to read the stuff you cite:
look, look – The stakes in the debate over global warming are high. If human activities are causing a major warming of the earth’s atmosphere, then actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions costing hundreds of billions of dollars would be necessary.

But how do we know if global warming is a problem if we can’t trust the temperature record?

This report, by meteorologist Anthony Watts, presents the results of the first-ever compre-hensive review of the quality of data coming from the National Weather Service’s network of stations. Watts and a team of volunteers visually inspected and took pictures of more than 850 of these temperature stations.

can you see it now? See his name on the cover? Exxon paid Heartland to have a bumpkin Fox news weatherman make a phony report which was debunked over and over again by NOAA.

good jerb!

Post Modified: 10/19/09 15:41:30

R402997
4 weeks ago
Livingston

i feel stupider for just being on this thread. im going get another cuba libre and write a fuckin grant proposal. bling bling $$$ im rich bitches! too bad the planets gon die…
hey you guys keep it real and watch for reptile aliens.


R403002
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

Pardon me for asking a question.

OK, so now you’ve linked Watts’ book with the Heartland Institute who you’ve linked with money from Exxon. The next step is to actually address the subject matter of SunTzu’s blog. Are you going to do that?


R403012
4 weeks ago
Biondello

Sorry, Floyd, ‘I’ don’t have any evidence, I am not a climate scientist. If you were interested in real, and very overwhelming evidence, then you would go to actual scientists working on this. Take a look at the peer-reviewed literature in journals like I mentioned, Nature, Science, et cetera, instead of relying on soundbites.


R403015
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

Sorry, Floyd, ‘I’ don’t have any evidence, I am not a climate scientist. If you were interested in real, and very overwhelming evidence, then you would go to actual scientists working on this.

Could you link to some “very overwhelming evidence” of man-made climate change that you’ve come across?


R403017
4 weeks ago
Dilated_Rebel

“Could you link to some “very overwhelming evidence” of man-made climate change that you’ve come across?”

Dude, you are so fucking lame and pathetic, you know perfectly well that NO AMOUNT of evidence will change your stubborn mind.

Silly rabbit..

Post Modified: 10/19/09 17:41:19

R403018
4 weeks ago
Truthcansuk

FLoydster – The next step is to actually address the subject matter of SunTzu’s blog.

Why? the majority of the points it attempts to make have nothing to do with the falsification of data, and the one instance that could be construed as such was apologized for and adjusted as soon as it was pointed out on their website.

Could you link to some “very overwhelming evidence” of man-made climate change that you’ve come across?

Floyd, you obviously don’t read links. You don’t read the information you ask for most times. And you have a knack of reposting information that has been debunked in the past.

It’s simply not worth the trouble…


R403019
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

Dude, you are so fucking lame and pathetic, you know perfectly well that NO AMOUNT of evidence will change your stubborn mind.

Whatever!

Why? the majority of the points it attempts to make have nothing to do with the falsification of data, and the one instance that could be construed as such was apologized for and adjusted as soon as it was pointed out on their website.

Because Livingston is full of shit and you guys seem to be swallowing it. Livingston can’t prove that man has caused catastrophic changes to the climate, and none of y’all morons can either.

Floyd, you obviously don’t read links. You don’t read the information you ask for most times

Yes I do liar. Carefully go through the links of the above exchange between Livingston and I and you will see that he was being an asshole.

And you have a knack of reposting information that has been debunked in the past.

Like what?

It’s simply not worth the trouble…

Yes it is trollscansuk. You always seem to have smartass remarks on the climate change issue, but where is the damn evidence of all this man-made climate doom that y’all are so scared of?


R403020
4 weeks ago
Dilated_Rebel

“Because Livingston is full of shit and you guys seem to be swallowing it. Livingston can’t prove that man has caused catastrophic changes to the climate, and none of y’all morons can either”

Were you dropped as a child?

Livingston did a great job researching who and what ( Big Oil companies) was behind the misinformation of this blog.

You on the other hand, are retarded.


R403022
4 weeks ago
Livingston

Because Livingston is full of shit and you guys seem to be swallowing it. Livingston can’t prove that man has caused catastrophic changes to the climate, and none of y’all morons can either.

yeah, hey fuckwit – read some of my publications and try to disprove them with facts instead of BS from exxon mobile shills. turns out i write for more than just teh GNN, too.

OK, so now you’ve linked Watts’ book with the Heartland Institute who you’ve linked with money from Exxon. The next step is to actually address the subject matter of SunTzu’s blog. Are you going to do that?

no. its a shitty blog by a fuckwit. how ‘bout you and shit zoo tell us who you are and what you do? are you activists? do you do any goddamn thing other than pay taxes to the fucking untied states of ‘merikkka or what bro?

why are you worried about bullshit like reptile aliens?

your cuntry is slipping into fascism, global war, and ecological collapse and yet you blog about moon bombing and ET fighting back? what the fuck is your damage you rosetta stoned alex jones clone fuckwit?

do you work for the oil industry? you guys sure play very well into their agenda…

oh, hey, forget about those wars for oil that we pay for… beware the scientists who want to tax you! or the reptile aliens that are comin’ to make circles in your crops! oh mah gosh!

what’s up with that fuckwits?


R403024
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

do you work for the oil industry? you guys sure play very well into their agenda…

I don’t work for the damn oil industry.

Livingston, you happen to be playing right into the nwo agenda. Maybe someday you will see it once you evolve past your stupid global warming doomsday bullshit and see that the elites are using this issue to push for more and more control. You morons just can’t seem to figure it out.


R403025
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

Were you dropped as a child?

not sure. i don’t think so.


R403027
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

and I hate when people call me bro


R403028
4 weeks ago
Dilated_Rebel

“you happen to be playing right into the nwo agenda.”

And Floyd seems to be playing into the elite, pro-kapital, oil sponsored agenda.


R403029
4 weeks ago
Dilated_Rebel

“your cuntry is slipping into fascism, global war, and ecological collapse and yet you blog about moon bombing and ET fighting back? what the fuck is your damage you rosetta stoned alex jones clone fuckwit?”

Lulz, its so true!!!!!!!!!


R403030
4 weeks ago
Truthcansuk

Floydster – Because Livingston is full of shit and you guys seem to be swallowing it.

Oh, so many Alex Jones jokes, so little time…

Livingston can’t prove that man has caused catastrophic changes to the climate, and none of y’all morons can either.

Floyd, you are an idiot. I know, i know… it’s painful. Just accept it and go post about how scientists are plotting your downfall by not taking you and/or your uninformed opinions seriously. After all, you’ve gone through the trouble of not studying the data they provide. Who could expect you too? Again: you’re an idiot.

Floyd – Yes I do liar.

No you don’t, liar. Or, if you do, you are either too painfully stupid to read and comprehend what’s on the other end of those links, or you have the memory retention of a goldfish. And not even a smart goldfish, Floyd. I’m talking a really, really, really retarded goldfish here…

Floyd – Carefully go through the links of the above exchange between Livingston and I and you will see that he was being an asshole.

If you ignore the fact that you’ve been an outright douchebag to people you don’t agree with on GNN for a while now, then yes. Yes, Liv comes off as rude. If you do take your past attitude into account, it’s merely a wonder that anyone responds to you at all on this matter.

Floyd – Like what?

See above – re: memory of a really, really, really retarded goldfish.

Floyd – Yes it is trollscansuk.

You forgot to make it pig related. It’s become your thing. Don’t give up a thing like that!

Floyd – You always seem to have smartass remarks on the climate change issue, but where is the damn evidence of all this man-made climate doom that y’all are so scared of?

See above: re – Floyd, you obviously don’t read links. You don’t read the information you ask for most times…

On Edit: Floyd – and I hate when people call me bro.

It irritates me too.

Post Modified: 10/19/09 19:11:27

R403031
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

And Floyd seems to be playing into the elite, pro-kapital, oil sponsored agenda.

No, I’m exposing the global warming bullshit. Fuck the elites. Fuck pro-kapital. Fuck the oil companies.

Wait, are you a socialist or a commie or something?


R403032
4 weeks ago
Dilated_Rebel

“Wait, are you a socialist or a commie or something?”

Im an evil god-less RED!!!

Lolz, I just figured you out. You’re still in high school. There is just no way a person with an education beyond 12th grade could be so narrow minded and obviously stupid.

Very frustrating, I must admit.

Post Modified: 10/19/09 19:02:43

R403033
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

You’re an atheist communist?

So what do you want? Do you want bigger government?

Post Modified: 10/19/09 19:03:02

R403034
4 weeks ago
Dilated_Rebel

“You’re a communist? So what do you want? Do you want bigger government?

I want you to stop being stupid, simply said.

Also, go back and look *critically* at all your posts on this thread, tell me they dont paint you as being an idiot. As Truth said and pointed out, you have the IQ of a ‘really, really, really retarded goldfish.”


R403035
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

OK, well whatever. So are you a communist? If so what appeals to you about it? Seriously. Maybe you’ll convince me of something.

Cause I see the response to this so-called global warming problem as being much bigger government.


R403036
4 weeks ago
Namaste_Rich

The conclusions from this work and from other measurements that have been done, and from new models, are that the summer ice will disappear within twenty to thirty years, and a lot of it will be gone within 10 years.

Prof. Peter Wadhams – Cambridge

As ice melts, species will die and new territorial fights emerge

Post Modified: 10/19/09 19:12:54

R403037
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

Speculation like that is so typical of these morons. You’ll give up your rights over something stupid like that? Well then if you want to tango with the New World Order, just come out and say it weirdos.

Post Modified: 10/19/09 19:26:28

R403038
4 weeks ago
Dilated_Rebel

“So are you a communist? If so what appeals to you about it? Seriously. Maybe you’ll convince me of something”

The communist critique of kapitalism is flawless, 20th century communism’s structure was not. Look into it, how communism and anarchism are ‘cousins’ and have the same goals…

“I see the response to this so-called global warming problem as being much bigger government”

And it may possibly be; except that most world governments deny or do nothing except blow hot air about the issue. But people have to understand that we all co-exist with one another in the same biosphere; EG, the shit you do upstream, fucks up shit downstream, simply said.


R403039
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

I came across this dude today. He’s a Lord, so you never knwo but it’s worth listening to. It’s about the United Nations Climate Change Treaty that is scheduled to be signed in Copenhagen in December 2009.


R403041
4 weeks ago
Livingston

Cause I see the response to this so-called global warming problem as being much bigger government.

ah, worried bout teh guvment now are ya? you mean teh guvment that you fund with your fucking taxes you fucking witless amerikkkan shit?

heh.

ok, seriously, dumbtard – you’re going to stay in amerikkka, aren’t you? and you got beef with the guvment, right? listen: learn to grow all your own food and make primary and secondary explosives.
seriously. ;)


R403043
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

ah, worried bout teh guvment now are ya? you mean teh guvment that you fund with your fucking taxes you fucking witless amerikkkan shit?

look admiral, not paying taxes can lead to problems and I can pay them so I do. I don’t like problems like that, it’s not worth it at all. Ed and Elaine Brown are sitting in prison right now. fuck that.

I see that you hate the U.S. Were you born here? did you leave out of disgust?


R403044
4 weeks ago
Dilated_Rebel

“I see that you hate the U.S. Were you born here? did you leave out of disgust?”

You dont have to be born within the empire in order to understand that its nothing more than a corporate state.

But for some reason, most Americans are blind to the reality…


R403045
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

You dont have to be born within the empire in order to understand that its nothing more than a corporate state.

Yeah I know but I was thinking I had seen that Livingston is from the States and then he left, and he seems to hate the U.S.


R403046
4 weeks ago
Dilated_Rebel

Ummm, I think Liv is a so- canadian, but something tells me he’s a subversive human being….


R403047
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

But people have to understand that we all co-exist with one another in the same biosphere; EG, the shit you do upstream, fucks up shit downstream, simply said.

oh yeah that does make sense but these folks have something else in mind with this climate change issue.


R403068
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

oh by the way, y’all ever seen part one of wake up call. oh man it’s good:


R403069
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

how about part one of the great global warming swindle? damn, this one’s good.


R403070
4 weeks ago
ShiftShapers

the proposed solutions, which are designed to centralize even more wealth and power, are certainly a swindle.


R403071
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

R403076
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

oh and in my opinion, Al Gore is a NWO goofball as well and what they are trying to do is control us!

:)


R403077
4 weeks ago
Biondello

Yeah, here, I’ll tell you where a great start is: Nature.com, sign up for an account and you can begin reviewing it; I’m not your secretary, Floyd.

http://www.nature.com/search/executeSearch?sp-q=Climate+change&sp-p=all&sp-c=25&sp-m=0&sp-s=date_descending&include-collections=journals_nature%2Ccrawled_content&exclude-collections=journals_palgrave%2Clab_animal&sp-a=sp1001702d&sp-sfvl-field=subject|ujournal&sp-x-1=ujournal&sp-p-1=phrase&submit=go


R403082
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

Yeah, here, I’ll tell you where a great start is: Nature.com, sign up for an account and you can begin reviewing it; I’m not your secretary, Floyd.

Oh Biondello, I happened to notice you’re a no info user! hey the no info user wants you to just go look for that info yourself, oh yeah! No info user will not provide it!!


R403092
4 weeks ago
Dilated_Rebel

Floyd, do you get most of your knowledge from web-based videos?

“the proposed solutions, which are designed to centralize even more wealth and power, are certainly a swindle.”

Which is why the change must come from each individual, not imposed by some government tax, or utility rate.

Post Modified: 10/20/09 00:33:25


R403127
4 weeks ago
Truthcansuk

Floyd – how about part one of the great global warming swindle?

See: And you have a knack of reposting information that has been debunked in the past. – Truthcansuk

Floyd – Oh Biondello, I happened to notice you’re a no info user! hey the no info user wants you to just go look for that info yourself, oh yeah! No info user will not provide it!!

See: You don’t read the information you ask for most times… – Truthcansuck


R403137
4 weeks ago
Livingston

Yeah I know but I was thinking I had seen that Livingston is from the States and then he left, and he seems to hate the U.S.

its not something specific to the US that i find disagreeable. i am against hierarchical social organizational paradigms and the idea of the nation-state. the US is just the big bully on the block for now, but that is changing very fast. another empire will take over and repeat the cycle unless we take it upon ourselves to create progressive cultural development. that’s exactly what i have been discussing with Jeff Vail (www.jeffvail.net) – his rhizome theory and ideas on creating post-industrial complex yet self-sufficient societies might be among some of the most helpful concepts to pull us out of the collapse we are situated in. froid, you and your ilk seem worried about big guvment controlling you but you have no solutions to implement. you chastise me and other scientists for accepting grant money to do my work yet haven’t got the slightest idea what how it is used or what we are attempting to do. it reminds me of what Nietzsche described as “slave morality” – its nothing more than the sniveling complaints of the powerless. why are you worried about reptile aliens and rich people partying in the bohemian grove? your cuntry is falling apart, wars are raging, the real world has real big fucking problems… but you wouldn’t want to confront those, would you? its much easier to live the comfortable life of a US taxpaying citizen and wave your finger at monsters under the bed and aliens and the rich and powerful, isn’t it? meanwhile you have done nothing.
we are growing our own food, we are providing alternative energies and restoring nature, and sharing what we learn through emerging networks outside of governments and repressive societies.

Ummm, I think Liv is a so- canadian, but something tells me he’s a subversive human being….

heh. im from the back of the class.


R403138
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

Floyd, do you get most of your knowledge from web-based videos?

yeah


R403139
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

See: And you have a knack of reposting information that has been debunked in the past. – Truthcansuk

cite plz

See: You don’t read the information you ask for most times… – Truthcansuck

I was given Nature.com as evidence of man-made climate change. I’d like to get a more specific link please.

Post Modified: 10/20/09 12:09:33

R403140
4 weeks ago
ShiftShapers

Floyd, do you get most of your knowledge from web-based videos?

yeah

i don’t think Floyd knows how to gauge the credibility of sources. either that or he thinks “credibility” is just a way the status quo silences dissenting voices and keeps things quiet and people under control.


R403142
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

take it upon ourselves to create progressive cultural development.

sounds good

froid, you and your ilk seem worried about big guvment controlling you but you have no solutions to implement.

yeah I do. smaller government and an audit of the federal reserve for starters. i don’t want sovereign nations absorbed into larger power blocks like what is happening right now with the EU and the Lisbon Treaty being forced down their throats, and this is the nwo plan for the rest of the world.

you chastise me and other scientists for accepting grant money to do my work yet haven’t got the slightest idea what how it is used or what we are attempting to do.

ok, tell me then grant boy.

its nothing more than the sniveling complaints of the powerless.

huh?

why are you worried about reptile aliens and rich people partying in the bohemian grove?

I’m interested in it. should I not be?

your cuntry is falling apart, wars are raging, the real world has real big fucking problems… but you wouldn’t want to confront those, would you?

oh I certainly have admiral cherry picker

its much easier to live the comfortable life of a US taxpaying citizen and wave your finger at monsters under the bed and aliens and the rich and powerful, isn’t it?

what the hell are you talking about?

meanwhile you have done nothing.

you are a disgusting egomaniac. I have done quite a lot to spread information on the internet. The videos I have made are currently at about 364,000 views. So is that nothing?

we are growing our own food, we are providing alternative energies and restoring nature, and sharing what we learn through emerging networks outside of governments and repressive societies.

well congratulations. you are also spewing disinfo like a mad dog.


R403147
4 weeks ago
Dilated_Rebel

Floyd: “I’m interested in it. should I not be?” In regards to his belief in reptilian invaders.
“oh I certainly have admiral cherry picker” In regards to Liv’s dead-on analysis of American fascism
“what the hell are you talking about?” In regards to his hobby.

“Yeah” In regards to his knowledge of the world being derived from web-based videos.

“i don’t think Floyd knows how to gauge the credibility of sources”Shifty

Lulz, Floyd is very amusing.

Post Modified: 10/20/09 12:45:11

R403155
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

I’m glad you’re amused you godless commie!


R403156
4 weeks ago
ShiftShapers

you godless commie

no gods, no country!


R403160
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

further evidence that you’re not a reasonable person.


R403162
4 weeks ago
ShiftShapers

gods and countries are mechanisms used by the elite to divide and control the people.

abre los ojos


R403164
4 weeks ago
ShiftShapers

nationalism is but the precursor to globalism. they are simply degrees of centralized and hierarchical authority, power, and control. and that is what i oppose, regardless of the scope or form of the construct.


R403165
4 weeks ago
ShiftShapers

what do you have against localized, decentralized, horizontal, participatory, direct democratic community self-governance from below as a viable alternative to highly centralized and hierarchical nationalist or globalist government from above?


R403173
4 weeks ago
Trainspotter

If I may be so bold…

The direction this is taking right here could (and I think should) form it’s own thread.

Feel like initiating a “Nationalism leads to Globalism” thread Shift?

This one has run it’s course – and all the scrolling is making me dizzy. :)


R403174
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

what do you have against localized, decentralized, horizontal, participatory, direct democratic community self-governance from below as a viable alternative to highly centralized and hierarchical nationalist or globalist government from above?

Look, I want power decentralized Shifty but you just seem to reject everything about hierarchy and you smear elected officials like Ron Paul who are working intelligently within the system to resist centralized global empire. Your method to resist is to promote violence and to say that you reject all governments and all countries and I just don’t find you to be reasonable.

Post Modified: 10/20/09 14:19:40

R403176
4 weeks ago
Biondello

You’re right, I’m sorry. Here, why don’t I give you my login to the website? Or maybe just pay for your subscription to it?

See, like for instance this one right here:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v397/n6721/full/397688a0.html

Or this one:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v347/n6289/pdf/347139a0.pdf

Or this one:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7248/full/nature08047.html

Unfortunately you need a login for that, which I have, but you don’t. So I guess in order to sway the opinion of somebody on the Internet, I should probably buy you one or let you use mine. Makes perfect sense.

Replying to this obvious fact would just take too much time and effort, it’s much easier to use asinine insults to…? Prove your point? Make yourself look like a clown?


R403177
4 weeks ago
Biondello

Yeah, you’re totally right, I should have provided you with a login, maybe you could borrow mine? Or should I just give you my credit card so you can purchase one?

If you had actually bothered to go to the link I provided you would notice you needed a login to view articles such as:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v397/n6721/full/397688a0.html

or this:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7248/full/nature08047.html

or this gem, published in 1997:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v390/n6657/full/390225a0.html

“A scientific consensus that humans are influencing the climatewill be behind any agreements on greenhouse-gas reductions nextmonth.”

– Yeah those crazy scientists coming to a consensus that humans are influencing climate change, what the fuck would they know about it?

Reviewing this so you could have an informed decision would take time and effort, plus you’d immediately fall flat on your face and realize you were dead wrong, so it’s just easier to use asinine insults, right?


R403190
4 weeks ago
FloydAnderson

Drum roll please…..........

Here is Biondello’s proof of catastrophic man-made climate change:

Relative impacts of human-induced climate change and natural climate variability
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v397/n6721/full/397688a0.html
Nature 397, 688-691 (25 February 1999) | doi:10.1038/17789; Received 30 April 1998; Accepted 30 November 1998

Assessments of the regional impacts of human-induced climate change on a wide range of social and environmental systems are fundamental for determining the appropriate policy responses to climate change. Yet regional-scale impact assessments are fraught with difficulties, such as the uncertainties of regional climate-change prediction, the specification of appropriate environmental-response models, and the interpretation of impact results in the context of future socio-economic and technological change. The effects of such confounding factors on estimates of climate-change impacts have only been poorly explored. Here we use results from recent global climate simulations and two environmental response models to consider systematically the effects of natural climate variability (30-year timescales) and future climate-change uncertainties on river runoff and agricultural potential in Europe. We find that, for some regions, the impacts of human-induced climate change by 2050 will be undetectable relative to those due to natural multi-decadal climate variability. If misleading assessments of—and inappropriate adaptation strategies to—climate-change impacts are to be avoided, future studies should consider the impacts of natural multi-decadal climate variability alongside those of human-induced climate change.

To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
________________________________________

The ice-core record: climate sensitivity and future greenhouse warming
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v347/n6289/pdf/347139a0.pdf
Nature 347, 139-145 (13 September 1990) | doi:10.1038/347139a0

The prediction of future greenhouse-gas-induced warming depends critically on the sensitivity of Earth’s climate to increasing atmospheric concentrations of these gases. Data from cores drilled in polar ice sheets show a remarkable correlation between past glacial–interglacial temperature changes and the inferred atmospheric concentration of gases such as carbon dioxide and methane. These and other palaeoclimate data are used to assess the role of greenhouse gases in explaining past global climate change, and the validity of models predicting the effect of increasing concentrations of such gases in the atmosphere.

To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
________________________________________

The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7248/full/nature08047.html
Nature 459, 829-832 (11 June 2009) | doi:10.1038/nature08047; Received 4 December 2008; Accepted 14 April 2009

The global temperature response to increasing atmospheric CO2 is often quantified by metrics such as equilibrium climate sensitivity and transient climate response. These approaches, however, do not account for carbon cycle feedbacks and therefore do not fully represent the net response of the Earth system to anthropogenic CO2 emissions. Climate–carbon modelling experiments have shown that: (1) the warming per unit CO2 emitted does not depend on the background CO2 concentration; (2) the total allowable emissions for climate stabilization do not depend on the timing of those emissions; and (3) the temperature response to a pulse of CO2 is approximately constant on timescales of decades to centuries. Here we generalize these results and show that the carbon–climate response (CCR), defined as the ratio of temperature change to cumulative carbon emissions, is approximately independent of both the atmospheric CO2 concentration and its rate of change on these timescales. From observational constraints, we estimate CCR to be in the range 1.0–2.1 °C per trillion tonnes of carbon (Tt C) emitted (5th to 95th percentiles), consistent with twenty-first-century CCR values simulated by climate–carbon models. Uncertainty in land-use CO2 emissions and aerosol forcing, however, means that higher observationally constrained values cannot be excluded. The CCR, when evaluated from climate–carbon models under idealized conditions, represents a simple yet robust metric for comparing models, which aggregates both climate feedbacks and carbon cycle feedbacks. CCR is also likely to be a useful concept for climate change mitigation and policy; by combining the uncertainties associated with climate sensitivity, carbon sinks and climate–carbon feedbacks into a single quantity, the CCR allows CO2-induced global mean temperature change to be inferred directly from cumulative carbon emissions.

To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
________________________________________

Relative impacts of human-induced climate change and natural climate variability
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v397/n6721/full/397688a0.html
Nature 397, 688-691 (25 February 1999) | doi:10.1038/17789; Received 30 April 1998; Accepted 30 November 1998

repeat link
________________________________________
The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7248/full/nature08047.html
Nature 459, 829-832 (11 June 2009) | doi:10.1038/nature08047; Received 4 December 2008; Accepted 14 April 2009

repeat link
________________________________________

Climate-change research after Kyoto
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v390/n6657/full/390225a0.html
Nature 390, 225-226 (20 November 1997) | doi:10.1038/36719

A scientific consensus that humans are influencing the climatewill be behind any agreements on greenhouse-gas reductions nextmonth. But how can climate research have an optimal influenceon climate policy in the future?

The issue of climate change, to be negotiated next month at the United Nations climate conference in Kyoto, Japan, is the most difficult environmental problem facing us. The impact of greenhouse-gas emissions will last for many centuries, far beyond normal economic and political planning horizons.

To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).

Post Modified: 10/20/09 19:09:47

R403192
4 weeks ago
ShiftShapers

Biondello can you log in and copy/paste the relevant info from those articles to this thread?


R403209
4 weeks ago
ShiftShapers

Baffin Island Reveals Dramatic Scale Of Arctic Climate Change: Study delves back into 200,000 years of history to demonstrate the devastating impact of global warming


R403239
4 weeks ago
bacchus


R403244
4 weeks ago
Dilated_Rebel

^ From Fox News…

Hmmm…..


R403246
4 weeks ago
Truthcansuk

Dear Bacchus,

a) He hasn’t been sued.

b) A list of 30000 scientists again. Hmm… I think we’ve heard that before?

c) And finally, a weatherman is claiming someone else has no credibility. I’m checking my 5 day forecast as we speak…

Fail…


R403577
3 weeks ago
BestUserNameEvar

“and the source of the blog is…. drum roll… a bumpkin weatherman and contributor to the anit-environmental, pro-fossil fuel agenda of the Heartland Institute… funded by EXXON!”

Heartland Institute can’t be all bad. It has heart in it.

1 comment:

  1. Holy hell, someone decided *this* fucking horseshit was worth keeping off that site? Egad.

    ReplyDelete

Archived GNN Threads