Global Warming Liars

[mamooth]

Didn't mean to trigger you mammoth.
Have you been attacked by another cloud today?

What is it with you and your fixation with clouds?

 

[Crick]

Biden and the democrats have virtually stopped oil drilling off coast, issuing new permits to drill on federal lands or in Alaska, stopped worked on major pipe lines, deplored fracking, and instituted more choking regulations on the domestic oil and gas and coal industries. This is malicious to Americans and our economy. All under the guise or for the sake of the total B.S. political play called Climate Change. That is what they are doing, using this phony climate change crap to scare people to enact all kinds of destructive measures and maintain power and control.

Biden also greenlighted a Russian pipeline to continue at the same time he stopped ours. And then he goes begging other nations for oil. Sick!!! Being energy independent is a national security issue. Of course you creeps do not care about that, just look at the southern border. You have wasted --- WASTED! --- trillions of dollars on green jobs and green regulations that are funds that could have solved so many more real and grave ills in our society. Trump stops giving half a trillion to the joke Paris Climate accords, Biden gives it all back. FYI, God controls the weather, not politicians or scientists.

Speaking of your ‘god’ science, the chair of climatology at Georgia Tech, Judith Curry, resigned her position and gave up her tenure a couple of years ago because she was sick of the misinformation and manipulation of data being forced up the students. If everyone is so sure man it’s affecting the climate then why the need to lie?

How does what Biden has done - or would like to do, re global warming - enable him to maintain power and control?

 

[jehanne1431]

How does what Biden has done - or would like to do, re global warming - enable him to maintain power and control?

By the democrat party being gigantic cheerleaders for stopping global warming --- it’s all politically motivated of course, if Trump was big on it they would all be against it --- they have curried favor with the liberal mainstream media and major newspapers who push the same agenda. Also with the universities and science organizations of all kinds who receive government funding for their operations to continue in this vein. Green corporations of all kinds receive government subsidies and other favors. The movie, TV, music and game industries push the same message, constantly. Public education indoctrinates our children on this. Put it all together and what those entities are doing is convincing the public how vital is our carbon footprint etc, the oceans are rising, it’s 100 degrees three days in a row, etc. ---- and they accept this issue as the major issue of the day ---- or as Biden’s press secretary said the other day, “our number one national security risk.” Votes keep them in power. How many liberals do you know that are not on board with the danger of climate change?

 

[alexa]

There it is "Evil Oil"... And not based in fact.

Oh it is based on fact. You prefer comics. Your choice.

 

[alexa]

Correlation does not prove causation. The geologic record is littered with examples of warming and cooling trends that were not caused by CO2 or orbital forcing.

That is true. That is why this time it is different. A difference which has been known about for almost a hundred years. Even most people who believe in Climate Disaster are dragging their feet It seems us humans have some difficulty dealing with things until they are upon us. The UK could easily have done something about its roads and runways before - or at least got started. We probably will now.

 

[ding]

That is true. That is why this time it is different. A difference which has been known about for almost a hundred years. Even most people who believe in Climate Disaster are dragging their feet It seems us humans have some difficulty dealing with things until they are upon us. The UK could easily have done something about its roads and runways before - or at least got started. We probably will now.

The only correlation between temperature and CO2 on a planetary scale that is known with any certainty is from the time before the industrial revolution. Prior to the industrial revolution CO2 was a proxy for temperature. This is a fact that no one disputes. If you don't know why this correlation existed, just ask me. Since that time man's emissions have broken the correlation between temperature and CO2. We know this with 100% certainty because we are 2C cooler than in the past with 120 ppm more CO2.

Some scientists have attribute the recent warming trend to CO2 based upon model results. But other scientists come to opposite conclusions about the causes of recent climate change depending on which datasets they consider. For instance, the panels on the left lead to the conclusion that global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to human-caused emissions, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), i.e., the conclusion reached by the UN IPCC reports. In contrast, the panels on the right lead to the exact opposite conclusion, i.e., that the global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to natural cycles, chiefly long-term changes in the energy emitted by the Sun.

Both sets of panels are based on published scientific data, but each uses different datasets and assumptions. On the left, it is assumed that the available temperature records are unaffected by the urban heat island problem, and so all stations are used, whether urban or rural. On the right, only rural stations are used. Meanwhile, on the left, solar output is modeled using the low variability dataset that has been chosen for the IPCC’s upcoming (in 2021/2022) 6th Assessment Reports. This implies zero contribution from natural factors to the long-term warming. On the right, solar output is modeled using a high variability dataset used by the team in charge of NASA’s ACRIM sun-monitoring satellites. This implies that most, if not all, of the long-term temperature changes are due to natural factors.

Here is the link to the full paper.
ShieldSquare Captcha

 

[Crick]

http://GlobalWarmingLiars.blogspot.com

THE LIE: An overwhelming consensus of scientists support global warming.

This lie is based on a 2009 article by Maggie Kendall Zimmerman, then a student at the University of Illinois.
As stated in the Wall Street Journal, "The '97 percent' figure in the Zimmerman/Doran survey represents the views of only 79 respondents who listed climate science as an area of expertise and said they published more than half of their recent peer-reviewed papers on climate change. Seventy-nine scientists—of the 3,146 who responded to the survey—does not a consensus make."
The WSJ went on to elaborate further: "The survey's questions don't reveal much of interest. Most scientists who are skeptical of catastrophic global warming nevertheless would answer "yes" to both questions. The survey was silent on whether the human impact is large enough to constitute a problem. Nor did it include solar scientists, space scientists, cosmologists, physicists, meteorologists or astronomers, who are the scientists most likely to be aware of natural causes of climate change."
So much for that lie one hears so often and so loudly.
THE LIE: Humans are causing catastrophic changes in earth's climate by burning fossil fuel and increasing carbon dioxide.
This lie is based on the extremely disingenuous and anti-scientific Keeling Curve, below.

This terribly misleading graph is intended to scare you into immediate action.
Just adding water vapor, which constitutes 1.5% of the atmosphere, or 15,000 parts per million, that graph above becomes this below, far more realistic, more honest, less misleading:


Other greenhouse gases, such as methane and nitrous oxide, are omitted from graphs and discussion.
If in fact humans were the primary, or even major contributor to carbon dioxide production, then the highest concentrations of CO2 would be industrial and population centers around the globe, instead of the rain forests of Africa and South America:

THE LIE: Global catastrophe, "tipping point"! We must do something now!
This incredible lie is preached by Al Gore, the United Nations, bureaucracies beholden to research billions, and by Barack Obama. Obama recently flew on Air Force One from Washington, D.C. to California, to play a round of golf with his friends, the same way he uses Air Force One to fly to Democrat fund-raisers all over the U.S.
Preaching doom and gloom to you little people is what they do, but not what they practice themselves. At the most recent Global Warming Scare-Fest, in Davos, Switzerland, the Scare-Mongers flew 1,700 private jets, rather than videoconference. Don't do as they do, do as they say.
Net global emission of CO2 looks nothing like human production of CO2. Rather, CO2 is the product of temperature and soil moisture.


THE LIE: Big oil billions are driving "deniers"
Budget requests from a few of the U.S. government agencies for global warming "research" money, just in 2011:

NOAA $437 million
NSF $480 million
NASA $438 million
DOE $627 million
DOI $171 million
EPA $169 million
USDA $159 million

ON OCTOBER 6, 2010, UC SANTA BARBARA PHYSICS PROFESSOR EMERITUS, HAROLD LEWIS, RESIGNED FROM THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY IN PROTEST OF THE GLOBAL WARMING FRAUD. HIS LETTER READS IN PART:“FOR REASONS THAT WILL SOON BECOME CLEAR MY FORMER PRIDE AT BEING AN APS FELLOW ALL THESE YEARS HAS BEEN TURNED INTO SHAME, AND I AM FORCED, WITH NO PLEASURE AT ALL, TO OFFER YOU MY RESIGNATION FROM THE SOCIETY. “IT IS OF COURSE, THE GLOBAL WARMING SCAM, WITH THE (LITERALLY) TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS DRIVING IT, THAT HAS CORRUPTED SO MANY SCIENTISTS, AND HAS CARRIED APS BEFORE IT LIKE A ROGUE WAVE. IT IS THE GREATEST AND MOST SUCCESSFUL PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC FRAUD I HAVE SEEN IN MY LONG LIFE AS A PHYSICIST. ANYONE WHO HAS THE FAINTEST DOUBT THAT THIS IS SO SHOULD FORCE HIMSELF TO READ THE CLIMATEGATE DOCUMENTS, WHICH LAY IT BARE. (MONTFORD’S BOOK ORGANIZES THE FACTS VERY WELL.) I DON’T BELIEVE THAT ANY REAL PHYSICIST, NAY SCIENTIST, CAN READ THAT STUFF WITHOUT REVULSION. I WOULD ALMOST MAKE THAT REVULSION A DEFINITION OF THE WORD SCIENTIST. “SO WHAT HAS THE APS, AS AN ORGANIZATION, DONE IN THE FACE OF THIS CHALLENGE? IT HAS ACCEPTED THE CORRUPTION AS THE NORM, AND GONE ALONG WITH IT." - END OF QUOTE BY PROFESSOR LEWIS ​

​

NOBEL LAUREATE IN PHYSICS, IVER GIAIVER LIKEWISE RESIGNED IN DISGUST FROM THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY ON SEPTEMBER 13, 2011 OVER THIS ONGOING SCANDAL PARADING AS "SCIENCE". IT IS ANYTHING BUT.​

THE LIE: Why would scientists lie! For money, and for cowardice. They don't want to be blackballed by other cowards.

The AGW consensus is based on a great deal more than Zimmerman's small study (which turned out to be quite accurate) and you know it perfectly well. YOU are the LIAR.

 

[ReinyDays]

That is true. That is why this time it is different. A difference which has been known about for almost a hundred years. Even most people who believe in Climate Disaster are dragging their feet It seems us humans have some difficulty dealing with things until they are upon us. The UK could easily have done something about its roads and runways before - or at least got started. We probably will now.

Well ... you'll certainly have time ... and choices ... is not Scotland currently under isostatic rebound or something? ... otherwise what's going to happen in Scotland is a banner for the good this warming will do ... with the assumption what's good for Scotland is good for everybody ...

A single degree of temperature isn't a disaster ... and then spread out that rise over fifty years ... you got nothing ... use common sense here ...

 

[Crick]

Leftists traffic in fear, lies and ignorance. This is simply another example of it.

Fear of minorities. Fear of immigrants. Fear of gays and lesbians. Ignorance about global warming, the climate, pollution, the environment, ecology and the scientific method. Liberals hate America, socialism is the same as communism, blacks are lazy and tend to criminality, immigrants commit violent crimes out of proportion to their numbers and Biden and the Democratic party stole the 2020 presidential election through voter fraud.

Talk about some fucking projection.

 

[jehanne1431]

the political system, with only two corrupt political parties helps, but really a lot of people, on both sides, are simply unable to have a meaningful debate about things. ...When one person claims it's only the other side.... it's rather hilarious.

Did Hitler have a just argument?
How about an open southern border where illegals, and criminals from various nations, and fentanyl pour across the border? Defensible?
Still cannot see why 2nd graders have to be told to consider if they want to be a boy or a girl, and 4th graders, check out this film we got for you on the pleasures of sex. Is this debatable for the goodness of a child?
Why is it ok for the DNC to obtain fake Russian dossier, turn it into illegal FISA warrants so they can spy on a sitting U.S. president and no one goes to jail? That's justice?

Often enough right vs. wrong is glaringly obvious, and it is not about both sides being obstinate.

 

[White 6]

Be advised. This is the global warming debate thread in the environment forum.
Stay on topic or more warnings and post deletions will accrue or further Moderation action.
Stay on topic.
Enjoy the thread.

 

[alexa]

You guys got my post which showed that what the OP said is not true deleted for this strange reason "Off topic response to off topic post of the op'. I fail to see how presenting evidence which shows the op is not true is off topic but I do see that you climate deniers do not want any evidence which shows your position is wrong to be produced. As such I will do what most people do which is not to answer your posts as that in itself gives you some credibility, suggesting there may be some truth in what you say. There isn't.

 

[Mindful]

This was on the front of the Radio Times in 1974. What happened to that theory?

 

[Mindful]

Did Hitler have a just argument?
How about an open southern border where illegals, and criminals from various nations, and fentanyl pour across the border? Defensible?
Still cannot see why 2nd graders have to be told to consider if they want to be a boy or a girl, and 4th graders, check out this film we got for you on the pleasures of sex. Is this debatable for the goodness of a child?
Why is it ok for the DNC to obtain fake Russian dossier, turn it into illegal FISA warrants so they can spy on a sitting U.S. president and no one goes to jail? That's justice?

Often enough right vs. wrong is glaringly obvious, and it is not about both sides being obstinate.

^ What’s that got to do with anything?

Did l get lost?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

http://GlobalWarmingLiars.blogspot.com

THE LIE: An overwhelming consensus of scientists support global warming.

This lie is based on a 2009 article by Maggie Kendall Zimmerman, then a student at the University of Illinois.
As stated in the Wall Street Journal, "The '97 percent' figure in the Zimmerman/Doran survey represents the views of only 79 respondents who listed climate science as an area of expertise and said they published more than half of their recent peer-reviewed papers on climate change. Seventy-nine scientists—of the 3,146 who responded to the survey—does not a consensus make."
The WSJ went on to elaborate further: "The survey's questions don't reveal much of interest. Most scientists who are skeptical of catastrophic global warming nevertheless would answer "yes" to both questions. The survey was silent on whether the human impact is large enough to constitute a problem. Nor did it include solar scientists, space scientists, cosmologists, physicists, meteorologists or astronomers, who are the scientists most likely to be aware of natural causes of climate change."
So much for that lie one hears so often and so loudly.
THE LIE: Humans are causing catastrophic changes in earth's climate by burning fossil fuel and increasing carbon dioxide.
This lie is based on the extremely disingenuous and anti-scientific Keeling Curve, below.

This terribly misleading graph is intended to scare you into immediate action.
Just adding water vapor, which constitutes 1.5% of the atmosphere, or 15,000 parts per million, that graph above becomes this below, far more realistic, more honest, less misleading:


Other greenhouse gases, such as methane and nitrous oxide, are omitted from graphs and discussion.
If in fact humans were the primary, or even major contributor to carbon dioxide production, then the highest concentrations of CO2 would be industrial and population centers around the globe, instead of the rain forests of Africa and South America:

THE LIE: Global catastrophe, "tipping point"! We must do something now!
This incredible lie is preached by Al Gore, the United Nations, bureaucracies beholden to research billions, and by Barack Obama. Obama recently flew on Air Force One from Washington, D.C. to California, to play a round of golf with his friends, the same way he uses Air Force One to fly to Democrat fund-raisers all over the U.S.
Preaching doom and gloom to you little people is what they do, but not what they practice themselves. At the most recent Global Warming Scare-Fest, in Davos, Switzerland, the Scare-Mongers flew 1,700 private jets, rather than videoconference. Don't do as they do, do as they say.
Net global emission of CO2 looks nothing like human production of CO2. Rather, CO2 is the product of temperature and soil moisture.


THE LIE: Big oil billions are driving "deniers"
Budget requests from a few of the U.S. government agencies for global warming "research" money, just in 2011:

NOAA $437 million
NSF $480 million
NASA $438 million
DOE $627 million
DOI $171 million
EPA $169 million
USDA $159 million

ON OCTOBER 6, 2010, UC SANTA BARBARA PHYSICS PROFESSOR EMERITUS, HAROLD LEWIS, RESIGNED FROM THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY IN PROTEST OF THE GLOBAL WARMING FRAUD. HIS LETTER READS IN PART:“FOR REASONS THAT WILL SOON BECOME CLEAR MY FORMER PRIDE AT BEING AN APS FELLOW ALL THESE YEARS HAS BEEN TURNED INTO SHAME, AND I AM FORCED, WITH NO PLEASURE AT ALL, TO OFFER YOU MY RESIGNATION FROM THE SOCIETY. “IT IS OF COURSE, THE GLOBAL WARMING SCAM, WITH THE (LITERALLY) TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS DRIVING IT, THAT HAS CORRUPTED SO MANY SCIENTISTS, AND HAS CARRIED APS BEFORE IT LIKE A ROGUE WAVE. IT IS THE GREATEST AND MOST SUCCESSFUL PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC FRAUD I HAVE SEEN IN MY LONG LIFE AS A PHYSICIST. ANYONE WHO HAS THE FAINTEST DOUBT THAT THIS IS SO SHOULD FORCE HIMSELF TO READ THE CLIMATEGATE DOCUMENTS, WHICH LAY IT BARE. (MONTFORD’S BOOK ORGANIZES THE FACTS VERY WELL.) I DON’T BELIEVE THAT ANY REAL PHYSICIST, NAY SCIENTIST, CAN READ THAT STUFF WITHOUT REVULSION. I WOULD ALMOST MAKE THAT REVULSION A DEFINITION OF THE WORD SCIENTIST. “SO WHAT HAS THE APS, AS AN ORGANIZATION, DONE IN THE FACE OF THIS CHALLENGE? IT HAS ACCEPTED THE CORRUPTION AS THE NORM, AND GONE ALONG WITH IT." - END OF QUOTE BY PROFESSOR LEWIS ​

​

NOBEL LAUREATE IN PHYSICS, IVER GIAIVER LIKEWISE RESIGNED IN DISGUST FROM THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY ON SEPTEMBER 13, 2011 OVER THIS ONGOING SCANDAL PARADING AS "SCIENCE". IT IS ANYTHING BUT.​

THE LIE: Why would scientists lie! For money, and for cowardice. They don't want to be blackballed by other cowards.

Manmade Global Climate Warming Change is the greatest scientific fraud in human history

 

[CrusaderFrank]

1) AGW deniers love to react to consensus comments with the size of the Zimmerman/Doran survey. They conveniently ignore the numerous other surveys, polls and studies, examining the opinions of THOUSANDS of scientists and finding GREATER than 97% support for the IPCC's conclusions.

2) Isotopic analysis of the CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere as well as a simple book-keeping analysis of the amount of CO2 that would be produced by the amount of fossil fuels humans have burned, BOTH show conclusively that virtually every fucking MOLECULE of CO2 added to the atmosphere since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution was produced by the combustion of fossil fuel.

3) AGW is an existential threat to fossil fuel industries. Anyone who thinks that they wouldn't bend the truth to hold off that threat, just as the tobacco industry did to the finding of tobacco's relationship to several different cancers, is an ignorant fool.

In China too, right? Are you threatening China's fossil fuel industry too?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

1) AGW deniers love to react to consensus comments with the size of the Zimmerman/Doran survey. They conveniently ignore the numerous other surveys, polls and studies, examining the opinions of THOUSANDS of scientists and finding GREATER than 97% support for the IPCC's conclusions.

2) Isotopic analysis of the CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere as well as a simple book-keeping analysis of the amount of CO2 that would be produced by the amount of fossil fuels humans have burned, BOTH show conclusively that virtually every fucking MOLECULE of CO2 added to the atmosphere since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution was produced by the combustion of fossil fuel.

3) AGW is an existential threat to fossil fuel industries. Anyone who thinks that they wouldn't bend the truth to hold off that threat, just as the tobacco industry did to the finding of tobacco's relationship to several different cancers, is an ignorant fool.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Anthropogenic global warming has not been a concern for over 100 years and, of course, is not a scam. The people most often "buying in" are those with even a basic foundation in physical science and that you should characterize the world's PhDs as "low info types" simply identifies the depth of your own personal DK-ism. AGW denialism is the home of the ignorant. When you choose to use a cartoon to make your point, rather than attempting to refute the science assessment of, say, AR5 or 6, it is obvious that you lack both the ability and the resources to mount an effective argument supporting your claims.

PS: Ayn Rand's character John Galt has the intellectual standing of the Cat in the Hat.

"But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore...." Ottmar Enedhofer, IPCC, 2010,

 

[alexa]

This was on the front of the Radio Times in 1974. What happened to that theory?


View attachment 672672

I don't know but I know in 72 we got the first alarm I knew of.

 

[alexa]

This was on the front of the Radio Times in 1974. What happened to that theory?


View attachment 672672

update

In 1972, a team at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) predicted that humanity's pursuit of economic growth without regard for environmental and society costs would lead to society collapsing by the mid 21st century – a new study finds this may become a reality.

MIT's 1972 prediction of society collapsing could happen by 2040

A researcher tested MIT's 1972 prediction that we could see a societal collapse by 2040 and found we are currently on the path of destruction, but we could change it in a decade.

www.dailymail.co.uk