Russia gets heaviest snowstorm in 100 years!!!

[Saigon]

Look at all the hardcore denialists here.

SSDD
Oddball
Westwall
bripat9643
Skookerasbil
polarbear

Without exception, every single one the them is sworn member of the nutball-righty-fringe political cult. They all regularly goes into crazy rants about the phantom socialists who haunt their every waking moment, usually as a diversion just after someone just spanked them over the science.

.

This really is a key point, although I have been reluctant to admit that it is.

But you are absolutely right - all five of these posters launch into rants about 'socialism' left, right and centre - suggesting it is that which is central to their thinking here, and not science. Last week, SSDD accused me of having a "socialist education". I don't even known what this is, and of course he couldn't explain it himself. But what it did establish is how politically-oriented his thinking on this topic is.

It's also worth noting that three of the six posters listed can't read or write particularly well.

The thing is - the earth is not influenced by politics. Socialism does not make glaciers melt. Liberalism doesn't make ocean pH change, sea levels rise, or coral reefs bleach. This simply is not a political topic.

The funniest thing about this is that most conservatives are away ahead of these guys. Almost every conservative party in the world accepts AGW, as do the last bastions of denial - oil companies.

 

[Old Rocks]

Here is their problem. By connecting their political philosophy with a failed denial of science, they have backed themselved, ideologically, into a corner. Those of us that follow the science, were someone to be able to show that GHGs were not the cause of the present warming, and show what was the cause, would accept that proof. Our egos and philosophy are not tied to AGW. It is simply that, at present, there is no other hypothesis, let alone theory, out there that explains what we are seeing. What was established by Tyndall in 1858 still stands.

 

[Saigon]

Here is their problem. By connecting their political philosophy with a failed denial of science, they have backed themselved, ideologically, into a corner. Those of us that follow the science, were someone to be able to show that GHGs were not the cause of the present warming, and show what was the cause, would accept that proof. Our egos and philosophy are not tied to AGW. It is simply that, at present, there is no other hypothesis, let alone theory, out there that explains what we are seeing. What was established by Tyndall in 1858 still stands.

This really is a terrific statement, and I couldn't agree more.

One of the sceptics the other day suggested something to the effect that I'd be humiliated should AGW be proven wrong. Whereas in reality I'd be delighted to find the world is not in any real danger, and that we really can continue to use petrol and coal without concern.

I'm not a scientist, and AGW isn't a theory I put forward - it just seems like the most compelling and most logical scientific explanation for the climate change I see outside my window. If a more compelling scientific explanation is ever put forward, I'd be delighted to see it.

 

[bripat9643]

Here is their problem. By connecting their political philosophy with a failed denial of science, they have backed themselved, ideologically, into a corner. Those of us that follow the science, were someone to be able to show that GHGs were not the cause of the present warming, and show what was the cause, would accept that proof. Our egos and philosophy are not tied to AGW. It is simply that, at present, there is no other hypothesis, let alone theory, out there that explains what we are seeing. What was established by Tyndall in 1858 still stands.

The claim that you follow science doesn't pass the laugh test. You choose your position based on a political agenda and then cherry pick the "science" that supports your position.

 

[Oddball]

Here is their problem. By connecting their political philosophy with a failed denial of science, they have backed themselved, ideologically, into a corner. Those of us that follow the science, were someone to be able to show that GHGs were not the cause of the present warming, and show what was the cause, would accept that proof. Our egos and philosophy are not tied to AGW. It is simply that, at present, there is no other hypothesis, let alone theory, out there that explains what we are seeing. What was established by Tyndall in 1858 still stands.

Problem there being that virtually everything is "proof" of Goebbels warming to you nutburgers....That's how brain washed cultists operate.

The notion that your egos and authoritarian central planner politics aren't attached to your neo-Malthusian religion is laughable on its face.

 

[Saigon]

The claim that you follow science doesn't pass the laugh test.

It does when you consider that everyone of the major scientific organisations back human involvement in climate change.

 

[Oddball]

It doesn't when you use broad sweeping universal qualifiers, saying "every" and "all", when even pimps for your cult admit that there are scientific organizations which are skeptical.

Global Warming Skeptic Organizations | Union of Concerned Scientists

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Has Russia called Gore yet? LOL

Yes, Baleshinka special ops director advised calling it, "Climate Change". Problem solved.

 

[Saigon]

From Oddball's link of "scientific" organisations -

Greening Earth Society

The Greening Earth Society (GES) was founded on Earth Day 1998 by the Western Fuels Association to promote the view that increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 are good for humanity. GES and Western Fuels are essentially the same organization. Both used to be located at the same office suite in Arlington, VA. Until December 2000, Fred Palmer chaired both institutions. The GES is now chaired by Bob Norrgard, another long-term Western Fuels associate. The Western Fuels Assocation (WFA) is a cooperative of coal-dependent utilities in the western states that works in part to discredit climate change science and to prevent regulations that might damage coal-related industries.

Funding: The Greening Earth Society receives its funding from the Western Fuels Association, which in turn receives its funding from its coal and utility company members.


Global Warming Skeptic Organizations | Union of Concerned Scientists

Absolutely wonderful posting, Oddball. I can't thank you for it enough.

 

[Saigon]

Also from Oddball's most informative link:

According to the report, ExxonMobil has funneled nearly $16 million between 1998 and 2005 to a network of 43 advocacy organizations that seek to confuse the public on global warming science.

Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)

Spin: Moreover, climate change won t be bad for us anyway. Action on climate change is not warranted because of shaky science and flawed policy approaches.

Funding: Conservative foundations including Bradley, Smith Richardson, and Forbes. SEPP has also been directly tied to ultra right-wing mogul Reverend Sung Myung Moon s Unification Church, including receipt of a year s free office space from a Moon-funded group and the participation of SEPP s director in church-sponsored conferences and on the board of a Moon-funded magazine.

Global Climate Coalition

Founded in 1989 by 46 corporations and trade associations representing all major elements of US industry, the GCC presents itself as a "voice for business in the global warming debate." The group funded several flawed studies on the economics of the cost of mitigating climate change, which formed the basis of their 1997/1998 multi-million dollar advertising campaign against the Kyoto Protocol. The GCC began to unravel in 1997 when British Petroleum withdrew its membership. Since then many other corporations have followed BP s lead and left the coalition. This exodus reached a fevered pitch in the early months of 2000 when DaimlerChrysler, Texaco and General Motors all announced their exodus from the GCC. Since these desertions, the GCC restructured and remains a powerful and well-funded force focused on obstructing meaningful efforts to mitigate climate change.

Global Warming Skeptic Organizations | Union of Concerned Scientists


Well I think we all have to thank Oddball here for being so open about getting his information on science from organisations funded by the likes of the coal industry and the Reverend Moon. They are very good sources.

 

[bripat9643]

The claim that you follow science doesn't pass the laugh test.

It does when you consider that everyone of the major scientific organisations back human involvement in climate change.

That's proof that your understanding of science is nil. Scientific truth isn't determined by popular vote. Only the leadership of these organizations back the AGW theory, and the leadership kisses government asshole. They are all a bunch of government toadies.

 

[bripat9643]

same ole - same ole: When you can't attack the message, then attack the source. Your use of Alinskyite tactics doesn't convince the skeptical that your position is based on scientific objectivity. It's politically motivated to support a political agenda.

From Oddball's link of "scientific" organisations -

Greening Earth Society

The Greening Earth Society (GES) was founded on Earth Day 1998 by the Western Fuels Association to promote the view that increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 are good for humanity. GES and Western Fuels are essentially the same organization. Both used to be located at the same office suite in Arlington, VA. Until December 2000, Fred Palmer chaired both institutions. The GES is now chaired by Bob Norrgard, another long-term Western Fuels associate. The Western Fuels Assocation (WFA) is a cooperative of coal-dependent utilities in the western states that works in part to discredit climate change science and to prevent regulations that might damage coal-related industries.

Funding: The Greening Earth Society receives its funding from the Western Fuels Association, which in turn receives its funding from its coal and utility company members.


Global Warming Skeptic Organizations | Union of Concerned Scientists

Absolutely wonderful posting, Oddball. I can't thank you for it enough.

 

[Saigon]

Bripat -

Unfortunately, that theory doesn't make any sense at all.

Can you explain to me why scientific organisations which you claim "kiss governments asshole" confirmed the human role in climate change - under George Bush?*

*This also occured under conservative governments in Germany, New Zealand, France, the UK, Australia and a half dozen other countries.

 

[Saigon]

It's politically motivated to support a political agenda.

Oddball's OWN SOURCE confirms that its funding is from the coal industry, yes.

 

[bripat9643]

The federal government funnels $billions into global warming "research" every year. according to your own theory of scientific epistemology, that means the theory of global warming is nothing but government propaganda, and it's proponents are nothing but government propagandists and hacks.

Also from Oddball's most informative link:

According to the report, ExxonMobil has funneled nearly $16 million between 1998 and 2005 to a network of 43 advocacy organizations that seek to confuse the public on global warming science.

Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)

Spin: Moreover, climate change won t be bad for us anyway. Action on climate change is not warranted because of shaky science and flawed policy approaches.

Funding: Conservative foundations including Bradley, Smith Richardson, and Forbes. SEPP has also been directly tied to ultra right-wing mogul Reverend Sung Myung Moon s Unification Church, including receipt of a year s free office space from a Moon-funded group and the participation of SEPP s director in church-sponsored conferences and on the board of a Moon-funded magazine.

Global Climate Coalition

Founded in 1989 by 46 corporations and trade associations representing all major elements of US industry, the GCC presents itself as a "voice for business in the global warming debate." The group funded several flawed studies on the economics of the cost of mitigating climate change, which formed the basis of their 1997/1998 multi-million dollar advertising campaign against the Kyoto Protocol. The GCC began to unravel in 1997 when British Petroleum withdrew its membership. Since then many other corporations have followed BP s lead and left the coalition. This exodus reached a fevered pitch in the early months of 2000 when DaimlerChrysler, Texaco and General Motors all announced their exodus from the GCC. Since these desertions, the GCC restructured and remains a powerful and well-funded force focused on obstructing meaningful efforts to mitigate climate change.

Global Warming Skeptic Organizations | Union of Concerned Scientists


Well I think we all have to thank Oddball here for being so open about getting his information on science from organisations funded by the likes of the coal industry and the Reverend Moon. They are very good sources.

 

[bripat9643]

And the federal government funds global warming "research" (propaganda).

It's politically motivated to support a political agenda.

Oddball's OWN SOURCE confirms that its funding is from the coal industry, yes.

 

[Saigon]

The federal government funnels $billions into global warming "research" every year. according to your own theory of scientific epistemology, that means the theory of global warming is nothing but government propaganda, and it's proponents are nothing but government propagandists and hacks.

Again, this makes no logical sense whatsoever.

Virtually all climate change research is conducted by universities, and university funding in Europe is not linked to particular faculties, let alone to particular studies.

Faculties themselves decide what to research dependent on their interests and based on bulk funding - not the other way around.

And the federal government funds global warming "research" (propaganda).

So the Bush administration funded research that confirmed climate change - even as the Bush administration denied climate change?

As I said - this make no logical sense.

Seriously BriPat, you really need to take a step back from this topic and start to ask yourself why you believe things that simply don't stack up.

 

[bripat9643]

Bripat -

Unfortunately, that theory doesn't make any sense at all.

Can you explain to me why scientific organisations which you claim "kiss governments asshole" confirmed the human role in climate change - under George Bush?*

*This also occured under conservative governments in Germany, New Zealand, France, the UK, Australia and a half dozen other countries.

Your belief that the government bureaucracy takes orders from Republican presidents wold be charming if it wasn't so absurd. The bureaucracy is composed to toadies totally devoted to more government. they are creatures of government that always lobby for more government, whether a Republican or a Democrat is in office.

 

[bripat9643]

The federal government funnels $billions into global warming "research" every year. according to your own theory of scientific epistemology, that means the theory of global warming is nothing but government propaganda, and it's proponents are nothing but government propagandists and hacks.

Again, this makes no logical sense whatsoever.

Virtually all climate change research is conducted by universities, and university funding in Europe is not linked to particular faculties, let alone to particular studies.

Faculties themselves decide what to research dependent on their interests and based on bulk funding - not the other way around.

The government provides the money for this research. Bureaucrats decides who gets funding and who doesn't. Any "researched" who concludes that global warming isn't a problem gets no further research dollars.

And the federal government funds global warming "research" (propaganda).

So the Bush administration funded research that confirmed cliate change - even as the Bush administration denied climate change?

As I said - this make no logical sense.

It only doesn't make sense to those who don't have a clue as to how government actually operates. The bureaucracy is constantly at war with Republican presidents. Undermining them is one of its main objectives.

 

[Saigon]

Your belief that the government bureaucracy takes orders from Republican presidents wold be charming if it wasn't so absurd. The bureaucracy is composed to toadies totally devoted to more government. they are creatures of government that always lobby for more government, whether a Republican or a Democrat is in office.

Ah-ha.

So the Bush administration, which denied climate change, funded research which confirmed climate change.

And this happened right around the world.

You must realise yourself that this is nonsense.