The Arrogance of the Warmers

[daveman]

If a lie is being repeated and not being challenged, most will accept the lie as truth despite evidence that counters since they have not heard/seen that evidence.

This plan is not on its face "bad", although any opposition to the Truth proffessed by a Liberal is branded as being intrinsically "bad".

The good or the bad of anything is a philosophical argument. The accuracy or the inaccuraracy of anything is a scientific argument. The accuracy of AGW Science is suspect. Revealing the weakness of the argument is not in itself a philosophically bad thing to do.

Why do you think that it is?

Why WOULD you think that it is.

Is pollution and it's deadly effects 'a philosophical argument' too? Because the SAME abatement that addresses pollution is being fought by the same pseudo-scientists and the same big industries.

And an extremely well funded anti- science propaganda machine has helped create a whole culture of ignorant and dangerous ideologues who ignore ALL science.

We just ended the regime of the worst environmental president in history...Ronbo on steroids Bush...the war criminal and murderer. His attack on every environmental law and policy will lead to the premature deaths of thousands of Americans every year. He so severely disabled the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, it will be impossible to force polluters to EVER clean up their toxins and carcinogens. And polluters can dump any debris they want into our streams and tributaries by just filing for a permit from the Corp of Engineers. Something that can be done by mail. Killing human beings is a crime.

I suggest you look at the history of MTBE sometime. We warned everybody that it was a terrible thing to put in the gasoline and yet you guys were the "experts" and rammed it down the throats of of the Californians.

The result? Poisoned water wells all over the state that will not be useable for at least 100 years. WE were correct. Not you. If you had listened to us billions of dollars would not have been wasted, and lost because you idiots couldn't be bothered to do proper science.

YOUR TRACK RECORD AS REGARDS SCIENCE IS ONE OF ABJECT AND TOTAL FAILURE.

None of that matters. They meant well, so they're blameless.

Right, bfgrn, Roxy?

 

[IanC]

The problem with warmists is that they need continual lies to support their claims. Like mapmakers who had maps reflect loss of ice mass in Greenland when it wasn't true.

Mapmakers' claim on shape of Greenland suddenly melts away - Climate Change, Environment - The Independent

According to promotional material for the 13th edition of the atlas, this provides "concrete evidence of how climate change is altering the face of the planet for ever – and doing so at an alarming and accelerating rate."

However, scientists at the Scott Polar Research Institute at Cambridge University, which investigates climate change in the Arctic and is headed by the revered glaciologist Julian Dowdeswell, have asserted that the publisher's claims are flawed.

"Recent satellite images of Greenland make it clear that there are in fact still numerous glaciers and permanent ice cover where the new Times Atlas shows ice-free conditions and the emergence of new lands," the Institute said in a letter to Harper Collins, made public yesterday.

"We do not know why this error has occurred, but it is regrettable that the claimed drastic reduction in the extent of ice in Greenland has created headline news around the world... There is to our knowledge no support for this claim in the published scientific literature."

The arrogance of the warmists is that they expect their falsities to be accepted as truth.

they are learning though. it took quite a while to admit to Himalayagate but they acted quickly in this case, although they were not first to notice

 

[SW2SILVER]

Einstein may have been wrong about the absolute speed of light, maybe not. About the arrogance of "Warmers"...I am 53 years old. I have experienced climate change in the last 20 years, and it has been getting drier and WARMER. That is a fact, for me. Call me a “Warmer”, then. Some of you wags believe the SUN is causing this, and YOU folks are using the same "science" to support that hypothesis others use to support global warming or the absolute speed of light. Then, you guys question science. That shows me how concerned some of you folks are with "Science", facts or the truth. Arrogance of "Warmers" my sweet bippy. Anyone here is arrogant if they think they know exactly what is causing this WARMING, and that includes all you that appose the human caused hypothesis.

 

[code1211]

Einstein may have been wrong about the absolute speed of light, maybe not. About the arrogance of "Warmers"...I am 53 years old. I have experienced climate change in the last 20 years, and it has been getting drier and WARMER. That is a fact, for me. Call me a “Warmer”, then. Some of you wags believe the SUN is causing this, and YOU folks are using the same "science" to support that hypothesis others use to support global warming or the absolute speed of light. Then, you guys question science. That shows me how concerned some of you folks are with "Science", facts or the truth. Arrogance of "Warmers" my sweet bippy. Anyone here is arrogant if they think they know exactly what is causing this WARMING, and that includes all you that appose the human caused hypothesis.

And so you are now branded a Denialist. See how that works? You did not wholeheartedly and with no reservations proclaim that CO2 is the one and only cause of Global Warming.

By allowing the possiblity that there are other causes or even one other cause, like the Sun perhaps, you disallow the certainty that reducing CO2 will solve the problem. If reducing CO2 is reduced to a 3% posibility of addressing the problem, what's the use?

Simply saying that the conditions of weather are changing does not make you a Warmer. Assigning the cause as CO2 and recomending a drastic change to the way of life of everyone on the planet is what makes you a warmer. The warming movement has little to do with science and much to do with controlling activities through governmental overreach and redistributing money.

That is why the main driver of the debate is a political organization, the IPCC.

 

[westwall]

Einstein may have been wrong about the absolute speed of light, maybe not. About the arrogance of "Warmers"...I am 53 years old. I have experienced climate change in the last 20 years, and it has been getting drier and WARMER. That is a fact, for me. Call me a “Warmer”, then. Some of you wags believe the SUN is causing this, and YOU folks are using the same "science" to support that hypothesis others use to support global warming or the absolute speed of light. Then, you guys question science. That shows me how concerned some of you folks are with "Science", facts or the truth. Arrogance of "Warmers" my sweet bippy. Anyone here is arrogant if they think they know exactly what is causing this WARMING, and that includes all you that appose the human caused hypothesis.

Wow, compared to the 4.5 billion year history of the planet your 53 years upon it is so much more important. Pretty arrogant don't you think? Here's a clue. The MWP lasted hundreds of years, the Little Ice Age lasted hundreds of years (and we're STILL warming up from that EVEN though it ended in 1850), I hope you've noticed something there....it takes HUNDREDS of years for things to happen on the planet...not your measly 53 years.

Arrogance personified. Thank you for making our point so eloquently.

 

[wirebender]

Some of you wags believe the SUN is causing this,

The fact that damned near every planet in the solar system is experiencing climate change should give you a clue. Unless of course, you believe SUVs are operating on other planets than earth.

 

[Old Rocks]

Why yes, Uranus is getting colder.

 

[Old Rocks]

Then there is the matter of measured TSI. But that is science, and an anthema to Walleyes.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Who here thinks that it would be a good thing if it warmed 5c in 89 years in the earth's mean temperature.

 

[wirebender]

Then there is the matter of measured TSI. But that is science, and an anthema to Walleyes.

TSI is not the end all and be all where the sun is concerned rocks.

 

[wirebender]

Who here thinks that it would be a good thing if it warmed 5c in 89 years in the earth's mean temperature.

Looking back over paleohistory, life exploded during warm periods; not during cool periods as we are presently experiencing. Warm favors life, not cool.

 

[Bfgrn]

Who here thinks that it would be a good thing if it warmed 5c in 89 years in the earth's mean temperature.

Looking back over paleohistory, life exploded during warm periods; not during cool periods as we are presently experiencing. Warm favors life, not cool.

Ah, the Western Fuels Association propaganda.

 

[wirebender]

Who here thinks that it would be a good thing if it warmed 5c in 89 years in the earth's mean temperature.

Looking back over paleohistory, life exploded during warm periods; not during cool periods as we are presently experiencing. Warm favors life, not cool.

Ah, the Western Fuels Association propaganda.

So in which period in paleohistory except for a very short period between the perminan and triassic periods did a warm climate not equal an explosion in life on earth? And can you offer up a shred of evidence that proves that the present climate is ideal for life on earth?

 

[Bfgrn]

Looking back over paleohistory, life exploded during warm periods; not during cool periods as we are presently experiencing. Warm favors life, not cool.

Ah, the Western Fuels Association propaganda.

So in which period in paleohistory except for a very short period between the perminan and triassic periods did a warm climate not equal an explosion in life on earth? And can you offer up a shred of evidence that proves that the present climate is ideal for life on earth?

The Permian–Triassic (P–Tr) extinction event, informally known as the Great Dying, was not 'brief' for almost all life on this planet. It was ETERNAL.

 

[wirebender]

The Permian–Triassic (P–Tr) extinction event, informally known as the Great Dying, was not 'brief' for almost all life on this planet. It was ETERNAL.

No actual answer I see. Not surprising. When propagandists are asked penetrating questions, they generally result to quips.

 

[Bfgrn]

The Permian–Triassic (P–Tr) extinction event, informally known as the Great Dying, was not 'brief' for almost all life on this planet. It was ETERNAL.

No actual answer I see. Not surprising. When propagandists are asked penetrating questions, they generally result to quips.

It is not a quip, it is stark reality. The earth is not going anywhere, it will survive. But human beings are not inert pieces of rock, they are fragile life forms that can only survive within a 'brief' window of temperature.

 

[skookerasbil]

Ah, the Western Fuels Association propaganda.

is winning s0n!!!!!

 

[konradv]

Who here thinks that it would be a good thing if it warmed 5c in 89 years in the earth's mean temperature.

Looking back over paleohistory, life exploded during warm periods; not during cool periods as we are presently experiencing. Warm favors life, not cool.

It's human life and civilization that's the concern. Paleohistory is of little importance in that case, since human civilization flourished during cooler times.

 

[IanC]

Who here thinks that it would be a good thing if it warmed 5c in 89 years in the earth's mean temperature.

the first ten years of the new century.

it is quite a leap of faith to find basically all of those 5K in the next 9 decades isnt it?

or are we just playing a 'what if' game?

hey Matthew, you like making graphs. why dont you make one for 1901-2100 with real temps to 2011 and a line from now to 2100 showing a 5K increase?

 

[Bfgrn]

Ah, the Western Fuels Association propaganda.

is winning s0n!!!!!

Parrots like you are proof...

Poly says:

This is who we should listen to on climate change.

And this is who we should trust with our environment.