Jim in Anchorage Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Princeton Physicist Says GW "Science" is Mistaken. In 1991, Happer was appointed director of energy research for the US Department of Energy. In 1993, he testified before Congress that the scientific data didn't support widespread fears about the dangers of the ozone hole and global warming, remarks that caused then-Vice President Al Gore to fire him. "I was told that science was not going to intrude on public policy", he said. "I did not need the job that badly". Sea Ice Ends Year at Same Level as 1979 650 International Scientists Now Denying... Again, this is not a diatribe saying we shouldn't do a better job with the environment. It's simply pointing out that there are over $45 TRILLION of proposals at stake if this "Climate Change" A-Holes keep up the bully pulpit. Of course this is confined to obscure publications. You will never see yhat information on cnn,nbc,etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Of course this is confined to obscure publications. You will never see yhat information on cnn,nbc,etc. Which is why I don't read or watch them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 http://makewealthhistory.files.wordpress.c...e-consensus.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 It seems that the flock has lost faith http://people-press.org/report/485/economy...policy-priority Oh no I've said too much. I haven't said enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 It seems that the flock has lost faith http://people-press.org/report/485/economy...policy-priority Oh no I've said too much. I haven't said enough We're all gunna die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsNYC Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 yes, but not totally man made (if at all) The planet warms and it cools....its just what it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPDontletthedoorhityourars Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 yes, but not totally man made (if at all) The planet warms and it cools....its just what it does. GoreBull Warming-Another big scam that will get you arrested in Europe if you denounce it...sort of on the same political correctness spectrum as the Holocaust (I'm not saying it didn't exist so don't go off the deep end). The fact is 19,000 scientists have claimed it has more to do with the sun reaching a high temperature cycle due to increased sunspot activity. The arrogance of humans thinking we could actually have an effect on a huge sphere such as the Earth on such an infinite level. Earth to Humans: you're too insignificant to matter. Just look at the universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 You arrogant camels with your heads in the sand like to dismiss climate change as not happening. The trends say differently and even if we can't change the warming to reverse the trend, saying it is not happening because you some campaign by the carbon polluters claim differently in the PR efforts to preserve their cash cow doesn't mean it isn't. The reasons and sources of it may be varied, but is undeniable it is happening... From the ponds in the NY area that used to be frozen all winter long when I was a kid to the geese spending the winter further and further North. I have heard but can't at the moment substantiate the earths axis has moved some 5 plus degrees, the northern polar ice cap is shrinking, but I have also heard that the southern ice cap is growing. Whether it is solar flares combined with man's carbon and greenhouse gas admissions, saying it isn't happening is just patently wrong. A good report by the congressional research service lays out the information and debate well. I suggest all should read before continuing this debate. http://digital.library.unt.edu/govdocs/crs...meta-crs-8752:1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPDontletthedoorhityourars Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 You arrogant camels with your heads in the sand like to dismiss climate change as not happening. The trends say differently and even if we can't change the warming to reverse the trend, saying it is not happening because you some campaign by the carbon polluters claim differently in the PR efforts to preserve their cash cow doesn't mean it isn't. The reasons and sources of it may be varied, but is undeniable it is happening... From the ponds in the NY area that used to be frozen all winter long when I was a kid to the geese spending the winter further and further North. I have heard but can't at the moment substantiate the earths axis has moved some 5 plus degrees, the northern polar ice cap is shrinking, but I have also heard that the southern ice cap is growing. Whether it is solar flares combined with man's carbon and greenhouse gas admissions, saying it isn't happening is just patently wrong. A good report by the congressional research service lays out the information and debate well. I suggest all should read before continuing this debate. http://digital.library.unt.edu/govdocs/crs...meta-crs-8752:1 Taxing farmers for farting cows is not the answer. I just believe the problem is minimally man-made and there are greater forces we have no control over. I applaud people for taking "green" action (as silly as it seems at times) but when it is all said and done, there are galactic forces working here. Who knows this (solar flares, magnetic field changes, polarity changes, axis shift) might all tie in to 12/21/2012 and all we can do is pray...well at least I will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Taxing farmers for farting cows is not the answer. I just believe the problem is minimally man-made and there are greater forces we have no control over. I applaud people for taking "green" action (as silly as it seems at times) but when it is all said and done, there are galactic forces working here. Who knows this (solar flares, magnetic field changes, polarity changes, axis shift) might all tie in to 12/21/2012 and all we can do is pray...well at least I will. Farmers have so many exemptions from taxes and so many government giveaways, I suggest we just cut Ag programs and we make up the same amount in Tax dollars anyway, either that or go back to the same staff levels at USDA that was there at the end of the Clinton Administration.... somewhere around 90,000.... I hear now it is over 130,000 since Bush took office, same with Department of Commerce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 First: I can't vote in a poll that doesn't include my choice = a whole lot of people have a whole lot of work to do before we "know" anything. The conclusion to use alternate energy (including nuclear) follow from these premises that I think you'd agree with: (1) Cleaner less-polluting energy sources are better for us all than dirtier polluting ones. (2) Sending hundreds of billions of dollars to the middle east and Russia is not in our national best interest. (3) Fossil fuel resources are limited and certain fossil fuels are more limited in supply than others. I would add a 4th premise that I'm not sure you'd agree with: (4) I'm willing to pay a little more for energy (not in taxes but in the form of cost at the pump/light switch) to follow the premises in 1-3. Wait, are you arguing for the fact that Global Warming exists, or, for the de facto rationalizations and "by the ways" that have been spun up by Global Warming supporters and are prefabricated to be attractive to those of us in the center? This post is the intellectual equivalent of a Hot Pocket(yes I said Hot Pocket) or the McRib = let's see if they will eat schit on bread.... But I do think we need to be very careful in how we tread and that Al Gore and anyone who thinks he knows a damn thing need to be repeatedly Roshamboed. Quoted for truth. However forget the "contest". Keep it simple: Teabag Al Gore supporter. Repeat. If my weatherman can't tell me what the weather will be like in a week, how am I supposed to believe what the temperature of the earth is going to be in 20 years - within half a degree........ Yes, I agree. Why are they overreaching? Start simple: correctly predict the weather tomorrow within 10 damn degrees, then do it for a week within 5 and I might be inclined to listen to the "scientists". Perhaps we haven't put enough stress on the situation, or, we have set our expectations too low. Solution: Increase the consequences for failure. Teabagging seemed to be the answer above, why not here? Farmers have so many exemptions from taxes and so many government giveaways, I suggest we just cut Ag programs and we make up the same amount in Tax dollars anyway, either that or go back to the same staff levels at USDA that was there at the end of the Clinton Administration.... somewhere around 90,000.... I hear now it is over 130,000 since Bush took office, same with Department of Commerce. Ah, and the real evil behind Global Warming rears its ugly head! "You've heard of re-writing history, well, this is that, plus more! Not only do you get our 3, count em, 3 famous false premises: 1. More taxes are always good 2. More government jobs/spending are always good 3. More government jobs/spending are always good, except when a Republican does it but you also get a completely irrelevant, and false to boot, corollary that somehow activity at the USDA will have something to do with Global Warming. But only if you call in the next 5 minutes" The Truth: 1. Capitalism and the free market, if regulated properly, but mostly left unhindered by government has proven to be a much better economic system than socialism. This has been proven over and over, in many countries for centuries. 2. Socialists cannot accept that their ideas are simply bad, because they are supposed "intellectuals". 3. Instead of facing reality, or winning the game, they need to invent some strange outside influence, a game-changer. Since they lost the original game, they have no choice but to create a new game with different rules. The new game means they automagically win, and that forces the failed economic policies they insist on supporting onto us, whether they make sense or not, due to the new rules of the game. 4. Ask yourself: defense, fear of uncertainty, expecting the worst things to happen...since when is that the fundamental view of liberals? Never. They are always telling conservatives to lighten up, to see the relativity in things, to look at multiple points of view, to allow compassion to largely govern thought, to assume that everyone is always "trying their best", and it's OK when they fail, etc. Kum-ba-ya.... 5. But when it comes to Global Warming, suddenly everything turns black and white, the culprits are guilty without trial and should be executed, with no allowance for any point of view that detracts from their absolute and righteous judgment, Therefore, there is an immediate need to change any and all economic policy without debate or question based solely on a singular point of view???? Really? Why all the sudden urgency? Where's the reasoned debate? Where's the "considering points of view"? Why the Immediate Declaration of Consensus when I have taken craps longer than the time it took to supposedly reach the "consensus". What was the actual process used to determine the consensus? Why the complete departure from they way they handle every single issue other than this one? What is more likely? That the lefties suddenly and completely change their MO based on one issue? Or, that they believe that Global warming can be used to override economic policy without having to win the game = convince/prove that their policies have merit? They try to use the courts to legislate from the bench, because they can't get people to vote for what they want. How is this any different than that? Simple. They need the game changed immediately, before Marx's nonsense is formally and finally committed to the history books as another failed attempt at inventing a new religion. Global warming is the game-changer. Real or not, it is being used as a manipulative device, and far too many people are apparently too dumb/scared of being called names to question it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 The whole man made global warming thing started when a few researchers noticed the funding poured in when they proposed it.Monkey see, monkey do[always look for the key phrase "more research is needed"=I need a grant] And the libs were happy to chip in, because they despise Western civilization. Far to much use of natural resources in their opinion[except them, with their $20,000 soler panels] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPDontletthedoorhityourars Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 First: I can't vote in a poll that doesn't include my choice = a whole lot of people have a whole lot of work to do before we "know" anything. Wait, are you arguing for the fact that Global Warming exists, or, for the de facto rationalizations and "by the ways" that have been spun up by Global Warming supporters and are prefabricated to be attractive to those of us in the center? This post is the intellectual equivalent of a Hot Pocket(yes I said Hot Pocket) or the McRib = let's see if they will eat schit on bread.... Quoted for truth. However forget the "contest". Keep it simple: Teabag Al Gore supporter. Repeat. Yes, I agree. Why are they overreaching? Start simple: correctly predict the weather tomorrow within 10 damn degrees, then do it for a week within 5 and I might be inclined to listen to the "scientists". Perhaps we haven't put enough stress on the situation, or, we have set our expectations too low. Solution: Increase the consequences for failure. Teabagging seemed to be the answer above, why not here? Ah, and the real evil behind Global Warming rears its ugly head! "You've heard of re-writing history, well, this is that, plus more! Not only do you get our 3, count em, 3 famous false premises: 1. More taxes are always good 2. More government jobs/spending are always good 3. More government jobs/spending are always good, except when a Republican does it but you also get a completely irrelevant, and false to boot, corollary that somehow activity at the USDA will have something to do with Global Warming. But only if you call in the next 5 minutes" The Truth: 1. Capitalism and the free market, if regulated properly, but mostly left unhindered by government has proven to be a much better economic system than socialism. This has been proven over and over, in many countries for centuries. 2. Socialists cannot accept that their ideas are simply bad, because they are supposed "intellectuals". 3. Instead of facing reality, or winning the game, they need to invent some strange outside influence, a game-changer. Since they lost the original game, they have no choice but to create a new game with different rules. The new game means they automagically win, and that forces the failed economic policies they insist on supporting onto us, whether they make sense or not, due to the new rules of the game. 4. Ask yourself: defense, fear of uncertainty, expecting the worst things to happen...since when is that the fundamental view of liberals? Never. They are always telling conservatives to lighten up, to see the relativity in things, to look at multiple points of view, to allow compassion to largely govern thought, to assume that everyone is always "trying their best", and it's OK when they fail, etc. Kum-ba-ya.... 5. But when it comes to Global Warming, suddenly everything turns black and white, the culprits are guilty without trial and should be executed, with no allowance for any point of view that detracts from their absolute and righteous judgment, Therefore, there is an immediate need to change any and all economic policy without debate or question based solely on a singular point of view???? Really? Why all the sudden urgency? Where's the reasoned debate? Where's the "considering points of view"? Why the Immediate Declaration of Consensus when I have taken craps longer than the time it took to supposedly reach the "consensus". What was the actual process used to determine the consensus? Why the complete departure from they way they handle every single issue other than this one? What is more likely? That the lefties suddenly and completely change their MO based on one issue? Or, that they believe that Global warming can be used to override economic policy without having to win the game = convince/prove that their policies have merit? They try to use the courts to legislate from the bench, because they can't get people to vote for what they want. How is this any different than that? Simple. They need the game changed immediately, before Marx's nonsense is formally and finally committed to the history books as another failed attempt at inventing a new religion. Global warming is the game-changer. Real or not, it is being used as a manipulative device, and far too many people are apparently too dumb/scared of being called names to question it. Great post, my man. BTW, I heard the other day, Bird-Flu is making a comeback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da Big Man Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Global warming is another Lib/Dem scare tactic. I live in Buffalo and we are experiencing the coldest winter in 30 years. Now I know that someone will go and find some article by a scientist saying all kind of self serving theories. 3 years ago global scientist were sent to the north , during the summer months, and still couldn't find evidence of warming. Instead they found a northern pass that is usually open to freighters that time year was to iced over to pass...hhmmm. ENJOY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 First: I can't vote in a poll that doesn't include my choice = a whole lot of people have a whole lot of work to do before we "know" anything. Wait, are you arguing for the fact that Global Warming exists, or, for the de facto rationalizations and "by the ways" that have been spun up by Global Warming supporters and are prefabricated to be attractive to those of us in the center? This post is the intellectual equivalent of a Hot Pocket(yes I said Hot Pocket) or the McRib = let's see if they will eat schit on bread.... Quoted for truth. However forget the "contest". Keep it simple: Teabag Al Gore supporter. Repeat. Yes, I agree. Why are they overreaching? Start simple: correctly predict the weather tomorrow within 10 damn degrees, then do it for a week within 5 and I might be inclined to listen to the "scientists". Perhaps we haven't put enough stress on the situation, or, we have set our expectations too low. Solution: Increase the consequences for failure. Teabagging seemed to be the answer above, why not here? Ah, and the real evil behind Global Warming rears its ugly head! "You've heard of re-writing history, well, this is that, plus more! Not only do you get our 3, count em, 3 famous false premises: 1. More taxes are always good 2. More government jobs/spending are always good 3. More government jobs/spending are always good, except when a Republican does it but you also get a completely irrelevant, and false to boot, corollary that somehow activity at the USDA will have something to do with Global Warming. But only if you call in the next 5 minutes" The Truth: 1. Capitalism and the free market, if regulated properly, but mostly left unhindered by government has proven to be a much better economic system than socialism. This has been proven over and over, in many countries for centuries. 2. Socialists cannot accept that their ideas are simply bad, because they are supposed "intellectuals". 3. Instead of facing reality, or winning the game, they need to invent some strange outside influence, a game-changer. Since they lost the original game, they have no choice but to create a new game with different rules. The new game means they automagically win, and that forces the failed economic policies they insist on supporting onto us, whether they make sense or not, due to the new rules of the game. 4. Ask yourself: defense, fear of uncertainty, expecting the worst things to happen...since when is that the fundamental view of liberals? Never. They are always telling conservatives to lighten up, to see the relativity in things, to look at multiple points of view, to allow compassion to largely govern thought, to assume that everyone is always "trying their best", and it's OK when they fail, etc. Kum-ba-ya.... 5. But when it comes to Global Warming, suddenly everything turns black and white, the culprits are guilty without trial and should be executed, with no allowance for any point of view that detracts from their absolute and righteous judgment, Therefore, there is an immediate need to change any and all economic policy without debate or question based solely on a singular point of view???? Really? Why all the sudden urgency? Where's the reasoned debate? Where's the "considering points of view"? Why the Immediate Declaration of Consensus when I have taken craps longer than the time it took to supposedly reach the "consensus". What was the actual process used to determine the consensus? Why the complete departure from they way they handle every single issue other than this one? What is more likely? That the lefties suddenly and completely change their MO based on one issue? Or, that they believe that Global warming can be used to override economic policy without having to win the game = convince/prove that their policies have merit? They try to use the courts to legislate from the bench, because they can't get people to vote for what they want. How is this any different than that? Simple. They need the game changed immediately, before Marx's nonsense is formally and finally committed to the history books as another failed attempt at inventing a new religion. Global warming is the game-changer. Real or not, it is being used as a manipulative device, and far too many people are apparently too dumb/scared of being called names to question it. I am not saying raise taxes on farmers, just cut their government welfare.... Read what I said and understand it before you go off half-cocked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts