OH NO! What do I do now??!! Buy more SUV’s??? Smash my solar panels and start burning a pile of tires in my yard?? Al GORE please tell me what is best!!
Repenting has absolutely nothing to do with it. What’s needed is for you to accept the empirical reality of the world you inhabit. Antarctic sea ice is increasing because the continent is melting down. Ice is moving from the land to the sea.
If Climate Depot were a reliable source of information and not a dishonest Climate Denier propaganda outlet, why would they pretend to have difficulty understanding this?
It does? Obama has me and others convinced that the world revolves around him… Or am I confused and Obama is black hole where all logic,sanity etc is sucked down to never return?
Faith in something greater than me, tradition, history, being sophisticated enough and trained as an engineer to know that I’m not the cousin of an amoeba. But, this pope is doing tremendous damage to the church. He is supposed to be a spiritual leader.
Look, I’m not going to get into a debate on the role of the pope or his infallibility. I can tell from your snarky comment that you are just attempting to take a cheap shot at the pope because he is an easy target.
He’s a human being elevated by men to a position of deity. Sorry, but the whole pope thing is a fraud. I cringe every time I hear someone refer to him as “the holy father”. Man, better start taking those Biblical warnings about idolatry seriously.
He is not a deity. He is not worshiped. He is the leader of the church much like the Archbishop of Canterbury is the leader of the Anglican church. So, to even say that show your lack of knowledge.
He’s not worshiped? Hah! I know many Catholics who think this man is infallible. Only God is infallible. To attribute that quality to anyone else is, by definition, worship. They call him “The Holy Father”, not “the leader of the church”. The Holy Father is in heaven. Not worship? Geesh, these people refer to him as a deity and claim he is infallible, and you don’t think that’s worship? Get a clue.
You call him the Pope because that is the position he was elected to by a group of other Pope-wannabees. So, what if he had lost the election? We could have Pope Oscar and his world view could be a whole lot different. Catholics have to stop giving credence to this person who literally won a personality contest among a group of so-called abstinent men.
He was elected because of his religious “resume”. I am sure that there was an element of politics considering that he was from Latin America, a Jesuit, etc. But he was elected to be a religious leader. He should stay out of politics.
as born out by what scripture? None. Only God sits on the throne of God – Go’ds permissive will – the same will that allows you to worship false idols, follow a human instead of Jesus, murder babies, steal from others, live in sin etc. I have no doubt you believe that drivel you just spewed – sad really.
They didn’t even have to make a man-made volcano to spew billions of tons of reflective particles into the atmosphere to solve it. Man, those guys are effective. Really dodged a bullet, here. Now we should just give them billions of tax dollars out of gratitude.
VUNDERBAR,. I was under the impression that polar bears were drowning due to no ice. Global warming was melting it away. And East Angelia college was always telling the truth. VUNDERBAR.
And last year the Great Lakes were 96% frozen over for the first time in decades. I don’t care what the warmers say, I’m cold. Would somebody please forward this data along to the Pope?
The pope is a socialist and believes global warming is the political equivalent of the Christian Compact. In other words, it is up to the wealthy Christian nations in the world to give freely to the needy in order to follow the path that Christ set forth as the way to god. I believe in the Christian compact as well, but within the framework of free market capitalism guided by the rule of law and a democratic form of government. Remember the Pope is from Argentina. Argentina and the US were similar in almost all respects socially and economically in 1900. Unfortunately, Argentina took a different turn politically which resulted in a lost century of liberty for the Argentinian people. The pope is comfortable with the path the Argentinians took.
Liberals love to claim that socialism isn’t bad, because certain socialist dictators were vaguely “right wing” in the most ambiguous definitions possible of the term. It’s like liberals insisting Hitler was “right wing” despite the modern usage of “right wing” to mean believing in limited government, and the power of the individual in contrast, not despite, the power of the state — a school of thought that failed to reach Hitler during his campaign, promises lavish social benefits, through his tenure as ruler as he created government-run companies that produced automobiles and so much more, clear through to his death after government intrusion into the private economy, to fund expansionism and socialist utopian promises, utterly destroyed German prosperity and security.
“Those right-wing guys growing the government massively are evil. But man, we need more socialism.”
Speaking of Hitler, socialism can be summed up in one simple statement: “[…] because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in
the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or
voluntarily.”
Yes. There are no such things as right-wing fascism or socialism. Both are left-wing. The differences are in the implementation and type of force used. Fascism is more barrel-of-the-gun. Socialism is more peer-pressure-choice-limitation-censorship-information-witholding style withOUT the gun.
Actually, Socialism (Fabian is one facet) has the ideology of waiting until you get enough of the support and policies in place. Once that is done, you kill and jail all dissenters. Kind of throws in the face of what Hillary said about dissent being unAmerican. Democrats only espouse freedom of speech and dissent as long as it serves their purpose. Ever tried to argue with a Democrat? You’ll find a very closed minded and/or uneducated person.
Both socialism and facism use force or ‘barrel-of-the-gun’ interchangeably. Don’t believe me? Try not paying your US income taxes or selling loose cigarettes to avoid tax revenues in NY.
The term ‘facism’ has to do with coopting or binding private interests to government interest. I am not an Italian historian, but Mussolini first used the term which comes form the Latin term ‘fasces’ or bundle of sticks.
Yep, “fasces” as a symbol indicates power; the synchronized, coincidental, parallel application of the stick as opposed to the carrot. It symbolizes the power of those who assert it under legitimate, i.e. legal, authority. In the simplest explanation it symbolizes the power of the unity of purpose to impose the axiom “might makes right”.
That symbol is pervasive throughout all authoritarian organizations. Do a google search on the image of “fasces” and the concept is pretty clear, but here’s a preview.
Depends how you define ‘left wing’ and ‘right wing’. Very ambiguous terms. They really don’t do political discourse any good at all.
Particularly since there are plenty of things that could be considered cite-able references that insist big-government dictators like Hitler are ‘right-wing’, the conversation gets muddied.
I define ‘right-wing’ political ideology to mean placing the power (responsibility and liberty) on the individual, and left-wing to place it in the hands of bureaucrats. Makes it simple.
Side note: An individual standing up against hatred is good. A government using alleged hatred to grab power is a disaster.
“Left-wing” and “right-wing” are not really useful terms, and mask the complicity and similarities between Nazis, Fascists, Socialists and Communists. What they all have in common is big, strong government. A more useful distinction is a “statist” axis. At or near one extreme are all four philosophies, above. At the other end, is individualism and liberty (aka our Founding Fathers).
Too bad that “Statist” does not sound as scary as Nazi, Fascist, Socialist or Communist. In truth, it is the scariest thing of all.
Telling people to help the poor is totally different than telling people to subjugate themselves to another person’s presumed authority under the pretext of helping the poor.
If socialists didn’t believe flagrant lies, they wouldn’t believe anything.
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Joseph Goebbels a very well known Socialist in Germany. Yes the Nazis were socialist
wow what an utter dolt you are… perhaps he should have said “I feel my airways are being constricted which is making it harder for me to take in oxygen and expel carbon dioxide…”? tard’s like you make it so hard to fight for critical thinking
By definition, Charity isn’t charity if it’s being enforced by law, sword, or gun.
Jesus’s teachings were to be charitable. Trying to ‘enforce’ charity defeats its very purpose.
The Catholic Church isn’t worried about charity, look at the top brass with their multi-million dollar estates. It’s a fraud.
OTH, sea ice doesn’t account for as much as total ice pack. Earth is losing ice – PERIOD. It’s cyclical, just check out wiki for “ice age” and see this cycle has about a 125K year reboot. We are spiking around the top soon to be followed by an EXTREME drop into cold.
Liberals made up the religion of global warming so they can PRETEND to be the savior of the planet.
Just as they PRETEND to be the savior of the poor, the blacks, the gays, the feminists, the unions and dozens of other special interest groups too lazy, ignorant and weak minded to think beyond the media lies.
Anybody that thinks this global warming scam is about anything other than a massive redistribution of wealth is playing into their hands.. That is all this is about period…It is the attempt at global government with global laws which loosely translates into ransacking the US and giving that wealth to a global oligarchy.. Simple.. Thats why they will never let it go. Never..
BINGO!!
we have a winner !!!!!
I thought that the earth began to heal and the seas began to recede the very moment Barak Obama took office……….weren’t we told exactly that?
…and the bankers who knowingly sold bad loan debt to other banks and collapsed the banking system. Also, the politicians who made that possible by gundecking Federal loan reports at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for years. They have the cash and the media flacking for them though. They should all be locked up.
Not defending them and I agree with most posts here, but multi-million dollar estates? That they own? Please, if this is not just some brown gas coming out your back side, provide some links to this, I am interested.
Go look it up yourself you lazy dolt. People don’t have to do research for you. Al Gore lives in a palatial estate in Tennessee and it’s easily seen via Google Earth. If I found it, so you can you.
AND his beachfront Malibu home, prefectly safe from rising oceans, apparently. Right on the beach, though.
BTW the Church of Rme, to deal with mess those touchy feelie priests made, is selling off a TON of really nice waterfront property in New England, and elsewhere. Vow of “poverty” ROFLMAO.
I may be a lazy dolt but the comment was not talking about Al Gore, it was talking about the Catholic Church, you ignorant dolt. And I am not backing up the Catholics, I think they have a lot of nerve wanting the US to spend on their programs while they have great wealth in buildings and art work and I think the Pope is way out of line and an Obama loving socialist, I was just asking about the comment that was made. I don’t really think it is too much to ask when someone makes a unfounded statement to ask them to back it up. If not, the entire comments section dialog is nothing but drivel and although a lot of it is, like your comment, I believe a good deal if it is healthy dialog.
German Bishop Franz-Peter ($40 million dollar home)… & google “The lavish
homes of American archbishops” – $1 million plus. And, I’m sure there’s more.
Apology not necessary my friend. And, as a disabled US Army veteran and veteran supporter, Wounded Warriors is a good place to show your support. Thanks.
A good percentage of my giving had been going to WW recently but now they get it all. Once the Bishops sell the mansions and feed the poor, I might start listening to them again. I think it takes big balls to tell the US government what to do with tax money when you live in a 14 million dollar mansion
The church owns expensive real estate- the priests, bishops, cardinals own virtually nothing but the clothes on their back. When they are in civilian clothes, that is. When they are in their vestments they don’t own those either.
Agree. It appears that we are in an interglacial period of an ice age. I looked ice age up after returning from Alaska when a glacier guide said we are in an ice age.
What you do not realize is everything the Church has, was donated or given to them. Unless you know the history of the Catholic Church and how It came to be, you really should keep your opinions to yourself. You are just like the libs and perhaps you are one. You point out what is on the surface and not the truth. This is about Global warming, not the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church is simply the world’s largest real estate company. Ever been to the Vatican’s “Map Room”? And that’s just the Italian properties! Then they have their “other assets”, i.e., you and me, who fork over our paychecks to pay taxes, rent and maintenance on all that real estate … in exchange, of course, for a solemn assurance that we’ll have a great time after we’re dead.
No doubt… but believing in global warming doesnt mean you must believe in a socialist fix. I infact believe in letting the earth do whatever it intends to do. It will either wipe away our existance or it will turn out to be much to do about nothing.
“I infact believe in letting the earth do whatever it intends to do”
Uh huh, and why would you pretend humans have nothing to do with that?
We have increased CO₂ from 290PPM before the industrial revolution to 400PPM today. If it’s so likely that polar ice caps will be able to withstand CO₂ so high, why isn’t there a single example of them doing so in Earth’s history?
Nice try – taking this article’s snapshot of 36 years in an approximately 4.5 billion year history (shrinking it to your own 8 year snapshot), then trying to magnify the significance of your own numbers, and making your premise of cause the only available one….
Hot is global warming. Cold is global warming. Rain is global warming. Snow is global warming. Clouds and the lack of clouds are global warming…
There you go: Reverting to your Confederate mythology of the helots slaving on plantations. At least you are honest about wanting to go against humanity in wishing to enslave your brothers.
Hurricane? Global warming. Warmer winter? Global warming. Colder winter? Global warming.
Oh wait……it’s called “climate change” now. It is all-encompassing, and everything that occurs under the sun is the fault of greedy mankind.
“Global warming” was proving to be a real embarrassment. With “climate change” you can have your cake and eat it too.
Get with the program. “Climate Change” was so yesterday. It is “Climate Disruption”.
According to my personal Guru, Chicken Little, the glaciers are coming and we’re all going to freeze to death.
We’re doomed unless you fork over tons of money to Mr. Little, via me.
Algore, is that you?
Damn! Busted.
Little by little, car lanes are being removed in favor of bike lanes. I wonder why is that?
Beats the shit out of me. How many nuts would prefer commuting to work on a bike?
Me!
Have fun next snowy day.
The eco-freak dictatorship. agenda 21. Starting with Common core. Total control.
You are paranoid!!
Listen oilcanp – I got no problem with oil if it’s a healthy olive or canola oil dressing a dish of salad. You are obviously fixated on extracting and profiting from every last ounce of petroleum, right? Liquid gold. Well, sad to say, a big societal change is underway.. less driving, less car ownership. Why are gasoline prices falling? Because of decreased demand. What will the result be? Less driving = less air pollution, less driving = more physical activity. Score two big pluses for the environment and peoples’ health. Score two big minus for the oil industry, which has to retrench/retool/re-imagine itself which will also involve R&D costs and accept less for the product it pumps.
You know, they just banned wood fires in fireplaces in NYC. I think that was the right thing to do – considering the pollution caused by wood fires.
Of course you do, dear. Although lunatics are gunning down cops in the streets, I’m sure wood fires are VERY high-priority concern in the Rotten Apple.
Just read an article that said the polar ice caps are the largest every recorded. The global warming folks have got to be getting nervous. Nothing is playing out as they predicted.
Oh, maybe you want to go back to a world of dirty air and water? I guess you favor birth defects, emphysema, lung cancer, and mutations, and so forth. Most people don’t.
When you are cornered and can’t rationally reply, you spout socialist claptrap. Your assertions that “…you favor birth defects, emphysema, lung cancer, and mutations, and so forth…” are not borne out by anything in this thread. They are racist insults.
Racist insults? I’m telling you: Birth defects, emphysema, lung cancer, heart disease and on and on – these are your legacies. You and people like you who do not wish to have a clean environment, you brought these scourges down on us. All of us.
Yeah, yeah, hold on to your dream of expensive oil, and endless profits for big oil and all the business that flows from it. You should see what cities in Europe are doing – always in the vanguard of progress: Banning private cars in city centers including swaths of Paris, encouraging bicycling/walking, and installing solar/wind like there’s no tomorrow.
Well, it’s about time we moved on from sickening ourselves and our descendants by allowing coal and heavy oil fired plants to pour out tons of emissions, as well as car exhaust, don’t you think?
There are no “heavy oil” electricity generating plants in the US.
It’s still used to power residential oil burners. Diesel is still used for electrical generation. Coal is certainly the biggest culprit – isn’t it still widely used?
You are correct about coal – it accounts for approximately 40% of our nation’s electric generation. Just curious: What would you like to replace that 40% with – natural gas or nukes? Other than coal, those are the only choices. Don’t say wind and solar because they are intermittent resources and can’t substitute for base load generation.
BTW – There is very little utility scale diesel gen in the US, Most in Hawaii and other island Territories. Plenty of small emergency diesel gensets, though!
Kitty… News flash! You and eco buddies wouldn’t be around, be fed, clothed, have transportation or a roof over your heads without oil. Anthropomorphic global warming is the biggest hoax perpetrated in history to control every part of human being’s lives. (e.g. “banning” what allows independence, force dependence/control). Windmills in the U.S. alone kill 1.5 million birds and bats per yr. Not very “Green” are they!
Ignorant
Next it will be “Climate Stagnation” since the temperature is not changing.
Brilliant!!
Laugh it up now, while oil is still ascendant. I guess you GW deniers are the ultimate carpe diem folks – the ultimate fatalists. What do you care about the future as long as you can make money today – untrammeled by government regulation or the adverse health consequences of dirty air/water/soil.
No, typically conservatives are far more responsible with our use of energy, and how trash is handled. Liberals leave trash everywhere, don’t recycle as much, and like AlGore, have massive electric bills. Just because you buy falsified data, does not make you a better, more concerned person. There simply is no alternative to oil & coal, thanks in part to you liberals that won’t allow nuclear energy. But The US is far cleaner than China. In fact it is your disregard of China’s massive pollution that makes you the ultimate fraud.
Gimme a break. Take a look at Germany – which is putting in solar at the speed of light. They are the progressive ones in the Green battle. This isn’t even a Liberal/Conservative problem. It’s a nearsighted-farsighted one: The ones that plan and think will survive, the ones that don’t – eh, sorry, maybe a flood will wash away your “sins.”
Current solar technology is not efficient enough to be economically feasible. It’s also not scalable. Replacement for 1 Nuclear powered power plant producing 1000 MegaWatts would take solar “farm” approx. 1/4 the size of Rhode Island 292
sq mi.
Not true. Germany is replacing nuclear with solar – and Germany isn’t even that sunny.
Kitty it seem you’re a Reality Denier. Gov’t regulation cost individuals and companies hundred of billions of $ every yr. $ that could in most cases be used for bettering peoples individuals’ lives, used for research to cure disease, provide for better education, used for R&D to make better use of resources, etc. etc.
No – it’ll be climate clean-up, once the price of oil really collapses due to people driving less and biking more (for example) or China finally cracks down on electrical power generating stations burning coal/heavy oil (which it is about to do). I do not think you can call the Chinese “dumb” for cracking down on air pollution.. not “dumb” at all..
Again, *pollution* is not *global warming*. Stop confusing the two issues.
Really? Since when do emissions/air pollution not lead to GW? China is currently one of the biggest culprits (if not the biggest) but it has recently promulgated legislation to end coal-fired power stations in three key provinces (so so many of its citizens are dying due to the effects of pollution).
Example: dump a bunch of old cares, batteries ans light bulbs full of mercury into a lake and you have *pollution*. None of these things contribute to “global warming”.
They are separate things.
I am saying emissions from polluting industry/cars lead to GW. That is accepted world-wide by now. The array of pollution from polluting industry can certainly include illegal dumping in lakes, rivers, soil. The same polluting industry probably also dumps tons of particulate matter into the air. All these forms of pollution need to be addressed – and they are being addressed.
You just make stuff up, don’t you. Flechette did not say it was “dumb.” Perhaps you are, though.
Kitty the only thing that Communist Chinese gov’t is “cracking down on” are the heads of 100s of thousands of people would dare to speak out or think for themselves. Their air is dirtier than ever. Though I do think you and thousands who talk like you would feel at home there… at least until reality set in.
No, China just signed on to a climate agreement with Obama – to ban coal fired electrical generating stations in 3 key provinces. I agree that there is not much freedom of speech – but there is a tradition of almost daily demonstrations/frequent riots throughout the country, and occasionally the message of people fed up with pollution does get through to the central authorities.
It doesn’t matter what you call it. Those who lived through Sandy – including quite a large portion of the US population – and maybe one of the most influential sections of the country (East Coast) believe in its reality. You want to keep shelling out billions to repair superstorm damage? Then go right ahead and keep on burning coal or heavy oil to generate electricity – go right ahead and do not force industry to clean up its act. There are millions of people though who think otherwise – especially those who saw their property inundated/destroyed or swept out to sea
No, it’s Climate Catastrophism!
Well, cactus, it’s easy for you to say that.. Try dealing with your house washed away by Sandy.. or expensive art collections of the uber-rich inundated in Tribeca, or Chelsea, or the West Village. Sandy hit some of the wealthiest zip codes in the US. These people donate – to both parties. They will make sure measures are put in place to curb emissions.. clean up dirty industry, etc.
Sandy was mild. The fact that anything was left at all is a sign that the storm lacked the strength of past storms.
So you Sandy had washed away the E. Coast. I bet you wish that. Nice – it would have washed away the cradle of our United States: Boston, NY, Phila, and on down to the Virginia and the Carolinas. How unpatriotic.
Public Education? Do you know what a barrier island is?
Yep. Have also visited many. Your point is? The barrier islands will “protect” the cities? Umm.. it didn’t quite work out that way with Sandy unfortunately. Water washed into Lower Manhattan – filling the construction pit at the WTC site for example, the Bklyn-Battery tunnell, the trans E. River and trans Hudson transit tunnels, and so forth.
No. Barrier Islands are a natural feature created in a large storm. They are the last “sand bar” before the mainland, where the waves break. In the storm that creates such a feature, the “barrier island” is nothing more than a submerged sand bar. They don’t protect anything.
Gimme a break. This is typical oil-based-economy-justification-talk – you know it and I know it – all of a sudden you are going to “scientifically” prove that Sandy was umm… just “par for the course” and has nothing to do with “the environmental depredations caused by decades of air pollution.” You can’t admit the environment is all screwed up even though 2014 was a record warm year. So you’ll try to say Sandy wasn’t so bad and even worse storms are possible – even when nobody was driving. Right. Maybe from your perspective (doubt if you’re on the E. Coast of the US) it was a walk in the park. Guess what – it was a nightmare, xdream.
Actually I think it has been re-branded yet again…it is now climate disruption. Now any variation or anomaly that any Stalinist enviro-idiot perceives to be real is caused by man disrupting the climate.
At the core of this madness: self-loathing.
and ignorance
I think you are the ignorant one if you doubt the reality of what rampant un-regulated development leads to: Air pollution off the chart, thousands if not millions unable to breath, prematurely dying, sky-rocketing health care costs,and so forth Why do you think China has instituted strict controls on coal fired plants (also possibly heavy-oil powered electrical generating plant)? It doesn’t want millions of its people dying of basically smoke inhalation… and having to pay the cost in hospital/disability expenses.
Well thank God we have been regulated to death here.
You sure do. Otherwise, we’d still be living in smog-choked cities world-wide. Look at the increase in life expectancy since the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts were introduced here, and anti-air pollution measures were enacted in England. China is now going through the same process – the backlash to the harmful effects of breakneck development, without the least thought for the environment.
No – at the core of the madness is greed and the rush for development, be it under capitalism or communism. Also, the fear of being taken over by other countries, and the rush to be armed to the teeth and economically “strong.” Things today are exactly as they were on the eve of WWI: Alliances tested by crazy nationalist outbreaks, such as Ukraine. The difference is that the superpowers today fight limited wars rather than all-out self-destructive conflicts.
Interesting take! Greed is an interesting concept. One man’s greed is another’s ambition. I supposed every collector, and hoarder, can be considered greedy, along with everyone who desires upward mobility. And greed is not limited to material wealth. I suppose it’s a question of degree, which, at the far end of the spectrum, bleeds into obsessions.
As I see it, greed is a common, almost universal human characteristic. We see it on the Green Left, with partisans hustling after public subsidies, not to mention the Big Players (i.e., the greediest, so to speak) who seek to establish entire markets (e.g., cap and trade), and far-reaching global regulations, from which they derive considerable profit. And, of course, every ambitious capitalist (from businessmen, such as myself, to artists) can be considered greedy.
The problem with the advocates of Slow Growth (or, more extremely, No Growth) is that they are typically members of highly advanced capitalistic economies — places where they can routinely visit grocery stores and shopping malls that offer a mind-boggling variety of consumer goods — 6 varieties of apples, 25 flavors of yogurt, dozens of automobiles, every book you would ever want to read, dozens of movies — all within a short radius, all at competitive prices (driven by the efficient market). Along with high technology. And indulgent luxury goods. And a crushing volume of information.
People in this culture have no right to demand growth limits on 2nd- and 3rd-world economies — as if to say, I’ve got mine, and you can just live with your primitive economy. That’s not going to happen. The 2nd world is catching up, as well they should, and the even the lost causes in the third world (e.g., Haiti) are making some progress. This is, after all, the Age of Global Capitalism.
“Armed to the teeth”? Easy to say if you live under the nuclear umbrella of the United States. Again, can we tell the developing world to just live as primitives, and hope for the best, while America can assure it’s actual and would-be enemies that death and destruction are only minutes away if they cross the line (as we define it)?
I think Americans (actually, the entire ‘1st world’, as we define it) has forfeit its right to place limits on the economic and military development of the developing world. The hypocrisy is beyond the pale.
Whoa – the old Soviet Union was the biggest enviro-criminal state – much worse that the “capitalist” states of the “West.” In the “East” development led to actual ecocide. Even though things got pretty bad in the US – remember the smog of LA? – I’m not sure we actually ever completely poisoned the Earth as thoroughly/mindlessly as they did in E. Europe and Russia. Of course – forget about ecocide in China today – a carnival of untrammeled capitalist-communist development that has surely led to thorough poisoning of that land.
Hey, today is cloudy when it was sunny yesterday! Oh teh noes! It’s “climate change”!
Continue to live in your Pollyana world of denial. Maybe you would want to take a dip in Newtown Creek – which partially forms the border of the boroughs of Queens and Brooklyn, NY – a nice refreshing dip in some of most polluted water on Earth, the direct result of untrammeled development/dumping of industrial waste since Colonial times! If you think capitalism (or communism for that matter – since the communists have been equally oblivious to the effects of untrammeled development) is so great, be my guest – take a nice refreshing dip in those polluted waters!
I never said that we should stop trying to clean up our water. I am against dumping arsenic in our rivers. Who isn’t?
But *clean water* is not *global warming*.
I find it amazing that so many people use pollution in order to justify “global warming” regulations. It is a DIFFERENT ISSUE!
Really? You explain how the issues are different. The ideal is the cessation of the use of coal to fire energy stations, as well as the cessation of heavy oil. After that, we go after gasoline-powered cars. Any dirty/polluting industry must also be cleaned up. Have I missed anything?
Yes, you missed the basic premise: *pollution* (like dumping toxic waste into the water) is not *global warming* (which is supposedly caused by carbon dioxide…even though the earth has only warmed 0.8 degrees in a century).
If you are against *pollution* then lobby for trade restrictions on China; they produce the majority of the *pollution* on the planet.
Air pollution leads to global warming. As far as China is concerned, there is only so much any country other than China can do. How much leverage do you really think the US has over China at this point?
1. Pollution does not necessarily lead to “global warming”. They are two different things. Arsenic in a river is not “global warming”.
2. If China is causing the majority of the pollution then we have a *duty* to try to get them to clean up. Just looking the other way and saying “we can’t really get them to do anything” is a cop out. Do you *really* care about the environment? If so, do not cop out.
Pollution does not necessarily lead to “global warming”. If you are referring to air pollution (AP) that is a matter of opinion. I suppose you would advocate for no regulations whatsoever on any polluting business, right? Do you also feel AP does not lead to any adverse health effects?
Absolutely not! Of course we should have regulations restricting pollution. I am just making it clear that “global warming” is not “pollution”.
The reason I insist on correct terminology is that bad decisions get made when the two issues are confused. Reasonable regulations controlling pollution are a good thing, but many people carry that argument into the “global warming” debate, which is a different subject entirely.
Many people will see smog around a city and then conclude that we need “global warming” regulations. Two different things.
It is important because a bad regulations can hurt the nation’s economy AND hurt the *environment*as well. If you *really* want to help the environment then you have to make sure that the regulations being passed are valid, not just political insider money manipulation.
I am for curbing pollution, so I obviously disagree with the Pope on that. I do not think that “global warming” is a real issue at all, man-made or otherwise
From the artcile, note this quote, “The ultimate goal of U.N. climate negotiations is to stabilize greenhouse gases at a level that keeps global warming below 2 degrees C (3.6 F), compared with pre-industrial times.”
This is absurd since the earth has only warmed 0.8F in the last 110 years, and the temperature has not risen signifiacntly in the last 17 years. If we can only raise is by 0.8F how could we possibly reduce it by 3.6F?
If you believe in man-made global warming this means that if we stopped ALL human activity we would only lower the earth’s temperature by 0.8F. Lowering it by 3.6F would be *impossible*.
Back to the Pope, his statment that “Man has slapped nature in the face” is actually blasphemous if you are Catholic. “Nature” is not a living entity, it is simply the way the universe works. To imply that nature has some sort of concience, that its feelings can be hurt is akin to saying that it is another God. Catholism is supposed to believe in one God.
This would not be the first time a Pope has committed blasphemy. I am not religious so the Catholics can figure this out for themselves.
You love pollution caused by rampant capitalism/communism (take your pick) – go live in Beijing, China! There, you can’t see your nose in front of your face for all the smog. Oh wait! China is alright, because without China churning out the world’s cheap goods, we wouldn’t have capitalist penetration/subjugation of the world’s economies on a global scale! Thus, you should be perfectly happy choking on the foul air of China!
Last time I checked, we don’t live in China. You are comparing a country with absolutely no regulations to one that is so over-burdened by regulations we have no JOBS!
You can blame NAFTA for the lack of jobs in the US. It was an intentional plan by the powers that be on both sides of the aisle to ship US jobs overseas, the idea being that our amigos south of the border would then buy more US goods, leading to more US jobs. Well, it didn’t exactly work out that way – either for Central America or the US.
You sound like a stupid c#nt trying to use big words to make yourself seem smart. Shut the hell up before I cock-slap you. Can you even define communism or subjugation you fat cow??
Huh??
Duh??
Global warming and climate change are two different but related things.
You f#cking retard…shut up.
Religion is global warming, meaning global warming is religion.
It’s worse than that. It’s a cult that prays to a statue of Al Gore.
maybe they will drink the Kool’aid and die like Jonestown
If only…
If only Darwin was a god they would. Wishful thinking. Must think harder. Maybe if we all pray like an Atheist: Kumbiology, me lord Darwin, kumbiology!
You wish. If that was the case, the entire structure of science would come crashing down. And then you’d have no more “progress.” I guess you would like to see the world petrified – like your precious fossil fuels – in the 50s era, wouldn’t you, with gas-guzzling autos, and no thought at all for the future. Unfortunately, your thinking is a fossil too: Out-dated, brittle, and broken.
And sends money to HIS carbon credit company, Generation Investment Management.
This is one fat statue… Shouldn’t M. Obama cut on fat Gore consumes?
Keep clutching your Bible – as GW-caused flood-waters rise. I doubt if it’ll “save” you, unfortunately; but science will. And 99% of scientists accept the truth of GW.
There you go lying again. You must be,what 7th grade? Believe all the propaganda you’ve been taught?
Lying? You really think Sandy wasn’t caused by GW? You are the one who defies common sense in disbelieving data that describes the deleterious effects on the environment/human health of air/water pollution.
hahaha ROFLMAO It’s funny you say this, you little puss, as you type this on your Chinese-made computer, made of oil-based plastic, shipped by communist billionaires burning fossil-based fuels to your local Best Buy so you can buy it on your Arab-owned credit card (again, plastic) and plug it into your wall outlet (Chinese plastic) so you can power it up (burning oil-based fuel) so you can waste your time (and ours) spouting your hatred toward Christians and those with different belief that have not drank Gore’s koolaid-laced pee and begged
You’re kind of a liar and a hypocrite that makes things up to look smart but you fool only yourself.
I truly doubt you know many scientists yet you come up with a startling “99%” statistic. How very scientific of you. Actual scientists roll their eyes at you at parties when you start smacking your ‘brilliance’. Soooo cute when you try acting smart!!!!! You must have gotten this 99% from a government-funded scientist. Do share your source! Please. In your response, cite the 99% source or STFU. Such a puppet: Sit up. Beg. Memorize. Regurgitate. Repeat.
Is this as reliable as the 100% of Koreans that voted FOR their ‘Dear Leader’?! I don’t have stats (so I dont make them up like you) but my parents go to a Church in a VERY progressive Ivy League community blocks from campus. No liberal arts profs amongst them, mind you. Only hard sciences. Several are Rockefeller and Rhodes Scholars and all patent-holders. Their advanced education and research behind the microscope has only strengthened their belief in God, Two dozen professors in a single Church among dozens in this community that also have professors that believe in God and that science is simply God’s programming language. One professor, a volcanologist, states that the planet ‘breathes’, expanding and contracting, consuming and exhaling. Our body temperature rises when we are more active and declines as we slumber. Ditto with Earth. People that fail to understand this are the ones that are the troglodytes with false gods. It takes a real self-centered simpleton to believe that a God did not create a massive planet but that little men, like you, can actually have an irreversible impact on it.
News Flash: You’re not the Sun. Get over yourself, little man.
BTW, I hope you live at Sea Level…….and while you do keep in mind that fossils have been found high in the mountains and that land bridges once existed connecting to what we now call islands. All of this occurred long before Detroit ever made cars. The Earth is constantly changing. Glaciers once towered over where I am now typing at 1200’ASL
Excellent Unopinionated. Like Al Gore who’s carbon footprint is many times the norm she makes use of every convenience fossil fuels prrovide. Like our prez who preaches green living but burns 5 gallons of jet fuel per mile on his frequent 9,500 mile round trip Hawaiian vacations along with a giant support an security detail. Gotta love the ironic hypocrisy.
Is engorging yourself on the products of our petrochemical based culture something to brag about? Did you or me have a choice in the matter? We were born into the culture – which once was a car worshiping culture in the days of cheap gasoline. We also were once a tobacco worshiping culture – before the axe fell on that particular poison. Or do you doubt the science on tobacco as well?
Let’s stick to the topic. If we are going to veer off onto religion, there’s no end to discussing why it’s so vital to maintaining the social status quo – especially the patriarchy – worldwide. But hey, the Pope is religious, and he has bought into global warming, which means that even religious folks can “see the light” and accept GW as a fact.
So…….let’s get this straight……Religious people are nuts and completely wrong (according to you) but then you bring up that the pope has bought into global warming so all the Christian sheeple should, too. You seem to endorse patriarchies when it comes to supporting your causes but otherwise they are evil white men billionaires and colonial overlords. Frankly, the pope is about as whacko as the POTus. The Chinese communist dictators, on the other hand, are admirable ‘rag-tags’ who ‘kept it together’ despite killing millions through pogroms, intimidation, genocide and starvation. REALLY?!?!?
Look, China is made up of as many different peoples and nations as Europe. It isn’t mutual brotherly love that keeps them together: It’s the tip of the bayonet and threat of execution. Spout your liberal philosophy there and see how long you survive! You clearly do not know what you are talking about. China has invaded and absorbed other sovereign countries and parts and has forced other countries to pay ‘protection money’ to them. Right now, China is practicing colonial power over large swaths of Africa. China has invaded Japan, Vietnam, Korea, Tibet, Nepal, India, Mongolia, Russia, Silla, Hami, Formosa, Kotte, the Tocharians, Myanmar/Burma and others. Hami is now a prefecture of China. Tibet was a HUGE country swallowed up by China. Today, the US pays ‘protection money’ in the form of trade to China. If the US went cold turkey and banned Chinese imports to the US then China would invade us tomorrow.
It’s ironic how you frame Westerners as evil colonizers since the Chinese committed a genocide against the Dzungars of Xinjiang, conqueredd it and then brought in Han Chinese settlers to colonize and secure it as their new Western Frontier from 1760-1820. Please note that this was well BEFORE the British gained Hong Kong Island through a treaty that did not involve genocide.
You are like swiss cheese, man. You deplore the West for GW but then you praise China despite the fact they are the most flagrant generator of it and have to spraypaint their mountains green.
BTW, Mao did not defeat Japan in China. Mao and KMT had a United Front during WWII and the US continued their support of KMT throughout war. When Japan surrendered to US Mao then continued the Civil War against US-allie KMT. Get your facts straight.
Yes, it’s a NEW religion and DOGMA they so HATE in religion so they passed their own brand of dogma to the Pope so it looks like legit dogma.
And it now has its own “Pope”. I wonder how the Marxists deal with that one in their feeble minds.
Everyone knows Jesus was a proto-socialist – at the very least an anti-establishment agitator/rebel. If Jesus were alive today, I’m sure he’d be very comfortable in the pro-GW camp, lined up in opposition to big/polluting business and pro-the little guy.
SO THAT’s WHY THE POPE IS GETTING IN ON IT !
The Pope is nominally the religious leader of the West – of all Christendom, East and West, Catholic and Protestant. If he says we must respect the Earth and rein in capitalist/communist untrammeled development/pollution – then we should listen to him.
IT IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL CRIME WHEN PEOPLE CHANNEL RESOURCES AWAY FROM REAL POLLUTION PROBLEMS TO CURB CO2 WHICH IS NOT
A POLLUTANT .
BOTH YOU & THE POPE SHOULD KNOW BETTER
Let’s not talk about CO2. That’s not the only thing that is contributing to GW. Also – typing in caps is not helping your arguments.
WHAT DOES TYPING IN CAPS HAVE TO DO WITH ANY ARGUMENT?
IF YOU THINK IT HURTS MY ARGUMENT , THEN YOU MUST BE EASY TO FOOL BY PEOPLE WHO TYPE LIKE YOU .
OK , LET’s TALK ABOUT THE BIG ENCHALATA .
IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE EARTH’s AVERAGE TEMPERATURE
FOLLOWS SOLAR ACTIVITY .
THE GW PEOPLE CAN’T EVEN TELL US WHAT THE TEMPERATURE
SHOULD BE . SO ATTEMPTS TO CONTROL IT ARE NOT ONLY FUTILE
BUT MISGUIDED .
THE CLIMATE ALWAYS HAS CHANGED AND IT ALWAYS WILL .
THE TRULY CRAZY PEOPLE ARE THE ONES WHO THINK THEY CAN STOP IT .
I guess you feel science is religion? Or maybe we should all just accept Scripture as the “truth” which explains “everything?” How would you like it if all the “progress” since the Renaissance, Enlightenment up to the modern era, were dialed back, and we ended up back in the Faith-obsessed Dark Ages?
Science is not religion. Science questions all, and is constantly evolving. Also – the empirical evidence of measurable increases in dirt/smog/ozone and so forth – don’t lie. The effects of GW? Take a look at what happened on the E. Coast a couple of years ago (October 2012) with Sandy.
Then embrace this science or hold firm in your faith.
Sandy was a hurricane. It may be hard to believe but they’ve happened before.
Climate has never been static. It’s constantly changing but in such small increments that our perception is skewed such that 20 year warm periods make people believe that things are going out of control (weather things have never been in control) and then people commit to a dogma that gives them the illusion of control and this prevents them seeing the clearly contradictory empirical evidence that violates their closely held beliefs. Or maybe you have a good explanation for the 18 year pause? Go consult your book of revelations (Earth In The Balance) written by your prophet (Al Gore) and supported by your priests (government funded scientists) and get back to me.
As in almost all human created things, follow the money. Know also that at least one US agency as well as the UN are preaching that mankind must be removed from the earth to almost completely lower carbon (dioxide) emissions. And we would give these people governance over a free people?
Follow the money?
How about we follow the money to the funder of this site!
It’s always great when you clowns post this, it’s so easily debunked a child wouldn’t take it seriously, but NOPE!
Denier clowns just KEEP ON POSTING IT!
hahahahahha
Because DERP!!
A denier is one who denies truth when faced with a fact. The fact is there has been global cooling and temperatures today are lower than the peak of 1998. That is fact, not opinion. When faced with this fact, WHO IS THE DENIER? Anyone who still clings to outdated and false science when faced with the fact of global cooling is a denier.
The magazine cover you posted is a fake.
You don’t care in the slightest about facts, and you obviously don’t care about looking like a fool.
Why would I continue to talk to you, clown?
Consensus? You talk about a ‘consensus’ among “scientists”?
Several hundred years ago there was also a consensus among scientists. It involved the sun revolving around the Earth.
They put people to death for believing otherwise.
Aaaand your fake magazine cover means what then?
Actually it was conservative religious nuts that put people to death. Scientists only care about evidence.
But thanks for playing!
Shake it off and do a little research, and next time you won’t come off as such a lightweight.
BTW I was making a point about ‘consensus”. Just because a lot of people believe something does not make it true.
You know, like people who believe that you can tax yourself into prosperity?
Simple absolutes.
The cornerstone of the mislabeled “liberal” mindset.
For calling themselves “progressives” they are profoundly incapable of progressing an argument, virtually categorically.
It takes a very empty soul to see the world through such simple, naive eyes.
Yeah, I’ve been meaning to see a doctor about my empty soul.
Do you think by becoming a right-wing shill loon clown I could fill the void?
Did it work for you?
Oh, and hey everyone else out there-I’ll spare you having to slog through “OmaJohn” here’s disqus comment history by linking to a single image that sums it up nicely.
Your capacity for thought ranges from “LIBTARDS!!!!” to “GAAAAAA! OBOZO!!!!” and that’s about it!
Pot meet kettle. Basically your post is typical for your kind of low-info warmist. When you run out of anything credible to say, you put on your Saul Alinsky panties and fall back on Alinsky #5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon”
Warmist!
That’s rich!
I also eat food, so am I a foodist?
I am affected by gravity so am I a gravityist?
I don’t mean to ridicule you clowns, in fact you do it perfectly fine yourselves, but I have to admit it’s a blast to step into your little echo chamber and set off a few firecrackers.
Look how you scramble and buzz!
Like a hornet’s nest with some mud sprayed on it, except instead of hornets you’re a bunch or regressive clowns.
It’s adorable.
What is the ideal temperature of the earth? If we are going to spend money to try and change the earth’s climate, how do we measure when we are done?
Ummmm, you do know that isn’t me, right? I just wanna keep you grounded back here in reality where, when your intellect comes up short, you resort to the stupidity infesting every one of your posts on this page.
Yeah, since you’re too cowardly to comment under your own name you stole the name of the captain from Firefly.
So to goof on you I posted a picture of Captain Reynolds from the show Firefly, naked.
You then demonstrated that you don’t even know who it is.
Ridicule is a very, very potent weapon.
Too bad it’s wasted on the dipwads that need it the most.
Omg, you’re dumber than a bag of hammers. OF COURSE I know who the picture is. How the hell do you ridicule ME by putting up a picture from a scene in firefly? When you can answer that, then reply please, otherwise, STFU moron.
Your blind ignorance is amazing! Scientists are just like everyone else — plenty of them will say almost anything if it will fatten their wallets. Read history again. People were put to death by arrogant, power lusting people in charge of government as always. Whether they were corrupt, self-worshiping Catholics or corrupt, self-worshiping Hedonists is irrelevant. The most dangerous people that have ever existed are those that demand we let them control the economy because they are smarter, wiser than millions of people making individual decisions. Granting them control has always led to more power, more wealth and more debauchery at the top, and more poverty and suffering for the average family.
Actually over 126 million people were put to death in the 20th century by Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot. All of them were radical leftists.
To equate modern-day Conservatives with religious leaders of centuries past on another continent is absurd, especially from someone who can’t see the connection between the modern Leftist movement in this country, and the totalitarian Socialist/Communist regimes of the 20th century and today. You have, once again, opened your mouth and removed all doubt.
Yawn. Whatever.
History reveals you to be a bunch of anti-science, torturing, loon scumbags and it’s borne out today in the efforts of the Cheney regime and clowns like Michelle Bachman, Ted Cruz etc.
You’re on the wrong side of history and you always, always will be.
Every advance society has ever made, from fair pay to the 40 hour work week to women’s suffrage has been a PROGRESSIVE movement, and you right wing clowns fought tooth and nail against it.
You’re a stain on history.
Yes oh how true that great leader SC Pomeroy from Kansas introduced woman’s suffrage to the senate floor, oh wait he was a republican. No wait is was Theodore Roosevelt that great democrat who adopted is as a national party plank, oh wait he was a conservative too. No wait civil rights were championed by those great democrat leaders, Robert Byrd, and Al Gore Sr. Oh wait, shoot the opposed it and it was the republicans that drove civil rights legislation. Oh well, guess the progressives aren’t so progressive after all. Better luck next time!!! Thanks for playing though.
Lol, you leftist really crack me up. You make stuff up and then expect us to us accept them without checking any facts. I offer you facts and you call me dumb. Wow, have you looked in a mirror lately. Does that style of discourse really work, LMAO!!!!
So you’re saying Teddy Roosevelt WASN’T a leader and founder of the Progressive movement.
You should totally go edit wikipedia and fix that then.
hahahahhahah
He was still a republican, and having a progressive tendencies doesn’t make you a hard core progressive of today. See it all in such simple terms, it must be a wonderful carefree life LOL. Can you even keep a job, I suspect not.
Ohhh, I see.
You’re one of those people that holds labels in higher esteem than actions.
Gotcha.
And as far as holding a job goes, you’ll be derped to derp that I own my own business.
Derp.
I doubt both your sincerity and truthfulness considering your disregard for anyone. Furthermore, you websites are very left leaning, so you are the pot calling the kettle black. A progressive today is more a communist, or socialist at best, Teddy was neither. You can’t accept that truth, good luck to you.
You’re a goalpost-moving disingenuous partisan jerkoff, and it’s been a waste of time goofing on you. This year I’m turning over a new leaf, and I’m gonna stop goofing on the right wing deranged fringe..it only makes things worse.
So go on back to your swine posts on your swine site everyone, and keep patting each other on the back for out-derping one another.
I’m on to better and more challenging things…if NASA and NOAA can’t convince you clowns then what hope does a raghead libtard marxist fartbama blower like me have?
You all are a disgrace on your families and this great nation, and you should hang your heads in shame for your willful stupidity, and support of oil baron billionaires and their agendas.
Yes and their manipulating data is noble, and you calling everyone an idiot is so honorable. You are the problem with politics today, you can have a civil discussion with you degrading everyone around. You are paid troll and you act like a petulant brat. Good luck in life with that style of discussion.
Lots of people believed him then, as did so many people today believe Obama. Liars tell lies. They are believed by the gullible. Dictators will use lies to consolidate power. Do you believe every word Hitler spoke was undeniable truth? Do you believe the ACA saved every American more than $1000 per household? Do you believe Obama wants to disarm law-abiding citizens for their own safety (you know, like Chicago and Detroit)? If you answered yes to any of these questions, you may need a cradle-to-grave nanny state controlling your whole life. That would explain a lot.
“My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. …Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross. … ”
– Adolf Hitler, speech on April 12, 1922
Yes, just like those scientists who said the world was flat. You do understand those people are the same folks who now make up your wonderful left wing buddies in Europe. So much for defining them as conservatives. Maybe you should go back to school and read up on what a modern day conservative is, you may find that they want much of what you do, freedom, a clean planet to live on, etc. They just don’t think you need to round up the world and kill off 3 quarters of the population to do it, like your buddies Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot. FYI, being a Christian doesn’t mean you can’t be a whack job lefty. Hitler was a socialist, not a conservative. Nazi, National Socialist Party.
Oh debunked in one click too!!!! I never called you a raghead or anything, yet you seem to be fit to call me names. Your lack of civility is showing your true nature. Good luck with that hating in life.
Wow! Your link to sodahead with a slideshow by “Oreillyfan” is pretty much a grand slam!!
Who could ever argue with that?
Oh wait, I know. Let’s look at Hitler’s actual words.
“My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. …Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross.”
– Adolf Hitler
Yes, who could ever argue with the left wing professor who wrote the article you cited. LOL, you argument is ridiculous. Being Christian or Jewish doesn’t make you a conservative. But if it does, then I guess Bill Clinton, and Jimmy Carter would be conservative as well as FDR and LBJ by your logic. So much for logic from you, oh well, again nice try. 🙂 Have a great day!!
No, being retarded makes you a conservative.
The last bastion of great political debate, call people names when you can’t win an argument, ROFL!!!! Maybe you should try the “liar, liar pants on fire” method next. LOL, you are so funny.
hahahahahhaha no but seriously you have to admit conservatives are retarded.
Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Ted Cruz…these are your heroes.
Rick Santorum. hahahahahahah
George Bush. hahahahahahahahahahah
Real intellectuals there.
I will raise you a Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, Jimmy Carter and a Barack Obama. There are idiots on both sides dude.
If you think the people you listed there are as pants-on-head retarded as the people I listed there’s something deeply wrong with you.
And your Doctorate is in what that qualifies you to say those people are all idiots, of that’s right you don’t have one. People say stupid things, here is a few quotes for you ” you have to pass it before you know what is in it” “I haven’t been to all 57 states before” and I raise you a Joe Biden. You are completely clueless if you think everyone is an idiot who says something stupid at some point. That is my point man, wake up, people aren’t perfect and say dumb things on both sides of the isle. You really need to look in the mirror and stop being such a partisan. Good luck to you.
Now call me a bunch of names and jump up and down like you normally do.
The argument was won long before I even entered into it.
This is just me having some fun toying with right wing loons while I wait for the clothes to dry.
As soon as the buzzer goes off, I’ll go fold laundry and leave you clowns to derp freely in your echo chamber.
There was no difference at the time between “scientists” and “religionists” – which is true of far too many in academia, politics, & scientific circles today. The correct term is “climate cycles” because there is no global change but merely shifting patterns & rebalancing. That’s true science.
I was alive in the 70’s when my school and all the papers were preaching global cooling not to mention there is sane person can deny it My point is what are you trying to say. That they were never preaching global cooling?
Me too Independent. 1974, the first Earth day. They told us that there was a coming ice age, the world would be overpopulated leading to mass die offs, and we’d be out of oil, all by the year 2000. Look magazine told me in 1968 that we’d all be driving flying cars by then too.
Big daddy say you be dee fool trying to defend the indefinsabilitys!!!
bgulick, you really shouldn’t. If you can’t have a thoughtful discussion — and you obviously can’t — you may as well just give up. You’re certainly not going to convince anyone of anything. All you’re doing is acting childish and patting yourself on the back while belittling and demeaning others.
Of course, for certain types of people, that can feel rewarding, so maybe you’re actually getting something out of this. If that’s the case, why are you asking him why you would continue to pretend to respond to what’s being said?
Crushing right wing clowns is its own reward.
So “crushing right wing clowns” means “acting like an ignorant child to people your masters tell you to hate”? After you performance today, they might decide you are not such a useful tool after all.
You know, my masters tell me that all the time.
I call in to the main Libtard office and check in with the Liar in Chief Presidum B HUSSEIN FARTBINGO III to see what my marching orders are for the day, and they tell me “Bruce, you’re not so useful after all!”
When I ask what they mean they tell me that right wingers already do so much to discredit themselves, that I’m just gilding the lily.
And you know what? I have to agree. Nothing I type here could make you clowns look any worse than you already do, so it’s a moot point.
So why do I continue?
The sheer SPORT of it, I suppose.
It’s just a BLAST to mock shills and clowns, and it’s cheap entertainment.
So I’ll keep doing it gratis, even though my libtard masters tell me my effort is wasted.
Oh, side note, in that very article the author states directly that there was plenty of ‘scientific’ assertion that we -were- entering into an ice age. So the date of the image on the cover is more important to you than the reality of the discussion. I’ll borrow one from your playbook and call names for a moment: Congratulations, you’re a weak-minded parrot. 🙂
So why do you think someone found it necessary to fake the cover?
Why did you find it necessary to continue the lie by reposting it?
See, things like this reveal clearly that you don’t look into things, and instead happily parrot whatever right-wing clown sites tell you to.
You’re a disgrace.
Notice that the cover he posted may be a fake, but the fact remains that “scientists” thought it was globull cooling then.
Remember, you’re the denier here.
And you’re the one who can’t spell “global”.
Ummm, it’s intentional. As in, you’re so dumb you believe in BULL crap. You’re a special little snowflake, yes you are.
OOOOOOOH!
It was intentional.
Kind of like when you call President Obama “Fartbummer” or “Obozo” and then Michelle becomes “Moochelle”.
I get that, I see it a lot with you right wing clowns.
And yes, now that I look back at your comments, I can see you do it every single time, so it’s definitely because you’re a partisan hack shill, and not that you’re actually ignorant of how to spell the word “global”.
I stand corrected, shill.
No, more like when I call him Obamao, cuz (<— oh ohhhh) he's a freaking Marxist like…you know…. Mao. I don't call him Obozo and I don't call Michelle Moochelle. I call her 'the wookie' or just Chewbacca outright because…you know…ugly critter.
Good grief dude, you really are a simpleton.
And you’re a racist traitor clown disgrace.
Mmm, I’ll run home and tell my wife who is not of the same race as I am then. HEY HONEY, I’m a racist. You’re an idiot. I think we’re done.
“U.S. corporations’ after-tax profits have grown by 171 percent under Obama, more than under any president since World War II”
– Bloomberg
“The deficit is now only 4% of the GDP, down from over 10% at the end of Bush’s administration – and projections are for it to be only 2% by 2015 (before Obama leaves office.) America’s “debt problem” seems largely solved, and almost all due to growth rather than austerity.”
– Forbes
“The Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index has more than doubled since Barack Obama took office”
– New York Times
“The Dow Jones industrial average hit 16,000 for the first time this morning, and the Nasdaq began within 15 points of 4,000 (last seen in 2000). The S&P 500, which passed $16 trillion in market value for the first time, is up 26.1%.
“Obama has now stolen national security and the economy from Republicans. The media tells us Obama is finished as a President because of the website glitches, but my money is on what other issue he can steal from the GOP before 2016.”
– Politicususa dot com
Barack Hussein Obama: Worst Marxist ever.
Now talk about the CPI, QE, record low labor participation and more debt than ALL other presidents combined. Otherwise you’re telling yourself lies to make yourself feel better. MORON.
Back in reality, being a Marxists doesn’t automatically mean he gets everything he wants. But then you knew that didn’t you, idiot.
You see, to leftwing dumbschlitz (<— Oh ohhhh) like you, debunked means someone, upon whose knob you slobber, went 'nuuu uhhhhh' and off you little dopes run to proudly proclaim DEBUNKED. Back in reality, nahhhh.
As you said, thanks for playing.
Son do you even English?
The only denier here seems to be you. You foolish posts make the rest of us feel sorry for you. The entire climate change religion has been proven to be a total lie. The results are in and all the major predictions have been wrong! No one can predict the future climate, not even close. Have you not read how the rain forests are growing faster due to the increase in CO2?
Man! You shills really come out of the woodwork!!
I have hit the HONEY HOLE OF DERP!!!
That cover might be fake, but the articles are real…
ONCE UPON A TIME THERE WAS A SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS AND THE SCIENCE WAS SETTLED .
THEN THEY DISCOVERED THAT THE EARTH WAS ROUND .
IT DOES NOT TAKE A BILLIONAIRE’s BACKING TO FIGURE OUT THAT THERE IS
NO SUCH THING AS SETTLED SCIENCE .
IF YOU THINK THAT THERE IS , THEN YOU DO NOT THINK SCIENTIFICALLY .
THE CLIMATE ALWAYS HAS CHANGED AND IT ALWAYS WILL .
THE TRULY CRAZY PEOPLE ARE THE ONES WHO THINK THEY CAN STOP IT .
You claim every scientist agrees, the truth is the don’t all agree. Thanks for playing.
No arguing with fake facts LOL. Just ask those guys at EAU. LMAO, man you kill me, thanks for the wonderful laugh today. You should hide behind trees and jump out and say boo too !!! 🙂
You know, not that your opinion piece from the Wall Street Journal doesn’t hold more water than 97% of climate scientists that published peer-reviewed articles on climate change.
hahahahahhahah
Yes 200 of 11,000 plus equal 97% in you world of math. You do realize that the 200 are those support it and funded for such research. Posting a cite that is not a neutral scientific site, but a shill group for global warming is meaningless. Not that you opinion of 200 verse 11,000 holds water LOL!!!
I know you’re derping but all I hear is derp.
Try derping a little derpier.
As if there’s any thing wrong with being a billionaire, or an industrialist, or right, or an oil baron. Must be jealous.
Yeah, dipsh*t, I’m super jealous of a dead guy.
ANYHOO, please keep frantically scrambling to figure out a way to explain why the only “news” sources that pump out this denier nonsense are owned by rich right-wing oil barons like this jerkoff and the Koch brothers.
Hmmm?
Anyone here honest enough to give it a shot?
Not gonna hold my breath, facts and right-wingers are oil and water..you’re all a disgrace to your families and whores for billionaires.
Slurp, slurp that big ol’ billionaire dong..
And you can tell that to your BFF Tom Steyer, eh?
Hmmm? How about you stop being a foolish worshiper? The most important fact is that no one, absolutely no one, is even close to being able to predict the future climate. All of the significant predictions of the last 20 years have been wrong! There have been less major storms, not more. There is more polar ice, not less. There has been no warming as predicted. How can anyone be so stupid as to sell their soul to people whose words have been proven wrong much, much, much more often than they are correct? Al Gore and friends are the most wickedly rich charlatans in history. The climate change religion is all about centralizing power into the hands of the elite. Wake up before it is too late.
If his masters say it’s so, he believes unquestioningly, no matter what he experiences personally.
Silly left wing wacko facts are for people who can think by looking at all the (FACTUAL) data no matter where it comes from not just from your liberal rags. See not everyone believes everything they read in the NYtimes. DIPSH#t.
Right! Why listen to a bunch of scientists who spent their entire lives in the field? We have Breitbart! LOL. God the stupidity is amazing.
I guess you missed the memo stating that those scientists were on the take, being paid by leftists… by the way, more scientists believe that global warming is a bullshit conspiracy…
You’re right!
I should totally ignore those leftard clowns at NASA and NOAA, and instead I’ll come here, where guys like “Independent” and “bigpinch” can tell me what’s REALLY happening.
Scoot off, you silly git.
BETTER YET , LOOK AT THE PREDICTIONS MADE BY THE PEOPLE WHO ARE CONVINCED
THAT THE “SCIENCE IS SETTLED” . ( A BIG RED FLAG IN ITSELF )
THEY HAVE NOT ACCURATELY PREDICTED ANYTHING UP UNTIL NOW SO I HAVE NO IDEA WHY
ANYONE WOULD THINK THE LATEST ROUND OF PREDICTIONS ACTUALLY MEAN ANYTHING .
Your all-caps make you seem 31% smarter!
DOES IT MAKE ME WRONG ? CAN YOU PROVIDE A GRAPH ?
I GUESS TELLING OTHER PEOPLE HOW TO TYPE MUST MAKE YOU FEEL SMARTER .
BESIDES , THEY IS NO BETTER WAY TO REPLY WITHOUT ACTUALLY SAYING ANYTHING .
FACT IS , I LIVE IN A CAPITAL CITY THAT HAS BEEN FREE OF GLOBAL GUILT SINCE 1792 .
No, clown, you were wrong despite the all caps.
All caps just makes you HYSTERICALLY wrong.
YOU ARE CLEARLY ONE WHO SHOOTS THE MESSENGER .
CLIMATE CHANGE PREDICTIONS HAVE BEEN HYSTERICALLY WRONG .
BUT IT IS EASIER TO BLAME ME THAT ADMIT YOU HAVE BEEN HAD .
Just because they don’t regurgitate the same garbage peddled by your your Leftist master’s mouthpieces doesn’t mean it’s an evil attempt to burn the planet down.
Here are some things for you to consider:
-You don’t live in a comic book.
-You don’t understand what political Right and Left means.
-Someone who has built a fortune with his bare hands has a much better understanding of the real world than a bunch of egg-headded scholars and bureaucrats living off money taken forcibly from people they are unaccountable to, and God bless them for spending large amounts of that fortune fighting the those bureaucrats and egg-heads who are bent on world-wide tyranny.
-Think about the logic of claiming a particular news story is somehow part of the master plan of a dead guy to destroy the planet.
-What has Socialism built? Communism? Fascism? Those are the force of destruction. People build, create, and innovate. Governments restrict the actions of people in the name of an ordered society. The brilliance of our Founding Fathers forged a compromise between personal freedoms and a government that was limited to protecting those freedoms. Jerkoffs like you have supported tyrants who have whittled away at our freedoms because you are afraid of having to be responsible for yourself.
Insults, mischaracterizations, and lies don’t work outside your cadre of losers.
This in a nutshell is why we shouldn’t listen to the FrightWing radicals on this. So you’d rather listen to a billionaire than a scientist who’s PHD is in the field he’s talking about. In other words Donald Trump knows more than any climatologist. This was an IQ test. You failed.
You lost him as soon as you told him he wasn’t living in a comic book.
You spelled “headed” wrong.
That’s all you’ve got? One measly typo? Pathetic, but the Tools of Tyranny can’t win debates with substance or rational discourse, so I’m not too surprised.
See East Anglia University where emails between “climate scientists” were exposed and prove that they changed statistics to support their theory. They were proven to be liars who willingly schemed and distorted data in order to maintain the money flow. AGW is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on mankind.
If there’s one thing that guaranteed besides death and taxes, it’s that every time there’s a news story that goes against globull warmist dogma, there’s a cretin that will comment
“news sources that pump out this denier nonsense are owned by rich right-wing oil barons like this jerkoff and the Koch brothers”
Thank you for being today’s ‘Cretin of the day’. Here’s your cookie.
Oh! Are you claiming Climate Depot isn’t funded by a right-wing billionaire oil baron?
Is the Heartland Institute not funded by the Koch brothers and the Walton family?
Are you really making these claims with a straight face?
Well bless your heart!
Here’s a gold star for effort, a pat on your dear little head, AND a big cookie!
Clown on, clown.
Clown on.
Oh, and by the way, I know Malcom Reynolds is a fictional character, but you’re still not man enough to carry his jock strap.
PS you should ALWAYS care who funds the website. You can save yourself a lot of derp.
And again, you REALLY should learn how to spell “global” if you’re gonna come stink up threads like these.
Oh, you still haven’t figured out that’s intentional? I guess you’re determined to earn every last drop of that cretin award.
“Globull” is a clever play on words. Mencken, Shaw and Clemens would have liked it.
SUPER clever.
There’s a reason right-wingers are so famous for their comedic skills.
Is it billionaires you dislike or is it just Republican billionaires….Bloomberg, W. Buffett, Tom Steyer, G. Soros all leftist/progs. Biggest PACs were the Senate Majority PAC and the House Majority PAC both Dem PACs. Your boy/prez BHO is the first pol in history to raise over 1 bil in campaign funding…none of the top 10 donors were to the Repubs…..so you can now resume breathing, little thronelicker.
“thronelicker” Lol!
I’m sure he licks the royal staff too.
How much money are the Clinton’s worth these days? How many hundreds of millions of dollars has Al Gore made peddling Global Warming/Cooling/Climate Change since he left the Vice Presidency? Obama isn’t terribly wealthy now but is there little doubt he will worth well in excess of one billion dollars within five years of leaving the Presidency? How much money is Nancy Pelosi worth compared to when she went to Congress? The Democrats do not really represent the regular people either.
No, clown..but when one of you shills links to a site owned directly by an oil billionaire as if it’s “science”, I feel it is my duty to mock you and shame you.
Just as I’ve done here to you.
Now go back to being a shill for your republican scumbag overlords.
Wish I could upvote this a million times. If you want to find bought out scientists and tons of money pumped into science denial look at AGW denialists. Over 500 million in the past 9 years by FrightWing groups operating under Donor Financial. The largest contributors are Exxon and the Koch brothers. LOL at the easily manipulated dunces dancing to the tune of their corporate masters.
Modern day climate kahunas exactly modeled after pagan priests of yore who demanded sacrifices from villagers to control drought, floods, volcanoes. When the natural events occurred anyway, shamans shouted: Sacrifices too meager! Give us more or else!
Same as climate hustlers of today.
OK, where’s your equivalent list? After all, it’s just a big hoax. Tell us where exactly each climatologist got his funding. Also look at who gave them the money so we can look precisely at what strings are attached. For example, Donor financial has pumped over 500 million solely going to anti-global warming denier groups. Show me the equivalent on the left with facts and figures.
The determination of the reality of nature (ie. Science) is not discerned by who9 funds what. It is discerned by the evidence.
Anyone who endlessly argues about who funds, or “believes” what is completely irrelevant.
I’m sure that Hitler and the Nazis believed that water fell from the sky but because according to your apparent main argument because they were evil Nazis then their belief in water falling from the sky should be ridiculed and ignored simply because people that you don’t like believe in it.
That said, there is FAR FAR more money supporting the AGW theory than anything supporting those that refute it entirely for the fraud that it is.
But that is completely irrelevant.
Those of us who have studied this issue for years (which includes reading EVERY SINGLE email involved in the released IPCC’s internal University of East Anglia fiasco) know for a fact that the AGW theory is based on blatant fraud.
Those of us that practice critical thinking skills examine ALL the evidence, from all sources before we even consider having an opinion either way.
Apparently this is a completely foreign concept to those few people here who have apparently immediately chose what their belief system will be and then spend all their energy in attacking those who don’t choose to believe as they do.
Either that or they’re simply one of the endless thousands of employees that are paid handsomely to sit at home and fill comments sections on all sorts of sites with trolling attacks that support the fascist elite’s agenda.
A denier is one who denies truth when faced with a fact. The fact is there has been global cooling and temperatures today are lower than the peak of 1998. That is fact, not opinion. When faced with this fact, WHO IS THE DENIER? Anyone who still clings to outdated and false science when faced with the fact of global cooling is a denier.
BGulick misspelled BJquick cause Grubered pigressives gobble obamunist dicta and spew it out on public keyboards at libraries between trix.
Love those people who can barely scrawl a sentence point out the spelling errors of others.
You make an EXCELLENT point.
Please, do go on.
Some people have managed to convince themselves of astonishingly irrational conspiracies. Yours has a decidedly homoerotic flavor. Interesting mix — right-wing oil barons, ‘jerkoff’, disgrace, whores, and your favorite flavor of Slurpee! That’s a fascinating case study in self-loathing. I think psychologists refer to this as ‘projection’ — projection to achieve repression, as it were.
You know nothing about the animal abuse in China, so why are you arguing about the issue?
What are you talking about?
Nothing wrong with making something of yourself and making money – just try to do it in a less polluting/harmful way. That’s all we are saying.
So what. That just means he is smart. Then aren’t you just as concerned that the majority of rich people donate to liberal causes and to Democrats or progressives?
When money is taken from people in the form of taxes then given to scientists by politicians to support causes that will enrich them, that raises much more concern than rich industrialists spending his own money to support a cause they believe in. They put their own money where their mouth is. The corrupt politicians don’t give a hoot about any of us. And none are as corrupt as Democrats.
OMG HE SMART
HE BILLIONAIRE
HE MUST HAVE WORLD BEST INTEREST AT HEART
HE FRIEND
DERP
GUBMINT EMENY
DERP
You do realize “DERP” isn’t really a word. Probably not!!
What’s that you derp?
I can’t derp you.
Derp up a little!
You know, I read your comment below, btw first, thank you for your service. Second, your attacks on me and complete disregard for my service by calling me a “retard” and “dumb” etc… Your sense of service and decorum is about as pale as your skin.
Poverty and incompetence are not the moral high ground, rag head.
Rag head! That’s great! You have revealed yourself to be both stupid and racist in one sentence.
Expanding the definition of Racism now, are you? Well, since you are raising the bar for idiocy, you might as well fill out your resume.
Hmm, what’s that clown?
I can barely hear your little squeaks..
Sorry, I’ll say it louder. YOU ARE A RAG HEAD, rag head! Pull your rag heqd out of your raggedy a$$ and you might hear better.
Oh, that’s lovely. It’s much less racist when you scream like a child.
Also, a quick spell check will make you appear 90% less retarded.
Rag head! Rag head! Rag head!
hahahah
There you go!
With GUSTO, now, clown!
RAG HEAD! RAG HEAD! Can you hear me now?
Loud and clear, clown.
Rag head.
See everyone, this is how right-wingers treat veterans.
Four years serving my country, and “bigpinch” comes along and calls me a “raghead”.
Rag head. Why don’t you whine some more?
I think I may have stumbled across a five year old.
Are you up late, son? You should check with your mommy and see if she says it’s okay to keep derping.
Squirt a few more tears, Rag head. You intellectually vacant stooge.
The child screaming “raghead” calls me “intellectually vacant”.
Classic!
Please continue, little boy..did your mommy teach you any other slurs than “raghead” or is this as far as you got?
It’s the only one I need for you, rag head.
Well, it’s been great conversing with you then “bigpinch”!
It was awesome when you said raghead but then when you said raghead it really made me think…then you were like “RAGHEAD” and that was an excellent point and then to wrap it all up with that grand slam “raghead”! That was MAGNIFICENT!!
As usual it’s an honor to debate a member of the right-wing, I’ve learned a lot, and I’ll bid you a good night!
Nighty night, rag head.
AND HE TOPS IT ALL WITH ANOTHER “RAGHEAD”!!
Man, I never saw THAT coming!
You’re just full of surprises, aren’t you!!
You right wingers should be proud of “bigpinch” here..he’s a true master of the English language, and a rapier with the likes of which I’ve seldom seen.
I bow to your obvious brilliance.
You ought to, rag head.
Would you like some cheese with your whine, RAGHEAD?!?!?!!
You right wingers are a class act.
Well I do believe it is just as good to be despised by the despicable as admired by the admirable. (Thomas Sowell), and leftists are despicable.
Whoever that is does have the elitist, smugness, and aloofness of a typical leftist.
Yeah and you have called me dumb and multiple other things, and I have served during the first Gulf War and was in Afghanistan. I didn’t call you anything, but you went right ahead a insulted me without me attacking you at all. So stuff your fake sanctimony and indignation.
Derp?
Derpy derp derp?
Derp, derp.
Derp.
Also, you really are dumb.
Now, call me a “raghead” like your pal “bigpinch” there and we can all confirm it.
I never called you a “raghead” no matter how much you wish it were true. Still calling me names. Wow, bet your buddies in the service really respected you and your ways, NOT!!!. Anyway, thank you for service, but you are about as gracious to your fellow veterans as an IED. Don’t bother replying to me, you have worn out your welcome with your complete lack of civility and respect. Good day to you.
Any word deemed offensive by the Left is either racist, sexist, homophobic, or xenophobic. Only they and they alone have the moral authority to decide what may be uttered in public.
How convenient for them. Saves having to think about it.
Hey BG, what ‘race’ are arabs, eh?
“Rag-head” is a racist slur.
Or are you one of those racists that’s so deeply racist he says things like “rag-head” in casual conversation?
You don’t have to reply, I’m just toying with you, fool.
Now scurry off and find someone who has an iota of respect for you or what you say!
Toodle-oo!
WE’ll take our rich guys over yours – Al Gore, George Works. And Warren Buffet
hahahaha, I think I struck a nerve!
Who signs your checks, little shills?
hahahahha
You climate change denier clowns are an absolute delight.
Now please go back to sucking that big old billionaire dong.
😀
A denier is one who denies truth when faced with a fact. The fact is there has been global cooling and temperatures today are lower than the peak of 1998. That is fact, not opinion. When faced with this fact, WHO IS THE DENIER? Anyone who still clings to outdated and false science when faced with the fact of global cooling is a denier.
Oh you sad, silly little shill.
So, prove me wrong dude. Show me higher temps since then and tell me all bout Maunder Minimum, eh?
Ope! Another link to the right-wing billionaire oil baron-owned “Climate Depot”.
Hey, how about you link me to “iceagenow.com” or the Heartland Institute while you’re at it.
Ever hear of Al Gore, George Soros and most of Hollywood?
Please define Right-Wing.
Hey aint you that little lib biotch that we used to pass around in the pen???
The same thing can be said for Al Gore and his company which sells carbon credits…whatever the hell those things are. Get real.
Al Gore is a billionaire oil baron industrialist right-wing sugar daddy?
Dang!
Never let ’em tell you a regressive internet clown can’t teach you something new!
An heir to the Mellon banking, oil and aluminum fortunes, the Pittsburgh-based Mr. Scaife spent hundreds of millions of dollars of his estimated net worth of $1.4 billion to counteract what he called “the liberal slant to American society.”
On the other hand, Al Gore has about $200 million. Not bad for a former vice president!
But you’re wrong by about oh, a factor of five.
Nice attempt at false equivalency though!
Keep practicing and you may come up with something a five year old couldn’t debunk.
So Scaife made his money by running a business which provides a commodity that people want and/or need. Gore made his money by lobbying Congress to pass laws and Gov’t agencies to implement regulations which will directly benefit him. So Al is like a pimp and politicians are his whores? I get it. That guy Scaife who ran a company that employed people and allowed them to provide for their families is really a big, bad guy. The nerve of him!!!! I know…the Gov’t should run the oil and gas industry like in Venezuala. Yeah, yeah, that’s the answer.
Clown:
The question isn’t whether or not Scaife was a good businessman. He obviously was.
The question is whether a right-wing oil billionaire’s climate site that’s run by Rush Limbaugh’s protege can be taken seriously.
Actually, it’s not a question at all.
It can’t.
Asshat:
The question is whether data knowingly faslified by climate hysterists at East Anglies University can be taken seriously. It can’t.
The place you referred to doesn’t even exist, except in your fevered right wing clown brain.
Alas for you, like every other denier “gotcha”, it’s nonsense.
Dude, this story is on the wire service. Even MSNBC, Yahoo, Google, Centrists and liberal rags have covered it.
Follow the money my ass! So, now, people with different faiths or ideologies than you are no longer allowed to own businesses or express opinions?!?!?! Quite the Democrat you are!!!!
Liberal rags cover originate and promote primarily topics that promote their liberal agenda……yet I dont see you up in arms over that. You know what you are? You are like Al Sharpton: Any time a black person dies….BOOM…..there you are, like a bad penny. Any time a cop or white dies…..*crickets*
Unless, you are going to be fair and balanced dont bother trolling here because you arent doing anything to add anything meaningful to the discussion. You are just argumentative……and that will never win hearts and minds.
Well, well, well! Whey doesn’t this surprise me? Anyway, it’s fun pricking the thought balloons of the big oil-oriented balloonatics commenting on this thread! Bring ’em on!
No, I think the reasoning is quite the opposite: In order to save the people, we must rein in polluting business/industry. If that means removing the coal-fired electrical generating stations in favor of sustainable, so be it. Even switching to natural gas for fuel to fire power plants is a big step forward. How does cleaning up industry equate to removing people off the face of the Earth?
Though I disagree with his premise when applied to Christianity, at least in this case Marx’s observation appears to be correct: religion, global warming, is the opiate of the masses.
…and Algore is it’s Oracle. You must grovel at his feet.
I think maybe your brains have been cooked if you equate science (GW) with religion (superstition). Also – GW/effects of rampant pollution/untrammeled development – are actually things you can see, such as the gigantic disaster of Sandy. Other than its ethical precepts, religion is based on “blind faith” alone.
Global warming ate the pie my wife left in the refrigerator last night.
Don’t you just hate it when that happens, Mr Fever?!?
Well, you should know, as you sit there and thumb through your profits – profits at the expense of clean air, water, and soil. No pie for folks like you – Santa won’t allow it!
You’re really strange. I would wager your electric bills, gas purchases, etc are right in line with everyone else. Which would make you a hypocrite.
A) I’m not a driver – never have been. B) NYC has made great strides in cleaning up its air since ConEd switched to natural gas. Oil is only used if there’s a shortfall of gas shipments. C) So everyone who tries to curb the pollution caused by big oil is a hypocrite according to you; that would mean most people who want to survive and not be inundated by floods are hypocrites. You should try to sell that line to the millions who lost homes and property in Sandy.
You’re so freaking weird. Floods?! You are a joke. Sandy was a hurricane. Guess what? Hurricanes happen, not because oil, you nincumpoop.
Good one!
Too bad the Pope-endorsed Santa doesn’t think so: No pie for GW deniers! You get a coal in your stocking instead – a worthy symbol of your enduring “marriage” to dirty coal fired power plants/industry/gasoline-based economic model..
If it was real global warming, it would have eaten her as well.
Maybe Santa ate it – since everyone knows all GW deniers are very bad boys who don’t deserve Mamma’s pie..
Excellent! Unfortunately that’s what constitutes scientific proof to a politically indoctrinated warming alarmist. I laugh watching them shove groceries into their green reusable bacteria farming bags at check out.
Hey, I think this climate change stuff is natural and the earth is going to heat and cool differently as it wobbles on it’s axis. I do use the reusable grocery totes because they are stronger, bigger and I wash mine regularly . Plus, do we really need more plastic that is very slow to break down on this earth, piling up in landfills and in the ocean and driving the price of oil up?
I bet you have a halo. Is it visible in daylight?
Nope, it’s covered in smog from the truck I drive.
Get a new muffler, you gross polluter. All your brownie points are cancelled and you have a big black mark against you. Get a Prius and beg forgiveness.
Do I beg to you or Al Gore?
Oh no, no, no. Al will not tolerate any begging…only cash and certified checks.
…and DNC votes.
Progress in combating pollution is always difficult for big business to accept – since it means millions will have to be spent in cleaning up dirty industry. Look at the landmark anti-fracking decision in NYS – and XL. Do we really need to keep polluting the Earth – especially when more and more people are turning away from cars?
LOL. Best to park it and go ride a bike instead… pretend like you never bought it… anyway, the heyday of motor vehicles powered by gasoline/diesel is probably drawing to a close (finally).
California is often in the vanguard of progress. Just wait until California’s emission standards are adopted by the other States.. then who will have the last laugh? The Prius owner!
LOL. Not in California.. with the strict emissions standards – exceeding Federal regs and all..
No – but it’s probably a solar-powered glow of health – as opposed to the smog/soot that must accompany you everywhere you go…
The reusable totes need to be washed as often as you wash your clothes. But, I guess the GW deniers don’t wash their clothes too often, so they wouldn’t understand that. Maybe they are the biggest “spawners of bacteria i.e. toxic ideas?”
Yuck it up – your views are unfashionably yucky. Respect for the environment, along with evolution, are taught nationwide in schools today.
Respect for the environment has been taught since the days of Teddy Roosevelt. It used to be called conservation of natural resources. It just wasn’t taken to the ridiculous end of the world / human beings are a pestilence extremes of today. BTW, no arguement that Evolution was part of God’s plan. Happy New Year and yuck yuck yuckety yuck yuck!
Well, because in TR’s day the environment had not yet been thoroughly trashed. If TR was a conservationist then, no doubt he’d be an environmentalist today.
Astute observation KM. The socialists tried to pivot to “climate change” which seemed to play well to the uninformed majority. However, common sense (the principled application of logic) tells us that the earth has been changing climate for millions of years.
(In the voice of Chevy Chase’s Fletch’s “Gordon Liddy” the airplane mechanic) Come on, guys, maybe you need a refresher course. It’s all global warming these days!
No – Sandy is global warming. You should have been on the E. Coast when Sandy occurred and you would have been convinced in a flash of the reality of global warming. Sandy disaster and its continuing after-effects don’t lie.
That is quite simply a bald faced lie, and I’m sorry there are people like you that buy into it.. When these faux scientists create a model that allows them to adjust the data and the results from it, well, how in the world can that go wrong? Fact is, the earth has warmed in the past and that caused the CO2 levels to rise.. When it cooled they decreased.. I can make my models too sweety..
Well, if you have all the answers, then let’s talk about the mass extinction of millions of wooly mammoths and about 30 other mammals that went extinct just after the last ice age of 15 to 20 thousand years ago. Climate changers incessantly hang on to increases of CO2 which even if doubled is still a trace gas. Please don’t let yourself be Grubered.
Love it. BTW, can you conjugate the verb “to gruber”?
I grubered, you grubered, he/she/it grubered.
We grubered, you (all) grubered, They (all) grubered
That’s past tense. Start with I gruber…
Using Gruber is well stated
I’m not sure I understand your response. But this is what I’ve posted before;
// Anybody that thinks this global warming scam is about anything other
than a massive redistribution of wealth is playing into their hands..
That is all this is about period…It is the attempt at global
government with global laws which loosely translates into ransacking the
US and giving that wealth to a global oligarchy.. Simple.. Thats why
they will never let it go. Never..//
Yes the climate changes.. Always has and no one needs a “model,” to know that.. I am simply pointing out that the whole premise of man made CO2 pollution is a myth just like the rest of it.. The, “scientists.” that came up with this crap got it backwards.. CO2 doesn’t drive the climate.. The climate drives CO2..
There is no example of their doing so in Earth’s history for the obvious reason that the ability to measure it was not yet available. I imagine though that the polar ice cap was shrunken during the Medieval Warming Period, a time of great cultural and economic flourishing when average temperatures are estimated to have been 3-5 degrees Celsius higher than the scare scenarios of the warmists for the end of this century. And by the way, humans had NO effect on that development. That period was followed by the so called Little Ice Age.
Think about what you just stated. CO2 has increased from 290 – to 400 ppm, and temperatures have dropped over the past 2 decades. That is only 2 decades, you might say. But, if there is a causation of warming by CO2, then the temperatures should have increased. Unless this is a religion to you, that is the only conclusion that can be logically reached.
If it weren’t for global warming, this exchange of opinions wouldn’t be taking place, as a large portion of the northern hemisphere of this planet was under a very large ice sheet 10-15k years ago. I am all for global warming.
There is this thingamajigger called Photosynthesis. I learned about it in the 4th grade, maybe you slept through that part. more CO2 = more plants = more O2.
Actually, the core data shows that the changes in atmospheric CO2 lagged behind the changes in global temperature, and that by an average of about 200 years. That data therefore says exactly the opposite of what the AGW people say. It says that changes in atmospheric CO2 were caused by changes in average global temperature, rather than changes in average global temperature were caused by changes in atmospheric CO2.
Keep looking for that missing heat CB, it’s got to be around here somewhere.
In the meantime, I’m going to buy two or three pounds of dry ice just to watch it sublimate. Then I’m going to fire up the grill and release some more carbon dioxide (plants love that stuff, ya know), and cook some steaks from Brazilian cattle that were raised on a pasture that was once rain forest.
Did you bother to consider the data included in this article? Man-made global warming is propaganda, pure and simple. Goebbels would be proud. The doctrine of man-made global warming is as essential to plans for global governance and wealth redistribution as the doctrine of evolution is to providing cover for immoral lifestyles. Both doctrines are propagated by the state and its so-called “public education system”.
I apparently did not grasp the meaning of the above article or you did not even take the time to read it. Also your graphs have 9 years of history as opposed to the millions of years that the earth has been here.
So how do we decide what is “normal” for Co2 and ice mass?
This is the exact opposite of what this article says and a new study has come out saying that increased co2 is good for the rain forests growth. Don’t you like rain forests?
We don’t decide. They decide. We, the uneducated masses could never muster the complex thought patterns to decide “normal”. Much like paying your “fair” share. They will decide what is fair for us to pay.
hey dumbass. Have you done any ice core samples recently…heck, ever? I can name lots of scientific articles the liberal media doesn’t talk about since it doesn’t increase any hype.
How about looking at oh, any ice core sample that goes back a thousand years or so to way back 100,000 years ago and you will start seeing a pattern, fluctuations, that show higher and lower CO2 levels. While we’re talking about ice core samples you can research how in the past 20 plus years ice has been melting at one pole and being redistributed at the other pole. But all you dumbass liberals like to show are pictures of one spot in Greenland or one spot in Antarctica that is losing ice. Sheesh. What kind of an idiot are you? Do you ONLY read what some dumbass liberal on tv talks about or do you actually read the studies regardless of bias? Maybe if you did that you’d get the whole picture and not just the picture you want to portray.
Oh…and tell NOAA that many of us Geologists were laughing at their hocus-pocus waaay before it was reported as fraudulent. It just doesn’t make sense when you look at other planets and AMAZING….those planets temperatures are fluctuating too. Makes me think its solar…not human….in basic cause. Yeah…the SUN. Try proving the Sun is our fault too.
If CO2 is high as the result of burning “fossil fuels”, how is such burning not just putting back into the atmosphere that which was previously there and sequestered by those long dead plants (fossils). The idea that the earth can not sustain much higher levels of CO2 is demonstrably absurd.
As I understand it, the problem is that we are burning in a very short period of time that which took a very long period of time to accumulate as fossil fuels.
On the other hand, if the CO2 was in the atmosphere to begin with to be “sequestered” by trees and grass and unicorns frolicking in the meadow then how can putting it back even in a “very short” period of time destroy the planet (as global alarmists clearly believe).
Focus your energy on deforestation and pollution of the seas (Fukushima?) where it belongs so the rate of re sequestering can keep up if your only issue is one of rate, rather than CO2 being a pollutant as the EPA tells us it is.
CO2 levels have been much higher than 400ppm in the past. The fact is, we have already seen the most of the warming that 400ppm will produce. Additional increases in CO2 will have much smaller impacts on global warming. An increase to 640ppm will have about 10% of the impact that the initial 120ppm increase had. Most people are ignorant of this fact.
YOU SOUND LIKE AN ARROGANT LEFT WING LOON. WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THE “EARTH’S HISTORY”? THE EARTH IS 4 AND 1/2 BILLION YEARS OLD. EVERY 20,000 YEARS THE SAHARA DESERT BECOMES A LUSH FORREST. EXPLAIN THAT??? MAN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. LOONS LIKE YOU IGNORE THE FACT THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO GLOBAL WARMING FOR TWO DECADES AND THERE IS RECORD ICE COVERE AS WE SPEAK. CO2 ALSO IS ESSENTIAL TO LIFE AND IS SPURRING RECORD GROWTH IN THE RAIN FORRESTS. HERE IS THE BOTTOM LINE—THE EARTH HAS BEEN COVERED IN ICE AND THEN LOST ALL OF ITS ICE SCORES OF TIMES LONG BEFORE MAN EVER EXISTED. EXPLAIN THAT ONE MS. LOON???
Cherry pick much?. You have to use all relevant data associated with the subject. If you want to be believed on a specific subject at least use all available information. Doing otherwise, you sound as though we need to add bleach to the shallow end of the gene-pool. I’m only spitballing here, but, it seems as if you missed class the day they taught earth science.
CB, I’m trying to understand your chart. If it is a chart that shows how much the ice mass changed per year, it would indicate that in most years the ice mass went up from the year before. If that is the case, even if the mass went up by less in one year than the year before, the mass is still going up even if the chart shows a downward trend. Correct? If so, even in the short trend that you posted, it appears that there would be an overall increase in mass. It also would make little sense for the mass to endlessly rise every year or we would at some point be in another ice age. If you look at your chart, it increased most years from 2002-2007, then decreased in years 2007-2009 when the chart ends. Without looking at current charts, I believe it did lose mass for a couple years after but has made a huge gain in the last couple years, as the article claims. Nobody wants to kill the planet but they have good reason for skepticism now that science and politics have become completely intertwined on this subject. Keep an open mind. look carefully at this issue before you allow the blowhard politicians to steal your personal and economic freedom.
plants grow MUCH better with 1200-1500ppm CO2 — this is why grow-houses increase CO2 inside… and guess what, there is no need for air-conditioning as a result.
Also, 290ppm is dangerously low. Increasing to 400ppm is a good thing, even though humans had nothing to do with it. The amount of CO2 we output is extremely minuscule in the grand scale of the atmosphere. The sun and water vapor are the primary drivers of climate.
All vegative life hits saturation CO2 between 1k-2k PPM we could easily double our current concentration and the only effect would be…..more plant growth
Indeed. A perfect illustration of something one of my physics professors warned us about 60 years ago: “…the unwarranted extrapolation of insufficient data.”
In the age of dinosaurs when no humans existed, the CO2 level of the atmosphere for 100s of million of years were between 500 ppm and 1400 ppm. Lush Vegetation EVERYWHERE. Animals growing to huge sizes. The bountiful earth giving forth life everywhere. Stop believing CO2 is something “bad” for you.
Take another look at algores giant graph of ice cores (CO2 vs. Temp), you will see that the rising global temps PRECEED the rise in CO2 (and SUVs were not even around back then), so when the earth warms (from SOLAR radiation), the oceans give off more CO2 into the atmosphere (and hence the ice core samples).
The area of sea ice on Earth has moved into unprecedented territory. When it was declining, they blamed it on global warming. Now that it is increasing, they blame it on global warming.
So let’s declare Carbon Dioxide a pollutant and stop buring all fossil fuels. Then when 7.1 of the 7.2 Billion humans die (because without fossil fuels, nobody eats, has a place to escape the weather elements, no medicine, no transportation, no Internet, no iPhones, no Tweeting, you get my point), the Earth will finally be “in the balance”. What a crock!
The earth has been hotter with more co2 in the past. To support dinosaurs, specifically the plant eaters, vegetation should need to be prolific and the temperature of the planet much warmer to support cold blooded animals of that size. Simple observation to anyone who’s ever kept reptiles really.
“If it’s so likely that polar ice caps will be able to withstand CO₂ so high, why isn’t there a single example of them doing so in Earth’s history?”
IF the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is as high as you claim it is currently then we have the proof you seek right now. The polar Ice caps are still there aren’t they?
It’s absolutely laughable that you post graphs with no data later than 2008. Over the past six years, nature has demonstrated that there is no basis for your projections of unceasing ice loss, and therefore no clear link between higher CO2 levels and temperatures.
And there were times when temperatures were warmer pre-industrial revolution. I don’t see that in your 8 year graphs. Nice try at skewing data, meanwhile, I’m putting on a coat.
And I suppose solar storms and volcanoes had absolutely nothing to do with your charts, its all man-made, right? By the way could you give me a chart that shows what the ice mass change was for 640,000 years ago when the Yellowstone Supervolcano, the Lava Creek eruption, put about 240 cubic miles of particles into our atmosphere? (Even though I don’t believe the guesstimated age of this eruption since the earth is only about 6,000 years old.)
Sure there are examples from prehistory. Old atmospheres are examined using bubbles trapped in miles of ice cores, drilled from the ice pack. Way back when, CO2 was many times todays concentration. What does that tell us? – that permanent ice was being laid down at vastly higher CO2 concentrations than we have…. Relax, get a life…..
Well, I can tell those charts didn’t come from the NSIDC. The Antarctic sea ice coverage has set all time record high levels the last 3 years, and is even showing that in the charts used for this article. Making up charts from your behind and posting them here does not make it ay more science than when Al Gore did it.
OK, good, now do some thinking on your own. Calculate the weighted, specific heat capacity of the atmosphere before and after the CO2 changes. CO2 contributes such an insignificant role in the atmosphere’s ability to hold energy, it doesn’t make a damn difference if you quadrupled CO2. CO2’s specific heat capacity value is amazingly unimpressive. CO2 is also .035% of the atmosphere. Hell increase it 1000%. Did all of you global warming scammers skip chemistry 101?
Riddle me this….What is the SINGLE largest source of CO2 emissions?
And, as a bonus, What percentage of the Total Global CO2 is NOT man-made?
Look these two facts up and get back to us about how Man is causing Global warming via CO2 emissions.
Hint: I know the answer and will cite the source if you are afraid to…..
The site remains vague about the total “Man-made” CO2 and
includes such things as land use.
“From 1850 to 2000, land use and land use change released an
estimated 396-690 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.” In 150 years man crated the equivalent of 1.5 years of the amount occurring NATURALLY in the Oceans alone.
A little math and we can deduct that the other Man Made CO2
created by ALL other sources after fossil fuels equals 4.3 billion tonnes.
That makes 37.5 billion tonnes per year.
Or, as a percentage of the total: 770.15 Billion (natural) /
37.5 Billion Man Made = 4.84 % of the total CO2.
This from the Global Warming fear monger site http(colon)//whatsyourimpact(dot)org/greenhouse-gases/carbon-dioxide-sources.
The climates change. Greenland was a lush “green land” when it was named. I guess there were too many cars and heavy industry 900 or 1100 years ago. England used to be known for their fine wines (before the climate change). The Mayan calender predicted today’s climate change 5000 years ago based on repeating cycles of climate, not cars and industry.
Polar ice caps have melted and grown many times across millennia. Even in the past 500-600 yrs. Greenland was called that because it was actually green…. well before the Industrial Age. Arctic and Antarctic ice caps are growing, not decreasing. The global as a whole has not warmed for over 18 yrs.
It’s leftwing lunatics, communists, fascists, Nazis and assorted criminals who are a pox on this earth. What a wonderful world it would be if none of them existed.
Absolutely. Orwell should be Man of the Century (20th)(ironic that he was a socialist – God works in strange ways). Add mozilms to your mix of people with FITH Syndrome.
Problem is: what to DO about it is always left hanging, even by brilliant and courageous commentators like Daniel Greenfield. We are not yet at the precipice; the tiger is not yet fully awake.
I suspect that it will take a major event such as an EMP or some other act of terrorism 10+ times worse than 9-11-2001, or perhaps a partial or complete collapse of the U.S. economy before enough people wake up. I Guarantee that the first day after the welfare checks and other batches of other people’s money don’t get tranferred to the takers, riots will erupt across the nation and that will result in falling into the precipice. It will be quite a show for those prepared for it and a nightmare for the rest.
But that’s the plan, don’t you know. Cause the whole house of cards to come tumbling down, the masses demand that the government DO something and presto-change-o: Socialist Utopia. It’s the Cloward & Piven plan.
The presto chango is technically known as the Hegellian Dialectic Thereom. This is the lever that social engineers use to affect change over and over and over again.
Unfortunately, some folks, far too many, will never wake up until they are no longer capable of doing so.
Far too few people realize how little separates us from barbarism and a new “dark ages”.
If an EMP event hit America, official estimates are 90 casualties within one year primarily due to starvation when the food distribution network breaks down, and later due to unsanitary conditions because of little things like no more indoor toilets.
I used to watch Star Trek, those huge, graceful starships, and think, that’s the dream of the West. Then the announcement that warp drive is theoretically possible got me excited. Then ISIS came. And I began looking into history, how classical civilization continued in the Eastern Empire even though Rome fell in the West. But then Islam came, and attacked it in the 7th century and destroyed it in the 15th with the fall of Constantinople. And I realized that the dream of the West isn’t going to happen, because Islam is going to kill it. And maybe us, as well.
Ahhhhhem, the Arabs had paper and other technologies first, which the West did not acquire until the Crusades where they invaded the region. That right there helped break Europe out of the Dark Ages.
I have been reading diar predictions from right wing economic snake oil salesmen for the past 7 years. None of Obama’s policies have caused our collapse, infact 6 years on, our economy is stronger than ever, gas prices have dropped to decade lows, and yet you continue to scream doom and socialism. Hell, we could probably use more of what you dolts consider socialism. What’s funny is that some Scandinavian countries have started litterally handing out money as a minimum living stipend. Their economies are doing great and they have a higher quality of liVing than the US.
1) “Dire.”
2) “Literally.”
3) The price of gasoline is a) the result of Saudi trying to undercut both us and Russia and b) is STILL higher than it was the day he took office.
4) Socialism is a pyramid scheme, and eventually you run out of other people’s money. Or else you start printing it and giving THAT away. Germany and Rhodesia can tell you a lot about that method.
5) Scandinavia also does not have a permanent underclass which has become rooted and bonded to government handouts and criminal/gang culture. Although they are starting to catch up, with their growing population of Middle Easterners*. Read up on Scandinavian crime statistics. Read up especially on rape in Norway.
6) “None of Obama’s policies have caused our collapse.” Huh? I thought the “obstructionist Congress” has kept him from getting ANYTHING done. Make up your mind, you can’t have it both ways.
7) How’s that whole business of race relations coming along?
*Yes, that’s dog-whistle code-word for Moslems.
Uh oh. Someone’s been paying attention. I name you…the ANTI-GRUBER!
Anti-truth person?
1, 2. Who cares about spelling these days?
3. The reason it was so far down was because the economy and demand collapsed. Before that it was at record highs. Presidents don’t have much impact on prices.
4. You meant to say Ponzi scheme, which it isn’t.
5. Way to blame the poor and minorities for our problems.
6. He is referring to all the Obama doomsday sayers, and those prophecies are false.
7. Race relations are fine. The media blows it out of proportion, both left and right.
“1, 2. Who cares about spelling these days?”
Says it all, folks, says it all.
The U.S. is doing that now. Going deeper in debt. & spend more than we take in on junk.
You can thank fracking technology and oil company ingenuity in navigating the EPA barricades erected by obama’s administration the past 6 years. In addition to obama’s misguided opposition to the Keystone pipeline. New technologies and low oil prices have spurred the economy and job growth. Nothing obama has done has built this economy. Nothing.
Sure he didnt. I gus it’s true what they say about you repub tools; you Blame the black guy when he’s cleaning up your conservative pig mess, but demand credit when things are finally working thanks to 6 years of democratic governance.
You are out of your mind.
And you apparently think you can burn billions of gallons of oil and release all that into the atmosphere with no consequence.
Do you understand why the gas prices are dropping and what it means long term?
I bet you do. Please enlighten us, O Wise One of Infinite Knowledge.
Oh, and I am wise and I do have infinite knowledge, but if you want to pretend I’m an idiot, Google “petrodollar” and see what you find.
Google “Communist fool”. See what you find.
Yeah, Putin suffers. Obama wins again.
Socialist Utopia Venezuela suffers (they’re in a depression now because of it)– and they can no longer keep Cuba afloat with aid. Thus– Obama bails out Cuba (loosening restrictions so people in the US can subsidize the Communist regime).
That is Baseless.
Obama has had little to do with it. The Saudis are deliberately flooding the market with excess oil to tackle the issue with Russia (yes, a nice side benefit), but also to knock the legs out from under our natural gas industry which will not survive if the price/barrel stays below $60 for much longer. Our “recovery” is shouldered by the natural gas boon. When it collapses, so does the dollar. But I’m sure you knew that, right? Love the arrogance of you lefties. But makes it all that much more fun to watch your mental gymnastics when the wheels come off the bad policy.
“Blame the black guy. Take the credit.” Did your white Supremacist majority whip think this up?
Such an easy, no-thought, inaccurate assessment. Dispute what I said with tangible fact. Stop name calling. Otherwise, you have no credibility whatsoever.
First, as usual, your rightwing analysis of the situation is wrong. Fuck natural gas, it’s environmentally damaging and I see no reason to support it since it only benefits degenerate red states. Electric is the future. Gas is just a stop gap.
Maybe. But a necessary stop gap to get to the future. And electricity has to come from somewhere. And, with no money, who do you assume will get you through that stop gap? But glad to see your civility is well in tact.
Unless you have a lot of hydro, electricity is either generated from dirty coal, nuclear, or natural gas. Clean burning natural gas is the future for electricity.
You missed thermal, solar, wind, and emerging technologies. Ever hear of the sun?
No I did not. They are not economically viable.
Yes moron. It’s called solar power, not electric.
USMC2010, I’m not going to be mean to you because i genuinely think you may have a learning disability. Solar power generates electricity. It’s the same thing.
Every other power source I mentioned can also be converted to “electric” so by your logic all of the actual sources I stated are the same thing. You are a moron.
Yeah, because the future is only 90 years long? That’s how long til it runs out.
How do you figure that?
My God you are a moron. “Electric” is not a power source. Coal, oil, NG, nuclear, wind and solar are power sources. “Electric” is one of the products for consumption. Here’s electric for you…you are a 5-watt light bulb. Not so bright.
USMC2010, I’m not going to be mean to you because i genuinely think you may have a learning disability. Solar power generates electricity.
Gee…solar generates electricity…really? I guess they built the Hoover Dam to generate moonbeams. Wonder what diesel generators produce…perhaps butterflies. Idiot.
Like I said; Learning disability.
You really are weak. A man could admit an error. Solar is a source…electricity is a product from EVERY SINGLE POWER SOURCE WE UTILIZE. Those following the thread know how dumb you sound trying to justify such a dumb initial assertion that, “electric is the future.” But, then again, liberals are known to be weak, illogical and just plain stupid.
Only an idiot could misread/misinterpret what I said. You’re twisting in the wind.
Electric car?
Ignorant and off topic. Stay up…we were talking about his assertion that the best future power SOURCE was “electric.”
Off topic, and austerity measures don’t usually work well and can be senseless
Orwell’s political ideas changed several times during his life.
Animal Farm was much more a critique of what Stalin did with Communism, rather than Communism itself. And of course 1984 is largely apolitical — totalitarianism can spring up from any quarter.
His first political orientation was Anarchist. He later became a Socialist writing a book called, “The Road to Wigon Pier”. He went to Spain where he ended up fighting communists in Barcelona. He returned to England as a Conservative and wrote, “Coming Up For Air”. He went through a period where he was a sort of a Libertarian while turning once again to Socialism. He became the editor of a left-wing socialist newspaper, but his experience in Barcelona fighting communists left him with a lifelong dread of Communism. Only after that, he wrote Animal Farm and 1984.
Make better arguments and you won’t find yourself swearing as much
That would be true if I encountered fewer rabid fanatics like you. They’re so annoying and so full of bullshiit.
By bullshit you mean facts, evidence, and concern for our future?
That’s why I can’t really oppose abortion or gay marriage. Good conservative people don’t engage in that. We should be having as many kids as we can. The bed wetting moonbats can abort and swallow themselves out of existence.
Good saying.
I’ve come to that conclusion, too, but you say it well.
Opposition to abortion should be based on the fact that a human life is being taken (murder) If you support abortion, you’re in favor of wanton murder. Just my opinion
You are just murdering future liberals. No loss there.
AL GORE IS A LIAR, THIEF, FRAUD AND HYPOCRITE. HIS GLOBAL WARMING POSITION IS A LIE THAT HE HAS USED TO DEFRAUD PEOPLE OUT OF HUNDRED OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. FRANKLY, IN BELONGS IN PRISON RIGHT NEXT TO PONZI SCHEME KING, BERNIE MADOFF.
Isn’t the Social Security system we have in this country the ultimate Ponzi Scheme?
The US should get out of the disability and health insurance business.
Except that other industrialized nations often do a better job than what we or the private industry could do.
Billy Ray sees the IRS, USPS and public housing as shining examples of how a big, overreaching government can do a better job of managing our environment.
What a fool.
You love corporations so much that you’re willing to hand them the keys to the kingdom.
SS do not count on it, Best to put away money through the underground economy that is now about 20 % of total GDP.
With the internet it is quite easy to sell and save 10 to 20 k a yr. buy and sell what you have a passion for.
He owns a magnificent beachfront hacienda in Santa Barbara and is probably bravely battling gnarly surf dudes who want to surf on his beach. He really hates peasants.
And you hate logic reason and science, so gfy.
No I don’t. Stop telling lies and making stuff up.
yer stoopit.
LOL. You’re such a pleb.
Pleb? Language dictates thought goofy, and you are someone who believes that your basic lefist moral superiority equals mental superiority. Nice try.
2014 was the hottest year ever recorded. You are arguing with the thermometer.
2014 was hottest only to those who will not actually look into the facts. Taking your facts from the media will make you think how the people that own the media want. Doing your own research will always lead an honest informed citizen to see human caused warming as the FRAUD that it is.
WRONG.
Last year was only the 6th warmest of the new century — sixth, out of 14 years.
Now the alarmist crowd has resorted to outright lying, since they don’t have credible facts.
Gee- such powerful, rational scientific argument, geek.
2014 was the hottest year ever recorded.
repeating a lie is a socialist/nazi tactic……..satalite records do not agree with you.
…Says Richard repeating a lie,
That must explain the record ice expansion. Wake up. Google “ClimateGate”
Actually, 1934 was. In addition, global warming trend is now broken. Climate is more closely correlated to solar activity than any crackpot Liberal theories. There’s a reason that your progressive masters have retreated and are now calling it “Climate Change.” That way, no matter what happens, they’re right :-). I passed by Al gore’s oceanfront house in Montecito, CA, right on the ocean :-). Wonder why he bought it if it’s gonna be inundated soon. Sounds like you’re the “plebe” geek :-).
Wow, maybe if you could just get this schlock through peer review you would win a Nobel Prize! Lol.
2014 was the hottest year ever recorded.
As if.
It wasn’t, but even if it was:
I am the tallest I have ever been. I am 6’2″ tall, and by your silly logic, that means:
a) I was always this tall, and
b) I will surely get taller [globaloney warming will only get ‘worse’]
Really, the alarmist cult is now using pathetic arguments. And they are simply lying because they don’t have credible facts.
Perhaps I don’t have data, but scientific american does.
Yeah like yours is any better?
Is this an elementary school playground?
This is a serious issue whichever side you are on and deserves far more maturity than you are showing.
Actually yes. The grown-ups have been showing the hyper-greens some facts hey’re not hearing in their echo chamber. I’ve heard it all after many years in Sierra Club. When I started seeing the other side, I started doing some checking and found ouit GW was being vastly overhyped. Then ClimateGate got exposed.
So you think the sun doesn’t affect temperature? am I reading that right?
Um no, you are not reading that right. Obviously the sun plays an important role in our climate. What kind of doofus derives that from what I said?
You can’t even spell it right, troll.
My phone is shit for quick typing.
How about trying to make the better argument? Or do you have no argument?
BloodAxe does not have an argument.
People who yammer dementedly about Al Gore prove they know nothing about climate science and furthermore, are not interested in what’s true!
Nothing Al Gore could possibly do would change the effect of CO₂ on planetary temperature.
Here’s a little common sense for those who worship at Al Gore’s altar: If the seas are rising from global warming why isn’t he selling his beach house? I will tell you why…because he wants YOU to sell YOURS so he can buy up the property. For a guy whose home uses enough electricity to power a small town you actually believe him? You are EXACTLY the type of person Jonathon Gruber talks about.
“Here’s a little common sense for those who worship at Al Gore’s altar”
Al Gore didn’t discover CO₂ warms planets. John Tyndall did… over 100 years ago:
“In January 1859, Tyndall began studying the radiative properties of various gases… Tyndall’s experiments… showed that molecules of water vapor, carbon dioxide, and ozone are the best absorbers of heat radiation”
earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Tyndall
Are you saying he was founding a cult that all scientists on Earth have been a part of for over a century?
Is that actually what you believe?
ALL scientists DON’T believe it. THAT IS WHAT I AM SAYING! The ones who do are mostly government scientists trying to keep their jobs. You need to do a little more research, fella. Your ‘ hypothesis’ is fuckedup.
“ALL scientists DON’T believe it”
…but all scientists do believe it.
…and they believe it, because we can actually see CO₂ warming the planet from space:
Whatever is going on is natural. It has nothing…zero, zippo…with any kind of change. And no..REAL scientists don’t believe Al Gore and his wing nut theorists. Most of their hysterical data comes from computer models. Garbage in; garbage out.
You are correct…scientists do not look to Al Gore to form their conclusions on Climate Change. They look at their data.
I think garbage in garbage out applies to your comments.
Green thinker says it all; Which means you DON’T think. And your stupid assumptions are being proved wrong daily. You and your ilk are very, very foolish people.
Your comment does not make sense.
Who and what are you talking about?
YOU do not make sense.
Simple answer is that it’s a lie. //…but all scientists do believe it.// That is a lie on it’s face!! In fact it is a ridiculous lie, easily exposed by the list of legitimate scientists who have signed documents refuting anthropogenic climate change!! Please at least make an effort at accuracy..
More than 31,000 American scientists have co-signed that document, saying that CO2 is harmless, and beneficial to the biosphere.
Since that COMPLETELY debunks your alarmist nonsense, I fully expect you to deflect to something else.
“Its face,” not “It’s face.” It’s means “it is.”
Ouch..
You say it is easily refuted.
Please show me the document.
I would like to see.
CB says:
…but all scientists do believe it.
Anyone who makes a baseless assertion like that is either a fool, or completely ignorant. Maybe both…
The OISM Petition was co-signed by more than 31,000 American scientists, every one of them named, and every one of them was required to have a degree in one of the hard sciences. They do not agree with your nonsense, so your comment above was insanity. At least you said “believe”, wghich shows where you’re coming from.
Next, you emit:
…and they believe it, because we can actually see CO₂ warming the planet from space:
Preposterous nonsense. If that were true, the debate would have been over long ago. Here are some empirical, testable FACTS:
There is NO scientific evidence that measures any warming cause by CO2. None at all. But there is a mountain of scientific evidence showing conclusively that changes in temperature are THE CAUSE of subsequent changes in CO2.
Thus, the original alarmist premise — claiming that rising CO2 will cause a measureable rise in global temperature — is flatly debunked.
The truth is that rising temperature causes rising CO2. That has been observed on all time scales, from months, to hundreds of millennia.
When you begin with a wrong premise, you are sure to arrive at the wrong conclusion. That is waht happened to the alarmist cult. But being their religion, they cannot admit that they were wrong.
But everyone else can see it.
Me loves me my Internet Performance Art!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
This hapless, clueless comedy makes me LOLz!
Best,
D
More evidence-free nonsense.
Clueless rube embarrasses itself for our amusement!
Best,
D
Still not one fact from the ‘dano’ a-hoe. Only hot air.
Keep that up, and we might really see some global warming.
Thank you for that limp response to your limp defense of the comical OISM – Gono is always good for a laff!
Best
D
We do have empirical evidence of the world with higher CO2 levels. Almost the entire Mesozoic Era was characterized by CO2 level at least six times what they are today – on a planet wide scale. At 2,400 ppmv the Earth was lush with vegetation and critters. The Mesozoic lasted more than 100 Million years. I call that empirical evidence.
So it’s Back to the Future and the Flux Capacitor? Actually, satellite and balloon data show no global warming at all.
.
You will not get the truth about it from the Washington
Post, the New York Times, or the rest of the self-regarded
“establishment” media. They are trying to pretend that there is no
legitimate scientific debate over whether mankind’s use of low cost, reliable
energy from oil, coal and natural gas portends catastrophic global warming that
threatens life on the planet as we know it.
.
Recently, the AGW alarmists tried to revive flagging public
respect for their fading message of doom. The occasion was massively overhyped
and misrepresented reporting of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST)
project. But all that was new from that project was the departures from the
official catechism. Reporting on the recorded temperature history since 1950
from stations on land, which covers less than 30% of the earth’s surface,
Berkeley University Earth Surface Temperature project leader Professor Richard
Muller reported in a Wall Street Journal commentary on October 21, that after
obtaining and reviewing “more than 1.6 billion measurements from 39,000
[land based] temperature stations around the world… the result offered no
independent assessment of the question of “how much of the warming is due
to humans and what will be the likely effects.”
.
But that is the whole issue in the global warming debate.
Muller also honestly admits that “The [land based] temperature station
quality is largely awful,” noting that “A careful survey of these
stations by a team of meteorologists showed that 70% have such poor siting that,
by the U.S. government’s own measure, they result in temperature uncertainties
of between two and five degrees Celsius or more. We do not know how much worse
are the stations in the developing world.” He adds that, “The margin
of error for the stations is at least three times larger than the estimated
warming, and that one-third of land based temperature stations worldwide show
cooling rather than warming.”
.
These concessions are important to recount because weather
satellites measuring atmospheric temperatures worldwide, over land and water,
which are not subject to the above troubles of land based weather stations,
show no warming since their record began in 1979, and before that there was
actually global cooling dating back to 1940. The satellite record regarding
atmospheric temperatures is independently confirmed by weather balloons.
Moreover, the computer based climate models utilized by the UN’s own
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and the atmospheric theory
they rely upon, all insist that if man’s use of carbon based fuels was warming
the planet, the atmosphere must be warming faster than the surface.
.
In addition, the scientifically recognized temperature proxy
data from tree rings, ice cores, lake and ocean sediments, and stalagmites also
show no warming since 1940. Note that the warming before1940 is attributable to
the global recovery of temperatures from the Little Ice Age, and even the land
based records show no significant warming over the last 18 years.
.
It is very likely that the reported warming during 1978-97
[from land based weather stations] is simply an artifact – the result of the
measurement scheme rather than an actual warming. When a letter to the editor
by Prof. Julius Singer was sent to the global warming cheerleading Washington
Post, pointing out the above anomalies and his conclusion, he reports the
peculiar response that “they were willing to publish my letter, but not my
credentials as emeritus professor at the University of Virginia and former
director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service. Apparently, they were concerned
that readers might gain the impression that I knew something about
climate.”
.
But there is more. Even the land based temperature record is
not consistent with the theory of man-caused global warming. That record does
not show persistent warming following persistent growth of CO2 and other
greenhouse gases. Rather, it shows an up and down pattern of temperatures more
consistent with natural causes. Those include solar flare and sun spot cycles,
and the periodic cycling of warm and cold water in the oceans from top to
bottom, particularly the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO).
.
The truth is a vigorous global scientific debate persists
over whether man’s use of carbon-based fuels threatens to cause catastrophic
global warming, and the media not reporting that is not performing journalism.
The most authoritative presentation of this debate can be found in the 856 page
Climate Change Reconsidered, published by the Heartland Institute in 2009. This
careful, thoroughly scientific volume co- authored by dozens of fully
credentialed scientists comprehensively addresses every aspect of global
warming, and indicates that natural causes are primarily responsible for
climate patterns of the last century. Heartland has just published a follow up
416 page Interim Report updating the debate.
.
When you run across an AGW alarmist, ask him for his
rebuttal to Climate Change Reconsidered. You will find the response is
something derogatory about the Heartland Institute, showing that he hasn’t read
the report. Liberals don’t need no stinkin’ facts; their minds are made up.
They know that the Heartland Institute’s report is wrong because someone told
them so.
.
Indeed, the latest and best work actually provides scientific
proof that the man-caused global warming catechism is false. Fully documented
work by Roy Spencer, U.S. Science Team Leader for the AMSR-E instrument flying
on NASA’s Aqua satellite, and Principal Research Scientist for the Earth
Systems Science Center at the University of Alabama at Huntsville, shows using
atmospheric temperature data from NASA’s Terra satellite that much more heat
escapes back out to space than is assumed captured in the atmosphere by
greenhouse effects under the UN’s theoretical climate models. This explains why
the warming temperature changes predicted by the UN’s global warming models
over the past 20 years have been proved to be false.
.
In August, 2011 came the results of a major experiment by
the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), involving 63 scientists
from 17 European and U.S. institutes. The results show that the sun’s cosmic
rays resulting from sunspots have a much greater effect on Earth’s temperatures
through their effect on cloud cover than the UN’s global warming models have
been assuming. This helps to explain why the historical pattern of temperature
changes seems to follow the rise and fall of sunspots, rather than the
concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. This further confirms what Heartland’s
Climate Change Reconsidered argues – that natural causes have the dominant
effect on Earth’s temperatures, not greenhouse gases.
.
Finally, the UN’s own climate models project that if man’s
greenhouse gas emissions were causing global warming, there would be a
particular pattern of temperature distribution in the atmosphere, which
scientists call “the fingerprint.” Temperatures in the troposphere
portion of the atmosphere above the tropics would increase with altitude
producing a “hotspot” near the top of the troposphere, about 6 miles
above the earth’s surface. Above that, in the stratosphere, there would be
cooling. But higher quality temperature data from weather balloons and
satellites now show just the opposite: no increasing warming with altitude in
the tropical troposphere, but rather a slight cooling, with no hotspot, no
fingerprint.
.
So the scientific foundation for shutting down our modern,
21st century, industrial economy has been obliterated. But that is not stopping
religious crusaders, due to the extremist ideology and special interests
driving the global warming charade.
You tinfoil hat guys, with your “man-made
CO2 increase causes global warming” can’t explain how, during the fastest increase
in CO2 ever, from 1940 to the early 1970s (the industrialized world went on an
armament-making spree in WWII, then lots of steel production for post-war
reconstruction and infrastructure, plus consumer durables like cars and
refrigerators in the post-war boom, 95% powered by coal-burning power plants)
………… and global temperatures went down for all 30+ years. Went down
enough for the predecessors of today’s AGW nuts to predict, with equal
confidence, the coming of a New Ice age, and suggest such remedies as
increasing particulate emission to help the greenhouse blanket, and even
covering the poles with soot to attract more sun’s heat. Read that again.
During the fastest increase in atmospheric CO2, global temperatures went down.
In fact, global warming and more atmospheric CO2 would be beneficial to the
world’s population. The 2 or 3 degree temperature rise that the AGW alarmist
industry keeps babbling about (well, they were babbling about it 18 years ago;
not so much now) would open up hundreds of thousands of square miles of
currently frozen tundra to agriculture.
.
Speaking of agriculture, the other scare tactic the AGW nuts use; eight years
after the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
warned of mass starvation from global warming caused by high levels of
atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), emissions of the greenhouse gas are at record
levels. The IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report, which was edited by chairman Dr.
Rajendra Pachauri [see** note at the bottom] and released in 2007, predicted
with “virtual certainty” that crop yields would plummet in some areas unless
industrialized nations immediately adopted stricter limits on CO2, which the
IPCC said was causing “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate
system. By 2020, in some countries, yields from rain-fed agriculture could be
reduced by up to 50%,” the report predicted.
.
But last year, a record level of atmospheric CO2 coincided with farmers reaping
record-breaking harvests worldwide. In fact, 2014 signified an all-time record
grain production. Oops. According to a report also released by the U.N.’s Food
and Agriculture Organization, “world cereal production [wheat, corn, oats,
barley, rice, etc.] in 2014 is at a new record of 2,532 million tonnes, 7
million tonnes above the previous peak.” That includes a record level of wheat
production worldwide, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The
study stated that the CO2 “fertilization effect is now a significant land
surface process” and has created “a greening of the globe over recent decades.”
That greening effect includes a growth spurt among redwoods and giant sequoias
in California [don’t tell the AGW featherbrains in Hollywood.]
.
Claims that global warming and more atmospheric carbon dioxide are harming crop
production have been proven preposterous by the real-world, objective data. We
know that in recent decades, we’ve seen an actual tripling of production of the
most important staple crops: corn, wheat, and rice. There’s been a record
production of wheat in the past year in much of Asia and Africa, and throughout
the world where the wheat harvest is important. Instead of diminishing crop
yields, high levels of CO2 actually help to increase them.
.
As we add more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, it can be expected that that’s
going to benefit crop production because carbon dioxide is not a
“pollutant,” as the IPCC and AGW loons say, but aerial plant
fertilizer. Horticulturalists pump CO2 into greenhouses to facilitate plant
growth. Just as people have demonstrated in greenhouses that plants that are
artificially fed more CO2 grow more rapidly and are more productive, the same
happens in the natural environment when we’ve had more atmospheric carbon
dioxide. The link between high levels of CO2 and record crop yields worldwide
was never discussed at the UN’s climate change conference in Lima last month
(surprise!) To the extent that crop production is discussed at any United Nation
meetings, it continues the claim, despite this evidence, that global warming is
wreaking havoc on crops.
.
Understand that the IPCC is a government body with government appointees. Some of
them are scientists, but most, including the bureaucrats in control, are not.
And even those who are scientists tend to work for environmental activist
groups such as The Sierra Club, the Environmental Defense Fund, Greenpeace,
World Wildlife Fund, etc. (The IPCC has even been exposed as including,
verbatim, propaganda handouts from one of these environmental groups in its
reports, with bogus claims of snow disappearing from the Himalayas and
destruction of rain forests because of global warming – then having to retract
them when exposed.) They have an agenda to push. It’s very little objective
science. It’s 99 percent politics from an environmental activist agenda. And
the Summary for Policy Makers that the IPCC non-scientist bureaucrats issue
every few years is often in total contradiction to what their own scientists
have reported. Unfortunately, in that environment, the facts simply don’t come
out if people aren’t doing their own research. If we’re just listening and
reading the UN press releases, we’re going to believe that a world exists that
is exactly opposite from what the real world really is. [**Update: IPCC
chairman Pachauri has been forced to resign after accusations of sexual
harassment.]
There is not the slightest factual data to prove that rising atmospheric CO2 raises global temperatures. In fact, quite the opposite. The fastest increase in atm. CO2 occurred during the WWII years and reconstruction/durable goods boom after – 1940 to the early 1970s. And global temperatures went down, steadily, for the entire 30+ years. Down to the extent that the predecessors of today’s global warming hoax were warning of a New Ice Age, and suggesting incresing greenhouse gases and even covering the poles with soot to absorb more sun’s heat.
Algore’s lying An Inconvenient Truth showed a graph with lines of CO2 concentration and global temperatures superimposed, with the conclusion “more CO2 means warmer planet.” Scientists and statiticians immediately showed that Gore had deliberately faked the data, by altering the time base. What the data actually showed was the reverse, that higher temperatures cause more CO2. Of course they do, they speed up dead plant decay, which produce methane and CO2.
You’re just parroting the AGW hoaxters’ propaganda without looking into the facts.
They are simply gasses that are opaque to various wavelengths of long wave infrared. Gasses that absorb heat expand and rise. Adiabatic lapse causes the rising gas to cool without the loss of heat. At some point the gas will reach a temperature for which it is transparent to long wave infrared. At that point the gas gives off the heat it absorbed in all directions – some to space.
Whether it is water vapor or CO2, the gas absorbs heat near the surface, rises and releases the heat at altitude. That is all there is to the greenhouse effect.
CO2 levels have historically been much higher than they are now with no harm to flora, fauna, and sea life. The Mesozoic Era had stretches of time longer than 100 Million years during which the CO2 level exceeded 2,400 ppmv. Life thrived and the planet was just fine.
You’re a special kind of stupid, ain’t ya
Global temperatures have far more correlation to solar activity than anything else. In fact, those temperatures have cooled since 1998.
Bringing logic to a liberal argument…. Shame on you, CM. 🙂
CB you made no arguement and your assertion is superficial.
Quote CB, “Nothing Al Gore could possibly do would change the effect of CO₂ on planetary temperature.”
OK, why is that? Because the physical phenomenon affecting global weather are so huge that they dwarf any human action and therefore anthropogenic global warming is unlikely? I don’t think this is where you were going. So Al Gore is just one person so his global warning impact is immeasurable and can therefore be disregarded? Or, Al Gore buys carbon credits and this cancels out his profligate consumption? This is my vote for what you meant. Or, you actually believe in anthropogenic global warming but don’t believe one person makes a difference? So how about two people, two hundred people, when does it start to matter? Or is it that you are enthralled and just believe that some people are so imperial that they reach a state in which there excrement fails to produce odor?
@CB:
Where did you find those fabricated charts? They are totally bogus.
Please stop emitting misinformation. It is too easy to debunk. For example, global ice cover is at an all-time high. So how could ice be declining like that?
If it were not for their lies, the alarmist crowd wouldn’t have anything to say.
This is a perfect example of the phrase “how to lie with statistics.” Your cherry-picked graphs end in 2010. Arctic ice mass ncreased 60% 2012-13, an area equal to half of Europe. Antarctic ice increased similarly. Remember the Ship of Fools, the global warming so-called scientists who set out to prove that the Antarctic ice was shrinking last year, and got stuck in ice so thick that the world’s most powerful ice breakers couldn’t reach them?
As for that lying bloated hypocrite Algore, if you want to know how his much-touted “An Inconvenient Truth” slide show, that he has made $millions showingf to gullible people round the world, has been totally discredited – destroyed, in fact – see this. After the show was shown to schools in Britain, parents and Members of Parliament complained to the High Court that children wer having nightmares about polar bears drowning and that they themselves would be either drowned in rising seas or burned by out of control temperatures. The High Court issued an order that children must be shown the contrary evidence, and also issued a total refutation of Gore’s assertions in Inconvenient Truth. Download the link, then click on the pdf format box:
You obviously didn’t understand my earlier reply to your claim about Algore. If you’re having difficulty in comprehending, have someone explain it to you.
It doesn’t take a lot to make a better argument than making a point, and having someone go, “that’s irrelevant.” You don’t clarify why you think those points are unrelated to what you see the core issue as being. You just dismiss everything as categorically irrelevant.
So, speaking of the ‘better argument’, you might practice what you preach. Offer something of actual substance.
Because there are many arguments being made here that don’t have anything to do with the problem, or the deniers are resorting to ad hominem attacks rather than attempt intellectual debate. Here’s some reading for you: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/09/why-is-antarctic-sea-ice-at-record-levels-despite-global-warming It could very well be a combination of increases in fresh water due to the melting from the undercurrent, a decrease in the ozone (which acts like a greenhouse gas), and an uptick in weather activity. It makes some sense, but weather activity is very complex and tough to understand so there could be other factors. Much of global warming is counterintuitive to the ill informed, like you have global warming actually being partly responsible for the blizzard in Buffalo this past November (the warming waters of Lake Erie led to increased lake effect snow). It also leads to strange events, like hurricanes washing away the middle of Vermont,a state with no sea or ocean coastline. It also has more devastating but not heard of effects like NYC getting flooded and NJ getting washed away by Sandy, and droughts that have dried up the Mississippi River and the state of California and wildfires that burn up the West (All of which would be almost impossible without Global Warming, Keep in mind too, in regards to the Arctic, I believe it was 2012 where we had shocking records of low ice. Also, events have been shown to be influenced by global warming. http://www.climatecentral.org/news/hansen-study-extreme-weather-tied-to-climate-change-14760
Now, instead of someone actually debating me, I get hit with ad hominem insults or excuses that “global warming is a hoax; it’s a socialist government power grab”. I, as a businessman, actually view it not as a political issue but a business risk (see the costs of the droughts and the billions spent cleaning up Hurricane Sandy, or even the businesses in Vermont shut down for good by Hurricane Irene).
You want debate? I doubt it..
Globval ice has recovered nicely, which debunks the ‘disappearing ice’ scare.
‘Counterintuitive” = “unscientific”
Vermont is a small ocation. Note the debate is about global warming
Global warming stopped many years ago
Every other example you give is cherry-picked confirmation bias, by showing locations, not global effects
Quoting the Guardian alone loses the argument. It shows you are commenting based on politics, not based on science.
Sea ice or land ice? Two different things. The land ice is disappearing. The sea ice is more volatile but is also under threat due to warming waters. Counter-intuitive means that the science behind it seemingly defies what on its surface seems logical, but which isn’t actually so or is much more complicated. Global warming rate hit a bit of a “plateau” but that does not mean it stopped; it is still going up and 2014 is likely to be the hottest year on record. The measurements are based on global results, not geographic. I can pull many other signs of evidence of global warming; there really isn’t much evidence to the contrary, or any evidence at all once you factor out what can be dispelled. Global warming is occurring, which there is no doubt about that it is happening. The only questions are how much if any influence human activity has on it, which the evidence points to greatly, and along with that is how much of a threat it is, which seems to be variable but serious.
Lastly, that was just one article that I pulled from the Guardian. I could pull the same type of data from many other sources. There are still plenty of conservatives out there that are concerned and that hate false propaganda. I could care less about the political issue; it’s a major business and environmental concern; just today I heard a story about how susceptible and exposed to risk our area is to brown-outs and loss of power due to global warming issues that have already and will continue to happen.
Easy goes it Al.
Al Gore is right about climate change.
really…..tell us more, moron!
I love comedians!
No…you hate logic!
Sure. I hate logic. You showed me.
well, put your tiny little mittens on because you are about to get cold, little Gore groupie. Logic obviously escapes you!
LOGIC , REASON & SCIENCE ALL SAY GLOBAL WARMING IS A FRAUD .
AGW IS THE MODERN VERSION OF THE FLAT EARTH SOCIETY .
YOUR FIRST CLUE SHOULD BE WHEN THEY SAY THAT THE
“SCIENCE IS SETTLED” .
WHENEVER SCIENCE SETTLES , IT HAS STOPPED BEING SCIENCE .
TYPING IN ALL CAPS MAKES YOU LOOK ANGRY & CRAZY.
TELLING PEOPLE HOW TO TYPE MAKES YOU LOOK INTOLERANT
AND UNACCOMMODATING .
THE POLICY GEEK HAS SPOKEN , IT’S MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY .
ABSOLUTELY! THAT’S WHY I ALWAYS SHOUT MY MESSAGES!! IF YOU CAN’T GET PAST THE SHOUTING, YOU ARE INTOLERANT AND UNACCOMMODATING!!! LOTS OF EXCLAMATION POINTS ARE GOOD TOO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
TAKE IT UP WITH THE POLICY GEEK .
Caps=yelling. That’s basic internet etiquette. I’m just trying to help you not look so stupid, but do what you like.
you should really read ALL the pieces on CLIMATE DEPOT , not just the ones you like.
I’ll waste my time reading real science sites. Not garbage denialist propaganda.
You can start by reading:
WattsUpWithThat.com
It has won the internet’s Best Science & Technology Award for the 3rd year running, and it has well over 200 million unique views in only 7 – 8 years. And it has more than one million reader comments. It posts articles all the time, by climatologists, physicists, engineers and scientists. Best of all, it doesn’t censor different points of view.
But alas, you probably read low-traffic blogs like realscience, and the climate propaganda blog ‘skeptical’ science [run by a neo-Nazi]. No wonder you emit so much misinformation.
You know what else is settled science; that the earth is round and revolves around the sun. Back when those ideas were new, Conservatives tried to crush those ideas too.
WATER IS MADE OF HYDROGEN & OXYGEN AND GRAVITY KEEPS US
ON THE THE EARTH . WHAT ELSE CAN CAPTAIN OBVIOUS TEACH US TODAY ?
THE AGW PROPONENTS CANNOT TELL US WHAT THE TEMPERATURE SHOULD BE . IS IT TOO COLD OR TOO HOT ?
THEY HAVE FAILED TO SHOW IF INCREASED CO2 CAUSES HIGH TEMPS
OR IF HIGHER TEMPS CAUSE CO2 .
PLEASE LEARN TO SEPARATE WHAT IS OBVIOUS FROM WHAT IS NOT .
( GREAT IGNORANT STAB AT CONSERVATIVES BY THE WAY )
WHAT IS OBVIOUS TO ME IS THAT THE GLOBAL WARMERS ARE THE FLAT EARTHERS OF OUR DAY . TO MANY PARALLELS TO IGNORE .
So your argument is because an error occurred 500 years ago (actually it didn’t occur but your history is as good as your physics) a similar error proves your case today. It’s called conflation and is a standard leftist “intellectual” tool.
2014 was the hottest year ever recorded. You are arguing with a thermometer.
You are repeating some one else’s lie….repeating a lie does not make it true
Actually it is true. Why do you hate science?
No, we’re arguing with a geek. 1934 has the record.
STOP IT.
Last year was the SIXTH warmest year of the new century/millennium. Sixth — out of only 14 years.
Thus, your lame argument crashes and burns. All you have left is a lie. Stop it. We know better.
Well, your wrong. But even if it had been the 6th warmest, that’s still a big red flag.
Some of the same people who push global warming were pushing global freezing a few decades ago,. Whatever gets the grant money. Google ClimateGate, geek.
Climategate was a really stupid right wing meme.
So you did not read the e-mails??? or do you have no concern for integrity???
Not even a fraction as stupid as AGW, the biggest wrongheaded diversion of resources in history, geek.
Nah, Iraq war trumps all.
Hey troll: Even more than a simultaneous 2-front war against the Germans and Japanese? Even more than QE? Even more than $18 trillion debt and $120 trillion in unfunded liabilities. propel;led by a runaway govt.? Even more than a lose-lose amateur foreign policy? No.
I was not in favor of Iraq war, but are you aware that 65% of the Senate voted for action against Iraq, including your Shrillary?
You would label everyone who disagrees with you a troll, Im sure. Repubs started Iraq. Obama spent the past 6 years cleaning up after your shit storm.
You really are a fool
1. I’m not a Republican
2. 75% of the Senate voted to take action against Iraq, including Hillary, Chuckie, Harry, etc.
3.and yes, since you’re on Climatedepot, you would be a TROLL.
It’s really unfair for me to be engaged in a battle of wits with you when you are clearly unarmed. Living in your mother’s basement and being a troll must be depressing. Get some gumption in 2015 and go out and get a job. Wait- you have no skills except AGW trolling? Not a good future, slacker. Learn something productive.
Hardly a “meme” and hardly right wing. It’s a major coup of facts and exposing/discrediting of the lies you so fervently embrace. Happy new year, ciao and may you come to your senses in 2015. You’re off to a poor start 🙂
people who use the term “settled science” are ignorant of what science is. A sure sign of an ill informed fool is using the term settled science, as SCIENCE IS NEVER SETTLED, it is always open to new facts or proofs!!!!!
Science is never settled. That is simply an alarmist tactic to try and shut down debate.
Didn’t work, did it?
So explain to me how the following scientific facts remain unsettled;
● the earth is round.
● the earth revolves around the sun
It’s not a tactic. It’s fact. Debate has already been shut down by science.
I HEAR THAT IF YOU PUT YOUR BULLSHIT IN CAPITALS, IT BECOMES TRUE.
THEN YOU CLEARLY HAVE A PRETTY LOW STANDARD FOR THE TRUTH .
That’s not how science works.
SCIENCE WORKS ON WHAT IS PROVABLE , GRAPHABLE , REPEATABLE & PREDICTABLE .
AGW IS NONE OF THOSE THINGS . OK , THE HOCKEY STICK WAS A GRAPH BUT IT WAS DEBUNKED .
TO YOU GUYS WITH THE “SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS” SCIENCE IS A POPULARITY CONTEST .
Yup. Climate data is graphable and others have duplicated the results. But you guys are so retarded that you think it’s liberal black magic. This shouldn’t be a partisan thing. It’s readings on thermometers. 2014 was the hottest year ever recorded.
ACCORDING TO THE READINGS ON THERMOMETERS ,
THE HOTTEST YEAR WAS 1934 .
THEY HAD LESS POLAR ICE BACK THEN TOO .
AS FAR AS PREDICTABLE , THE AGW “SCIENCE” PREDICTED FLOODED COASTAL CITIES AND OPEN SEAS OVER THE NORTH POLE BY NOW .
WITH 18 YEARS OF COOLING , MOST PEOPLE HAVE FIGURED OUT THAT THE SKY ISN’T FALLING & HAVE MOVED ON .
IT REALLY ISN’T THAT WE THINK OF IT AS LIBERAL BLACK MAGIC .
IT’s JUST THAT YOU KEEP LOOKING LIKE YOU HAVE NO IDEA
WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT .
Sorry, but it simply isn’t true, for reasons already laid out on this thread.
Maybe the geek would like to go argue with Snopes about the hottest year.
For me, I’m an engineer, immersed in the technical end of the global warming issue. It is crystal clear to me that man-made global warming is complete nonsense. There may, possibly, be a minuscule amount of AGW. But it is too small to even measure [my specialty; Metrology].
The proof? There are NO MEASUREMENTS quantifying AGW. NONE. Thus, when you hear about man-made global warming, it is nothing but a conjecture — an opinion.
Basing national Policy on nothing more than an opinion is extremely foolish. Isn’t it?
Where are the deluges you predicted, Geek? Did you know that even if te entire N Pole cap melted, it would make almost no difference in sea levels? Do you know why? Why is it that hardly any AGW fans really understand “the science” and those that do are bought off by Govt. to parrot the line. Why did 30,000+ scientists sign a letter debunking AGW?
You really think if all the ice melts, sea levels won’t be affected? You really are stupid.
I’m an engineer, stupid. You act like you have a degree in ethnic studies, basket-weaving or just hanging around. If you can shut up for a second, ‘;ll teach you something. Will you try it?
Get a large glass, add water and ice. Measure the water level. Make a mark at the water level. Go back when the ice melts. It will be the same level.
The vast majority of the north pole ice cap is on water . get it now?
Please explain why we weren’t already inundated by the 200+ yr warming period which melted most of the cap (at one time).
Do you know what the actual sea rise has been? Didn’t think so.
It shows your an engineer: you’re closed minded, lack imagination, and you think you’re way smarter than you actually are. You constantly misread the facts and can’t see what’s directly in front of your face. You may be good at math, but you suck at interpretation.
That’s all you have is imagination and BS- no education, no brains, no worldly knowledge. Please try the experiment idiot … and look at a map- or is that too constraining to you? You DO know how to read a map, right?
I’m obviously way smarter than you.
I’m a corporate director and working on my masters at Harvard. I’m not impressed by your engineering degree. Go build a concrete slab you flunky.
You sure don’t act or think like one, so I’m quite dubious. I owned my own company, a fairly “creative one :-))- sold it before I retired. Currently doing a startup for my amusement. I had MBA’s and MS’s working for me, but I wouldn’t be dumb enough to have hired the likes of you. Worked for the company Snowden did early on.
Seriously, you don’t show that you even know how to think. Regurgitating discredited pablum does not constitute thinking. Until you can answer some of the challenges put forth to you, your credibility is zero with 90% of the people on this site.
Lol, I couldn’t care less about validation from the dingbats on this site. This is just my sparing practice on a long weekend.
You obviously need far more practice, weak sister.
I liked your post. I want you to know that. I wouldn’t want you to miss it or mistake that like as being from someone else. It’s me.
LOL- have a good weekend.
Lol, I couldn’t care less about validation from the dingbats on this site. This is just sparring practice on a long weekend.
IF that is the case, then Harvard has fallen far lower than even I suspected.
Really, based on your comments, you don’t know nothin’…
…at least about science. And keep in mind that we could have gone to the moon without scientists. But not without engineers.
Ill spell it out for you: it isn’t the water ice, it is glaciers in Greenland, the artic, and Antarctica that sit on land. They melt too.
You really ARE stupid- and terribly uninformed.
1 The vast majority of polar ice cap is on water
2. Greenland’s not nearly as large as it looks on a Mercator projection. You DO know what that is, right?
3. Antarctic ice has been growing for a long time.
4. North Pole ice is growing again.
5. Lastly, explain why melting hasn’t already inundated the algore’s house in Montecito. All your mendacious models said that would already happen. I’ll ask you again, how much has the sea risen, Mr. Smarty pants?
WHY YES I DO . ANY ONE KNOWS THAT ICE FLOATS BECAUSE IT HAS EXPANDED .
THE DENSITY GOES DOWN AS THE VOLUME GOES UP AND THE AMOUNT OF THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG
IS EXACTLY PROPORTIONAL TO THAT EXPANSION .
THIS IS SIMPLE SCIENCE DESPITE HOW STUPID IT SEEMS TO SOUND TO YOU .
EASY TO PROVE & WORKS EVERY TIME .
IN OTHER WORDS , THE LEVEL WILL NOT CHANGE AT ALL WHEN THE ICE MELTS .
AL GORE HAS PROVEN HE HAS NO IDEA WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT NUMEROUS TIMES &
NOW SO HAVE YOU .
ICE OVER LAND IS ANOTHER MATTER . THE VOLUME OF ICE IN ANTARCTICA IS STAGGERING .
BUT THIS TOO IS STAYING PUT WHILE FLOATING ICE AROUND THE CONTINENT IS INCREASING
DESPITE THE WARMIST’s PREDICTIONS .
AT SOME POINT YOU WILL HAVE TO WAKE UP AND REALIZE THAT YOU HAVE BEEN HAD .
He said: IF THE NORTH POLE ICE MELTED…
That would, IN FACT, have no impact on sea levels.
Fifth graders know that, and they know why, because thet’s when they learn about Archimedes.
Go back to the 5th grade, you have some catching up to do, ‘geek’.
The north pole is a coloquialism that would include land masses in the artic circle.
I CAN’T BLAME YOU FOR TRYING TO COMPARE REAL SCIENCE WITH WHAT YOU ARE PEDDLING .
TROUBLE IS , IT DISAGREES WITH YOU . FOR MANY YEARS NOW THAT IS WHY THEY HAD TO DITCH “GLOBAL WARMING” AND CALL IT CLIMATE CHANGE .
SEEMS LIKE A SAFE HEDGE SINCE THE CLIMATE ALWAYS CHANGES , IT CAN’T BE DISPROVEN .
BUT THAT DOES NOT GET THE FEARFUL REACTION NEEDED TO ENACT LEGISLATION AND
MAKE MONEY SO THEY CHANGED IT AGAIN TO “CLIMATE DISRUPTION” .
WHAT ABOUT THE PREDICTABILITY ? YOUR 2014 WARMEST YEAR IS BASED ON NOAA DATA FOR OCEAN TEMPERATURES BUT THIS FORUM IS DISCUSSING RECORD ICE FORMATION AT BOTH POLES !
EITHER THEY HAVE REPROGRAMMED WATER TO FREEZE AT 38°F OR SOMETHING IS SERIOUSLY
WRONG IN CLIMATE CHANGE LAND .
HAVE ANY OF THEIR PREDICTIONS PANNED OUT ? THEY PREDICTED MASSIVE FREQUENT STORMS .
DATA SAYS THAT STORMS HAVE DECREASED WORLDWIDE . HURRICANES , TORNADOES AND CYCLONES ARE ALL DOWN .
THEY PREDICTED RISING SEA LEVELS AND MASSIVE COASTAL FLOODING . I HAVE BEEN TOP THE BEACH & IT LOOKS THE SAME . DATA CONFIRMS THERE HAS BEEN NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES .
PERHAPS OBAMA REALLY DID STOP THE RISE OF SEA LEVELS .
TEMPS ARE DOWN WORLDWIDE FOR AT LEAST 18 YEARS . SO WHAT IF IT WENT UP LAST YEAR .
DON’T YOU GUYS KEEP SAYING THAT ONE YEAR DOESN’T MATTER BUT N OW SUDDENLY IT DOES ?
SO YES , I CAN’T BLAME YOU FOR TRYING TO HITCH YOUR WAGON TO ANY REAL SCIENCE THAT’s YOU CAN CLAIM . WHAT I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IS THAT YOU KEEP TRYING TO DRIVE THE SCIENCE
AND PLAY THESE STUPID SHELL GAMES WHEN YOU FIGURE OUT IT IS GOING THE OTHER WAY .
Typical leftie reply… Don’t bring anything to the conversation, and start being obnoxious from the moment you enter.
I’ve brought science to the table and just like always conservatives rejected it.
Horse hockey. You may have brought your version of science to the table. The interesting thing about Gruber, the economist, is that he revealed that science with an agenda is not really science. Your science of global warming was founded on a FRAUD. But, since so much money and so much academic effort floats around global warming, the FRAUD was ignored. Global warming is a left wing political movement to create an excuse to increase control on individuals. It is not science.
There aren’t “versions”. There’s the scientific consensus, and the lies Glen beck tells you to believe.
CONSENSUS IS THE HARBOR FOR FOOLS WHO CAN’T UNDERSTAND THAT SCIENCE AND CONSENSUS ARE OPPOSITES
So what you’re saying is there’s no such thing as facts. And when it comes to something observable like climate change, you shouldn’t believe your lying eyes.
2014 was the hottest year ever recorded. I guess the librals must have faked that too you paranoid doofus.
THERE IS PLENTY OF FACTUAL INFORMATION ON THE ADJUSTMENTS TO TEMPERATURE ( LAND BASED ) THAT HAVE BEEN GOING ON TO MAKE THE LIE YOU KEEP TELLING FOOL PEOPLE LIKE YOU WHO WILL NOT CHECK OUT THEIR FACTS FROM INDEPENDENT SOURCES. DO YOU PRETEND THAT SATALITE DATA DOES NOT COUNT???
So Why don’t any scientists support your globbed up ideas. OMG it must be a Left wing conspiracy ya’ll!!!! Call Glen Beck!!!
At least 30,000 have signed a letter repudiating the AGW lie.
mmmkay. I’m sure you’ll make a world wide impact. Lol, best of luck!
Your petition gets a mention in this article. Apparently it includeded the respected minds of “the spice girls” and several star wars characters.
As I said before, my Galaxy S5 is a piece of junk. It messes up copy paste and the auto-correct/auto-type regularly changes correct words to garbage. I am posting this as a general info.
Galaxy S5=crap
I switched from an old I-phone to Galaxy S-5 a few months ago. Lots of raw power, great screen, apps, but I HATE the texting software. Overall, I-phone had a better user interface.
Re: The Moyers piece- mostly propaganda and full of untruths. I had Monckton speak at one of our events- very entertaining, but does no real research of his own- collects, analyzes papers. He didn’t originate the 1998 warming halt story. It’s based on the discovery that not all station reports are being used and some station are in areas which have gotten much more urbanized (hotter) and skew the data. Bottom line- false data- no longer representative.
As far as the Santer stuff- he lost all credibility when he said it IS man-made., He has zero proof, only some correlation (there is FAR better correlation with solar activity.).
If you really want to learn I;ll lead you, but I suspect you’re a”true believer.”
You still haven’t told me how much you think the sea has risen. Until you can answer- and correctly at that- you have zero credibility.
You still haven’t acknowledged that the climate “models,” “projections,” guesses,” whatevah, are all way, way off- wrong, wrong wrong.
I stopped after I read the first two whoppers in that link.
One more
“There have been three studies, using different methodologies, that have shown that almost all working climate scientists — 97 percent — accept the consensus view.”
One does not get work as a client scientist unless one buries ones ethics and buys in to an unproven theory 100%. Again, over 30,000 scientists have repudiated it.
Yeah, this is total bunk and gets mentioned in this article. Apparently it was signed by such dignitaries as “the spice girls” and several Star Wars characters.
Had this been open to the general public, I might agree, but since it was supposed to only be scientists who signed it, the fact that there were so many fakes should be troubling to anyone attempting to use it to prove their point.
Every time you say that 2014 was the hottest year EVAH!! you are lying.
You guys love to throw around “you lie!” like some kind of retarded congressman at a state of the union address, but FYI, I don’t make claims I can’t back up.
you do not seem to understand that science is always about challenging the consensus any more than you seem to understand that consensus is a political term and there is NO equivalent term in science. People who say “CONSENSUS” or “THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED” ARE USING POLITICAL RHETORIC AND ARE NOT DISCUSSING SCIENCE. THEY ARE DISCUSSING POLITICS. THEY ARE PROPAGANDISTS. Policygeek must learn the difference if he is ever going to play a meaningful role or be able to engage in fact based discussions. On this thread he reads as an ignorant fool who gets his science from his tv set.
Better than getting it from Sean Hanity.
Losing an argument? Strike off in a different direction! Conservatives don’t walk in lockstep with commanding overlords. That’s a Leftist thing. You can only condemn Hannity when you talk about Hannity, and no one else was. He is merely a commentator with Conservative leanings, and not a particularly good one, at that. The beauty of being a free thinker is being able to assimilate facts and come to our own conclusions about what makes sense and what doesn’t. If you believe all te propaganda your masters feed you, how will you know when one of them is lying? Why are questions raised about your ideology met with aggressive hostility? If your cause was just and tenets true, you should welcome the chance to explain you point. Might doesn’t make right, as your union goons and other professional protesters may believe. Physical domination is not a rational debate strategy, but a dishonest bully tactic. Think about why that is such a large part of your movement’s activities.
Meanwhile the Clintons invest in Beachfront DR land, you stupid ill educated peasant.
Logic and reason show the whole anthropogenic climate change scientist pool are a bunch of frauds and liars protecting their grant money.. Adjusted numbers.. Fluid models.. You can get a computer to tell you anything you want it to.. And that is exactly what these corrupt “scientists,” are doing.. You people seem to think that when you use the words,”settled science,” that that means the argument is over.. And you want it over on your terms.. NO!!!
And your still fighting on an online thread from over a month ago. Loser.
All irrelevant
Yes, you are.
“Yes, you are”
You forgot the word “correct”.
How might anything Al Gore does change the effect of CO₂ on planetary temperature?
He owns a fleet of SUVs, while lecturing us to use bicycles. He uses 20X more electricity than the average American family, ng us to be conservationists, and flies round the world to give his $100,000 speeches (no questions allowed) in his polluting private jet.
“He owns a fleet of SUVs”
Uh huh, and if Al Gore did own a fleet of SUVs, how might that change the effect of CO₂ on planetary temperature?
“Without greenhouse gases, Earth would be a frozen -18 degrees Celsius (0 degrees Fahrenheit).”
REALLY? Why would their commitment of resources not signal their real views?
The same hypocrite who forecast some years ago that by now the sea would have risen to engulf coastal areas, like wher he built his hacienda. The same Algore who uses 20X more electricity than the average American family, and flies round the world to give his $100,000 speeches (no questions allowed) in his polluting private jet. The same loon who forecast in 2007 that ALL arctic ice would be melted by 2014 (instead, it grew by 60% 2012-13.)
Haha, crazy conservative.
Shut up fool.
Your mind is so far gone you can’t even recognize the truth when it’s right under your nose.
Go out in the street and be run over. Wait for a trash truck.
Typical of you right wingers. Always trying to silence disent.
policygeek, you global warming alarmists are the ones trying to silence dissent. And you’re all left wingers. And I base this on your false belief that 98% of the worlds climate scientists all agree that man is the cause of climate change even though the climate has been changing for billions of years before humans even existed.
Now that’s plain stupid. But, it’s also hilarious because you actually believe you know more about it than any of us do, when you’ve done no experiments yourself that have proved any of what you claim is true.
Scientists have proven global warming is fact but you don’t believe them so why would you believe me? Now when the scientists say they all agree it’s a fact, why do you doubt them.
Bwahahahahahahahaha!
The scientists that make their living by garnering grant money?
The ones that know the government is all for the lie because it gives them more control?
The ones that are living large on the billions of dollars spent to try to prove what has not been proven?
What should the temperature be little troll?
They don’t know.
They will only say “cooler”.
But it is getting cooler, and they say it is due to warming.
Anyone with a brain sees that they are lying.
Anyone willing to NOT depend on the neo-communist media has seen that real scientists are jumping off the bandwagon in droves.
There has been “Global Warming throughout history- and cooling too.
There is zero proof that the current round of GW (in remission since 1998) was man-caused. Zero. There is a stronger correlation to solar activity to warming than anything else.
In addition, it has been proven that the “climate models” are all discredited. They don’t work.
Actual warming has not taken place since 1998.
It is also now clear that data were fudged- cherry-picked temperature recording stations, some in areas which have become more urbanized over the years.
Google ClimateGate, Luddite,
I don’t need to. This ol right wing meme has been debunked.
2014 was the hottest year ever recorded. You may now attempt to explain that away.
1. No 1934 was silly.
2. If 2014 was, how come the ice expanded so much?
You’re an engineer- figure it out.
I never ask a fool like you a question I don’t already know the answer to. YOU need to figure it out, slacker.
http://theconsensusproject.com how’s this for “under your nose”… you have to be wilfully ignorant to deny climate change.
No, you just need to be a realist. Global warming and climate change is merely a scam meant to enrich its proponents while exploiting liberal idealists. The world warms and cools because of sunspot activity and there is no way for taxes to regulate the sun’s cycles. Emissions amount to nothing. In fact, tropical rain forests are benefiting from CO emissions and are growing at a fantastic pace and are producing oxygen for our planet.
If these Global Warming evangelists want any credibility, they should start by turning over all their global warming wealth to their countries green initiatives. Like that would ever happen. Al Gore and David Suzuki love their high carbon footprint lifestyles.
Do You know how retarded you sound? This is why librals laugh at you. ” damn what the actual scientists say, i know what im talking about!”
And I guarantee you that people in your real life laugh at you behind your back. We really do think you are stupid.
Let’s pretend for a moment that counting votes who believe or don’t beleive is actually a valid sceintific pursuit in anything outside of politics.
Let’s talk about your assertion that the 2% (whereever you got that number from) are paid to do so by the oil and gas industries. Let me introduce you to Dr. Roy Spencer who is climatologist, Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, and the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer (AMSR-E) on NASA’s Aqua satellite. He has served as Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center. He also is a skeptic of manmade climate change the way it is pushed on us by alarmists.
I don’t know if the site will allow me to post a link or not, so just to not take a chance, I have given you his name and his titles. You can see that what I posted about him comes from Wikipedia. On his site, you can also find his credentials.
So here is one that blows up your nice, neat little world where people who don’t believe in catastrophic manmade global warming are all anti-science people, or else on the payroll of oil and gas companies.
This is just the beginning. Once you see that your scientific law doesn’t hold, it should be on you and your scientific curiosity to find that there are others, and what the science is behind their thinking. Either that, or you can continue to substitute the word “Scientist” for the way that others use “Priest” and continue to use “science” the way others use “Bible” without knowing what either actually mean. It’s up to you. It might lead you to less laughter behind people’s backs if you know more about skeptical scientists, so you have a trade-off, I suppose.
One skeptic does not make a trend. The difference between your religious assertion is that science is observable and not dependent on blind faith.
Gee. That was 75 self-selected government-paid “scientists” from 13,500 who were surveyed, wasn’t it? That is the 97% “climate scientists” was 75 out 77 – out of 3,500 who returned the survey, then the rest were filtered out.
This is what people ALWAYS say when they are unable to account for their own cognitive processes, even. It’s much harder than someone may guess to account for such things. It comes into play when your job security is at stake, or grant money may be at stake, too, and so it is essential to look at what may play into someone’s cognitive processes.
You attempted this when you said that the scientists that did not believe in global warming were only 2% (something that doesn’t add up any way I am aware of) and that they are paid to do so by the oil and gas industry.
I showed you the first one that was not. This disproves your assertion. If there is one, there are probably others, right? So do you search and see if there is a measurable trend, or do you now go into defense mode for your pre-conceived idea that there are only 2%, and that those are all paid-for by the oil and gas industry.
It seems at that point, you lost your curiosity, and reverted to your faith.
Look, I know it’s convenient to believe that everybody who is “Scientific” agrees with you. The simple fact is, that is incorrect. So if not all do, then it becomes necessary to know a little bit about the measurements, who makes them, whether or not they are adjusting them, how the measurements are taken over time, how they are analyzed, how the projections are made, etc. I’ve spent a little bit of time on this, and my thought at this point is that there is plenty to question. There are a lot of people using such appeals to authority as “Scientists say … ” then they continue on without really knowing what any scientist says, or how any other scientist counter-claims. That’s easy to do. However; the un-adjusted data is inconclusive, and the sattelite data is both very short term, and not showing the same thing that the land-based measurements are showing. So science deals in something measurable … when it is measured properly.
And of course, there is plenty of question about the models that are built. When you can hindcast, but cannot forecast with a model, that is going back to what your algebra teacher in the 7th or 8th grade got onto you about when you didn’t show your work: Getting the right answer for the wrong reason. The climate models have proven unskillful in forecasting, even when made to be able to hindcast. Likely they are programmed into hindcasting to the point of overfit (something data scientists will understand well, but someone who puts blind faith in scientists may not). Whether it is faulty association, overfitting, or something else, models, quite simply, have not proven skillful thus far in forecasting climate conditions, and they take very few conditions and parameters into account in a system as large as earth’s climate.
I think there is plenty to question, and there are climate scientists who think the same.
Oh wait! By that definition, we may not have any climate scientists we can believe. After all, there may be some that work for non-skeptical political organizations. If we have to disqualify one, then we might need to disqualify those, too, right?
My reply was directed to someone that asserted that there were only 2% of scientists that did not “believe” in manmade global warming, and that those were paid for by the oil and gas industry. I found him one that did not fit with his assertion.
Now to you: Are you familiar with the “Science” that Roy Spencer does? It seems that NASA respects it. What part of it is wrong? Just the part where he doesn’t support global warming with hisurement and processing of data that you can point to that is incorrect? or that doesn’t support the conclusions he asserts?
…says the man-child who previously said that “electric” was the best future power source.
Sunspots have been disproven as the main cause of global warming. The government also has no interest in lying about the issue.
Those anonymous and unknown government-paid “scientists” reviewing government-selected papers running government programs inside government bureaucracies using government computers in government labs with government grants issued by government bureaucrats promoted by government policies have 1.3 trillion dollars a year in new taxes and trillions more in “carbon credits” trading issued by government-favored banks and insurance companies that crave government approval?
Please talk science and not paranoia. It is not in the government’s interest to lie on this issue.
Your democrat politicians have a n intense psychological hate-filled need to destroy the energy and oil companies they hate, the need to control the population and the population’s energy supply of low-cost fuels and food, and most of all – a need for the 1.3 trillion dollars in new tax revenues to fund their programs. Your CAGW beliefs are all based on the politics of the energy situation, and NONE on the science nor the measurements.
Sunspots have an impact on the earth’s climate. Being the main cause has not been proven or unproven.
Obama’s administration lies about everything. Why should global warming be an exception?
And you don,t believe this story Sparkey???Call me..I can make u a deal on buying New York..No money down and I will throw in New Jersey if u call tonight..
Leave New Jersey out of it and you’ve got yerself a deal!
I agree. Deniers are willfully ignorant. It is an environmental issue, not a political one. Also, much of the problem is from overpopulation. The Earth simply can’t handle 7.2 billion people very well.
It could but would require extensive regulating.
You are more than welcome to round up as many people as you want and follow the lead of Reverend Jim Jones and the Peoples Temple from back in 1978. I understand some concern about overpopulation but saying ridiculous things like that 5 billion people on the planet basically need to disappear (as you wrote below) is insane. You sound like a despotic leader who actually justifies the killing of millions because it benefits the “greater good,” whatever that specifically is in their mind (e.g., rid the world of another tribe, race, religion, etc.). You’re a psychopath in training.
Right, because 7.2 billion is so sustainable….
Did you know that the worlds population could all be put in Texas, give everyone a large yard, a car and have room for all to drive on the highways? The world is a pretty big place and sparsely populated in many areas. The argument should not be what should we do about warming or cooling, but about using the energy resources we have in responsible ways until better and more efficient forms of energy are developed. Developing countries that are denied carbon fuels now and in the near future will be harmed greatly by even more poverty. No matter what the U.S. Does in this matter, China, India, South Africa and others will still burn their dirtiest coal with impunity.
The world’s population could fit into Texas but it would have the density of NYC, so no extra space, plus you have to figure in still meeting the food, energy, water, and other resources needed. Managing a world population of1 or 2 billion would be easier.
FACT: “Climate change is constant because the Earth is a dynamic, and has been occurring long before people and will continue to do so long after we’re gone.”
Yeah, no it wasnt, not like this. We have ice cores that prove it.
Ice cores prove what? It’s been much hotter and much cooler in the past. The funny thing is that your global warming religion can’t even explain the ice ages with any certainty. Not to mention you can barely predict next weeks weather.
The greenhouse gas effect is proven. The more gas the more heat that gets retained.
Ice cores are NOT continuous records like tree rings. They record the cold years, but the warm years melt away and are not recorded.
Looks like we’ve got an artic expert here! Look out!
YOU ARE AN ARROGANT LIBERAL FOOL. NO ONE ON EARTH DENIES CLIMATE CHANGE. IT HAS BEEN CHANGING FOR 4 AND 1/2 BILLION YEARS. LONG BEFORE MAN EXISTED, THE EARTH HAS FROZEN OVER AND THEN THE ICE ALL MELTED AND THEN IT FROZE AGAIN, ETC. THIS WILL CONTINUE UNTIL OUR SUN DIES BILLIONS OF YEARS FROM NOW. THE SAHARA GOES FROM DESERT TO LUSH FOREST EVERY 20,000 YEARS. MAN HAS ZERO TO DO WITH ANY OF THIS. YOU ARE A DISGUSTING ARROGANT ASSS FOR NOT REALIZING THAT YOU ARE THE ONE WHO HAS ABSOULTELY NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. SO GO VISIT URANUS NOW WITH YOUR LIBERAL FRIENDS AND LEAVE THE ADULTS ALONE.
Real adults don’t use all caps and can present an argument.
I JUST DID AND IT DESTROYS EVERYTHING YOU HAVE SAID. FACE IT—–YOU ARE IGNORANT AND A LIBERAL HYPOCRITE WHO CAN NOT DEAL WITH OR COUNTER REAL “FACTS”.
You can’t make one argument that I can’t counter with something more compelling. Your credibility is hurt by your use of all caps
This website is for third graders. Proves nothing. Says very little. Pathetic!
Then do new reading on the facts and research.
How about a counter argument instead of name-calling?
THE TRUTH HURTS DOESN’T IT LOON??? NO WARMING FOR MORE THAN 2 DECADES. RECORD SEA ICE ALL OVER THE WORLD. YOU BETTER DRESS WARM BECAUSE YOUR LIBERAL CHARADE IS COLLAPSING LIKE A HOUSE OF CARDS.
You clearly have no understanding how this stuff works.
Neither do you. You’re a cut & paste copycat, a stupid little parrot endlessly squawking the latest leftist hogwash.
Have a peanut.
Nor do you.
Yeah, actually I do. leftwithrightbrain already explained it in this thread.
Cut the ignorance and the all caps. 2014 was hottest year on record, and statistically speaking all the recent weather events and disasters would not have happened without global warming.
KEEP DRINKING THE LOONEY TOON KOOL-AID BECAUSE NO ONE WITH A BRAIN BELIEVES YOU ANY MORE. THE WORLD IS NOT WARMING. THERE IS NO LEGITIMATE SCIENCE TO BACK YOU UP. YOU RELY SOLELY ON “SCIENTISTS” WHO WILL GET NO FUNDING UNLESS THEY SAY THAT. NO HONEST SCIENTIST AGREES. DRESS WARM LOON. WE WILL FREEZE BEFORE WE GET HOTTER.
2014 was the hottest year.
What disasters? Was Florida swept away and I missed it? Floods, tornados, hurricanes, droughts…all have been occurring for some time. Pretty sure they’ll continue.
Utter nonsense. This is not the Liberal AGW echo chamber, kid.
Al Gore raised awareness of a major environmental issue. Where did he lie in that video?
Where did algore lie? For starters… He said man made globull warming was a fact. Next he said the solution was to pay taxes to solve it. Guess who would make massive income if these taxes got past the congress?
Global warming essentially is fact. Carbon taxes can be effective and the revenues can be used to clean up the mess and invest in better energy technology.
Free market economies and capitalism really seem to be your pet peeve. So much for rights.
No it’s not a fact, a lot of common beliefs are not facts. Scientist will tell you the planet has experienced periods where the Earth was much warmer than it is now, before, industrialization, and much colder than it is now again before industriazation (I prefer warmer, from what I have read the Ice Age sucked, pardon my vernacular). Imagine an ice sheet that extended as far south as Washington State. Much of the geography in the Northwest was caused by the Missoula Floods, huge ice dams created vast lakes into Canada and during brief periods of warming gigantic floods covered the Northwest. The planet gets warmer and the planet cools and it will continue to do so long after we’re gone.
Gimme a break. Isn’t it time to break out of the polluting model of an oil-based economy? You really don’t think human ingenuity can come up with less polluting alternatives? We should just wait around and see what will happen – and meanwhile the entire planet gets poisoned? I think you’re short-changing man’s ability to change, adapt, invent.
atomic energy for starters. There simply isn’t anything that produces as much energy as a drop of oil. Some day in the long-distant future, there will be efficient solar systems, but not in this century. The physics won’t allow it.
I don’t know for sure but I think our Solar System us pretty efficient.
The green energy boondoggle is simply the most effective means liberals like obama and gore have to redistribute money and then launder it back through the economy to their chosen entities – themselves and the democrat party.
She says, posting on a computer made from plastics and heavy metals, using power straight from a coal fired plant, eating food that was delivered by truck, staying warm with that natural gas. It’s so good to be a hypocrite!!!
Your idiocy is on a remarkable level.
And I think you don’t know crap about what you are talking about.
Currently, all the gushing idiots who think Solar and Wind power are reasonable alternatives to coal, oil, gas, and nuke power are just that, Idiots. You can’t generate enough power for present day society using any of the so called “Green” technologies. They’ve had almost 100years to improve refine, and make them feasible, but they have failed. Why? They can’t do the job period. You want an energy source that doesn’t pollute, fusion is the only technology being evaluated today which has a hope of doing so.
So let me get this straight, it is okay to ruin the lives of billions of people because you are afraid of something you don’t even come close to understanding? Right!
Also, CO2 isn’t a pollutant! You people make it easy for your masters to take your money, destroy your economy, and ruin billions of human lives.
The technology is available and improving constantly. The impediment is lack of political will. In the US, our elected representative are, for the most part, “owned” by the fossil fuel lobbies and do their bidding. The ensuing climate chaos has already shown how it will “take your money, destroy your economy, and ruin billions of human lives.”
This alternative energy technology has been available for 100 years, IT ISN’T CAPABLE OF PROVIDING OUR NEEDS, IT ISN’T EVEN CAPABLE OF PROVIDING 15% OF OUR NEEDS! Do you understand?
If it were 5 times better, it still wouldn’t be capable or good enough.
Solar won’t do it, and neither will wind.
Name one technology that is as easy to generate, transport, and power equipment as fossil fuels. It also has to be able to produce the same efficency of fuel-to-power that fossil fuels generate.
The whole reason why we rely on these polluting technologies is that there is, still, nothing else that competes with them for efficiency.
If you’re so convinced that techs can come up with a better mouse-trap, sink your money into a company, develop it yourself, and enjoy all the riches that will beat a path to your door.
95% of oil pollutants have already been eliminated via technology of refining, engines, filters, catalytic converters, etc.. As better methods come on stream, they will be used.
In any case, they aren’t causing “Global Warming,” which is far more correlated with solar activity than anything else.
Making a few extremely extremely wealthy
You mean, like Solyndra and most of obama’s other failed ‘enterprises’?
“Despite the program’s failures, the department now projects a profit of between $5 billion and $6 billion over the next 20 to 25 years. Overall, 20 of the program’s 30 enterprises are operating and generating revenues so far, according to the department.”
1. Why believe anything the department projects, as it has been so wrong?
2. The projected profit is based on how much investment? What would alternative investments have generated.
I love it when Liberal Arts majors talk technological and investing issues.
no, it’s not. no, they can’t be effective. see how easy it is just to ‘state a fact with no proof’? even i can do it. the only difference is that i see how stupid it really is, but you think you’re a top-notch debater.
Boolsheet.
You sound like a smart-ass know-it-all 16 year old that , in reality, knows nothing.
God, you have guzzled gallons of the Kool-aide haven’t you?
“Essentially”? Please explain.
500 years ago, they said the world was flat. Did they have a flat tax? Just asking.
The courts in the UK have established 29 separate and specific lies that Gore made in his video. And another 14 some-odd exaggerations and projections – that will not come true. It has now been steady global average temperatures for 18 years, 3 months. The earth has NOT warmed since 1996, despite a 35% percent increase in CO2 levels. Antarctic sea ice set a record high in June this year at 2.06 million “excess” square kilometers – the same reflective area as the ENTIRE land area of Greenland (2.16 Mkm^2).
False: The continental average Antarctic air temperatures have NOT risen (instead, have declined slightly) since 1979, so the twisted “logic” of land ice diluting the 20 million sq kilometers of sea water around Antarctica that “causes” is proved wrong because the change in sea water salinity is too small to matter. Loss of arctic sea ice between August and April each year leads only to increased heat loss from the open ocean – compared to the insulating effect of the sea ice cover.
ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
And, you are “broadly” sycophantic.
People that said that the world was flat were considered broadly accurate 500 years ago. Now they’re just considered morons.
Being “broadly accurate” that there would be more sea ice (which is the only kind of ice at the North Pole) jibes with his prediction that there would be no ice at the North Pole by,… what was it now?, 2012 or 2014?… how again?
Arguing with idiots can be very frustrating.
You’re a special kinda stoopit, ain’tcha?
Did Al Gore leave his wife for you? Come on, you can tell us.
lol
The courts in England decided he did lie and so have ruled against his movie being shown in schools.
Algeria raised awareness in the same way that the Ferguson thug protesters are raising awareness of racial discrimination by burning and looting.
Everywhere. From beginning to end. There isn’t a grain of truth in it. Not a molecule. Not an atom.
Right on !!
Al Gore has become completely irrelevant. The last thing I remember about him after he left his wife is that he was standing next to a masseuse and pointing down and saying, “What are you going to do about this?”
Only a small problem for her to solve.
IT IS MUCH WORSE THAN JUST THE MONEY HE HAS TAKEN .
REAL POLLUTION PROBLEMS ARE IGNORED AS THEY TRY TO FIX SOMETHING THAT ISN’T EVEN A PROBLEM .
MONEY AND RESOURCES THAT COULD HAVE BEEN USED TO CLEAN
THE ENVIRONMENT HAVE BEEN SQUANDERED ON REDUCING CO2
WHICH IS A NATURAL , NECESSARY & VERY SMALL PART OF THE ATMOSPHERE .
AL GORE IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL CRIMINAL WHO HAS HARMED
THE EARTH WHILE HE HAS BEEN HELPING HIMSELF .
Comments like this win you no love. Keep it up.
So classy.
Right, because it’s ok to murder liberals… Also who said the parents or the fetus were liberal?
I believe Hitler had similar thoughts and plans.
I could not possibly agree more, and gay marriage is better yet; no spawn, and no murder
Just like you can’t presume that a baby whose mother does drugs will go up to be a drug user, you can’t pass on the sin of liberalism/socialism to an innocent child.
It’s not old enough to support a political ideology, so we can’t lay the burden of tyranny at his/her feet.
tough call, the types who choose abortion based on having a child being inconvenient probably result in one less abused fatherless child.
Take, say, a 12-year-old raped by her mother’s boyfriend. Would you force her to endure nine months of being reminded, every day, of the violent act? Would you take care of the new baby? Take a mother – probably a Catholic – becoming pregnant and giving birth year after year because the Church forbids effective contraception, until her body can’t stand the strain any more. And now she’s pregnant again, and her doctors sday it threatens her health. You would compel her to go through the birth again? And probably more until it kills her? How about a woman with an ectopic pregnancy. Don’t know what that is? It occurs in about one in 200 conceptions; the fertilized ovum nidates (attaches) to the fallopian tube wall instead of reaching the uterus. It is, always, inevitably fatal to mother and fetus; it’s just a question of time. A timely operation to remove the fetus is needed, unless the mother is to die in unspeakable agony. Technically, because at the moment it means removing a living fetus, it’s an abortion. You would forbid that, calling it murder?
Good job bringing up exceptions., which may account for .5-1% of pregnancies. Also kudos for calling it a fetus. Does that make you feel better?
I guess you missed the point, which is that certain extremists, especially the Roman Catholic church and its hierarchy (who are unlikely to become pregnant) dig their heels in and declare “no abortions, ever, for any reason.” Yet, its concurrent forbidding of its members from using effective birth control itself is responsible for millions of abortions, worldwide. (Don’t even think of citing “natural” family planning, the so-called “safe period” method. A woman using only this during her fertile years will on average have five unplanned pregnancies.)
.
And, as in so many things, the Church is the arch-hypocrite when it directly affects itself. My uncle was a member of Medecins sand Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders) in Afrca in the late 50s and early 60s. He was in the Congro in 1960 when the Congolese army mutinied, killed its officers and went on a rampage of murder and rape. Many nuns in missions in the country were raped, and many became pregnant as a result. They were, with few exceptions, quietly aborted by the mission doctors. Catholic nuns. Catholic doctors. What they did was merciful and right, but it directly breached a Church law. No doubt they were absolved by the priests.
.
It didn’t have to be this way. Did you know that a commission set up by an earlier pope recommended by a large majority that the Chuch make an exception to its anti-contraception law with the “pill.” Of course you didin’t.
.
The story begins with the Second Vatican Council in the early l960s and the decision of two popes to re-examine the
church’s position on birth control. Pope John XXIII had intended to begin that re-examination, but he died before he
could begin the process. His successor, Pope Paul VI, appointed a Papal Commission on Population and Birth Control. It consisted of 79 members, cardinals, bishops and lay experts representing a variet of disciplines. After two years of study, the commission – with majorities from both the lay and clerical groups – voted 69 to 10 to change the position on birth control using the “pill,” because it did not involve any kind of physical barrier, and, more important, because it was the right thing
to do.
.
Oops; not what the pope had expected or wanted to hear. Luckily for him, a dissenting minority report was later submitted, co-authored by a Polish archbishop, Karol Wojtyla, who later became Pope John Paul II. A Roman Catholic historian and theologian, August Bernhard Hasler, tells the story in his 1979 book, How the Pope Became Infallible. He provided the following quotation from that minority report, which was the one accepted: “If it should be declared that contraception is not evil in itself, then we should have to concede frankly that the Holy Spirit had been on the side of the Protestant churches in
1930 (when the encyclical Casti Connubi was promulgated) and in 1951 (Pius XII’s address delivered before the Society of Hematologists). “It should likewise have to be admitted that for half a century the Spirit failed to protect Pius XI, Pius XII, and a large part of the Catholic hierarchy from a very serious error. This would mean that the leaders of the Church had condemned
thousands of innocent human acts, forbidding, under pain of eternal damnation, a practice which would now be sanctioned. The fact can neither be denied nor ignored that these same acts would now he declared licit on the grounds of
principles cited by the Protestants, which popes and bishops have either condemned or at least not approved” (page 170).
.
Dr. Hasler concluded: “Thus it became only too clear that the core of the problem was not the pill, but the authority, continuity, and infallibility of the Church’s magisterium.” In conformity with this minority report, Pope Paul VI issued his 1968 encyclical, Humnae Vitae, in which he condemned every form of contraceptive birth control. Hasler wrote: “After the
promulgation of the encyclical. . . the Church conducted a massive purge of its key personnel wherever it could” (page 283). In other words, the problems associated with countries that are overpopulated and the political campaign in the United States to deny reproductive freedom to women are all due to the papal decision to protect the authority and “infallibility” of the papacy.
.
Hans Kung, arguably the world’s leading Catholic theologian, wrote: “This teaching [against contraceptive birth control] has laid a heav burden on the conscience of innumerable people … for the people in many under-developed countries, especially in Latin America, it constitutes a source of incalculable harm, a crime in which the Church has implicated itself” (cited in Stephen Mumford, The Life and Death of NSSM 200, page 203).
.
Unfortunately the Vatican was not content with applying its dogma against contraceptive birth control to members of the Roman Catholic Church. Pope John Paul II in his Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation declared that Catholic teaching must become law. The Instruction states: “Politicians must commit themselves,
through this intervention upon public opinion, to securing the widest possible consensus on such essential points.” They are expected to enact into law “appropriate legal sanctions” for violations of the law. The Vatican wants to outlaw contraceptive birth control because of its stance that there should be no interference with conception [and an uninterrupted supply of new Catholics.].
.
These strictures, if enacted into law, would put the majority of the population, which is non-Catholic, along with non-conforming Catholics, into the position of being law breakers. Non-Catholics even today are affected if they use Catholic hospitals and compliant physicians. since these are forbidden to provide information about contraceptives or to prescribe
or apply them – even emergency contraception for a raped woman.
.
The problem with papal infallibility, aside from its requirement that Catholics are expected to accept it without question, is that
no human being is free from error. We are all creatures of our culture, our education, our vested interests and our prejudices. The pope tries to avoid this criticism by insisting that he is the vicar or spokesman for God or Christ; yet he was an ordinary
man, elected by vote to his exalted position by other ordinary men, and “proves” his authority to speak for the Almighty by the circular argument that it is so because he says it is. Yet the very fact that he asserts infallible authority over millions of people who must obey him is a radical departure from the teachings of Jesus, who told his disciples: “You know that those who are supposed to rule over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you; but whoever would be great among you must be your servant.” (Mark 10:42-43) Also: “In vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrine rules made by men.”
.
One could with justification say that in rejecting the conclusion of the overwhelming majority of his own commission, Paul VI, and successive popes, are directly responsible for millions of abortions worldwide, and also child deaths from malnutrition in underdeveloped countries unable to feed their populations, and early deaths from exhaustion by women unable to stem multiple closely-spaced births. One can add to this list a proportion of the millions of deaths from AIDS, especially in Africa, and the millions of consequent orphans, because the Church also bans the use of the only reliable means to prevent the spread of the disease, the condom.
Democrats are “tolerant” of everything, so they say, except an unborn fetus. This they cannot tolerate, kill it, abort it. There may be medical reasons for an abortion but birth control isn’t one of them. For criminals it’s “you do the crime, you do the time” in other words, we, society will make you responsible for your actions. Not so with pregnancy, you are not responsible for your actions so we will provide you with an abortion. Responsibility by selection, the democratic way.
You’re funny.
I should be I went to funny school.
Have you ever considered, like a very conservative Christian recently told me, that abortion as bad as it is, is like ‘weed killer’ for future Democrats and future welfare recipients.
The African American community is destroying their future voting base
That might be a good argument– but (Liberal) Democrats aren’t necessarily created in the womb. They’re created in public schools.
Ignorant and off topic
Oh, so THAT explains the recent major importation of future Democrats.
Ignorant and off topic.
Off topic and ignorant.
Off topic.
Greyfox, Democrats aren’t very tolerant of black conservatives. Neither are they tolerant of Christians in general. They only tolerate people who agree with them and their junk science.
Their science is junk because it’s ripe with fraud. That’s why I don’t believe anything they say any more.
The scientists have always claimed throughout my lifetime that milk was good for the body.
But, I saw a report recently that said milk does more harm to the body than it does good.
And In the 80’s, eggs were demonized by the scientific community because of cholesterol. Cholesterol was causing heart attacks and clogging of the arteries. But, in the past few years we are now being told that eggs aren’t as bad for us as was thought.
So, the science was not settled on eggs and milk either, I guess. Even though you could read ads and hear commercials on the tv and radio telling us to lower our cholesterol intake and drink plenty of milk.
How did that settled science end up being debated on decades later. Because of new research and more advanced equipment and methods? Probably. So, in science, the debate is never over. I’m talking to you Al Gore.
We’re on the same page, but I would make one slight change and suggest that perhaps most democrats fit the template you described. As far as the scientific community is concerned they are always ,on most things, coming up with new findings. Some things are absolute but many things are still up for debate. As far as food is concerned, eggs, milk etc, moderation is the key word. My only thought on Al Gore is: Al Gore is a putz, a liar and an egotistical jerk. He cares only about Al Gore. Remember this, when experts disagree, everyone becomes an expert. Have a great New Year.
I wonder why China climbed to the #1 spot on Earth – at least as measured by wealth and size of their economy – with a State-enforced strict 1-child limit. Doesn’t seem to make sense, does it?
Cheap labor and huge exports = booming economy. There, that was easy.
Don’t forget: No EPA or OSHA or Labor laws.
What’s funny is you’re advocating for the US to be more like China in what is quite literally one of their worse aspects. (Their piss poor working conditions for average workers)
I’m not advocating anything, just stating facts. You’re reading something that simply isn’t there. That’s how the telephone game in a group of people works.
So you agree we are better off thanks to the EPA and labor laws then?
Hence they have marathoners running marathons with masks on.
Low wages yes – but nobody has families of 14 or 15 to support either. Meanwhile, the wages are inching up, they’re bound to.
1) Slave labor
2) That 1 child limit is NOT as strictly enforced as one might think.
3) With more than a billion people over a huge patch of prime real estate, it’s a sign of the failure of Communism that it’s economy has been such a basket case for so long. Its only the fact that The Party has begun allowing something like a modern industrial economy exist at all that they are beginning to advance.
4) Compare the mainland with Hong Kong to truly appreciate the difference between a government regulated slave-labor economy and Western-style free markets.
That can’t make sense. Wasn’t the US #1 until just recently without slave labor?
In general, the 1 child limit is enforced.
Communism didn’t result in prosperity, it resulted in universal poverty/want, but the system did keep their country together and the communists did eject imperial Japan (as well as the other Western imperial powers that had footholds in China) despite their “poverty.” You have to admire the rag-tag communists prevailing over industrial, genocidal, cruel imperial Japan.
And, at one point in the war, the US backed Mao.
So Mao is still venerated in China, just like George Washington is venerated here.
Industrialization and investments are allowed in the special economic zones.. whole new cities have sprung up as well. As Deng said: What difference does it make if a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice. The Chinese approach is pragmatic, flexible, rather than doctrinaire. I suppose you could say that they have abandoned their “paranoia” about the West encroaching on their country again – as long as they can continue to play off Russia vs. the US, what do they care? They are happy to rake in money to build up their country.
HK? An ex-UK colony? How is HK supposed to be “representative” of capitalism? Or maybe you feel colonialism is the way to go.. exploitation of a “native” population by a colonial power, such as the UK. Isn’t that system anathema to us, though, as ex-UK colonies ourselves?
There are 1 billion, 350 million Chinese. Over 1 billion of them live in abject poverty, squalor and servitude under the Communist yoke. Maybe 1% of them have a standard of living equal to our middle class. I used to catch plenty of them sneaking across the border. Ever notice how no one wants to sneak into Red China? Does that suggest anything to you?
Most of what they make is cheap junk.
Why do you think your kids will not be liberals?
Read a study years ago the said most abortions end up aborting future liberals. So no great loss to humanity there.
There will be no more gays if they keep aborting.
Wait.. how does that work.
lol
7.2 billion people is at least 5 billion too many
I have this distinct feeling that in this generation and the generation to follow we’ll see one race or one tribe or one country abort itself out of existence. For example, the USA, which may be rescued by Catholic Hispanics.
Interesting final solution. I think someone had the same idea before only they added Jews to the list. Thanks for posting Adolf.
Look at the victory last year of Mayor de Blasio in NYC. He won by a land-slide. By that measure, we would have to say that the overwhelming majority of the largest city in the US are on the left, or at least progressive politically. Does that mean that the majority of the people in the most influential city in the US are wackos?
LOL! A landslide among the 24% of eligible voters of NYC is not really something to crow about.
Just like the 2014 elections.
Well ditto on that: You could have hardly expected the electorate to vote for someone like Romney – out of touch with the masses. Remember: Republicans may have money, but they don’t have the electoral edge, the votes. Republicans can buy politicians but they cannot buy every American voter.
That sounds like sour grapes to me. Accept it: Your ideas are rejected by the majority of the people of the most influential city in the US.
And that sounds like delusional to me.
If you think 70% of 24% of eligible voters equals “the majority” you have bigger problems than clinging to the sinking ship of human induced Gorebull warming.
And the idea that burning fossil fuels had anything to do with Hurricane Sandy (that wasn’t even a hurricane when it came ashore) or reducing the use of fossil fuels would have prevented the storm strays into the land of people who are locked up before they hurt themselves.
The US has not had a hurricane make landfall in 9 years. Do you realize how much money has been actually saved in that time?
Accept it, .7 of a degree Celsius of warming (if we accept that a measurement that small, worldwide over 120 years is even significant) and 50ppm of additional CO2 in the atmosphere (even if it was all attributable to the activities of man, which NO expert does) has resulted in 8 to 10% more vegetation cover of the planet according to NASA, fewer hurricanes, fewer wildfires and fewer tornadoes.
I forget, what was the problem again?
Correct, and yes.
My oh my – the airy conclusions we draw. Because we want regs on businesses so they are less polluting, then the population of the entire E. seaboard is considered “wacko.” Luckily for the survival of the US, we have learned the lessons of Sandy, although you would have us remain ignorant of the truth. Regs on business are the logical answer to climate change.
They’ve renamed themselves as Conservative. Classical liberal were what we consider the Tea Party now. People think the Tea Party is evangelical. They’re not. They are looking for small government, personal freedom, fewer taxes. The GOP hijacked the movement, as did the socialists. It’s why those of us who understand the mess have such a quandary in 2016. Bush and Clinton are the same candidate. In this, I will give Obama credit. He has officially created a one-party system.
A world without political parties… well, you could try living in China or Cuba, which effectively have outlawed all parties except for the communist party. A one-party state is more or less like living with no political parties. Or are you advocating anarchy perhaps?
They disabled the down arrow to spare airheads como tu unbearable embarrassment. Too bad. You’d be rackin’ ’em up by the score.
So you have run out of arguments and resorted to name-calling. Tsk tsk tsk.
Meanwhile – expect arguments from all sides, when it comes to dirty oil. The US is not a one-party State. Just sayin.’
I have only one argument and it is this: The so-called “Theory of Global Warming” or, in its latest incarnation, “Climate Change” is the biggest fraud, the biggest crock of shiit to come down the pike in the entire history of man. That’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it.
You can cut & paste all the latest leftwing talking points you want. It is all bullshiit. That means bovine excrement. It means it is a pack of lies and has no value whatsoever.
Don’t be a fool. It’s unbecoming.
Don’t forget Gaia cultists. Any human activity is raping their Mother.
See, from our perspective it looks like your love of exploitative capitalism and materialism is threatening both the economic wellbeing of our nation’s middle class and communities across the country. The investor class has bounced back from the great resession of 07-08, but the middle and working classes havent seen any of the growth; only stagnant wages. It’s the perfect illustration of the failure of trickle down economics.
You come across as a communist fool, a complete, total and utter ass of stupidity and a wannabe mass murderer. GFY you a-hole.
Will do, “bloodaxe”. Aka D-bag.
Get to it, jerk. Make it hurt.
Why DO you guys have all these wierd rape-y fantasies?
I can only speak for myself- I have no such fantasies. I merely consider it my civic duty to insult lowlife leftist scum in the vilest possible terms. They deserve it. Someone has to do it. So piss off, you hateful little creep.
Lol, try a little harder.
Those with graduate degrees are more likely to be liberal
Make an argument. Not a personal attack
No. I refuse. I like making personal insults against various obnoxious jerks whom I deem deserving of mockery, scorn and contempt. You’re one of them and you can take your stupid climate change charts and shove ’em where the sun don’t shine.
It’s colder than a witch’s tit outside and this is Sandy Eggo!
If you don’t like my comments don’t read ’em.
That’s only because you can’t make an argument.
The “investment class” bounced back from the housing bubble because the Fed was/is printing $85B per month and shoving it into the stock market.
Now who’s idea was that?
Seems to have worked. Are we arguing over who should get credit?
Yes… and the Community Reinvestment folks were real happy with the numbers of home loans created by lowering standards. Until it tiped over because the people who took the loans were unable to pay for them.
The danger of printing money is that money represents labor (what you do to produce something). Printing it out of thin air ultimately devalues the rest of the money in circulation (it is inflationary because it doesn’t represent anyting of value). Ultimately, widening the income gap and making life harder on the middle to lower end.
So where’s the runaway inflation your conservative overlords have been screaming about? Nowhere.
Lets see what the BLS and USDA have to say….
Consumer price index (CPI) An inflationary indicator that measures the change in the cost of a fixed basket of products and services, including housing, electricity, food, and transportation. The CPI is published monthly. also called cost-of-living index.
CPI Jan 2009: 211.143.
CPI Nov 2014: 236.151 (increased 11.84% since the recovery)
Median Income 2009: 26,558 dollars
Median Income 2013: 28,829 (increased only 8.55% since the recovery)
Food stamp enrollment 2009: 33,490,000 persons
Food stamp enrollment 2014: 46,536,000 (increase 38.95% since the recovery)
Ahhhhem…KKK? A conservative group? Also ISIS is conservative
Go take a swim in Brooklyn’s Gowanus Canal if you feel the Earth, its air, and waterways are so “…unspeakably powerful…” The Earth isn’t self-cleaning or self-correcting. Do you have any idea how many tons of chemicals have to be dumped into your drinking water to disinfect it and make it potable? That isn’t because it’s “pure” to begin with.
No, Miss Kitty. Tell us all about the various chemicals and the tonnages of each dumped into our drinking water. We breathlessly await your detailed report.
Certainly there is pollution- I would never deny that and it needs to be stopped and cleaned up. But, how about the millions of dead fish that wash up on the shores because of algae?? It’s completely natural. How about the huge number of deadly plumes of thousand year old NATURAL Methane and Hydrogen sulfide that bubble up from the bottom of the ocean? There are approximately 30 volcanoes going off on the earth every given day. How about the sulfur dioxide and other deadly gasses coming out of them? Pyroclastic flows? Any idea of what this does to our oxygen and water? Look up “The year without a summer”. OF COURSE we need to do a better job in many places but we already have in many more places. Please also read my reply to Billy Ray, above. 2015 is going to be the year of debunking all of this hysteria about people destroying the earth. Unfortunately, it won’t stop our politicians from using the hysteria to steal more of your tax money in the guise of “healing the planet”. GAWD, what a racket.
Yes, of course we do. I never would deny that there is bad behavior. However, this idea that people are bad for the planet is just embarrassingly ignorant. I could write 30 pages on this but instead, I will put it into perspective for you, in a brief way. The land mass of earth is about 29%. The rest is water. Some parts of that water are 25 THOUSAND feet deep. Human beings take up about 7% of the land mass of earth. Earth is ENORMOUS, mostly unpopulated and incredibly powerful- FAR more powerful than we are. The ocean contains an enzyme that eats petroleum. The Gulf, that was supposed to have been spoiled forever is now TEEMING with fish. Global warming is a freaking joke and now it’s being proven that greenhouse gas is GOOD. In the 1960’s & 70’s, we used to have 3rd stage smog alerts in Los Angeles. The air here is now SOOOO much cleaner. So, maybe stay off the liberal sites and get some real science so you can feel OK about being human and having built that pipeline in Alaska that provides so much warmth that the Caribou population is exploding.
Much ado, not “to do” – apparently you are neither a scholar of Olde English or Shakespeare.
“Mother” nature, it has been said, is nothing more (or less) than the laws of chemistry, biology, and physics creating new equilibriums when previous equilibriums have been disturbed. The earth is incapable of “intend”ing to do anything. The last laugh will be on our species, not from it.
The notion that humans can control nature in any way is nothing short of extreme arrogance. I agree with you, btw. And with that I add that climate science is no different than religion and can only be proven or disproven with the death of humans. I’m not advocating such. I just find the irony humorous given how many environmentalists would strip religious freedom first if given the chance.
It isn’t just global warming and the effects of global warming such as Sandy. It’s also what development run rampant has done to the environment. The biggest culprits in that regard were the ecocide of the old Soviet Union and E. Europe under communism, and now the rape of the Earth’s environment by the hybrid capitalist-communist economic system of China.
Exactly.
Jesus taught us to give with a glad heart.
How glad is your heart when you are giving away >39% taken by force by the jackboots known as the IRS and WASTED on things like studying the sexual habits of snails?
C’mon – what do you think our own system of taxation, as well as tax systems around the world represent: Legalized transfer of great wealth from those that have to those that don’t, enforced by the force of arms (the State). If you don’t like paying taxes to support the social safety net, you should go off the grid, and go live in an uncharted part of the Earth. There is no way to evade taxation otherwise.
Yes, He does, which is why, as good stewards of our environment, we should examine the claims on their merits and evidence, not blindly accept the proclamations of those who are invested in the Green Energy companies.
Windmills and solar panels have a marginal impact on our power production, by some estimates less than 10%. However, they are having a major detrimental impact to bird populations, including endangered species like the Bald Eagle. The blades literally knock the birds out of the skies, and solar reflectors can burn them to death as they fly over.
Ethanol, it turns out, actually has a greater Carbon footprint to manufacture than Gasoline manufacture AND use has. It’s also causing food price increases across the board, since farmers are using farm land to grow fuel crop instead of food crop. Ethanol is also less efficient, so when mixed with gas it actually causes more gallons to be consumed per load than pure gas does.
Battery manufacturing on the scale necessary for Electric cars causes massive amounts of chemical pollutants, which can contaminate ground waters and other water sources.
All other so-called “Green Energy” technologies are still in the test-tube phase, and not nearly ready for ‘prime time’.
In addition, the very reason that these technologies are being developed is being increasingly thrown into debate.
All of the predictions that the Global Warming models have generated over the past 30 years have missed the mark by miles. We are actually setting record cold temperatures in many areas, and the Global Warming scientists have recently been reduced to throwing theories against the wall to see what sticks. The actual evidence doesn’t support any of their theoretical models.
Oh good. So you’re saying that religious morality is no longer morality when it is enforced by the state, correct? In that case, you should agree that abortion and gay marriage are individual choices and individuals who want to engage in those activities should not be subject to laws restricting them.
Um…huh? Charity is a voluntary endeavor, by its very definition. When something is forcibly taken from you (i.e. taxes), it is, by definition, not Charity, since you don’t have the choice in the matter. Whether or not that confiscated income is for a just and moral purpose, such as feeding the poor or caring for the sick, or if it is instead being used to fund the drowning of kittens, that is irrelevant to the fact that, since it is law, you don’t have the choice in supporting it. Therefore, it is, by definition, not Charity.
As I’ve said before in other places, if the Government were to structure their social programs such that they were entirely funded by voluntary donations, as opposed to required taxation, I would have zero issue with it. That, actually, would be in line with Christian teachings.
And, by the way, your own sarcastic (and completely irrelevant to this discussion) logic on morality doesn’t hold weight. Murder and rape are individual choices, too. I’m assuming you’re not advocating for neutralizing laws pertaining to those, simply because some people might believe these are acceptable behaviors.
Global warming is a tax to make politicians rich not make the poor less poor. AND how did a story of global warming influence degrade into a conversation about religion so fast??
He’s being inundated for waivers of the celebacy requirement. He’s pro gay agenda. He’s pro big government NWO types. He’s pro global warming. He’s probably pro Monsanto for Christ’s sake. Err, let me rephrase that.
Because both Catholocism and global warming are religious sects. The difference is that at least there is proof that Jesus existed, unlike global warming data.
Where is this proof you speak of? And if you have any proof that he actually did miracles I would like that too. No, text in a rewritten book aimed at controlling the masses does not equal proof. You are beginning to sound like the AGW believers.
Seriously though, I have been searching for the proof my whole life.
He left the Jesuit order to take on a parish. However, upon becoming a cardinal he became the authority for the Jesuits in Argentina, but within two years as a cardinal, the head of that Jesuit region petitioned the pope, I believe Benedict XVI, to remove him as their authority. It was granted and that responsibility was striped from him. Simply put, he is practicing Liberation Theologian that was forged by the last five decades in Argentina.
LOL! You’ve got to be kidding… Where does the money get “spent?” Why do you think Warren Buffett strongly opposes the Keystone pipeline? Because his fleet of tankers carry the oil now! Obama’s biggest bestest friend has made a fortune being a crony of the Kenyan Interloper. Multiply this by 1000 and maybe we approach the magnitude of corruption in the Obama administration.
Actually, it’s because of the fall of the oil prices. Buffett is losing a fortune on his oil futures. The Keystone Pipeline would make oil prices crater even more than the Dakotas operations already are.
With the Keystone built, it would be obvious how much we’re paying in taxes, and that’s the last think liberals want the public aware of. Oil gets down to $10/barrel, yet gas is still averaging $2/Gal, someone’s gonna have some ‘splainin to do….
“AND how did a story of global warming influence degrade into a conversation about religion so fast??”
Because the Pope just openly declared war on us, and vowed to use everything he’s got to cram Global Warming Theory down our throats. That’s current events, not “degrading” the conversation.
Not only against the teachings of Jesus, but the Ten Commandments as well.
Commandments nine and ten:
16 “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.” Exodus 20:16-17 (KJV)
So don’t lie and don’t covet anything that isn’t yours. That pretty much eliminates the Liberal agenda.
Someone needs to tell the Pope that. I’m sure he wouldn’t want millions to blindly follow something and subjugate themselves to someone else’s authority. I mean, he’s the Pope. Wait, what?
Yes. Rich and poor have the exact same requirement for getting into heaven. Jesus said it was harder for a rich man to get into heaven than it was for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle. The reason it is more difficult is that wealth can give rise to the illusion of power; possession of personal power by which one can set terms. It is easier (usually) for a poor person to recognize that he brings nothing to the relationship with God and to accept the free gift of eternal life. But poverty doesn’t put a person at the head of the line.
When I was young, I needed everything written down in really simple terms, too.
I don’t mind giving food to the least of these, but feeding the trolls is simply a waste of time. And the bible doesn’t use have specific verses differentiating “trolls,” either.
funny I dont think Jesus ever mentions monetary charity. Rather you should take care of the less fortunate. But if it is money that concerns you “charity” can be either voluntary or enforced. Of course, given the trillions floating on Wall Street these days you could just pay a decent wage to every one who works to fill the market with our toys before you pay millions the CEO’s and other useless ULM (to include boards of directors), and then Wall Street.
Jesus admonished people to help the poor. Notice he wanted the “people”, not government. Somehow the socialists have hijacked this message and believe the government should tax the people, subject the people, and then decide which people receive the benefit.
That’s not socialism you false flag troll. And yes, Jesus’ words are the epitome of socialism. Don’t get rich while others are starving and dying. Christ, you people are delusional.
It really depends on how you read Jesus’ teachings. The liberation theologians certainly saw a similarity in Jesus’ teachings and the teachings of socialism. The meek shall inherit the earth certainly doesn’t sound like the rich shall inherit the earth. Just sayin’.
Being a scripture reading Catholic, are you now a Catholic without a Pope? Kind of throws out the whole infallible things out of the window doesn’t it? Maybe the protestants had something there?
Infallibility thing? That’s been spoiled since…well…back when PJP admitted that there just might be something to this whole “evolution thing!” LOL! Oh yeah…and the whole “maybe homosexuality is OK after all” gambit. Oh…and the “we don’t REALLY need to eat fish on Fridays” revelation. And as if those weren’t enough…there was the whole “maybe there IS room for the existence of ET in the Catholic philosophy…”
This is DEFINITELY not the first reversal from a Pope.
My recollection of PJP was that he suggested that evolution could be a reason for adaptation of species. He did not imply that is was a substitute for intelligent design.
??? You know those scriptures existed long before the Catholic church, right? Some fables (AKA Scriptures) even existed during Sumerian times. You really should look at alternate sources of history.
Papal infallibility means that in matters of faith and morals, when teaching within the line of Catholic Tradition and within a limited scope, the Pope is infallible. (Tradition with a capital T has a specific theological meaning.)
A pope can be totally wrong on topics not related to faith and morals: science being the foremost example.
I doubt most thinking Catholics over the decades had any misconceptions about papal infallibility. To many glaring examples that its just a myth. For hundreds of years.
His actions are that of a typical Franciscan. HIS philosophy was to be expected. It also should be understood that as a native of a third world country he expects redistribution of wealth.
Scripture reading Catholics is a relatively new thing It has not been all that long ago that Catholics were admonished not to read the Bible for themselves.
That is non-sense. Seriously where do you cats come up with this stuff? Sign me “A Scripture reading Catholic from a very old and long line of Scripture Reading Catholics”. And FWIW, El Papa’s credibility is spiraling fast, at least among us scripture reading Catholics.
I guess you do not know Catholic history. Back when Catholics did not read the Bible, it was because not many people could read. Not many people in the world could read period. Relatively new? The USA is relatively new compared to the world. So is England, for that matter man kind when compared to the age of the earth.
As a scripture reading recovered Catholic, I agree with you. When he said that atheists can go to Heaven if they do good, he refuted so many of Jesus’ teachings. He said that he’d like to meet aliens (thought by some Christians to be demons) and baptize them. He needs to refresh himself on the Bible before he jumps into defending the false religion CCC (Climate Change Cult).
Jesus never intended for governments to take care of the poor. His view was that charity and concern for one’s fellow man was more effective. Give freely all you can give to those in need. The socialist view is that “poverty can be eradicated.” The Biblical view is that “The poor will always be with us” (stated in some way shape or form as early in the Bible as Deuteronomy). In the past 3,500 years or so, the Bible’s view has yet to be proven wrong.
Really a scripture reading Catholic? Catholics you know can’t read? So you are going to repeat protestant garbage to make yourself look better? Good Job.
Which scriptures? The ones based on Jesus’ teachings that the Jesuit pope is peddling or the ones that the romans put in that are often contradictory to the aforementioned ones?
Does “turning the other cheek” mean making it easier to hit all of your transgressor’s face?
Even so, I wouldn’t under-estimate his popularity. Italy itself has a large number of left-wingers. Greece is about to elect a new left-wing government. There is bound to be a “reaction” to the “austerity” imposed by the neo-liberal market capitalist system – if the austerity always is at the expense of the poor.
Nope just scared of someone who supports the corporate and political elites to think that global warming has something to do with helping the planet is like thinking Obamacare improves healthcare or that common core is about education wake up follow the money take the red pill
Ok sure let’s say it is but just understand its fix is another money grab the players are aligned and there’s trillions at stake reminds me of some Dylan lyrics “after he took from you ever thing he could steal” how does it feel
anyway it would be great if it was some grand humanitarian effort but when you peel back the onion it will be disappointing unfortunately
The problem is Christ’s path is a personal path. As individuals we should give to the poor, who are por through no fault of their own. Jesus didn’t say force your neighbor to pay for your charitable desires, nor did he ask Cesar to pay for the poor.
Socialists have used the bible particularly the New Testament to preach social justice when in fact its more concerned with the individual and and forgiveness of his sins and place in heaven
Christ is ONLY about the individual – the Cathollic Church is about the masses (pardon the pun). There are no party reservations in Heaven – nor is there any Pope in the BIble, never mind apostolic succession…
And the Pope wants you to pay for all costs associated with Global Warming, whether anything can actually be done is not his problem. See, he and the Catholic Church have invested their money (thank you for the tithe) into elaborate, ornate and very expensive gold hardware and all the trimmings. I can see how concerned they are for the poor around the world by the quantity of icons and idols they possess.
Not sure we need to bash the entire Catholic Church for disagreeing with the pope.
The implication that donations to the Catholic Church are commonly used poorly because of this example is false. The Catholic Church does a lot of good in the world today, and millions owe it a meaningful debt of gratitude.
That said, I have no use for the man. I’m as opposed to his policies as I am any big-government leader. The fact that he puts a friendly face on it and goes down and helps poor people himself doesn’t mean he’s less promoting of tyranny.
Just proves that the Pope is a fraud. He is supposedly the mouth-piece of God but he can’t seem to get it right. Kind of goes back to the fact that a person is not a prophet of God (Old Testament) if he gets one thing wrong. Soooooo….the Catholics need to figure out what to do because the Catholic church is now defunct.
But it does if that organization deems that “figurehead” to be “infallible” and then has it as its entire basis for much of its structure and then that “figurehead” is shown to be fallible.
Actually, Papal Infallibility ONLY applies in certain circumstances. Specifically when the Pope is speaking on matters directly related to the practices, beliefs, and/or morals of the church, whether in Council with Bishops, or when issuing an Encyclical. The Pope is allowed to profess his personal opinions about anything without it meaning that he is binding the entire Catholic population the that same belief. Here is a link to a more thorough explanation.
Excellent now explain the purpose for a Pope – is he the one that relates all the mistakes God makes? Or is that how you muppets work it – if he’s wrong it’s him if he’s right it’s God? Dishonesty insyitutionalized…
I would love to, however its obvious you would rather mock my church than try to understand it – which is a shame.
unless of course someone points that out – then the back pedalling comes and eventually the ones that tell everyone else what to do start saying “don’t tell us what to do”
I would love to see what would happen if all the Catholics at odds with the Pope’s environ’mental’ stance stopped giving to the donation tray in protest. Yes, the money goes to help that specific Catholic franchise and not to the Vatican, but it would certainly be interesting to see the uproar created by the priests.
IF the Catholic Church was based on anything at all to do with the weather, OR if the Catholic Church proclaimed that the Pope was indeed a prophet, or is somehow endowed by God with Divine Wisdom, then you might have a shot at making this argument. But since church doctrin has nothing to do with climate change, and since the Pope is not endowed with any special revelations from God regarding weather forecasting, your argument is false.
The Pope is human and as a human has free will. He also has – as he will freely admit – the ability to commit sin. He can and does make mistakes – as I am also sure he will freely admit he has. He is not incapable of being wrong. but he is also not prevented from expressing his own opinions, regardless of topic
Whatever your profession is – are you restricted to only having opinions related to that profession? Are accountants incapable of having a opinion regarding anything outside the scope of accounting practices? This is no different. The Pope is no more an authority on climate change than Al Gore or Obama, but that does not mean he does not have the right as a world leader to express his opinions on the matter.
However, if I disagree with the Pope regarding climate change, and what to do about it – I am not at odds with the Catholic Church or Catholic doctrine. Whereas if I disagree with the Pope about something like at the core of the Catholic faith, like abortion, then I am at odds.
Actually, that’s a BIT out of context. BUT certainly the number of times popes have been wrong SHOULD have decimated the church by NOW, If the goof folk in the pew were actually awake on Sunday.
He truly pissed me off when he went to the anti-suicide Palestinian bomber wall in Israel and prayed,..for what? that more freaking suicide anti-Jewish bombers could kill more people in restaurants?l,..the Pope showed his true anti-Semitic colors then and there.
Yes. It’s all about controlling the people. Whether you are talking about politically, legally, religiously, whatever. It has always been about being able to tell someone else what to do. The Church today uses peer pressure, guilt, prophetic commands, and vicarian directive. The progressive left uses law, regulation, demonization, and ignorance.
Someone needs to teach the Pope that his beliefs in wealth distribution is actually Fabian Socialism. In it, people are all bowing down to the socialist leaders. That is, unless, that is now his god.
“The processes of globalization, suitably understood and directed, open up the unprecedented possibility of large-scale redistribution of wealth on a world-wide scale…” — Pope Benedict in 2009 encyclical
I’m Catholic and you took the words right out of my mouth. This contamination of South American Liberation Theology which is Communism with the face of Christ as a disguise. I love my Pope, but he is no economist. America is not Argentina where they only have rich and poor and the poor stay poor. These are the lenses he looks through.
He’s probably one of those Liberation Theologists. They preached socialism with a thin veneer of Christianity on top to give is respectability and trick people into swallowing socialism. I rather suspected as soon as he got the nomination that he would turn out this way.
the pope is just trying to keep his church tax exempt, so he’ll say the pc bs he needs to say to keep various national gubments of his back, lol. there’s no reform going on at the vatican, they aren’t melting the papal gold down to buy food and shelter for the meek. it’s lip service, all for show….just like everything is in the 21st century new world order.
The Argentines failure culminated in 1982-83 a lost war to sure up nationalism due to an economy that was horrific…they totally collapsed in 83. Now it seems its coming full circle yet again with this kook running their nation. She just purchased bombers from Russia…but the nation as a whole has defaulted on many of its loans world wide. My point is that the Pope is no stranger to Socialist/Marxist ideals. He has seen its horrific results firsthand .
He advocates ‘redistribution of wealth’ but won’t sell off the billions of dollars of wealth that the Catholic church has stolen through the centuries.
Thank you for a thoughtful response. Elitist progressives are always leveraging policy to promote frenzied egalitarianism and transfer of wealth through taxation and regulation. The framing of climate change as a vehicle for transformative societal change is just the latest of many veiled efforts by the control freaks of the left. These principles are embedded into almost every decision or bureaucratic regulation. They will use anything, absolutely anything, toward that end. Whether the Pope is a tool or a willing participant is incidental. Natural climate variation has been redefined as humanity’s self destruction due to capitalism, greed, and excessive use of finite resources. Yes, Argentina could have been a great nation, until it veered into leftist ideology and statism. I am reminded of Cuba’s descent into poverty and loss of personal liberties. In 1950, not so long ago, Cuba’s GNP was higher than Mother Spain, as was its average wage for workers. Who knew that climatologists would soon become politicized and provide a huge boost to the progressive objectives of elitist politicians? I suppose the boredom of tedious daily climatology research can be relieved by the sublime notion that you are saving the world from the evils of capitalism, while preserving those cuddly polar bear cubs. I sense that those who profess to save the world are one in the same as those who desire to control the world. The Pope seems like a fine fellow, but is he a monkey wrench for the Greenies?
The Pope may feel great comfort with socialism, but please understand that the clergy of my church are indoctrinated with that idea, in many seminaries (Catholic Priest colleges). As a Catholic, I know that our religion does not consider a Pope to be infallible on non-religious issues. The Pope has been elevated by an elective body within my church called the College of Cardinals (those of you who saw the “Davinci Code” movie may remember the red-robed men voting for a new Pope-thats the College of Cardinals). Cardinals are the highest rank below Pope. He and any Pope can say anything and everything, or nothing, and I and most of my fellow catholics will continue to give him our love. But-especially in the American Catholic church-many catholics will be free with disagreement.
You see examples of that in news of retired American Cardinals making public comments-noted in the news yesterday-clearly disagreeing in a general way with the Pope. Neither they nor I suggested or suggest lack of love for him-but within Catholicism., American Catholic freedom of expression and thought is notorious.
We will undoubtedly see more American Catholic disagreement because the Pope comes from a land where my Church had many high and low clergy joining with socialist revolutionaries in the name or (I think this was it) “liberation theology.”
Our modern, developed “free markets informed with law and love”-no joke, Libs-school of thought can educate and erode support from the emotion laden and simplistic “give to this cause ’cause, gosh, this group and all these other groups say its a good cause” school of thought.
“…give freely to the needy in order to follow the path that Christ set forth as the way to God.”
Scripture does not teach salvation by works. It teaches salvation by faith, period. Read Paul’s letter to the Romans, 4.1-5. James also writes about works as being an eventuality in the life of a believer if he has true faith. In other words, if your faith is true, you will join God in His work for He is constantly at work around us (John 5.17). It’s like the fruits of the Spirit spoken of in Galatians 5.22. All the fruits listed will show themselves in the life of the true believer as they are “worked out” in the process of the believer’s sanctification (Phil 2.12-13).
Juan Peron was a socialist?! Plus – what would you call Bismark? The German arch-conservative was the first to introduce socialist reforms in mid-19th C Germany such as the entire suite of benefits known today as the social safety net i.e. Social Security, unemployment insurance, and so forth. I wonder why an arch-conservative would do so – maybe to pre-empt social revolution? Now, there’s an idea!
I say let the needy die out. Do we really want to let people too stupid and lazy to better themselves bring down the rest of us. Sink or swim, your choice. Let nature weed out the bad seeds.
I like this pope at first. I am Catholic. But there is something wrong with the whole picture of him lately. I have decided he can’t be trusted and is not a man of God….just my opinion. Not trying to get anyone riled up!
I respect the Pope but they are becoming increasingly more irrelevant for most people. Probably, the last time they were relevant was when Pope John Paul II teamed up with Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher to bring down the Soviet Empire.
Free market is the most efficient producer of goods and services to ever exist on planet earth..no doubt, hands down, this is TRUE.
What is missing is controlling the wicked human heart…greed, abuse, and selfishness destroy human beings…not the free market.
The free market exists in an ethical void. One must bring ethics, morality and compassion, best demonstrated by the life, teachings and resurrection of Jesus. Combining real mercy and free market wins every time, all through the system….China now has free market, but no mercy…just central power….
Somebody’s misinterpreting something here. Christ’s admonition was for individuals to give freely of themselves to help others. Not for governments to extract money from those who have in order to pass it on to those who don’t. The same thing holds for nation to nation transfers, which defeats the uplifting morality of charity which, after all, is an individual quality.
The IPCC was established in the 80s. The CC stands for climate change. You don’t know what you are talking about. Why post nonsense? And just who is they you refer to?
The pope should give away the money in the Vatican Bank and sell off all their non church properties and give it to the poor. That would help his credibility.
Yep…because Catholicism is a scam. It’s hardly even based on the Bible when you make some man the “mouth-piece of God”. If they were serious about the poor, they would give up their own money.
If you’ve ever been to the Vatican Museum and seen the incredible amount of art that is on display (we can only imagine what isn’t on display) – then you know of the incredible wealth of the church.
On the one hand it is a very valid argument that the Church should sell these works and use the money to help the poor. However, it is equally valid to argue that the Church is the custodian of these priceless works of art and to sell them to private collectors would deny the poor of our opportunity to appreciate these works by being able to visit them in person – (note: you don’t have to be Catholic to visit the museum).
You have no idea what you are talking about. Who do you follow? You have no idea whomuch money Catholic Charities gives to the poor do you? You just see with your eyes and what little information your brain knows. So why don’t you sell off everything you have and give to the poor?
A) You don’t know that he hasn’t b) More interestingly, have you? c) exactly how does his not having sold off everything excuse the Pope (or you for that matter) from being a hypocrite?
The Pope has foolishly bought into the global warming mantra, but he has indeed been very focused on assisting the poor and lives simply as compared to the more opulent Popes. I am not Catholic, by the way….
Duh, the fact that you are cold has nothing to do with world wide climate. Last year was the warmest on record. Scientists were shocked at the rapid increase in the ocean temperature. Last year the east coast froze while Anchorage, Alaska had its first year without below 0 temperature. Siberia was warm and Australia baked.
Everything you stated has been proven to be untrue with just a little bit of research into information coming from sources other than liberal. It’s sad that so many of you can be so easily misled by people claiming to be scientists. The fact is, any cooling or warming that may be occurring is due to “Natural Climate Change” which has been occurring since the dawn of the planet. “Man-made Climate Change” is a myth. Absolutely. It is used as a tool of redistribution and governmental control. Go ahead and be a sheep/lemming. It’s climbing over your dead body that the left gains it’s power…
There is one simple question that all the climate change advocates will not address. If climate change is man made, why did the IPCC have to manipulate (fudge) the data to make the “hockey stick” graph work? You seem to have all of the facts, so what is your explanation?
You know that Global Warming (i.e. Climate Change) was first used as a scam to offset the socialist parties in the U.K. by the Thatcher parliament, right? You do know that all of the predictions on what would happen by climatologists that supported global warming were grossly off?
Oh wait, you’re just reliant on the very liberal press and your paradigm of religious bigotry in worshiping the state. Real science (the real one that relies on double blind studies and would not block out objectional views) would never play in your religion. That is why you ignore the thousands of scientists that say “wait a second, your data makes no sense”. That is why your “scientists” have to grossly skew the data to secure more funding (I use to work for one of these guys in the early 90s…it was horrible to see how we skewed the data).
You might skewer us for pointing to the facts but as Galileo said to the religious zealots of the day “and yet it moves”. You can have your religious view and worship the Earth with Al Gore and the Pope, just leave us alone and let us live in peace.
It’s because she’s a liberal. Facts don’t matter. It is how you feel. She feeeeellllls that it is warm and so it is. She feeeeelllllls for the illegal so she invites them into her neighbors home (because her compassion only goes so far and wouldn’t let them camp in her home). She feeeelllllls for the poor so she takes someone else’s money and gives it to someone else. She doesn’t respond because she can’t type feelings.
When future generations look back on the global-warming scare of the past 30 years, nothing will shock them more than the extent to which the official temperature records – on which the entire panic ultimately rested – were systematically “adjusted” to show the Earth as having warmed much more than the actual data justified.
Two weeks ago, under the headline “How we are being tricked by flawed data on global warming”, I wrote about Paul Homewood, who, on his Notalotofpeopleknowthat blog, had checked the published temperature graphs for three weather stations in Paraguay against the temperatures that had originally been recorded. In each instance, the actual trend of 60 years of data had been dramatically reversed, so that a cooling trend was changed to one that showed a marked warming.
This was only the latest of many examples of a practice long recognised by expert observers around the world – one that raises an ever larger question mark over the entire official surface-temperature record.
Watch: Climate change explained in 60 second animation
Following my last article, Homewood checked a swathe of other South American weather stations around the original three. In each case he found the same suspicious one-way “adjustments”. First these were made by the US government’s Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN). They were then amplified by two of the main official surface records, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (Giss) and the National Climate Data Center (NCDC), which use the warming trends to estimate temperatures across the vast regions of the Earth where no measurements are taken. Yet these are the very records on which scientists and politicians rely for their belief in “global warming”.
Related Articles
Barack Obama’s personal battle against climate change 23 Jan 2015
Rise in sea levels is ‘faster than we thought’ 14 Jan 2015
Homewood has now turned his attention to the weather stations across much of the Arctic, between Canada (51 degrees W) and the heart of Siberia (87 degrees E). Again, in nearly every case, the same one-way adjustments have been made, to show warming up to 1 degree C or more higher than was indicated by the data that was actually recorded. This has surprised no one more than Traust Jonsson, who was long in charge of climate research for the Iceland met office (and with whom Homewood has been in touch). Jonsson was amazed to see how the new version completely “disappears” Iceland’s “sea ice years” around 1970, when a period of extreme cooling almost devastated his country’s economy.
One of the first examples of these “adjustments” was exposed in 2007 by the statistician Steve McIntyre, when he discovered a paper published in 1987 by James Hansen, the scientist (later turned fanatical climate activist) who for many years ran Giss. Hansen’s original graph showed temperatures in the Arctic as having been much higher around 1940 than at any time since. But as Homewood reveals in his blog post, “Temperature adjustments transform Arctic history”, Giss has turned this upside down. Arctic temperatures from that time have been lowered so much that that they are now dwarfed by those of the past 20 years.
Homewood’s interest in the Arctic is partly because the “vanishing” of its polar ice (and the polar bears) has become such a poster-child for those trying to persuade us that we are threatened by runaway warming. But he chose that particular stretch of the Arctic because it is where ice is affected by warmer water brought in by cyclical shifts in a major Atlantic current – this last peaked at just the time 75 years ago when Arctic ice retreated even further than it has done recently. The ice-melt is not caused by rising global temperatures at all.
Of much more serious significance, however, is the way this wholesale manipulation of the official temperature record – for reasons GHCN and Giss have never plausibly explained – has become the real elephant in the room of the greatest and most costly scare the world has known. This really does begin to look like one of the greatest scientific scandals of all time.
It is fitting that the Pope holds forth on Global Warming/Climate Change, since he is uniquely qualified to express opinions upon matters of religious faith.
As can be CLEARLY SEEN from the graphs, the warm and cold peaks are a NATYRAL< CYCLIC event that occurs again and again, NOT caused by man.
The global warming morons are no better than chicken little crying the sky is falling, EXCEPT, they are making PROFIT off it at the expense of the people.
He doesn’t care. He has made so much money on this scam, it sets a new bar. Sooooooooooo much worse than Enron, since this fraud is perpetrated on the entire globe.
I think the Pope needs to give God a little credit for climate changes.
You can take the Pope out of south America , but you can’t take South America out of the Pope.
Fortunately the half life of Popes is quite short and a new one can’t be far behind
The words Global Warming are NOT Found within any of the stories other than the made-up Headlines. Climate Change, Yes. You have been duped by the leftist anti-Catholic Media. What abject fools some of you bigots are.
The Pope says Algore explained everything so now please buy some carbon credits. If you don’t know how to reach him then send me the money to me and I will pass it on (wink).
Permanent ice (4+yrsold) melts into the ocean. Desalinates the water. Fresh water freezes at Warner temperatures then salt water. Come winter you get more sea ice then normal due to the increase of fresh water, from the massive amounts of permanent ice melt. Then the warmer then normal sea pushes air currents like the polar vortex south, resulting in record snow falls and freezing temperatures for eastern North America. Global warming refers only to the upper atmosphere. Hotter summers and colder winters are a direct result of climate change.
Actually, Steve, in this current discussion of AGW, they’re talking about complete global warming, including the sea temperatures. The prediction was that we would have a dramatic increase in the number of massive hurricanes due to the rise in water temperatures (which haven’t happened.)
Further, this article isn’t about an increase in ice in winter compared to summer. This is a year over year study. Plus, you really ought to think before spouting – Antarctica is now in it’s summer, not it’s winter.
The warmists don’t say anything about the weather. They talk about the climate. Your point is akin to standing in front of an open freezer and saying “how can there be global warming when I feel cold”. Its the global measurements which matter. Its also not the extent of sea ice, but its volume which is more important. However even that is not greatly significant as ice volumes can increase in a warming world. Atmospheric dynamics are not as simple as you make out.
The pope (of long ago) changed God’s day of worship from Saturday (7th) to Sunday (1st), in order to gain influence and power in the world. This latest show of support for Evolution and Global Warming by the current pope is along the same vein.
Liberal demorats have found a way to professionalize lying… They are just the best at lying….
Think about it for a moment, right before they die they must think to themselves- all I can be proud of is deceit and being a liar. Their mothers would be proud…..
The Pope knows that this global warming (or is it chaos, climate change….what????) scam is just a redistribution of wealth scheme which he is in favor of. I am Catholic…and this Pope scares the hell out of me.
I think the Pope see this as an opportunity to transfer wealth to the third world, and whether Climate Change is real or not really doesn’t matter to him as this can be a tool to scratch his ‘social justice itch’ either way.
actual scientists (not agenda pushing liberal dishonest manipulative douche bags masquerading as men of science) have been forecasting that we started entering a mild ice age in the 70s
Wondered how long it’d take a Conservadunce to suggest killing the pope. If Jesus was alive it’d be TBaggers that crucified him while calling him a Marxist.
The Pope? What about a staunch Republican like Michael Bloomberg – one of the biggest believers in global warming, out to remove as many cars as possible from NYC streets! There are many believers in the ills of a carbon fuel based economy in both political camps!
Well, you can’t have it both ways. Either BB was a Republican Mayor of NYC who tried to crack down hard on cars – even tried to impose E. River bridge tolls – expanded bike lanes, and worked to get buildings to upgrade their oil burners so that they are no longer spewing pollution into the air – or he wasn’t. I was trying to point out that even conservatives can be pro-environment. You seem to think that unless someone is pro-oil lobby, they aren’t a Republican. That is just not true.
It is sad that the Pope has been snookered with bad data. The good thing is that although wise to strongly consider what he is saying all knowledgeable Catholics including the Pope himself would say this is his opinion and not theology and Catholics in good standing can reject this as its not a teaching ex cathedra.
The Pope knows. Also I take it you don’t live in an area hit by a drought or hurricane or flood or ice storm. 2014 looks to be the hottest year on record.
Impressive logic. The world can’t possibly be warming if it is cold outside of my house. The media plays with anecdotes, scientists work with data (if you don’t know the difference, please learn it). The time trend is that high temperatures are highly correlated with high CO2 levels. This relationship is robust throughout geological history and across planets (compare Earth with Venus and Mars to see for yourself). Scientists stopped debating whether global warming was happening decades ago in the face of overwhelming evidence and they are now identifying to what degree it is occurring and what its effects will be. Spoiler alert: its not looking good for us if we sit on our butts and do nothing to reduce our emissions.
How many times do we have to tell you people that your experience in one tiny part of the world doesn’t mean shit? The world, on average, is warming. Just because you had a cold winter doesn’t disprove a massive trend.
It’s easy to make a case for global warming when your just looking at the past 150 yrs of data. Look at the last 3000 yrs and tell me what you see (http://www.petitionproject.org/gw_article/GWReview_OISM150.pdf). That is unless your too scared to get your facts from science and prefer to stick with the media.
How reliable are those 3,000 years, Scott? Climate has changed dramatically several times since the time of Moses and the Bronze Age. I do have facts on my side and I am a statistically competent individual. Frankly, the media is on YOUR side in this. The problem is that the carbon based models simply do not seem to work no matter how they are tweaked to shoehorn themselves into current data. CO2, in my reasoned judgment, simply is inadequate in predicting climate changes. Then there is the political perversion in the equation. Who knew climatologists would be so easily bought by those who want to profess saving the world in order to control it. Your point man, Dr James Hanson, is an educated buffoon whose outrageous predictions are so absurd that they should have led to his scorn, ridicule, and contempt. However, he is still esteemed by those who care more of ideology than truth. On top of it all, my mature lemon trees froze to death, really ticking me off! Damn cold weather….
Just more evidence that ‘Global Warming’ is a BS farce. Oh wait, it’s now ‘Climate Change’ since ‘Global Warming’ is being thoroughly debunked with each passing day, right? Whatever it takes to give more power to government and green-leftists wanting to enrich themselves, and make the rest of us poor saps have to pay more just to live. Thank heavens for fracking and horizontal drilling on PRIVATE LAND, or we’d still be paying astronomical prices at the pump like our ‘dear messiah’ would prefer.
it’s always something new and frightening to those that place feelings/fears over facts…in the 50s nuclear annihilation, then the Population Bomb, then New Ice Age, then Global Pandemic, then AGW, now “Climate Change (aka “Seasons and Weather”)…whatever…after 40 or 50 years of observation, it becomes repetitive and boring…these people that perpetually tout this nonsense are ignorant cowards all…
before it was global warming, it was global cooling and we were all on our way to the next ice age….al gore and his followers are as close to a dog chasing its tail as you can get
The earth is in immediate peril!!!!! Prince Charles and Al Gore have said as much. Increasing arctic ice is a clear sign of the disruptive forces of man made global warming. Its settled science, you know and those who think otherwise are ignorant southern folks.
All you Global Warming deniers are flirting with the fires of hell. The Pope recently said that the UN must do more to stop Climate Change. What more proof do you need?
This is why they changed it to climate change… But they have also been bantering around that 14 was the warmest year on record also…. don’t see how thats possible with this data.
And my climate changes every single day.
Today – Raining and 70 degrees.
Yesterday – Partly cloudy and 84 degrees
2 Days ago – Partly cloudy and 80 degrees.
3 Days ago – Sunny and 84
The sky is falling!!!!
The Word of God says satan comes to steal.kiII and destroy and so does his son gay 0bama..
BOOK OF DANIEL
The King Who Exalts Himself
36 “The king will do as he pleases. He will exalt and magnify himself above every god and will say unheard-of things against the God of gods. He will be successful until the time of wrath is completed, for what has been determined must take place. 37 He will show no regard for the gods of his ancestors or for the one desired by women, nor will he regard any god, but will exalt himself above them all. 38 Instead of them, he will honor a god of fortresses; a god unknown to his ancestors he will honor with gold and silver, with precious stones and costly gifts. 39 He will attack the mightiest fortresses with the help of a foreign god and will greatly honor those who acknowledge him. He will make them rulers over many people and will distribute the land at a price.[d]
40 “At the time of the end the king of the South will engage him in battle, and the king of the North will storm out against him with chariots and cavalry and a great fleet of ships. He will invade many countries and sweep through them like a flood. 41 He will also invade the Beautiful Land. Many countries will fall, but Edom, Moab and the leaders of Ammon will be delivered from his hand. 42 He will extend his power over many countries; Egypt will not escape. 43 He will gain control of the treasures of gold and silver and all the riches of Egypt, with the Libyans and Cushites[e] in submission. 44 But reports from the east and the north will alarm him, and he will set out in a great rage to destroy and annihilate many. 45 He will pitch his royal tents between the seas at[f] the beautiful holy mountain. Yet he will come to his end, and no one will help him.
2 Thessalonians 2:8
And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming…………
One started it a few years ago when there were a few reports of possible global cooling. He said, yea maybe, but if we go into a mini ice age we won’t go as deep and when we eventually come out of it the heat will return with such force we’ll all be toast. They’ll move the prediction however far into the future it requires. They are not going allow anything to cause doubt of their dire warnings cuz they’ll change their predictions – and they have a lot of ’em, many contradicting.
I actually expect the warming trend to continue. The earth has been warming since the last glacial period, and may continue to do so for another 50,000 years. But since no one really knows what causes glacial cycles, that’s only a guess. To blame climate cycles on the activities of mankind is premature, at best.
Seems like we may be due for a mini-ice age sooner rather than later. Aren’t they on a 10-11,000 yr cycle & the current cycle has been going for about that time?
But thy Lord God Obama and Al “Jesus” Gore told us that we’re melting and will be gone in a few years if we don’t spend trillions of dollars to cool the planet. Are you trying to tell me that they are lying?
Does anyone seriously believe that the portrayal of the devil in that Jesus mini-series just COINCIDENTALLY looked like Obama? The producers SWEAR they did not do it on purpose. I believe them. Them SOMEBODY was sending us a message. Don’t you think?
The dirty secret is that “climate change” is about world control and one world socialist government, the Democrats ultimate goal. They just need more mindless idiot voters they can buy off to keep them in Power.
Satellite data shows that the global temperature is in a cooling trend. NASA which doesn’t use satellite data to compute their global temperature results say that 2014 is the warmest year on record. What a bunch of BS. Their computer models SUCK!!
What is wrong with you folks? Can’t you see that Al Gore’s efforts have been successful? Global warming, er climate change or whatever they are calling it now has been eradicated! You should be dancing in the streets and sending Al and the Pope and whoever else more money…
I remember Global Cooling back in the 1970’s. There was undeniable scientific proof that we’d be in the middle of a nuclear winter by 2000. Uh oh. Then the Ozone Hole would cook us, Acid Rain would melt us and the Rain Forest would be gone. Then Global Warming (aka Anthropomorphic causation, or something) that morphed into Climate Change. Gee, the climate is changing. Thanks. Climate change is like global sun rise. Shame on us for even listening to this anymore. Liberals remain on the wrong side of everything and are slowly being exposed for frauds because science is always in favor of the truth. Truth to Liberals is like a crucifix to a vampire, or for that matter a crucifix to a Liberal (same effect).
If you actually look at this article you’ll see that the only data shown is over the last 30 years. There is no significant statistical conclusion possible for variation in the sea ice over just 30 years.
Climate change research is based on data over 10’s of thousands of years from many sources. The most significant corollary in data is the direct connection between CO2 and mean global temperature. To have gone from 300ppm to 400ppm in a half a century is a 25% increase.
It is not theory that global extinction events over thousands of years have resulted from smaller variations in global CO2 levels. It is not theory that CO2 has rose 25% in a half century. It IS theory that the same forces that destroyed species in the past will do so in the future. Personally I believe it is reasonably sound to rely on the oft stated saying “History repeats itself” to ignore this threat to civilization.
So what happens if climate science is correct? Sea level increases of several feet will force Billions of people from their coastal homes. Where will they go? What levels of toxicity will inundate the oceans as cities are flooded? Do you really want to leave this type of planet to your children and grandchildren? Don’t they deserve better?
DOES THE TEMPERATURE GO UP BECAUSE OF CO2 OR DOES THE CO2 GO UP BECAUSE OF THE TEMPERATURE ?
THEY NEVER ANSWER THAT QUESTION .
NOT THAT IT MATTERS , CO2 IS LESS THAN 0.04% OF THE ATMOSPHERE .
THIS HAS ONLY CHANGED FROM 0.03% IN 150 YEARS SO ALL THE HUBBUB IS OVER ONE PART IN 10,000 .
THEY CALL IT A 30% INCREASE AND MEASURE IN TONS TO MAKE IT EMOTIONAL & SOUND SCARY ~
BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS REALISTICALLY , IT IS A GREAT DEAL OF NOTHING .
You mean it wasn’t “created” on October 26th 4004 BC according to Catholic Dogma. It was a Tuesday if I’m not mistaken.
However, we can only speak of what we have discovered. We can be willing to reanalyze given data when new information is revealed through investigative research.
My mistake – I get all these sects confused occasionally. C of E, C of I, Catholics – it all gets a bit confusing when new churches are formed because a king wants a bit of crumpet.
Al Gore wanted to screw poor people, so he lobbied for a carbon exchange, where carbon credits and offsets are purchased and sold. Wealthy people like Al care not for the cost of “using” the carbon since they can easily afford the fees. But the rest of us would be paying what amounts to added taxes on our energy. I assume you know nothing about economics, as most liberals don’t, so you probably don’t understand the taxes kill wealth accumulation, keeping the wealth in the hands of the few and never in the hands of the many, but take my word for it.
well as long as I have your word for it, I guess I don’t need to research anything else.
Supply side economics is the theory that all of us will do better when the wealthy “create” more jobs because they have more money. Where are those jobs that should have miraculously appeared over the last 30 years?
Demand side economics is the theory that all of us will do better when everyone has sufficient means to purchase the goods we make – Henry Ford was the epitome of Demand Side economics when he recreated the assembly line and insisted on paying his employees enough money to buy one of his cars.
In the early 1980’s when Reagan ran on Supply Side, Bush the senior referred to that theory as “voodoo economics” – Reagan’s top economic adviser David Stockman has already repudiated Supply Side economics, will you?
Converting our economy from Carbon Based energy to renewable resources will create American Jobs – why are you against that?
Did that feel good? My, you’re insecure. The religious cult of AGW is much more pathetic, any day of the week, than Catholicism or any other religion, and that includes the pederastic Islam.
Kelly, when someone makes fun of what others believe, it is because they are insecure about themselves. If you felt strongly in your conviction that Catholicism and its followers are stupid, then you’d have no need for the sarcasm. It’s interesting you go there, too, since I didn’t (500,000 years has nothing to do with 6,000 years – a date also shared by the Jewish calendar), especially considering the status of “climate science.” Not a theory has been correct, many of the original supporters are now detractors, and the entire belief rests on thinking more powerful central governance has the knowledge and the ability to stop it. There’s nothing more arrogant for atheists than to think humanity is the pinnacle of being. And that’s what you have here: atheists thinking they can play “god” by altering the global climate. We have a better shot at relocating the Earth.
Yes, I thought you had poor reading comprehension.
Science pointing out that we’ve entered a dangerous zone of greenhouse gas levels is not trying to change the world. It is trying to inform the world of the consequences of inaction. I pity the future, when it is dependent upon the ignorant.
But see, Kelly. That’s not what they’re doing. If they were merely “trying to inform” they wouldn’t be regulating the coal industry to extinction, capping emissions on everything from vehicles to your lawn mower, and discussing massive wealth transfers to the third world in order to pay “reparations.” You really are a fool.
Regulating Coal Industry is a political decision based on science. If you disagree with the political decision vote for the GOP.
Nationally the country prefers Obama to your version of America.
Kelly? Name calling is what you do when you have no answers. Typical lib.
LIKE I SAID , AN INCREASE OF 1 IN 10,000 .
BARELY MEASURABLE & LITERALLY NO EFFECT ON THE CLIMATE
Nothing funnier than someone who’s done none of the work, who just reads what others have done, telling someone else they’re being spoonfed lies. See, the difference is Fox news doesn’t make a claim one way or the other. Anyone who can still think critically and independently knows to run the other way when non-scientists are telling you “science is settled.” Did you hear? A scientist recently put forth a peer reviewed paper claiming the big bang is incorrect.
Every single claim that has been about global cooling/warming/change has been wrong! The moronic koolaid drinker is the idiot who doesn’t know that.
What? CO2 levels have steadily increased, while the temperatures are decreasing to make more ice? Your synopsis (bad example) is not working. It would be a lot better if it was warming. A lot healthier for humans. Be sides their is nothing you can do about it anyway?
It’s not what can “you or I” do about it. It’s what are we willing to do.
Are we willing to continue as a carbon based economy subservient to the political needs of an Islamic overlord? Or are we willing to invest in renewable energy infrastructure here in the U.S. freeing us from the Middle East as well as creating jobs here in the U.S.?
Of course that would mean thinking and investing rather than calling libtards and Gore/Obama names. It’s a lot easier to go on doing the same than it is to embrace change, no matter the benefits.
Catholic teaching, known technically as the Magisterium, is ordered to matters of faith and morals. Hence, when a pope affirms the intrinsic immorality of murder, abortion, contraception, or even masturbation, Catholics must accept that such acts are by their very nature contrary to the natural law of God. The popes can even teach authoritatively that Catholics are bound to be good stewards of the planet and are not allowed morally to engage in economic practices that impede the honest efforts of other entrepreneurs. But when a pope tells Catholics that the planet is warming or that the planet is harmed by production of carbon dioxide, he is teaching outside the realm of faith and morals, which alone are the legitimate province of the Magisterium. Catholics must listen respectfully, but are not bound by such scientific opinions.
Moreover, the Magisterium lays down general principles, but allows that Catholics must make prudential judgments about how those principles are to be implemented. That means that while a Catholic may never commit murder, he may licitly conclude that being a good steward of the planet does not necessarily entail committing economic suicide by a cap and trade policy that is based on erroneous scientific claims.
“The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility
in virtue of his office, when, as Supreme Pastor and teacher of all the
faithful–who confirms his brethren in the faith–he proclaims by a
definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals….The
infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of
bishops when, together with Peter’s successor, ‘they exercise the
supreme Magisterium,’ above all in an Ecumenical Council. When the
Church through its supreme Magistrium proposes a doctrine ‘for belief as
being divinely revealed,’ and as the teaching of Christ, the
definitions ‘must be adhered to with the obedience of faith.’ This
infallibility extends as far as the doposit of divine revelation
itself.” Catechism of the Catholic Church, #891, 1994 edition.
At a recent United Nations conference devoted to climate change, the
Holy See’s representative said that “the critical problem of global
warming is inextricably bound to the search for authentic human
development.”
So please enlighten me. Is the Pope fallible and wrong? Or is the Pope capable of examining the facts before him and God and does his opinion have the Weight of the Throne of God?
You must distinguish between matters of faith and morals — and scientific opinions. The definition of infallibility pertains to matters of faith and morals solely. If the pope teaches on matters pertaining to faith and morals, even if such teaching is not “ex cathedra,” Catholics are still bound to give a religious assent of soul to such teaching. (Be cautious. Not every teaching rises even to this level.) But if his teaching pertains to some prudential matter about how much coal should be allowed to be produced in order to achieve good care of the planet, his scientific judgment, while deserving careful analysis and due respect, is not binding on individual Catholics.
The Church usually speaks only at the level of general principles, and rarely addresses, say, the morality of a particular conflict. In matters of prudential politics and economics, while Catholics must in good conscience attempt to apply those general principles, they must follow their own consciences about what are the most prudential ways to fulfill the general principles. This does not allow Catholics the “luxury” of following their own consciences, say, to use contraception or abortion, since such acts always violate the general principles of the natural law and can never be justified by “individual circumstances.”
So just like the bible, people of faith are free to use the word of God as a cafeteria and only eat that which they choose.
You see, they haven’t proven a direct connection between CO2 levels and global temperature, that’s your problem. They attempt to show a correlation frankengraphs and manipulated data. The problem is, the climate science has been wrong every single time. For decades now. It was global cooling first. YOu should educate yourself, you look idiotic. What happens if we’re wrong? Well, I’m certainly not ploanning on transferring all my wealth to the elites so they can attempt mad scientist experiments like spraying metals in the atmosphere to cool us down. The other problem with your endgame is that, the real polluters China and India don’t care! While we’re reducing out pollution incredibly, the actual polluters continue to pollute! Now, why on Earth would we bankrupt ourselves in order to placate emotions? For if the real polluters won’t stop, then there’s no point other than to do what you did, which is to claim moral superiority while spouting absolute nonsense and saying it’s fact.
Even if you accept the premise that the earth is warming, why is it assumed that a warmer earth is bad? In fact, the only warmer period for which there is written historical evidence shows that it was a time of abundance.
You forget these are the same people who think the planet suffers from human overpopulation and desire to drastically reduce fertility on a global scale. Look no further than the “vaccination” campaigns across the entirety of the African continent. So, to them, abundance is a bad thing because it supports the “overpopulation” we have now.
warmer air increases food production. read the studies on it. its astonishing.
If Gore is worried about warm air then he should shut his pie hole as that hot air is ruining our planet.
these are the same people who says cows flatulence hurts the earth, then I think humans flatulence also is the same- so I guess we need to cork all our butts?
Prediction from 2007 – by 2014 the Arctic ice would be gone, Al Gore…… how’s that crow taste Al?……. but with all the extra millions you made scamming carbon credits you can at least have some Dom and a new G5 with that bird.
Did we say it was warming? No, you misunderstood us. We clearly stated climate CHANGE. Either way, just pay the carbon gods a tithe for your carbon crimes.
Look we don’t know which direction the thermometer is going but we know there’s a catastrophic problem on the horizon and we know we are causing it. Just pay into this fund and jump through these rugulatory hurdles and we’ll take care of everything.
I’m not sure what the hell this means, but I’m pretty sure it’s gonna cost a butt load of money to fix. Just sign a check and send it to the DNC. They’ll fill it in.
Unbiased science at http://agwunveiled.blogspot.com derives a physics-based equation which calculates results
consistent with all measured average global temperatures.
1. A reference there provides historical evidence that CO2 change does not cause climate
change.
2. The two factors that do correlate with climate change are identified. The correlation is 95% with average global temperatures since before 1900; including the current plateau. The analysis also predicts the ongoing down trend of average global temperature.
3. An explanation of why any credible CO2 change does not cause significant climate change.
Been saying for years warming is a hoax perpetrated by political pundits looking for a vehicle to place there policies into and push them through. Also been saying weather patterns are cyclical meaning they will fluctuate like this. We have always been likely to go through warming and cooling spells, that could possibly last decades. The problem is humans are short lived and therefore short sighted and only notice what is running in there short lifetime upon the earth, missing the much bigger picture. Smart people know this and use it to dupe the naive people. Who remembers the story of Chicken LIttle, the analogy fits the global warming Nazis.
Global warming is a tax scam. PERIOD You dammmn fools. Why do you think Al Gore and Goldman Sachs have set up carbon credits. Al plans to get stinky rich off the “stupidity” of the democrat, just as they get elected. YOU FOOLS and TOOLS !!! Wake up and stop being used.
Real Rocket Scientist James Hanson in 1971 claimed we were facing a new ice age in 50 to 60 years. In December 1988 he scared the foolish again into believing it was global warming. This rocket scientist was wrong before he was wrong (again!).
No, he voted against global warming before he voted for it. Or maybe he voted for an ice age before he voted against it. Or maybe h…….. Who knows? Maybe he is just bewildered or just plain baffled. All I know is George Soros has funded part of his most recent unbiased, non politicized, open minded research.
The lack of sea ice was supposed to hamper the polar bear’s ability to hunt seals. Now we will have a seal shortage due to the extra ice being so good for hunting. “Save the seals!” will be their next war cry. And somehow they will tie that into global warming.
I used to be a “catlick” until I was 12. Changed to Episcopalian because we don’t get down on ourselves for much of anything, especially a cool drink or 3 on a warm day.
Matthew 19. 21 Jesus told him, “If you want to be perfect, go and sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
Pope. If you want to be perfect, go and give me all your possessions, and I’ll give the money to the Vatican Bank and I will have treasure in commercial real estate. Then come, and follow me.
The governments are broke and they need more of your money. So invent a NEW tax scam. WAKE UP. The gov’t can’t even balance their own budget, somehow they will magically fix the planet if you send them more $ MORONS
The earth is not round its pear shaped. It does not rotate on its axis it wobbles. As we rotate around the sun who knows how accurate our path is, some years we may go hundreds othousands of miles outside/inside of where we were last year. Climate is not predictable. The biggest single influence on our planet is the sun not man. Global warming is a scam. Check out the mini ice age of the 16th century when man could not have influenced the weather, just like now
Some scientists believe the earth is warming, and maybe it is. Other scientists believe that other planets in our solar system such as Mars and Pluto are also warming, and maybe they are. Could it be there are influences beyond the sphere of influence of the planets, such as the sun that are causing the planets to warm? It would be wise to revamp Mankind’s primitive global warming models to more accurately model these variables. It should be obvious that it is useless to spend billions if not trillions of dollars on a global warming problem that may be beyond the control of Mankind. Albert
Looks like sometimes there’s llots of ice, and sometimes there isn’t. Hmmm. Natural fluctuations or EVIL KOCH BROTHERS AND THEIR EARTH WARMING MACHINE!!!!!
Remember the old song ‘Istanbul’ by the Four Lads?
Here’s an update inspired by the topic du jour.
Climate Change was Global Warming
Now it’s Climate Change not Global Warming
Been a long time now
Old Global Warming still gives Al Gore delight
On a moonlight night
Take me back to Global Warming
No you can’t go back to Global Warming
Now it’s Climate Change not Global Warming
Why did Global Warming get the works?
That’s nobody’s business but the jerks.
So a song about a real thing changing is your basis for a song about… real things changing?
Global Warming was too easily used as a talking point to the ignorant when it snowed. Oooh it’s snowing so Global Warming isn’t real. Climate Change incorporates the observable data that overall global warming trends don’t result in localized warming for every community.
The idea that there will be “winners and losers” in global climate change ignores the reality that a mass extinction event has been observed every time climate has changed the way current models predict.
‘Climate change’ was chosen alternate to ‘Global warming’ because nearly every indicator of ‘Warming’ has shown itself to be false and embarrassing.
‘Climate change’ (antonymious to ‘Static Climate’) while self evident is non sequitur to claims of man made problems. The Global warming jerks needed a less foolish handle and the cool aid drinkers bought into it.
first of all – has no one ever looked at core samples or mtns? areas of this planet were covered in glaciers and some were lakes then became desserts! The planet is on an axis and it changes. there have been studies on this from national geographic showing the axis and the adjustments and some deserts were once oceans. Ever look at a rock imbedded with a ocean mammal found in the dessert? even our rocks show that desserts were once oceans!
A Gore’s (carbon credit) is just bunk. Its the guilt trip imposed on each person to “pay” a penalty. He probably thought this up when sitting at the country club sipping fine Scotch trying to figure out how to make the masses guilt trip and he can get rich! But where does this penalty $$ go? the $ goes into the pockets of the people who invented the “carbon credit rule”- convenient don’t you think? These same people would not help an old lady cross the street or feed the hungry, they are only interested in getting richer and richer and greed is a demon when you forget about humans. they also don’t follow their own rules, rules are for peasants. in fact Pelosi called elderly “astro turf” because they got in her way! disrespectful hag!
there is a difference between making money and helping people and making money and greedy for more and helping no one and using your power for evil and not good.
and how does a carbon credit actual stop the axis of the planet? it does not
how does the carbon credit stop china from spewing so much toxic waste in air and water? it does not
there have been studies that if the entire planet went dark for years, not one energy ever used, it still would not correct 1 weeks of Chinas spewing waste! so don’t you think China should stop spewing chemical waste? they cant even see through their air! can you imagine what the water is like? I read their soil and water is so toxic it cant grow anything- you think those poisons wont migrate to other continents? think again.
Don’t you think all the libs would attack china for its toxic chemical use since it spews to other continents?
you see, its all about money/power/greed, if it was not then Gores and the others would allow actual scientist to debate them and Gore would not be flying his jet here and there polluting the nation.
The elitists (in power) have different rules. its basically socialism- these same people attack capitalism but they are worse than capitalism-
socialism has never worked, but the people that can taste the power high- never figure that out.
also socialism has plenty of sociopaths in power, hmmmm that word is so similar.
so live your life and don’t worry about it. because dinosaurs became extinct not from you driving your SUV but from a asteroid or some other major event, so the planet is going to do as it wishes and we don’t have any control.
However, you can live smartly- but until China and other nations make changes this is not going to make it better worldwide. Also all those nukes that the middle east is building cant be good for the world (and we know they are testing and will use them!)- but no left lib every talks about that! I bet that will kill more than a few owls and spotted squirrels.
I get so sick of hearing the climate changers call everyone else a denier while telling us the science is settled. When story after story has been coming out for quite a few years now that blows their claims away. Look, if there really is man made climate change happening I would be interested to know it. But YOU have to make the case. I don’t have to make the case that it’s not. The science is not settled and you are the deniers. Nothing you have claimed has been proven right.
north korea hacked sony..no a disgruntles employee did,,,the earth is warming…no its cooling…you can keep your medicine man…you cant keep your medicine man..eggs are bad for you…eggs are good for you. everything is effed up. thank u
im trying to quit buing Costco smoked salmon because of fukishima radiation. im too lazy to go catch my own een tho I live in prime territory and its cheaper. thank u
I don’t feel the need to add “”sarc” to my posts. why? because I don’t give a rats what yall think about my posts…but I know you read them. I think people who add the word “sarc” to their comments have mental issues and neurosis. thank u
Couple of things: if you assert that your settled science shows the world is warming, please just stick with that. If it ends up as debatable or disproven, own it and move on. Please don’t rename it as Climate Change and hope that everyone forgets what was said in the first place. Stunts like this reduce credibility to almost zero.
My second point is that Global Warmers need to present a better solution than a global tax on industrialized nations, especially when their Dear Leader negotiates a deal with China (the WORST offender for carbon output) that exempts them for 20 years from even beginning to think about curbing carbon emissions.
Even the Communist Chinese regularly mug Obama, closely followed by the Russians, Cubans and North Koreans (and soon the Iranians).
Did you know that climate and weather are synonyms? Yep, Climate and Weather mean the same thing…..Democrats are so stupid they have just now figured out that THE WEATHER CHANGES.,….
Yesterday the t@rds at CNN threw in a comment “If you don’t believe in global warming, just ask the managers who take care of removing your snow.” What kind of stupid comment is that. They were talking about snow removal and then throw in their own views. The only reason I watch is because my wife likes how they aren’t so heavy. Stupid yes.
Will someone please delete this information as it will prevent the further use of Global Climate Change as a reason for more political agenda use, regulation & taxes.
Funny how EVERY computer model was wrong but the bitter clingers, the flat eathers the champainge environements, still cling to their beliefs.
Remember the President, Leo DiCarprio, & Al Gore all said the science is closed. Like they would know!
WHY don’t Demcowards want THE WEATHER to CHANGE? Don’t you idiots know how disasterous it would be if the weather stayed the same all of the time? You Democrat idiots do know that climate and weather are synonyms, right?
Democrats should run their lies by a panel of people smarter than them…..like 1st graders!!!!
Democrats are so stupid that they don’t even know what the word GLOBAL means…..
HOW are record cold temps possible anywhere on earth IF it is getting warmer ALL OVER THE ENTIRE GLOBE?
Democrats are too cowardly to even attempt an answer……
And this past year Arizona had record high temperatures most of the year for the first time in decades. I don’t care what the deniers say, I’m hot. Would somebody please forward this data along to the Pope?
That wacky warming. Just don’t know if it’s going to make ice. Must be tough in this climate trying to sell global warming when your research boat got stuck in the Antarctic Ice last year…..
It is pretty interesting Most sea ice and the Northern Hemisphere show extent approaching records as well. Must be from all the heat. 2014 is after all the hottest year ever.
Maybe folks will wake up and now realize the major weather services have been really goosing the numbers.
WHY do Democowards say the “science is settled”, but then come up with 52 NEW reasons in the last year why the earth is getting colder as CO2 levels rise?
Democrats are so stupid that they don’t even know what the word “settled” means….
Lots of posting here making fun of the Catholic Church being anti-science and clinging to its tenets. While it did take 350 years to admit Galileo was correct…lets see how many centuries it will take the Climate Change hoaxers to admit their beliefs are wrong. Climate Change believers cling to their (pseudo) religion just as dearly as they argue that the Church does.They argue heresy anytime someone wants to debate their beliefs, they excommunicate any Scientist who disproves their little hoax and castigate they “unbelieving masses”.
If computer modelling really worked, every investment house on Wall Street would bringing in a 100% ROI, every one at the race track would be a winner and crime would be eliminated, as we could predict who would be committing a crime and when and where it would happen, before it happens.
Actually, you are wrong about Galleo. They admitted he was correct right away, but just didn’t want him to widely publish his work in a book written in Italian. They said he should write it in Latin and keep it among the scientific folk. The church has actually been involved in lots of good scince, from comissiong the work that overturned Aristotle’s view of the Universe, to proving Halley’s comment theory, by fixing his mistakes (the comet came late, a bishop proved why) the church was also involved in genetics research and a priest even discover how to make carbonated water.
Actually, they didn’t admit he was correct. They just didn’t argue with it. Instead, they struggled between execution and jail. He was spared death by recanting his findings.
You have a point. Today’s church is far more accepting of science than in the past, except for Climate Change. In my opinion (and I do not wish to denigrate the Church) the Church accepts Climate Change more for the supposed sociological impact than as a scientific fact. In this respect the Church will always have the internal hearts vs. minds dilemma.
I am not condoning the decision to lie for the “greater good”, just saying that is perhaps what the Church sees as its only option, such is the focus of organized religion. Now for governments to lie for the greater good, that is dangerous and no longer only the bastion for dictators (we see liberals and democrats do this daily). And for science to lie for the greater good (as the Climate Change hoaxers do) relegates us back to Age of Darkness an thus can no longer be termed “science”.
Back to the modelling. That is what kills me. Doing research for a living, I can’t help but role my eyes when I hear people talk about modelling as facts. I can create a model for you that shows that pigs can actually fly when the spin their tails fast enough. It doesn’t mean that it will happen. The model is very dependent upon the data and the assumptions. Doing research in GA Tech’s Earth and Atmospheric Science’s school in the early 90s, we (my professor) skewed data all of the time to secure funding for the next year. Being young, impressionable and without any real say, I just went along with it. That was a whole lifetime ago but it has definitely skewed my thoughts about all of this climate stuff.
If you live long enough, you can sit back and either laugh or cry at all the various entities trying to make money from scaring the public. New agencies, research, charities, government, drug companies, religions, etc. They all want your money and the easiest way to get it is to scare you! If you read some dire news, follow it to its source and you’ll find someone profiting and gaining power from it. So predictable.
Sadly you are right Lorinda, but remember if there wasn’t any money in it, they would stop. P.T. Barnum was correct…”there is a sucker born every minute” and the Climate Change hoaxers have made billions across the globe.+
Every Global Warming enthusiast continues to do their very best to promote the concept and increase the temperatures. This is the reason that all of the Global Warming World Conference for the Benevolent Earth and Society as a Whole Association meets in Hawaii or some such place. Nothing like fueling up a few dozen 747’s for a cruise to combat Global Warming. Call me when they bury their SUV’s and start living in a tent and I’ll consider giving their argument more attention
Climate (THE WEATHER) has always changed…..Democrats are so stupid they don’t even know that the definition of climate is THE WEATHER……Climate and weather are synonyms….apparently, Democrats are too stupid to know what a synonym is too…..
Climate = The weather conditions
Weather = The climatic conditions
Only complete morons don’t realize that weather and climate mean the same thing….don’t you Democowards even know what a synonym is?
The problem with attempting debate with Democrats is that 99% of them are illiterate buffoons who are appallingly ignorant of the definitions of common words.
Climate Change theory. It’s very true that science cannot predict exactly what the future holds based on observable data. That is why it is theory. We know ice ages have come and gone in the past without the influence of mankind. We also know that there is a long cycle of warming and cooling that is observable. It is believed that short term variations in the long term cycles have occurred, however why these variations have occurred is subject to debate within the climate science community. One theory is based on the global oceanic conveyer. It is believed that an inundation of fresh water when the previous glaciers retreated in the great lakes area resulting in a diversion of fresh water through the St. Lawrence seaway changed the salinity of the North Atlantic enough to temporarily shut down the oceanic conveyer resulting in a cooling period in the middle of a warming period. Cause and effect.
One current theory regarding climate change is that a sufficient melting of the Arctic Ice sheet will once again shut down the global conveyor. So yes it is very possible that a global warming trend can result in another ice age.
The following link is regarding the global oceanic conveyor, not about climate change.
Nobody panic! Oil is reaching record lows, china is expanding it’s infrastructure. Should be a veritable fleet of new v8 powered cars and trucks on the road very soon. Everyone’s gotta do their part to prevent a global freezing catastrophe! I plan to do my part to help by slow roasting a 10# prime rib on the grill tomorrow! and running my kerosene heater on my deck to keep it and my friends warm. There’s also 3 cords of wood stacked up for the bonfire later for New years!
3,469 Responses
OH NO! What do I do now??!! Buy more SUV’s??? Smash my solar panels and start burning a pile of tires in my yard?? Al GORE please tell me what is best!!
No, no, no! You must IGNORE the data and say 10 Our Father Gore’s for entertaining such blasphemous ideas!
More fracking!
Sinner! Repent!
Repenting has absolutely nothing to do with it. What’s needed is for you to accept the empirical reality of the world you inhabit. Antarctic sea ice is increasing because the continent is melting down. Ice is moving from the land to the sea.
If Climate Depot were a reliable source of information and not a dishonest Climate Denier propaganda outlet, why would they pretend to have difficulty understanding this?
Gee, I hope you’re right: I’m going to invest in coconut palm futures in Antartica. I’ll make zillions!
Who are you going to sell them to if the world’s coastal cities are drowned beneath 75 meters of melted ice cap?
Ay – you gotta love that Global Warming. If it were not for Global Warming, I would be freezing my arse off.
quick!!! send all your money to al gore, he’ll fix everything!!!
Didn’t you get the memo? The planet is cooling. The ice cap is returning. Algore saved us! Nobel prizes for everyone.
couldn’t have done it without that awesome new pope!!! {sarc}
As a Catholic, I don’t want to tear down this pope,but……….SNAPS!
at some point enough has to be enough…
The world revolves around the Sun, too. Why are you Catholic?
For the same reason Galileo and Copernicus were.
Which is??
It does? Obama has me and others convinced that the world revolves around him… Or am I confused and Obama is black hole where all logic,sanity etc is sucked down to never return?
Dat’s rayciss!
Faith in something greater than me, tradition, history, being sophisticated enough and trained as an engineer to know that I’m not the cousin of an amoeba. But, this pope is doing tremendous damage to the church. He is supposed to be a spiritual leader.
Perhaps he’s not getting the correct updates from upstairs on his cell phone. I thought he was supposed to be infallible?
Look, I’m not going to get into a debate on the role of the pope or his infallibility. I can tell from your snarky comment that you are just attempting to take a cheap shot at the pope because he is an easy target.
He’s a human being elevated by men to a position of deity. Sorry, but the whole pope thing is a fraud. I cringe every time I hear someone refer to him as “the holy father”. Man, better start taking those Biblical warnings about idolatry seriously.
He is not a deity. He is not worshiped. He is the leader of the church much like the Archbishop of Canterbury is the leader of the Anglican church. So, to even say that show your lack of knowledge.
He’s not worshiped? Hah! I know many Catholics who think this man is infallible. Only God is infallible. To attribute that quality to anyone else is, by definition, worship. They call him “The Holy Father”, not “the leader of the church”. The Holy Father is in heaven. Not worship? Geesh, these people refer to him as a deity and claim he is infallible, and you don’t think that’s worship? Get a clue.
You call him the Pope because that is the position he was elected to by a group of other Pope-wannabees. So, what if he had lost the election? We could have Pope Oscar and his world view could be a whole lot different. Catholics have to stop giving credence to this person who literally won a personality contest among a group of so-called abstinent men.
He was elected because of his religious “resume”. I am sure that there was an element of politics considering that he was from Latin America, a Jesuit, etc. But he was elected to be a religious leader. He should stay out of politics.
Its always Politics. Especially in the Vatican.
The Pope is the personal representative of God on Earth. He sits on the throne of God. His election was God’s will.
as born out by what scripture? None. Only God sits on the throne of God – Go’ds permissive will – the same will that allows you to worship false idols, follow a human instead of Jesus, murder babies, steal from others, live in sin etc. I have no doubt you believe that drivel you just spewed – sad really.
I believe the best response is from your own words:
“I have no doubt you believe that drivel you just spewed – sad really”
Me, too, Shelby. As a Catholic I have to admit that this new pope is a disaster for the Church.
They didn’t even have to make a man-made volcano to spew billions of tons of reflective particles into the atmosphere to solve it. Man, those guys are effective. Really dodged a bullet, here. Now we should just give them billions of tax dollars out of gratitude.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/geoengineering-to-fight-global-warming/
His bank account has sure grown off the “Stupidity of the Democrat”
They know it’s stupid. They laugh all the way to the bank about how it all actually works.
did he run out of fine Scotch already?
That Global Warming is a b i t c h.
VUNDERBAR,. I was under the impression that polar bears were drowning due to no ice. Global warming was melting it away. And East Angelia college was always telling the truth. VUNDERBAR.
Your German is impeccable.
The polar bears are truly flurishing…now they have plenty of ice to eat.
Is there a chance the rotation of the earth will go off it’s axis, and rotate out of control because there is too much weight in the Antarctic?
no, but since the average american is 30 pounds overweight…if all the homegrown fatties jump up and down at the same time…it might happen.
All us “deniers” think it’s flat, don’t you remember? So, it can’t rotate, or at least not very well.
The risk is from AL GORE’S weight.
Or Hillary.
No, that’s Guam that will tip over if too many people get on one side of it. Or at least that what a Democrat loon said.
That won’t happen until we get total protonic reversal.
Can you buy that at the supermarket?
In the dairy aisle, next to the yoghurt.
Oh no! How did this article get through Al Gore’s MEDIA FILTER?? Heads will roll.
And last year the Great Lakes were 96% frozen over for the first time in decades. I don’t care what the warmers say, I’m cold. Would somebody please forward this data along to the Pope?
The pope is a socialist and believes global warming is the political equivalent of the Christian Compact. In other words, it is up to the wealthy Christian nations in the world to give freely to the needy in order to follow the path that Christ set forth as the way to god. I believe in the Christian compact as well, but within the framework of free market capitalism guided by the rule of law and a democratic form of government. Remember the Pope is from Argentina. Argentina and the US were similar in almost all respects socially and economically in 1900. Unfortunately, Argentina took a different turn politically which resulted in a lost century of liberty for the Argentinian people. The pope is comfortable with the path the Argentinians took.
Juan Peron was a fascist and so are his successors. Albert
What is your point? Are you saying that Argentine fascists were not socialists?
Fascism, socialism, and communism are the same thing but packaged differently. Albert
Man, we’re off topic.
But, hey, good times.
Liberals love to claim that socialism isn’t bad, because certain socialist dictators were vaguely “right wing” in the most ambiguous definitions possible of the term. It’s like liberals insisting Hitler was “right wing” despite the modern usage of “right wing” to mean believing in limited government, and the power of the individual in contrast, not despite, the power of the state — a school of thought that failed to reach Hitler during his campaign, promises lavish social benefits, through his tenure as ruler as he created government-run companies that produced automobiles and so much more, clear through to his death after government intrusion into the private economy, to fund expansionism and socialist utopian promises, utterly destroyed German prosperity and security.
“Those right-wing guys growing the government massively are evil. But man, we need more socialism.”
Speaking of Hitler, socialism can be summed up in one simple statement: “[…] because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in
the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or
voluntarily.”
Emotional nutcases they are indeed.
Facism and Socialism are two sides of the same coin.
Yes. There are no such things as right-wing fascism or socialism. Both are left-wing. The differences are in the implementation and type of force used. Fascism is more barrel-of-the-gun. Socialism is more peer-pressure-choice-limitation-censorship-information-witholding style withOUT the gun.
Actually, Socialism (Fabian is one facet) has the ideology of waiting until you get enough of the support and policies in place. Once that is done, you kill and jail all dissenters. Kind of throws in the face of what Hillary said about dissent being unAmerican. Democrats only espouse freedom of speech and dissent as long as it serves their purpose. Ever tried to argue with a Democrat? You’ll find a very closed minded and/or uneducated person.
Amen to that…but they’d NEVER admit it!!!!
Both socialism and facism use force or ‘barrel-of-the-gun’ interchangeably. Don’t believe me? Try not paying your US income taxes or selling loose cigarettes to avoid tax revenues in NY.
The term ‘facism’ has to do with coopting or binding private interests to government interest. I am not an Italian historian, but Mussolini first used the term which comes form the Latin term ‘fasces’ or bundle of sticks.
Yep, “fasces” as a symbol indicates power; the synchronized, coincidental, parallel application of the stick as opposed to the carrot. It symbolizes the power of those who assert it under legitimate, i.e. legal, authority. In the simplest explanation it symbolizes the power of the unity of purpose to impose the axiom “might makes right”.
That symbol is pervasive throughout all authoritarian organizations. Do a google search on the image of “fasces” and the concept is pretty clear, but here’s a preview.
Depends how you define ‘left wing’ and ‘right wing’. Very ambiguous terms. They really don’t do political discourse any good at all.
Particularly since there are plenty of things that could be considered cite-able references that insist big-government dictators like Hitler are ‘right-wing’, the conversation gets muddied.
I define ‘right-wing’ political ideology to mean placing the power (responsibility and liberty) on the individual, and left-wing to place it in the hands of bureaucrats. Makes it simple.
Side note: An individual standing up against hatred is good. A government using alleged hatred to grab power is a disaster.
“Left-wing” and “right-wing” are not really useful terms, and mask the complicity and similarities between Nazis, Fascists, Socialists and Communists. What they all have in common is big, strong government. A more useful distinction is a “statist” axis. At or near one extreme are all four philosophies, above. At the other end, is individualism and liberty (aka our Founding Fathers).
Too bad that “Statist” does not sound as scary as Nazi, Fascist, Socialist or Communist. In truth, it is the scariest thing of all.
As a scripture reading catholic this new pope scares me
Socialism is directly against Jesus’ teachings.
Telling people to help the poor is totally different than telling people to subjugate themselves to another person’s presumed authority under the pretext of helping the poor.
If socialists didn’t believe flagrant lies, they wouldn’t believe anything.
There is actually a difference between teaching someone to fish and buying them a Long John Silver meal – Oh with a diet soda -gotta watch my weight.
Does LJS take the good ole “EBT”
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Joseph Goebbels a very well known Socialist in Germany. Yes the Nazis were socialist
And therefore…probably would have been a Democrat.
Example: “Hands up don’t shoot.” & “I can’t Breathe.”
Obviously, he could BREATH, or he would NOT have spoken the words that were heard.
wow what an utter dolt you are… perhaps he should have said “I feel my airways are being constricted which is making it harder for me to take in oxygen and expel carbon dioxide…”? tard’s like you make it so hard to fight for critical thinking
@hfd: And apparently you still believe he was in a choke hold when he (repeatedly) said that?
A little critical thinking on your part would help.
Both lies, made popular by liars
By definition, Charity isn’t charity if it’s being enforced by law, sword, or gun.
Jesus’s teachings were to be charitable. Trying to ‘enforce’ charity defeats its very purpose.
The Catholic Church isn’t worried about charity, look at the top brass with their multi-million dollar estates. It’s a fraud.
OTH, sea ice doesn’t account for as much as total ice pack. Earth is losing ice – PERIOD. It’s cyclical, just check out wiki for “ice age” and see this cycle has about a 125K year reboot. We are spiking around the top soon to be followed by an EXTREME drop into cold.
And, no, there are no SUV fossils.
AL GORE SHOULD BE IN PRISON RIGHT NEXT TO THE PONZI SCHEME FRAUDSTER BERNIE MADOFF. GORE IS A LIAR, THIEF, FRAUD AND WORST OF ALL, HYPOCRITE.
You forgot buffoon
Liberals made up the religion of global warming so they can PRETEND to be the savior of the planet.
Just as they PRETEND to be the savior of the poor, the blacks, the gays, the feminists, the unions and dozens of other special interest groups too lazy, ignorant and weak minded to think beyond the media lies.
Anybody that thinks this global warming scam is about anything other than a massive redistribution of wealth is playing into their hands.. That is all this is about period…It is the attempt at global government with global laws which loosely translates into ransacking the US and giving that wealth to a global oligarchy.. Simple.. Thats why they will never let it go. Never..
BINGO!!
we have a winner !!!!!
I thought that the earth began to heal and the seas began to recede the very moment Barak Obama took office……….weren’t we told exactly that?
But he’s got the chakra!
No, Joe Biden holds the patent on Buffoon.
With a $24K/mo electric bill. God. What a douche.
Will he get time off for inventing the internet?
LMAO. Bet Baraq is pissed at him for not putting government controls on it at the time.
You forgot to preface all those labels with “very rich”
You also forgot that he has sh!t for brains!
Thug, Bully, Egomaniac, Pervert, Sociopath, Propagandist, and that covers about half of it..
Twenty Four carat gold plated hypocrite. And he is a prick to boot.
…and the bankers who knowingly sold bad loan debt to other banks and collapsed the banking system. Also, the politicians who made that possible by gundecking Federal loan reports at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for years. They have the cash and the media flacking for them though. They should all be locked up.
And especially the creators of the Community Reinvestment Act and its followers, Clinton, Reno, Frank, Dodd, Waters.
Not defending them and I agree with most posts here, but multi-million dollar estates? That they own? Please, if this is not just some brown gas coming out your back side, provide some links to this, I am interested.
Go look it up yourself you lazy dolt. People don’t have to do research for you. Al Gore lives in a palatial estate in Tennessee and it’s easily seen via Google Earth. If I found it, so you can you.
AND his beachfront Malibu home, prefectly safe from rising oceans, apparently. Right on the beach, though.
BTW the Church of Rme, to deal with mess those touchy feelie priests made, is selling off a TON of really nice waterfront property in New England, and elsewhere. Vow of “poverty” ROFLMAO.
I think warpony meant the Catholic Leaders.
Attenhut!
STHU PO Green. You were too lazy to read the article, or the comments or you would know he was referring to the top Vatican officials in Italy.
At ease and carry on
I may be a lazy dolt but the comment was not talking about Al Gore, it was talking about the Catholic Church, you ignorant dolt. And I am not backing up the Catholics, I think they have a lot of nerve wanting the US to spend on their programs while they have great wealth in buildings and art work and I think the Pope is way out of line and an Obama loving socialist, I was just asking about the comment that was made. I don’t really think it is too much to ask when someone makes a unfounded statement to ask them to back it up. If not, the entire comments section dialog is nothing but drivel and although a lot of it is, like your comment, I believe a good deal if it is healthy dialog.
If you get to live in it for life — does it really matter if you own it or not? Isn’t it semantics at that point?
Old Al does live in an multi million dollar palace in TN. Cannot get near it.
He was talking about the top brass in the Catholic Church not Al Bore
German Bishop Franz-Peter ($40 million dollar home)… & google “The lavish
homes of American archbishops” – $1 million plus. And, I’m sure there’s more.
I recant my position and apologize to you.
Apology not necessary my friend. And, as a disabled US Army veteran and veteran supporter, Wounded Warriors is a good place to show your support. Thanks.
A good percentage of my giving had been going to WW recently but now they get it all. Once the Bishops sell the mansions and feed the poor, I might start listening to them again. I think it takes big balls to tell the US government what to do with tax money when you live in a 14 million dollar mansion
I can’t wait.
The church owns expensive real estate- the priests, bishops, cardinals own virtually nothing but the clothes on their back. When they are in civilian clothes, that is. When they are in their vestments they don’t own those either.
Yes, but they have access to some fine vacation properties such as ski lodges in Colorado.
Agree. It appears that we are in an interglacial period of an ice age. I looked ice age up after returning from Alaska when a glacier guide said we are in an ice age.
What you do not realize is everything the Church has, was donated or given to them. Unless you know the history of the Catholic Church and how It came to be, you really should keep your opinions to yourself. You are just like the libs and perhaps you are one. You point out what is on the surface and not the truth. This is about Global warming, not the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church is simply the world’s largest real estate company. Ever been to the Vatican’s “Map Room”? And that’s just the Italian properties! Then they have their “other assets”, i.e., you and me, who fork over our paychecks to pay taxes, rent and maintenance on all that real estate … in exchange, of course, for a solemn assurance that we’ll have a great time after we’re dead.
And after that guy forgives your sins before getting back to diddling little boys.
I read that wiki article last week…pretty interesting that so much has been made about a natural trend with thousands of years supporting it.
“The Catholic Church…look at the top brass with their multi-million dollar estates. It’s a fraud.”
I am looking but where are those ‘estates?’ Can’t you control your religious bigotry and ignorance even when the subject is the global warming fraud?
German Bishop Franz-Peter ($40 million dollar home)… google “The lavish
homes of American archbishops – $1 million plus)”
Gore has not one, but two mansions, it seems.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/gorehome.asp
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/05/03/stunning-pictures-al-gores-new-9-million-mansion-media-totally-ignore
No doubt… but believing in global warming doesnt mean you must believe in a socialist fix. I infact believe in letting the earth do whatever it intends to do. It will either wipe away our existance or it will turn out to be much to do about nothing.
Uh huh, and why would you pretend humans have nothing to do with that?
We have increased CO₂ from 290PPM before the industrial revolution to 400PPM today. If it’s so likely that polar ice caps will be able to withstand CO₂ so high, why isn’t there a single example of them doing so in Earth’s history?
oh nooooooo !
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/17277-global-warming-alarmists-stuck-in-antarctic-sea-ice
Believer huh? Too bad.
Another one who mainlines the Democrat Plantation Kool Aid.
Nice try – taking this article’s snapshot of 36 years in an approximately 4.5 billion year history (shrinking it to your own 8 year snapshot), then trying to magnify the significance of your own numbers, and making your premise of cause the only available one….
Hot is global warming. Cold is global warming. Rain is global warming. Snow is global warming. Clouds and the lack of clouds are global warming…
Forget it KM, you are talking to a Democrat Plantation helot too long immersed in the Kool Aid.
There you go: Reverting to your Confederate mythology of the helots slaving on plantations. At least you are honest about wanting to go against humanity in wishing to enslave your brothers.
Hurricane? Global warming. Warmer winter? Global warming. Colder winter? Global warming.
Oh wait……it’s called “climate change” now. It is all-encompassing, and everything that occurs under the sun is the fault of greedy mankind.
“Global warming” was proving to be a real embarrassment. With “climate change” you can have your cake and eat it too.
Get with the program. “Climate Change” was so yesterday. It is “Climate Disruption”.
According to my personal Guru, Chicken Little, the glaciers are coming and we’re all going to freeze to death.
We’re doomed unless you fork over tons of money to Mr. Little, via me.
Algore, is that you?
Damn! Busted.
Little by little, car lanes are being removed in favor of bike lanes. I wonder why is that?
Beats the shit out of me. How many nuts would prefer commuting to work on a bike?
Me!
Have fun next snowy day.
The eco-freak dictatorship. agenda 21. Starting with Common core. Total control.
You are paranoid!!
Listen oilcanp – I got no problem with oil if it’s a healthy olive or canola oil dressing a dish of salad. You are obviously fixated on extracting and profiting from every last ounce of petroleum, right? Liquid gold. Well, sad to say, a big societal change is underway.. less driving, less car ownership. Why are gasoline prices falling? Because of decreased demand. What will the result be? Less driving = less air pollution, less driving = more physical activity. Score two big pluses for the environment and peoples’ health. Score two big minus for the oil industry, which has to retrench/retool/re-imagine itself which will also involve R&D costs and accept less for the product it pumps.
You know, they just banned wood fires in fireplaces in NYC. I think that was the right thing to do – considering the pollution caused by wood fires.
Of course you do, dear. Although lunatics are gunning down cops in the streets, I’m sure wood fires are VERY high-priority concern in the Rotten Apple.
Just read an article that said the polar ice caps are the largest every recorded. The global warming folks have got to be getting nervous. Nothing is playing out as they predicted.
Oh, maybe you want to go back to a world of dirty air and water? I guess you favor birth defects, emphysema, lung cancer, and mutations, and so forth. Most people don’t.
When you are cornered and can’t rationally reply, you spout socialist claptrap. Your assertions that “…you favor birth defects, emphysema, lung cancer, and mutations, and so forth…” are not borne out by anything in this thread. They are racist insults.
Racist insults? I’m telling you: Birth defects, emphysema, lung cancer, heart disease and on and on – these are your legacies. You and people like you who do not wish to have a clean environment, you brought these scourges down on us. All of us.
This one? (Just posted it up top)
http://testclimate.wpengine.com/2014/12/30/global-sea-ice-breaks-all-time-record-high-antarctic-sea-ice-also-breaks-all-time-record-high/
Yeah, yeah, hold on to your dream of expensive oil, and endless profits for big oil and all the business that flows from it. You should see what cities in Europe are doing – always in the vanguard of progress: Banning private cars in city centers including swaths of Paris, encouraging bicycling/walking, and installing solar/wind like there’s no tomorrow.
Well, it’s about time we moved on from sickening ourselves and our descendants by allowing coal and heavy oil fired plants to pour out tons of emissions, as well as car exhaust, don’t you think?
There are no “heavy oil” electricity generating plants in the US.
It’s still used to power residential oil burners. Diesel is still used for electrical generation. Coal is certainly the biggest culprit – isn’t it still widely used?
You are correct about coal – it accounts for approximately 40% of our nation’s electric generation. Just curious: What would you like to replace that 40% with – natural gas or nukes? Other than coal, those are the only choices. Don’t say wind and solar because they are intermittent resources and can’t substitute for base load generation.
BTW – There is very little utility scale diesel gen in the US, Most in Hawaii and other island Territories. Plenty of small emergency diesel gensets, though!
Kitty… News flash! You and eco buddies wouldn’t be around, be fed, clothed, have transportation or a roof over your heads without oil. Anthropomorphic global warming is the biggest hoax perpetrated in history to control every part of human being’s lives. (e.g. “banning” what allows independence, force dependence/control). Windmills in the U.S. alone kill 1.5 million birds and bats per yr. Not very “Green” are they!
Ignorant
Next it will be “Climate Stagnation” since the temperature is not changing.
Brilliant!!
Laugh it up now, while oil is still ascendant. I guess you GW deniers are the ultimate carpe diem folks – the ultimate fatalists. What do you care about the future as long as you can make money today – untrammeled by government regulation or the adverse health consequences of dirty air/water/soil.
No, typically conservatives are far more responsible with our use of energy, and how trash is handled. Liberals leave trash everywhere, don’t recycle as much, and like AlGore, have massive electric bills. Just because you buy falsified data, does not make you a better, more concerned person. There simply is no alternative to oil & coal, thanks in part to you liberals that won’t allow nuclear energy. But The US is far cleaner than China. In fact it is your disregard of China’s massive pollution that makes you the ultimate fraud.
Gimme a break. Take a look at Germany – which is putting in solar at the speed of light. They are the progressive ones in the Green battle. This isn’t even a Liberal/Conservative problem. It’s a nearsighted-farsighted one: The ones that plan and think will survive, the ones that don’t – eh, sorry, maybe a flood will wash away your “sins.”
Current solar technology is not efficient enough to be economically feasible. It’s also not scalable. Replacement for 1 Nuclear powered power plant producing 1000 MegaWatts would take solar “farm” approx. 1/4 the size of Rhode Island 292
sq mi.
Not true. Germany is replacing nuclear with solar – and Germany isn’t even that sunny.
Kitty it seem you’re a Reality Denier. Gov’t regulation cost individuals and companies hundred of billions of $ every yr. $ that could in most cases be used for bettering peoples individuals’ lives, used for research to cure disease, provide for better education, used for R&D to make better use of resources, etc. etc.
No – it’ll be climate clean-up, once the price of oil really collapses due to people driving less and biking more (for example) or China finally cracks down on electrical power generating stations burning coal/heavy oil (which it is about to do). I do not think you can call the Chinese “dumb” for cracking down on air pollution.. not “dumb” at all..
Again, *pollution* is not *global warming*. Stop confusing the two issues.
Really? Since when do emissions/air pollution not lead to GW? China is currently one of the biggest culprits (if not the biggest) but it has recently promulgated legislation to end coal-fired power stations in three key provinces (so so many of its citizens are dying due to the effects of pollution).
Example: dump a bunch of old cares, batteries ans light bulbs full of mercury into a lake and you have *pollution*. None of these things contribute to “global warming”.
They are separate things.
I am saying emissions from polluting industry/cars lead to GW. That is accepted world-wide by now. The array of pollution from polluting industry can certainly include illegal dumping in lakes, rivers, soil. The same polluting industry probably also dumps tons of particulate matter into the air. All these forms of pollution need to be addressed – and they are being addressed.
You just make stuff up, don’t you. Flechette did not say it was “dumb.” Perhaps you are, though.
Kitty the only thing that Communist Chinese gov’t is “cracking down on” are the heads of 100s of thousands of people would dare to speak out or think for themselves. Their air is dirtier than ever. Though I do think you and thousands who talk like you would feel at home there… at least until reality set in.
No, China just signed on to a climate agreement with Obama – to ban coal fired electrical generating stations in 3 key provinces. I agree that there is not much freedom of speech – but there is a tradition of almost daily demonstrations/frequent riots throughout the country, and occasionally the message of people fed up with pollution does get through to the central authorities.
It doesn’t matter what you call it. Those who lived through Sandy – including quite a large portion of the US population – and maybe one of the most influential sections of the country (East Coast) believe in its reality. You want to keep shelling out billions to repair superstorm damage? Then go right ahead and keep on burning coal or heavy oil to generate electricity – go right ahead and do not force industry to clean up its act. There are millions of people though who think otherwise – especially those who saw their property inundated/destroyed or swept out to sea
No, it’s Climate Catastrophism!
Well, cactus, it’s easy for you to say that.. Try dealing with your house washed away by Sandy.. or expensive art collections of the uber-rich inundated in Tribeca, or Chelsea, or the West Village. Sandy hit some of the wealthiest zip codes in the US. These people donate – to both parties. They will make sure measures are put in place to curb emissions.. clean up dirty industry, etc.
Sandy was mild. The fact that anything was left at all is a sign that the storm lacked the strength of past storms.
So you Sandy had washed away the E. Coast. I bet you wish that. Nice – it would have washed away the cradle of our United States: Boston, NY, Phila, and on down to the Virginia and the Carolinas. How unpatriotic.
Public Education? Do you know what a barrier island is?
Yep. Have also visited many. Your point is? The barrier islands will “protect” the cities? Umm.. it didn’t quite work out that way with Sandy unfortunately. Water washed into Lower Manhattan – filling the construction pit at the WTC site for example, the Bklyn-Battery tunnell, the trans E. River and trans Hudson transit tunnels, and so forth.
No. Barrier Islands are a natural feature created in a large storm. They are the last “sand bar” before the mainland, where the waves break. In the storm that creates such a feature, the “barrier island” is nothing more than a submerged sand bar. They don’t protect anything.
Gimme a break. This is typical oil-based-economy-justification-talk – you know it and I know it – all of a sudden you are going to “scientifically” prove that Sandy was umm… just “par for the course” and has nothing to do with “the environmental depredations caused by decades of air pollution.” You can’t admit the environment is all screwed up even though 2014 was a record warm year. So you’ll try to say Sandy wasn’t so bad and even worse storms are possible – even when nobody was driving. Right. Maybe from your perspective (doubt if you’re on the E. Coast of the US) it was a walk in the park. Guess what – it was a nightmare, xdream.
Actually I think it has been re-branded yet again…it is now climate disruption. Now any variation or anomaly that any Stalinist enviro-idiot perceives to be real is caused by man disrupting the climate.
At the core of this madness: self-loathing.
and ignorance
I think you are the ignorant one if you doubt the reality of what rampant un-regulated development leads to: Air pollution off the chart, thousands if not millions unable to breath, prematurely dying, sky-rocketing health care costs,and so forth Why do you think China has instituted strict controls on coal fired plants (also possibly heavy-oil powered electrical generating plant)? It doesn’t want millions of its people dying of basically smoke inhalation… and having to pay the cost in hospital/disability expenses.
Well thank God we have been regulated to death here.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/19803-obama-imposed-75-000-pages-of-new-regulations-in-2014
You sure do. Otherwise, we’d still be living in smog-choked cities world-wide. Look at the increase in life expectancy since the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts were introduced here, and anti-air pollution measures were enacted in England. China is now going through the same process – the backlash to the harmful effects of breakneck development, without the least thought for the environment.
No – at the core of the madness is greed and the rush for development, be it under capitalism or communism. Also, the fear of being taken over by other countries, and the rush to be armed to the teeth and economically “strong.” Things today are exactly as they were on the eve of WWI: Alliances tested by crazy nationalist outbreaks, such as Ukraine. The difference is that the superpowers today fight limited wars rather than all-out self-destructive conflicts.
Interesting take! Greed is an interesting concept. One man’s greed is another’s ambition. I supposed every collector, and hoarder, can be considered greedy, along with everyone who desires upward mobility. And greed is not limited to material wealth. I suppose it’s a question of degree, which, at the far end of the spectrum, bleeds into obsessions.
As I see it, greed is a common, almost universal human characteristic. We see it on the Green Left, with partisans hustling after public subsidies, not to mention the Big Players (i.e., the greediest, so to speak) who seek to establish entire markets (e.g., cap and trade), and far-reaching global regulations, from which they derive considerable profit. And, of course, every ambitious capitalist (from businessmen, such as myself, to artists) can be considered greedy.
The problem with the advocates of Slow Growth (or, more extremely, No Growth) is that they are typically members of highly advanced capitalistic economies — places where they can routinely visit grocery stores and shopping malls that offer a mind-boggling variety of consumer goods — 6 varieties of apples, 25 flavors of yogurt, dozens of automobiles, every book you would ever want to read, dozens of movies — all within a short radius, all at competitive prices (driven by the efficient market). Along with high technology. And indulgent luxury goods. And a crushing volume of information.
People in this culture have no right to demand growth limits on 2nd- and 3rd-world economies — as if to say, I’ve got mine, and you can just live with your primitive economy. That’s not going to happen. The 2nd world is catching up, as well they should, and the even the lost causes in the third world (e.g., Haiti) are making some progress. This is, after all, the Age of Global Capitalism.
“Armed to the teeth”? Easy to say if you live under the nuclear umbrella of the United States. Again, can we tell the developing world to just live as primitives, and hope for the best, while America can assure it’s actual and would-be enemies that death and destruction are only minutes away if they cross the line (as we define it)?
I think Americans (actually, the entire ‘1st world’, as we define it) has forfeit its right to place limits on the economic and military development of the developing world. The hypocrisy is beyond the pale.
Whoa – the old Soviet Union was the biggest enviro-criminal state – much worse that the “capitalist” states of the “West.” In the “East” development led to actual ecocide. Even though things got pretty bad in the US – remember the smog of LA? – I’m not sure we actually ever completely poisoned the Earth as thoroughly/mindlessly as they did in E. Europe and Russia. Of course – forget about ecocide in China today – a carnival of untrammeled capitalist-communist development that has surely led to thorough poisoning of that land.
Hey, today is cloudy when it was sunny yesterday! Oh teh noes! It’s “climate change”!
Continue to live in your Pollyana world of denial. Maybe you would want to take a dip in Newtown Creek – which partially forms the border of the boroughs of Queens and Brooklyn, NY – a nice refreshing dip in some of most polluted water on Earth, the direct result of untrammeled development/dumping of industrial waste since Colonial times! If you think capitalism (or communism for that matter – since the communists have been equally oblivious to the effects of untrammeled development) is so great, be my guest – take a nice refreshing dip in those polluted waters!
I never said that we should stop trying to clean up our water. I am against dumping arsenic in our rivers. Who isn’t?
But *clean water* is not *global warming*.
I find it amazing that so many people use pollution in order to justify “global warming” regulations. It is a DIFFERENT ISSUE!
Really? You explain how the issues are different. The ideal is the cessation of the use of coal to fire energy stations, as well as the cessation of heavy oil. After that, we go after gasoline-powered cars. Any dirty/polluting industry must also be cleaned up. Have I missed anything?
Yes, you missed the basic premise: *pollution* (like dumping toxic waste into the water) is not *global warming* (which is supposedly caused by carbon dioxide…even though the earth has only warmed 0.8 degrees in a century).
If you are against *pollution* then lobby for trade restrictions on China; they produce the majority of the *pollution* on the planet.
Air pollution leads to global warming. As far as China is concerned, there is only so much any country other than China can do. How much leverage do you really think the US has over China at this point?
1. Pollution does not necessarily lead to “global warming”. They are two different things. Arsenic in a river is not “global warming”.
2. If China is causing the majority of the pollution then we have a *duty* to try to get them to clean up. Just looking the other way and saying “we can’t really get them to do anything” is a cop out. Do you *really* care about the environment? If so, do not cop out.
Pollution does not necessarily lead to “global warming”. If you are referring to air pollution (AP) that is a matter of opinion. I suppose you would advocate for no regulations whatsoever on any polluting business, right? Do you also feel AP does not lead to any adverse health effects?
Absolutely not! Of course we should have regulations restricting pollution. I am just making it clear that “global warming” is not “pollution”.
The reason I insist on correct terminology is that bad decisions get made when the two issues are confused. Reasonable regulations controlling pollution are a good thing, but many people carry that argument into the “global warming” debate, which is a different subject entirely.
Many people will see smog around a city and then conclude that we need “global warming” regulations. Two different things.
It is important because a bad regulations can hurt the nation’s economy AND hurt the *environment*as well. If you *really* want to help the environment then you have to make sure that the regulations being passed are valid, not just political insider money manipulation.
I suppose you disagree with the Pope on the issue of the need to curb pollution and so forth, and the link between global warming and super storms such as Haiyan.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_REL_POPE_ASIA_CLIMATE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-01-15-08-14-58
I am for curbing pollution, so I obviously disagree with the Pope on that. I do not think that “global warming” is a real issue at all, man-made or otherwise
From the artcile, note this quote, “The ultimate goal of U.N. climate negotiations is to stabilize greenhouse gases at a level that keeps global warming below 2 degrees C (3.6 F), compared with pre-industrial times.”
This is absurd since the earth has only warmed 0.8F in the last 110 years, and the temperature has not risen signifiacntly in the last 17 years. If we can only raise is by 0.8F how could we possibly reduce it by 3.6F?
If you believe in man-made global warming this means that if we stopped ALL human activity we would only lower the earth’s temperature by 0.8F. Lowering it by 3.6F would be *impossible*.
Back to the Pope, his statment that “Man has slapped nature in the face” is actually blasphemous if you are Catholic. “Nature” is not a living entity, it is simply the way the universe works. To imply that nature has some sort of concience, that its feelings can be hurt is akin to saying that it is another God. Catholism is supposed to believe in one God.
This would not be the first time a Pope has committed blasphemy. I am not religious so the Catholics can figure this out for themselves.
You love pollution caused by rampant capitalism/communism (take your pick) – go live in Beijing, China! There, you can’t see your nose in front of your face for all the smog. Oh wait! China is alright, because without China churning out the world’s cheap goods, we wouldn’t have capitalist penetration/subjugation of the world’s economies on a global scale! Thus, you should be perfectly happy choking on the foul air of China!
Last time I checked, we don’t live in China. You are comparing a country with absolutely no regulations to one that is so over-burdened by regulations we have no JOBS!
You can blame NAFTA for the lack of jobs in the US. It was an intentional plan by the powers that be on both sides of the aisle to ship US jobs overseas, the idea being that our amigos south of the border would then buy more US goods, leading to more US jobs. Well, it didn’t exactly work out that way – either for Central America or the US.
You sound like a stupid c#nt trying to use big words to make yourself seem smart. Shut the hell up before I cock-slap you. Can you even define communism or subjugation you fat cow??
Huh??
Duh??
Global warming and climate change are two different but related things.
You f#cking retard…shut up.
Religion is global warming, meaning global warming is religion.
Global Warming is religion.
It’s worse than that. It’s a cult that prays to a statue of Al Gore.
maybe they will drink the Kool’aid and die like Jonestown
If only…
If only Darwin was a god they would. Wishful thinking. Must think harder. Maybe if we all pray like an Atheist: Kumbiology, me lord Darwin, kumbiology!
You wish. If that was the case, the entire structure of science would come crashing down. And then you’d have no more “progress.” I guess you would like to see the world petrified – like your precious fossil fuels – in the 50s era, wouldn’t you, with gas-guzzling autos, and no thought at all for the future. Unfortunately, your thinking is a fossil too: Out-dated, brittle, and broken.
And sends money to HIS carbon credit company, Generation Investment Management.
This is one fat statue… Shouldn’t M. Obama cut on fat Gore consumes?
Keep clutching your Bible – as GW-caused flood-waters rise. I doubt if it’ll “save” you, unfortunately; but science will. And 99% of scientists accept the truth of GW.
There you go lying again. You must be,what 7th grade? Believe all the propaganda you’ve been taught?
Lying? You really think Sandy wasn’t caused by GW? You are the one who defies common sense in disbelieving data that describes the deleterious effects on the environment/human health of air/water pollution.
hahaha ROFLMAO It’s funny you say this, you little puss, as you type this on your Chinese-made computer, made of oil-based plastic, shipped by communist billionaires burning fossil-based fuels to your local Best Buy so you can buy it on your Arab-owned credit card (again, plastic) and plug it into your wall outlet (Chinese plastic) so you can power it up (burning oil-based fuel) so you can waste your time (and ours) spouting your hatred toward Christians and those with different belief that have not drank Gore’s koolaid-laced pee and begged
“Can I have some more, sir?” http://media0.giphy.com/media/mpQkJpBMbSxMs/200.gif
You’re kind of a liar and a hypocrite that makes things up to look smart but you fool only yourself.
I truly doubt you know many scientists yet you come up with a startling “99%” statistic. How very scientific of you. Actual scientists roll their eyes at you at parties when you start smacking your ‘brilliance’. Soooo cute when you try acting smart!!!!! You must have gotten this 99% from a government-funded scientist. Do share your source! Please. In your response, cite the 99% source or STFU. Such a puppet: Sit up. Beg. Memorize. Regurgitate. Repeat.
Is this as reliable as the 100% of Koreans that voted FOR their ‘Dear Leader’?! I don’t have stats (so I dont make them up like you) but my parents go to a Church in a VERY progressive Ivy League community blocks from campus. No liberal arts profs amongst them, mind you. Only hard sciences. Several are Rockefeller and Rhodes Scholars and all patent-holders. Their advanced education and research behind the microscope has only strengthened their belief in God, Two dozen professors in a single Church among dozens in this community that also have professors that believe in God and that science is simply God’s programming language. One professor, a volcanologist, states that the planet ‘breathes’, expanding and contracting, consuming and exhaling. Our body temperature rises when we are more active and declines as we slumber. Ditto with Earth. People that fail to understand this are the ones that are the troglodytes with false gods. It takes a real self-centered simpleton to believe that a God did not create a massive planet but that little men, like you, can actually have an irreversible impact on it.
News Flash: You’re not the Sun. Get over yourself, little man.
BTW, I hope you live at Sea Level…….and while you do keep in mind that fossils have been found high in the mountains and that land bridges once existed connecting to what we now call islands. All of this occurred long before Detroit ever made cars. The Earth is constantly changing. Glaciers once towered over where I am now typing at 1200’ASL
Excellent Unopinionated. Like Al Gore who’s carbon footprint is many times the norm she makes use of every convenience fossil fuels prrovide. Like our prez who preaches green living but burns 5 gallons of jet fuel per mile on his frequent 9,500 mile round trip Hawaiian vacations along with a giant support an security detail. Gotta love the ironic hypocrisy.
Is engorging yourself on the products of our petrochemical based culture something to brag about? Did you or me have a choice in the matter? We were born into the culture – which once was a car worshiping culture in the days of cheap gasoline. We also were once a tobacco worshiping culture – before the axe fell on that particular poison. Or do you doubt the science on tobacco as well?
Let’s stick to the topic. If we are going to veer off onto religion, there’s no end to discussing why it’s so vital to maintaining the social status quo – especially the patriarchy – worldwide. But hey, the Pope is religious, and he has bought into global warming, which means that even religious folks can “see the light” and accept GW as a fact.
So…….let’s get this straight……Religious people are nuts and completely wrong (according to you) but then you bring up that the pope has bought into global warming so all the Christian sheeple should, too. You seem to endorse patriarchies when it comes to supporting your causes but otherwise they are evil white men billionaires and colonial overlords. Frankly, the pope is about as whacko as the POTus. The Chinese communist dictators, on the other hand, are admirable ‘rag-tags’ who ‘kept it together’ despite killing millions through pogroms, intimidation, genocide and starvation. REALLY?!?!?
Look, China is made up of as many different peoples and nations as Europe. It isn’t mutual brotherly love that keeps them together: It’s the tip of the bayonet and threat of execution. Spout your liberal philosophy there and see how long you survive! You clearly do not know what you are talking about. China has invaded and absorbed other sovereign countries and parts and has forced other countries to pay ‘protection money’ to them. Right now, China is practicing colonial power over large swaths of Africa. China has invaded Japan, Vietnam, Korea, Tibet, Nepal, India, Mongolia, Russia, Silla, Hami, Formosa, Kotte, the Tocharians, Myanmar/Burma and others. Hami is now a prefecture of China. Tibet was a HUGE country swallowed up by China. Today, the US pays ‘protection money’ in the form of trade to China. If the US went cold turkey and banned Chinese imports to the US then China would invade us tomorrow.
It’s ironic how you frame Westerners as evil colonizers since the Chinese committed a genocide against the Dzungars of Xinjiang, conqueredd it and then brought in Han Chinese settlers to colonize and secure it as their new Western Frontier from 1760-1820. Please note that this was well BEFORE the British gained Hong Kong Island through a treaty that did not involve genocide.
You are like swiss cheese, man. You deplore the West for GW but then you praise China despite the fact they are the most flagrant generator of it and have to spraypaint their mountains green.
BTW, Mao did not defeat Japan in China. Mao and KMT had a United Front during WWII and the US continued their support of KMT throughout war. When Japan surrendered to US Mao then continued the Civil War against US-allie KMT. Get your facts straight.
Yes, it’s a NEW religion and DOGMA they so HATE in religion so they passed their own brand of dogma to the Pope so it looks like legit dogma.
And it now has its own “Pope”. I wonder how the Marxists deal with that one in their feeble minds.
Everyone knows Jesus was a proto-socialist – at the very least an anti-establishment agitator/rebel. If Jesus were alive today, I’m sure he’d be very comfortable in the pro-GW camp, lined up in opposition to big/polluting business and pro-the little guy.
SO THAT’s WHY THE POPE IS GETTING IN ON IT !
The Pope is nominally the religious leader of the West – of all Christendom, East and West, Catholic and Protestant. If he says we must respect the Earth and rein in capitalist/communist untrammeled development/pollution – then we should listen to him.
IT IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL CRIME WHEN PEOPLE CHANNEL RESOURCES AWAY FROM REAL POLLUTION PROBLEMS TO CURB CO2 WHICH IS NOT
A POLLUTANT .
BOTH YOU & THE POPE SHOULD KNOW BETTER
Let’s not talk about CO2. That’s not the only thing that is contributing to GW. Also – typing in caps is not helping your arguments.
WHAT DOES TYPING IN CAPS HAVE TO DO WITH ANY ARGUMENT?
IF YOU THINK IT HURTS MY ARGUMENT , THEN YOU MUST BE EASY TO FOOL BY PEOPLE WHO TYPE LIKE YOU .
OK , LET’s TALK ABOUT THE BIG ENCHALATA .
IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE EARTH’s AVERAGE TEMPERATURE
FOLLOWS SOLAR ACTIVITY .
THE GW PEOPLE CAN’T EVEN TELL US WHAT THE TEMPERATURE
SHOULD BE . SO ATTEMPTS TO CONTROL IT ARE NOT ONLY FUTILE
BUT MISGUIDED .
THE CLIMATE ALWAYS HAS CHANGED AND IT ALWAYS WILL .
THE TRULY CRAZY PEOPLE ARE THE ONES WHO THINK THEY CAN STOP IT .
I guess you feel science is religion? Or maybe we should all just accept Scripture as the “truth” which explains “everything?” How would you like it if all the “progress” since the Renaissance, Enlightenment up to the modern era, were dialed back, and we ended up back in the Faith-obsessed Dark Ages?
Science is not religion. Science questions all, and is constantly evolving. Also – the empirical evidence of measurable increases in dirt/smog/ozone and so forth – don’t lie. The effects of GW? Take a look at what happened on the E. Coast a couple of years ago (October 2012) with Sandy.
Then embrace this science or hold firm in your faith.
Sandy was a hurricane. It may be hard to believe but they’ve happened before.
Climate has never been static. It’s constantly changing but in such small increments that our perception is skewed such that 20 year warm periods make people believe that things are going out of control (weather things have never been in control) and then people commit to a dogma that gives them the illusion of control and this prevents them seeing the clearly contradictory empirical evidence that violates their closely held beliefs. Or maybe you have a good explanation for the 18 year pause? Go consult your book of revelations (Earth In The Balance) written by your prophet (Al Gore) and supported by your priests (government funded scientists) and get back to me.
As in almost all human created things, follow the money. Know also that at least one US agency as well as the UN are preaching that mankind must be removed from the earth to almost completely lower carbon (dioxide) emissions. And we would give these people governance over a free people?
Follow the money?
How about we follow the money to the funder of this site!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Mellon_Scaife
OOPSI!
Billionaire right-wing industrialist oil baron.
That was fun! We should play “follow the money” again some time.
And, in this case, what data changed?
Same thing can be said about every “scientist” who is still pushing this scam…
ATTENTION Eco-scammers……..for the right amount of “research funding” (eg:cash) I will endorse your fake science too. I need a new Lexus BAD
Your claim is that every scientist is paid by billionaires to lie?
“Whatever” is an amazingly appropriate name for you, clown.
Whatever, indeed.
Hey, BG, Time wants to know where to send you their latest issue, eh?
Oh that’s PRECIOUS!
You pulled out that old denier chestnut, the faked 1970s Time magazine cover!
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2013/06/04/the-1970s-ice-age-myth-and-time-magazine-covers-by-david-kirtley/
It’s always great when you clowns post this, it’s so easily debunked a child wouldn’t take it seriously, but NOPE!
Denier clowns just KEEP ON POSTING IT!
hahahahahha
Because DERP!!
A denier is one who denies truth when faced with a fact. The fact is there has been global cooling and temperatures today are lower than the peak of 1998. That is fact, not opinion. When faced with this fact, WHO IS THE DENIER? Anyone who still clings to outdated and false science when faced with the fact of global cooling is a denier.
The magazine cover you posted is a fake.
You don’t care in the slightest about facts, and you obviously don’t care about looking like a fool.
Why would I continue to talk to you, clown?
Consensus? You talk about a ‘consensus’ among “scientists”?
Several hundred years ago there was also a consensus among scientists. It involved the sun revolving around the Earth.
They put people to death for believing otherwise.
Aaaand your fake magazine cover means what then?
Actually it was conservative religious nuts that put people to death. Scientists only care about evidence.
But thanks for playing!
Shake it off and do a little research, and next time you won’t come off as such a lightweight.
“Scientists only care about evidence”
And retribution?
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/jun/23/fossilfuels.climatechange
http://grist.org/article/the-denial-industry/
http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2012/12/24/prof-richard-parncutt-death-penalty-for-global-warming-deniers/
http://testclimate.wpengine.com/2009/06/03/execute-skeptics-shock-call-to-action-at-what-point-do-we-jail-or-execute-global-warming-deniers-shouldnt-we-start-punishing-them-now/
There are more, but you get the picture, eh?
BTW I was making a point about ‘consensus”. Just because a lot of people believe something does not make it true.
You know, like people who believe that you can tax yourself into prosperity?
Simple absolutes.
The cornerstone of the mislabeled “liberal” mindset.
For calling themselves “progressives” they are profoundly incapable of progressing an argument, virtually categorically.
It takes a very empty soul to see the world through such simple, naive eyes.
Yeah, I’ve been meaning to see a doctor about my empty soul.
Do you think by becoming a right-wing shill loon clown I could fill the void?
Did it work for you?
Oh, and hey everyone else out there-I’ll spare you having to slog through “OmaJohn” here’s disqus comment history by linking to a single image that sums it up nicely.
http://memedepot.com/uploads/0/178_libszv1.jpg
Just another predictably partisan clown, stepping up to bat and striking out again and again and again.
Actually, bgulick, after reading your comments, a more appropriate meme to personify me would be this:
http://sd.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk/i/i-am-jacks-complete-lack-of-surprise-1.png
No, no clown.
You’re a “libs” ranting fool, nothing more.
Your capacity for thought ranges from “LIBTARDS!!!!” to “GAAAAAA! OBOZO!!!!” and that’s about it!
Pot meet kettle. Basically your post is typical for your kind of low-info warmist. When you run out of anything credible to say, you put on your Saul Alinsky panties and fall back on Alinsky #5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon”
Warmist!
That’s rich!
I also eat food, so am I a foodist?
I am affected by gravity so am I a gravityist?
I don’t mean to ridicule you clowns, in fact you do it perfectly fine yourselves, but I have to admit it’s a blast to step into your little echo chamber and set off a few firecrackers.
Look how you scramble and buzz!
Like a hornet’s nest with some mud sprayed on it, except instead of hornets you’re a bunch or regressive clowns.
It’s adorable.
What is the ideal temperature of the earth? If we are going to spend money to try and change the earth’s climate, how do we measure when we are done?
http://uproxx.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/firefly-mal-naked-1.gif
Whattya know?
Ridicule IS a potent weapon!
Ummmm, you do know that isn’t me, right? I just wanna keep you grounded back here in reality where, when your intellect comes up short, you resort to the stupidity infesting every one of your posts on this page.
Yeah, since you’re too cowardly to comment under your own name you stole the name of the captain from Firefly.
So to goof on you I posted a picture of Captain Reynolds from the show Firefly, naked.
You then demonstrated that you don’t even know who it is.
Ridicule is a very, very potent weapon.
Too bad it’s wasted on the dipwads that need it the most.
Omg, you’re dumber than a bag of hammers. OF COURSE I know who the picture is. How the hell do you ridicule ME by putting up a picture from a scene in firefly? When you can answer that, then reply please, otherwise, STFU moron.
Your blind ignorance is amazing! Scientists are just like everyone else — plenty of them will say almost anything if it will fatten their wallets. Read history again. People were put to death by arrogant, power lusting people in charge of government as always. Whether they were corrupt, self-worshiping Catholics or corrupt, self-worshiping Hedonists is irrelevant. The most dangerous people that have ever existed are those that demand we let them control the economy because they are smarter, wiser than millions of people making individual decisions. Granting them control has always led to more power, more wealth and more debauchery at the top, and more poverty and suffering for the average family.
Actually over 126 million people were put to death in the 20th century by Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot. All of them were radical leftists.
To equate modern-day Conservatives with religious leaders of centuries past on another continent is absurd, especially from someone who can’t see the connection between the modern Leftist movement in this country, and the totalitarian Socialist/Communist regimes of the 20th century and today. You have, once again, opened your mouth and removed all doubt.
Yawn. Whatever.
History reveals you to be a bunch of anti-science, torturing, loon scumbags and it’s borne out today in the efforts of the Cheney regime and clowns like Michelle Bachman, Ted Cruz etc.
You’re on the wrong side of history and you always, always will be.
Every advance society has ever made, from fair pay to the 40 hour work week to women’s suffrage has been a PROGRESSIVE movement, and you right wing clowns fought tooth and nail against it.
You’re a stain on history.
Yes oh how true that great leader SC Pomeroy from Kansas introduced woman’s suffrage to the senate floor, oh wait he was a republican. No wait is was Theodore Roosevelt that great democrat who adopted is as a national party plank, oh wait he was a conservative too. No wait civil rights were championed by those great democrat leaders, Robert Byrd, and Al Gore Sr. Oh wait, shoot the opposed it and it was the republicans that drove civil rights legislation. Oh well, guess the progressives aren’t so progressive after all. Better luck next time!!! Thanks for playing though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era
It must hurt to be as dumb as you.
Lol, you leftist really crack me up. You make stuff up and then expect us to us accept them without checking any facts. I offer you facts and you call me dumb. Wow, have you looked in a mirror lately. Does that style of discourse really work, LMAO!!!!
So you’re saying Teddy Roosevelt WASN’T a leader and founder of the Progressive movement.
You should totally go edit wikipedia and fix that then.
hahahahhahah
He was still a republican, and having a progressive tendencies doesn’t make you a hard core progressive of today. See it all in such simple terms, it must be a wonderful carefree life LOL. Can you even keep a job, I suspect not.
Ohhh, I see.
You’re one of those people that holds labels in higher esteem than actions.
Gotcha.
And as far as holding a job goes, you’ll be derped to derp that I own my own business.
Derp.
I doubt both your sincerity and truthfulness considering your disregard for anyone. Furthermore, you websites are very left leaning, so you are the pot calling the kettle black. A progressive today is more a communist, or socialist at best, Teddy was neither. You can’t accept that truth, good luck to you.
You’re a goalpost-moving disingenuous partisan jerkoff, and it’s been a waste of time goofing on you. This year I’m turning over a new leaf, and I’m gonna stop goofing on the right wing deranged fringe..it only makes things worse.
So go on back to your swine posts on your swine site everyone, and keep patting each other on the back for out-derping one another.
I’m on to better and more challenging things…if NASA and NOAA can’t convince you clowns then what hope does a raghead libtard marxist fartbama blower like me have?
You all are a disgrace on your families and this great nation, and you should hang your heads in shame for your willful stupidity, and support of oil baron billionaires and their agendas.
Yes and their manipulating data is noble, and you calling everyone an idiot is so honorable. You are the problem with politics today, you can have a civil discussion with you degrading everyone around. You are paid troll and you act like a petulant brat. Good luck in life with that style of discussion.
Here is your cite 🙂 http://www.heritage.org/events/2012/10/teddy-roosevel
Now run along and play like a good boy.
Oh!
A link to the Heritage foundation.
Surely that’s a neutral site with no bia-…….oh wait.
“The Heritage Foundation is an American conservative think tank based in Washington, D.C. ”
Ah, right. I knew I’d heard the name.
Yeah, great source, “Doc”.
You really know how to derp a good derp.
I remember when a famous Atheist Adolf Hitler put people to death..
http://e.fastcompany.net/multisite_files/fastcompany/imagecache/inline-large/inline/2013/12/3024022-inline-hitler-regalo-natale-285955.jpg
Yeah, he’s such an atheist here’s a picture of him celebrating Christmas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
http://www.goddiscussion.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/we-tolerate-no-one-in-our-ranks-who-attacks-the-ideas-of-christianity-our-movement-is-christian-adolf-hitler1-330×244.jpg
Lots of people believed him then, as did so many people today believe Obama. Liars tell lies. They are believed by the gullible. Dictators will use lies to consolidate power. Do you believe every word Hitler spoke was undeniable truth? Do you believe the ACA saved every American more than $1000 per household? Do you believe Obama wants to disarm law-abiding citizens for their own safety (you know, like Chicago and Detroit)? If you answered yes to any of these questions, you may need a cradle-to-grave nanny state controlling your whole life. That would explain a lot.
“My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. …Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross. … ”
– Adolf Hitler, speech on April 12, 1922
Yes, just like those scientists who said the world was flat. You do understand those people are the same folks who now make up your wonderful left wing buddies in Europe. So much for defining them as conservatives. Maybe you should go back to school and read up on what a modern day conservative is, you may find that they want much of what you do, freedom, a clean planet to live on, etc. They just don’t think you need to round up the world and kill off 3 quarters of the population to do it, like your buddies Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot. FYI, being a Christian doesn’t mean you can’t be a whack job lefty. Hitler was a socialist, not a conservative. Nazi, National Socialist Party.
http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/germanyandprussia/fl/Was-Adolf-Hitler-a-Socialist-Debunking-a-Historical-Myth.htm
Debunked in a single click, which is one click more than it usually takes.
I see plenty of what “modern day conservatives” are all about..on this comment thread alone I’ve been called a “raghead” about a hundred times.
Now buzz off, fool.
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/adolf-hitler-was-a-liberal/question-1407869/
Oh debunked in one click too!!!! I never called you a raghead or anything, yet you seem to be fit to call me names. Your lack of civility is showing your true nature. Good luck with that hating in life.
Wow! Your link to sodahead with a slideshow by “Oreillyfan” is pretty much a grand slam!!
Who could ever argue with that?
Oh wait, I know. Let’s look at Hitler’s actual words.
“My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. …Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross.”
– Adolf Hitler
Yes, who could ever argue with the left wing professor who wrote the article you cited. LOL, you argument is ridiculous. Being Christian or Jewish doesn’t make you a conservative. But if it does, then I guess Bill Clinton, and Jimmy Carter would be conservative as well as FDR and LBJ by your logic. So much for logic from you, oh well, again nice try. 🙂 Have a great day!!
No, being retarded makes you a conservative.
The last bastion of great political debate, call people names when you can’t win an argument, ROFL!!!! Maybe you should try the “liar, liar pants on fire” method next. LOL, you are so funny.
hahahahahhaha no but seriously you have to admit conservatives are retarded.
Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Ted Cruz…these are your heroes.
Rick Santorum. hahahahahahah
George Bush. hahahahahahahahahahah
Real intellectuals there.
I will raise you a Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, Jimmy Carter and a Barack Obama. There are idiots on both sides dude.
If you think the people you listed there are as pants-on-head retarded as the people I listed there’s something deeply wrong with you.
And your Doctorate is in what that qualifies you to say those people are all idiots, of that’s right you don’t have one. People say stupid things, here is a few quotes for you ” you have to pass it before you know what is in it” “I haven’t been to all 57 states before” and I raise you a Joe Biden. You are completely clueless if you think everyone is an idiot who says something stupid at some point. That is my point man, wake up, people aren’t perfect and say dumb things on both sides of the isle. You really need to look in the mirror and stop being such a partisan. Good luck to you.
Now call me a bunch of names and jump up and down like you normally do.
The argument was won long before I even entered into it.
This is just me having some fun toying with right wing loons while I wait for the clothes to dry.
As soon as the buzzer goes off, I’ll go fold laundry and leave you clowns to derp freely in your echo chamber.
Say it with me now, “DERRRRRRRP!!”
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/tobuscus/images/9/9f/Xzhibit-heard-you-like-derp-Pdn4FA.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20130507200742
Those were not scientists, but religionists.
There was no difference at the time between “scientists” and “religionists” – which is true of far too many in academia, politics, & scientific circles today. The correct term is “climate cycles” because there is no global change but merely shifting patterns & rebalancing. That’s true science.
I was alive in the 70’s when my school and all the papers were preaching global cooling not to mention there is sane person can deny it My point is what are you trying to say. That they were never preaching global cooling?
Me too Independent. 1974, the first Earth day. They told us that there was a coming ice age, the world would be overpopulated leading to mass die offs, and we’d be out of oil, all by the year 2000. Look magazine told me in 1968 that we’d all be driving flying cars by then too.
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
Bam, debunked.
Thanks for playing!
Big daddy say you be dee fool trying to defend the indefinsabilitys!!!
bgulick, you really shouldn’t. If you can’t have a thoughtful discussion — and you obviously can’t — you may as well just give up. You’re certainly not going to convince anyone of anything. All you’re doing is acting childish and patting yourself on the back while belittling and demeaning others.
Of course, for certain types of people, that can feel rewarding, so maybe you’re actually getting something out of this. If that’s the case, why are you asking him why you would continue to pretend to respond to what’s being said?
Crushing right wing clowns is its own reward.
So “crushing right wing clowns” means “acting like an ignorant child to people your masters tell you to hate”? After you performance today, they might decide you are not such a useful tool after all.
You know, my masters tell me that all the time.
I call in to the main Libtard office and check in with the Liar in Chief Presidum B HUSSEIN FARTBINGO III to see what my marching orders are for the day, and they tell me “Bruce, you’re not so useful after all!”
When I ask what they mean they tell me that right wingers already do so much to discredit themselves, that I’m just gilding the lily.
And you know what? I have to agree. Nothing I type here could make you clowns look any worse than you already do, so it’s a moot point.
So why do I continue?
The sheer SPORT of it, I suppose.
It’s just a BLAST to mock shills and clowns, and it’s cheap entertainment.
So I’ll keep doing it gratis, even though my libtard masters tell me my effort is wasted.
Oh, side note, in that very article the author states directly that there was plenty of ‘scientific’ assertion that we -were- entering into an ice age. So the date of the image on the cover is more important to you than the reality of the discussion. I’ll borrow one from your playbook and call names for a moment: Congratulations, you’re a weak-minded parrot. 🙂
So why do you think someone found it necessary to fake the cover?
Why did you find it necessary to continue the lie by reposting it?
See, things like this reveal clearly that you don’t look into things, and instead happily parrot whatever right-wing clown sites tell you to.
You’re a disgrace.
Notice that the cover he posted may be a fake, but the fact remains that “scientists” thought it was globull cooling then.
Remember, you’re the denier here.
And you’re the one who can’t spell “global”.
Ummm, it’s intentional. As in, you’re so dumb you believe in BULL crap. You’re a special little snowflake, yes you are.
OOOOOOOH!
It was intentional.
Kind of like when you call President Obama “Fartbummer” or “Obozo” and then Michelle becomes “Moochelle”.
I get that, I see it a lot with you right wing clowns.
And yes, now that I look back at your comments, I can see you do it every single time, so it’s definitely because you’re a partisan hack shill, and not that you’re actually ignorant of how to spell the word “global”.
I stand corrected, shill.
No, more like when I call him Obamao, cuz (<— oh ohhhh) he's a freaking Marxist like…you know…. Mao. I don't call him Obozo and I don't call Michelle Moochelle. I call her 'the wookie' or just Chewbacca outright because…you know…ugly critter.
Good grief dude, you really are a simpleton.
And you’re a racist traitor clown disgrace.
Mmm, I’ll run home and tell my wife who is not of the same race as I am then. HEY HONEY, I’m a racist. You’re an idiot. I think we’re done.
“U.S. corporations’ after-tax profits have grown by 171 percent under Obama, more than under any president since World War II”
– Bloomberg
“The deficit is now only 4% of the GDP, down from over 10% at the end of Bush’s administration – and projections are for it to be only 2% by 2015 (before Obama leaves office.) America’s “debt problem” seems largely solved, and almost all due to growth rather than austerity.”
– Forbes
“The Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index has more than doubled since Barack Obama took office”
– New York Times
“The Dow Jones industrial average hit 16,000 for the first time this morning, and the Nasdaq began within 15 points of 4,000 (last seen in 2000). The S&P 500, which passed $16 trillion in market value for the first time, is up 26.1%.
“Obama has now stolen national security and the economy from Republicans. The media tells us Obama is finished as a President because of the website glitches, but my money is on what other issue he can steal from the GOP before 2016.”
– Politicususa dot com
Barack Hussein Obama: Worst Marxist ever.
Now talk about the CPI, QE, record low labor participation and more debt than ALL other presidents combined. Otherwise you’re telling yourself lies to make yourself feel better. MORON.
Back in reality, being a Marxists doesn’t automatically mean he gets everything he wants. But then you knew that didn’t you, idiot.
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
Debunked in a single click.
Thanks for playing!
Except uhhh, not so much.
http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/02/the-1970s-global-cooling-alarmism.html
You see, to leftwing dumbschlitz (<— Oh ohhhh) like you, debunked means someone, upon whose knob you slobber, went 'nuuu uhhhhh' and off you little dopes run to proudly proclaim DEBUNKED. Back in reality, nahhhh.
As you said, thanks for playing.
Son do you even English?
The only denier here seems to be you. You foolish posts make the rest of us feel sorry for you. The entire climate change religion has been proven to be a total lie. The results are in and all the major predictions have been wrong! No one can predict the future climate, not even close. Have you not read how the rain forests are growing faster due to the increase in CO2?
Man! You shills really come out of the woodwork!!
I have hit the HONEY HOLE OF DERP!!!
That cover might be fake, but the articles are real…
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,944914,00.html
http://content.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,918620,00.html
Here are 68 other mainstream articles from the 1970’s that discuss “the coming ice age”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/01/global-cooling-compilation/
I thought they adjusted their numbers and 10 years later it was:
https://climatesanity.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/heidi-cullen-book-cover-detail1.jpg
Leftist Projection Syndrome.
ONCE UPON A TIME THERE WAS A SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS AND THE SCIENCE WAS SETTLED .
THEN THEY DISCOVERED THAT THE EARTH WAS ROUND .
IT DOES NOT TAKE A BILLIONAIRE’s BACKING TO FIGURE OUT THAT THERE IS
NO SUCH THING AS SETTLED SCIENCE .
IF YOU THINK THAT THERE IS , THEN YOU DO NOT THINK SCIENTIFICALLY .
THE CLIMATE ALWAYS HAS CHANGED AND IT ALWAYS WILL .
THE TRULY CRAZY PEOPLE ARE THE ONES WHO THINK THEY CAN STOP IT .
You claim every scientist agrees, the truth is the don’t all agree. Thanks for playing.
No, you’re right.
Only 97% agree.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303480304579578462813553136
Oops, it is on .3%, So sorry you have no facts to back up you claim again. Thank you, “pats you on the head” Nice try 🙂
http://www.skepticalscience.com/graphics/Escalator_2012_500.gif
*Pats you right back and gives you a lolly.*
No arguing with fake facts LOL. Just ask those guys at EAU. LMAO, man you kill me, thanks for the wonderful laugh today. You should hide behind trees and jump out and say boo too !!! 🙂
http://replygif.net/i/379.gif
That nice, more sophomoric behavior instead of a real discussion. Yup, is that a picture of you, what are you like 12? Dude grow up.
http://theconsensusproject.com/
You know, not that your opinion piece from the Wall Street Journal doesn’t hold more water than 97% of climate scientists that published peer-reviewed articles on climate change.
hahahahahhahah
Yes 200 of 11,000 plus equal 97% in you world of math. You do realize that the 200 are those support it and funded for such research. Posting a cite that is not a neutral scientific site, but a shill group for global warming is meaningless. Not that you opinion of 200 verse 11,000 holds water LOL!!!
I know you’re derping but all I hear is derp.
Try derping a little derpier.
As if there’s any thing wrong with being a billionaire, or an industrialist, or right, or an oil baron. Must be jealous.
Yeah, dipsh*t, I’m super jealous of a dead guy.
ANYHOO, please keep frantically scrambling to figure out a way to explain why the only “news” sources that pump out this denier nonsense are owned by rich right-wing oil barons like this jerkoff and the Koch brothers.
Hmmm?
Anyone here honest enough to give it a shot?
Not gonna hold my breath, facts and right-wingers are oil and water..you’re all a disgrace to your families and whores for billionaires.
Slurp, slurp that big ol’ billionaire dong..
And you can tell that to your BFF Tom Steyer, eh?
Hmmm? How about you stop being a foolish worshiper? The most important fact is that no one, absolutely no one, is even close to being able to predict the future climate. All of the significant predictions of the last 20 years have been wrong! There have been less major storms, not more. There is more polar ice, not less. There has been no warming as predicted. How can anyone be so stupid as to sell their soul to people whose words have been proven wrong much, much, much more often than they are correct? Al Gore and friends are the most wickedly rich charlatans in history. The climate change religion is all about centralizing power into the hands of the elite. Wake up before it is too late.
If his masters say it’s so, he believes unquestioningly, no matter what he experiences personally.
http://replygif.net/i/166.gif
Silly left wing wacko facts are for people who can think by looking at all the (FACTUAL) data no matter where it comes from not just from your liberal rags. See not everyone believes everything they read in the NYtimes. DIPSH#t.
Right! Why listen to a bunch of scientists who spent their entire lives in the field? We have Breitbart! LOL. God the stupidity is amazing.
I guess you missed the memo stating that those scientists were on the take, being paid by leftists… by the way, more scientists believe that global warming is a bullshit conspiracy…
You’re right!
I should totally ignore those leftard clowns at NASA and NOAA, and instead I’ll come here, where guys like “Independent” and “bigpinch” can tell me what’s REALLY happening.
Scoot off, you silly git.
BETTER YET , LOOK AT THE PREDICTIONS MADE BY THE PEOPLE WHO ARE CONVINCED
THAT THE “SCIENCE IS SETTLED” . ( A BIG RED FLAG IN ITSELF )
THEY HAVE NOT ACCURATELY PREDICTED ANYTHING UP UNTIL NOW SO I HAVE NO IDEA WHY
ANYONE WOULD THINK THE LATEST ROUND OF PREDICTIONS ACTUALLY MEAN ANYTHING .
Your all-caps make you seem 31% smarter!
DOES IT MAKE ME WRONG ? CAN YOU PROVIDE A GRAPH ?
I GUESS TELLING OTHER PEOPLE HOW TO TYPE MUST MAKE YOU FEEL SMARTER .
BESIDES , THEY IS NO BETTER WAY TO REPLY WITHOUT ACTUALLY SAYING ANYTHING .
FACT IS , I LIVE IN A CAPITAL CITY THAT HAS BEEN FREE OF GLOBAL GUILT SINCE 1792 .
No, clown, you were wrong despite the all caps.
All caps just makes you HYSTERICALLY wrong.
YOU ARE CLEARLY ONE WHO SHOOTS THE MESSENGER .
CLIMATE CHANGE PREDICTIONS HAVE BEEN HYSTERICALLY WRONG .
BUT IT IS EASIER TO BLAME ME THAT ADMIT YOU HAVE BEEN HAD .
WELL GOOD JOB THEN BROTHER KEEP UP THE DERP
http://www.quickmeme.com/img/2b/2bec5710ad446f171a0c8ec47e987aa54c13d9066eb227f6409a8df167da9715.jpg
I’m not trying to explain, I’m saying so what?
Just because they don’t regurgitate the same garbage peddled by your your Leftist master’s mouthpieces doesn’t mean it’s an evil attempt to burn the planet down.
Here are some things for you to consider:
-You don’t live in a comic book.
-You don’t understand what political Right and Left means.
-Someone who has built a fortune with his bare hands has a much better understanding of the real world than a bunch of egg-headded scholars and bureaucrats living off money taken forcibly from people they are unaccountable to, and God bless them for spending large amounts of that fortune fighting the those bureaucrats and egg-heads who are bent on world-wide tyranny.
-Think about the logic of claiming a particular news story is somehow part of the master plan of a dead guy to destroy the planet.
-What has Socialism built? Communism? Fascism? Those are the force of destruction. People build, create, and innovate. Governments restrict the actions of people in the name of an ordered society. The brilliance of our Founding Fathers forged a compromise between personal freedoms and a government that was limited to protecting those freedoms. Jerkoffs like you have supported tyrants who have whittled away at our freedoms because you are afraid of having to be responsible for yourself.
Insults, mischaracterizations, and lies don’t work outside your cadre of losers.
This in a nutshell is why we shouldn’t listen to the FrightWing radicals on this. So you’d rather listen to a billionaire than a scientist who’s PHD is in the field he’s talking about. In other words Donald Trump knows more than any climatologist. This was an IQ test. You failed.
You lost him as soon as you told him he wasn’t living in a comic book.
You spelled “headed” wrong.
That’s all you’ve got? One measly typo? Pathetic, but the Tools of Tyranny can’t win debates with substance or rational discourse, so I’m not too surprised.
See East Anglia University where emails between “climate scientists” were exposed and prove that they changed statistics to support their theory. They were proven to be liars who willingly schemed and distorted data in order to maintain the money flow. AGW is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on mankind.
If there’s one thing that guaranteed besides death and taxes, it’s that every time there’s a news story that goes against globull warmist dogma, there’s a cretin that will comment
“news sources that pump out this denier nonsense are owned by rich right-wing oil barons like this jerkoff and the Koch brothers”
Thank you for being today’s ‘Cretin of the day’. Here’s your cookie.
Oh! Are you claiming Climate Depot isn’t funded by a right-wing billionaire oil baron?
Is the Heartland Institute not funded by the Koch brothers and the Walton family?
Are you really making these claims with a straight face?
Well bless your heart!
Here’s a gold star for effort, a pat on your dear little head, AND a big cookie!
Clown on, clown.
Clown on.
Oh, and by the way, I know Malcom Reynolds is a fictional character, but you’re still not man enough to carry his jock strap.
Ya hear?
You’re more of a….let’s see….a Mr. Furley.
http://img5.bdbphotos.com/images/orig/p/f/pfhhfubxsh29hs9u.jpg?djet1p5k
Who cares who funded the website. Is the ice data accurate or not?
It’s not.
Do you have a link to different ice data?
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/01/new-satellite-maps-show-polar-ice-caps-melting-at-unprecedented-rate
Interesting. Thanks.
PS you should ALWAYS care who funds the website. You can save yourself a lot of derp.
And again, you REALLY should learn how to spell “global” if you’re gonna come stink up threads like these.
Oh, you still haven’t figured out that’s intentional? I guess you’re determined to earn every last drop of that cretin award.
“Globull” is a clever play on words. Mencken, Shaw and Clemens would have liked it.
SUPER clever.
There’s a reason right-wingers are so famous for their comedic skills.
Is it billionaires you dislike or is it just Republican billionaires….Bloomberg, W. Buffett, Tom Steyer, G. Soros all leftist/progs. Biggest PACs were the Senate Majority PAC and the House Majority PAC both Dem PACs. Your boy/prez BHO is the first pol in history to raise over 1 bil in campaign funding…none of the top 10 donors were to the Repubs…..so you can now resume breathing, little thronelicker.
“thronelicker” Lol!
I’m sure he licks the royal staff too.
How much money are the Clinton’s worth these days? How many hundreds of millions of dollars has Al Gore made peddling Global Warming/Cooling/Climate Change since he left the Vice Presidency? Obama isn’t terribly wealthy now but is there little doubt he will worth well in excess of one billion dollars within five years of leaving the Presidency? How much money is Nancy Pelosi worth compared to when she went to Congress? The Democrats do not really represent the regular people either.
No, clown..but when one of you shills links to a site owned directly by an oil billionaire as if it’s “science”, I feel it is my duty to mock you and shame you.
Just as I’ve done here to you.
Now go back to being a shill for your republican scumbag overlords.
http://replygif.net/i/510.gif
Wish I could upvote this a million times. If you want to find bought out scientists and tons of money pumped into science denial look at AGW denialists. Over 500 million in the past 9 years by FrightWing groups operating under Donor Financial. The largest contributors are Exxon and the Koch brothers. LOL at the easily manipulated dunces dancing to the tune of their corporate masters.
Modern day climate kahunas exactly modeled after pagan priests of yore who demanded sacrifices from villagers to control drought, floods, volcanoes. When the natural events occurred anyway, shamans shouted: Sacrifices too meager! Give us more or else!
Same as climate hustlers of today.
OK, where’s your equivalent list? After all, it’s just a big hoax. Tell us where exactly each climatologist got his funding. Also look at who gave them the money so we can look precisely at what strings are attached. For example, Donor financial has pumped over 500 million solely going to anti-global warming denier groups. Show me the equivalent on the left with facts and figures.
The determination of the reality of nature (ie. Science) is not discerned by who9 funds what. It is discerned by the evidence.
Anyone who endlessly argues about who funds, or “believes” what is completely irrelevant.
I’m sure that Hitler and the Nazis believed that water fell from the sky but because according to your apparent main argument because they were evil Nazis then their belief in water falling from the sky should be ridiculed and ignored simply because people that you don’t like believe in it.
That said, there is FAR FAR more money supporting the AGW theory than anything supporting those that refute it entirely for the fraud that it is.
But that is completely irrelevant.
Those of us who have studied this issue for years (which includes reading EVERY SINGLE email involved in the released IPCC’s internal University of East Anglia fiasco) know for a fact that the AGW theory is based on blatant fraud.
Those of us that practice critical thinking skills examine ALL the evidence, from all sources before we even consider having an opinion either way.
Apparently this is a completely foreign concept to those few people here who have apparently immediately chose what their belief system will be and then spend all their energy in attacking those who don’t choose to believe as they do.
Either that or they’re simply one of the endless thousands of employees that are paid handsomely to sit at home and fill comments sections on all sorts of sites with trolling attacks that support the fascist elite’s agenda.
A denier is one who denies truth when faced with a fact. The fact is there has been global cooling and temperatures today are lower than the peak of 1998. That is fact, not opinion. When faced with this fact, WHO IS THE DENIER? Anyone who still clings to outdated and false science when faced with the fact of global cooling is a denier.
BGulick misspelled BJquick cause Grubered pigressives gobble obamunist dicta and spew it out on public keyboards at libraries between trix.
Love those people who can barely scrawl a sentence point out the spelling errors of others.
You make an EXCELLENT point.
Please, do go on.
Some people have managed to convince themselves of astonishingly irrational conspiracies. Yours has a decidedly homoerotic flavor. Interesting mix — right-wing oil barons, ‘jerkoff’, disgrace, whores, and your favorite flavor of Slurpee! That’s a fascinating case study in self-loathing. I think psychologists refer to this as ‘projection’ — projection to achieve repression, as it were.
http://replygif.net/i/510.gif !
Confirmation! I knew it!
http://replygif.net/i/775.gif
IT depends on how YOU got there.
Exactly.
You know nothing about the animal abuse in China, so why are you arguing about the issue?
What are you talking about?
Nothing wrong with making something of yourself and making money – just try to do it in a less polluting/harmful way. That’s all we are saying.
So what. That just means he is smart. Then aren’t you just as concerned that the majority of rich people donate to liberal causes and to Democrats or progressives?
When money is taken from people in the form of taxes then given to scientists by politicians to support causes that will enrich them, that raises much more concern than rich industrialists spending his own money to support a cause they believe in. They put their own money where their mouth is. The corrupt politicians don’t give a hoot about any of us. And none are as corrupt as Democrats.
OMG HE SMART
HE BILLIONAIRE
HE MUST HAVE WORLD BEST INTEREST AT HEART
HE FRIEND
DERP
GUBMINT EMENY
DERP
You do realize “DERP” isn’t really a word. Probably not!!
What’s that you derp?
I can’t derp you.
Derp up a little!
You know, I read your comment below, btw first, thank you for your service. Second, your attacks on me and complete disregard for my service by calling me a “retard” and “dumb” etc… Your sense of service and decorum is about as pale as your skin.
Poverty and incompetence are not the moral high ground, rag head.
Rag head! That’s great! You have revealed yourself to be both stupid and racist in one sentence.
Expanding the definition of Racism now, are you? Well, since you are raising the bar for idiocy, you might as well fill out your resume.
Hmm, what’s that clown?
I can barely hear your little squeaks..
Sorry, I’ll say it louder. YOU ARE A RAG HEAD, rag head! Pull your rag heqd out of your raggedy a$$ and you might hear better.
Oh, that’s lovely. It’s much less racist when you scream like a child.
Also, a quick spell check will make you appear 90% less retarded.
Rag head! Rag head! Rag head!
hahahah
There you go!
With GUSTO, now, clown!
RAG HEAD! RAG HEAD! Can you hear me now?
Loud and clear, clown.
Rag head.
See everyone, this is how right-wingers treat veterans.
Four years serving my country, and “bigpinch” comes along and calls me a “raghead”.
Rag head. Why don’t you whine some more?
I think I may have stumbled across a five year old.
Are you up late, son? You should check with your mommy and see if she says it’s okay to keep derping.
Squirt a few more tears, Rag head. You intellectually vacant stooge.
The child screaming “raghead” calls me “intellectually vacant”.
Classic!
Please continue, little boy..did your mommy teach you any other slurs than “raghead” or is this as far as you got?
It’s the only one I need for you, rag head.
Well, it’s been great conversing with you then “bigpinch”!
It was awesome when you said raghead but then when you said raghead it really made me think…then you were like “RAGHEAD” and that was an excellent point and then to wrap it all up with that grand slam “raghead”! That was MAGNIFICENT!!
As usual it’s an honor to debate a member of the right-wing, I’ve learned a lot, and I’ll bid you a good night!
Nighty night, rag head.
AND HE TOPS IT ALL WITH ANOTHER “RAGHEAD”!!
Man, I never saw THAT coming!
You’re just full of surprises, aren’t you!!
You right wingers should be proud of “bigpinch” here..he’s a true master of the English language, and a rapier with the likes of which I’ve seldom seen.
I bow to your obvious brilliance.
You ought to, rag head.
Would you like some cheese with your whine, RAGHEAD?!?!?!!
You right wingers are a class act.
Well I do believe it is just as good to be despised by the despicable as admired by the admirable. (Thomas Sowell), and leftists are despicable.
http://replygif.net/i/692.gif
Whoever that is does have the elitist, smugness, and aloofness of a typical leftist.
Yeah and you have called me dumb and multiple other things, and I have served during the first Gulf War and was in Afghanistan. I didn’t call you anything, but you went right ahead a insulted me without me attacking you at all. So stuff your fake sanctimony and indignation.
Derp?
Derpy derp derp?
Derp, derp.
Derp.
Also, you really are dumb.
Now, call me a “raghead” like your pal “bigpinch” there and we can all confirm it.
I never called you a “raghead” no matter how much you wish it were true. Still calling me names. Wow, bet your buddies in the service really respected you and your ways, NOT!!!. Anyway, thank you for service, but you are about as gracious to your fellow veterans as an IED. Don’t bother replying to me, you have worn out your welcome with your complete lack of civility and respect. Good day to you.
Any word deemed offensive by the Left is either racist, sexist, homophobic, or xenophobic. Only they and they alone have the moral authority to decide what may be uttered in public.
How convenient for them. Saves having to think about it.
Hey BG, what ‘race’ are arabs, eh?
“Rag-head” is a racist slur.
Or are you one of those racists that’s so deeply racist he says things like “rag-head” in casual conversation?
You don’t have to reply, I’m just toying with you, fool.
Now scurry off and find someone who has an iota of respect for you or what you say!
Toodle-oo!
WE’ll take our rich guys over yours – Al Gore, George Works. And Warren Buffet
hahahaha, I think I struck a nerve!
Who signs your checks, little shills?
hahahahha
You climate change denier clowns are an absolute delight.
Now please go back to sucking that big old billionaire dong.
😀
A denier is one who denies truth when faced with a fact. The fact is there has been global cooling and temperatures today are lower than the peak of 1998. That is fact, not opinion. When faced with this fact, WHO IS THE DENIER? Anyone who still clings to outdated and false science when faced with the fact of global cooling is a denier.
Oh you sad, silly little shill.
So, prove me wrong dude. Show me higher temps since then and tell me all bout Maunder Minimum, eh?
I’ll just save us both the trouble.
http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
Isn’t that handy?
Just look up whatever right-wing talking point you believe, and this page should cover it.
That way I don’t drive myself crazy trying to reason with every clown on the internet, and you don’t have to be humiliated any further in public.
Win/win, wouldn’t you agree?
Your Global Warming heros seem to be changing their minds; http://testclimate.wpengine.com/2014/04/03/another-prominent-scientist-dissents-fmr-nasa-scientist-dr-les-woodcock-laughs-at-global-warming-top-prof-declares-global-warming-is-nonsense/
Ope! Another link to the right-wing billionaire oil baron-owned “Climate Depot”.
Hey, how about you link me to “iceagenow.com” or the Heartland Institute while you’re at it.
Ever hear of Al Gore, George Soros and most of Hollywood?
Please define Right-Wing.
Hey aint you that little lib biotch that we used to pass around in the pen???
The same thing can be said for Al Gore and his company which sells carbon credits…whatever the hell those things are. Get real.
Al Gore is a billionaire oil baron industrialist right-wing sugar daddy?
Dang!
Never let ’em tell you a regressive internet clown can’t teach you something new!
An heir to the Mellon banking, oil and aluminum fortunes, the Pittsburgh-based Mr. Scaife spent hundreds of millions of dollars of his estimated net worth of $1.4 billion to counteract what he called “the liberal slant to American society.”
On the other hand, Al Gore has about $200 million. Not bad for a former vice president!
But you’re wrong by about oh, a factor of five.
Nice attempt at false equivalency though!
Keep practicing and you may come up with something a five year old couldn’t debunk.
So Scaife made his money by running a business which provides a commodity that people want and/or need. Gore made his money by lobbying Congress to pass laws and Gov’t agencies to implement regulations which will directly benefit him. So Al is like a pimp and politicians are his whores? I get it. That guy Scaife who ran a company that employed people and allowed them to provide for their families is really a big, bad guy. The nerve of him!!!! I know…the Gov’t should run the oil and gas industry like in Venezuala. Yeah, yeah, that’s the answer.
Clown:
The question isn’t whether or not Scaife was a good businessman. He obviously was.
The question is whether a right-wing oil billionaire’s climate site that’s run by Rush Limbaugh’s protege can be taken seriously.
Actually, it’s not a question at all.
It can’t.
Asshat:
The question is whether data knowingly faslified by climate hysterists at East Anglies University can be taken seriously. It can’t.
The place you referred to doesn’t even exist, except in your fevered right wing clown brain.
Sorry for the typo: East Anglia University.
https://www.uea.ac.uk/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6679082/Climate-change-this-is-the-worst-scientific-scandal-of-our-generation.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/11/23/climategate-2-0-new-e-mails-rock-the-global-warming-debate/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/29/a-climate-of-fraud/
Ohhhhh, the sad little “climategate” scandal right wingers always trot out.
Yeah, good stuff.
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/
Alas for you, like every other denier “gotcha”, it’s nonsense.
Dude, this story is on the wire service. Even MSNBC, Yahoo, Google, Centrists and liberal rags have covered it.
Follow the money my ass! So, now, people with different faiths or ideologies than you are no longer allowed to own businesses or express opinions?!?!?! Quite the Democrat you are!!!!
Liberal rags cover originate and promote primarily topics that promote their liberal agenda……yet I dont see you up in arms over that. You know what you are? You are like Al Sharpton: Any time a black person dies….BOOM…..there you are, like a bad penny. Any time a cop or white dies…..*crickets*
Unless, you are going to be fair and balanced dont bother trolling here because you arent doing anything to add anything meaningful to the discussion. You are just argumentative……and that will never win hearts and minds.
Wow! You know a lot about me!
http://replygif.net/i/199.gif
Well, well, well! Whey doesn’t this surprise me? Anyway, it’s fun pricking the thought balloons of the big oil-oriented balloonatics commenting on this thread! Bring ’em on!
No, I think the reasoning is quite the opposite: In order to save the people, we must rein in polluting business/industry. If that means removing the coal-fired electrical generating stations in favor of sustainable, so be it. Even switching to natural gas for fuel to fire power plants is a big step forward. How does cleaning up industry equate to removing people off the face of the Earth?
Though I disagree with his premise when applied to Christianity, at least in this case Marx’s observation appears to be correct: religion, global warming, is the opiate of the masses.
…and Algore is it’s Oracle. You must grovel at his feet.
I think maybe your brains have been cooked if you equate science (GW) with religion (superstition). Also – GW/effects of rampant pollution/untrammeled development – are actually things you can see, such as the gigantic disaster of Sandy. Other than its ethical precepts, religion is based on “blind faith” alone.
Global warming ate the pie my wife left in the refrigerator last night.
Don’t you just hate it when that happens, Mr Fever?!?
Well, you should know, as you sit there and thumb through your profits – profits at the expense of clean air, water, and soil. No pie for folks like you – Santa won’t allow it!
You’re really strange. I would wager your electric bills, gas purchases, etc are right in line with everyone else. Which would make you a hypocrite.
A) I’m not a driver – never have been. B) NYC has made great strides in cleaning up its air since ConEd switched to natural gas. Oil is only used if there’s a shortfall of gas shipments. C) So everyone who tries to curb the pollution caused by big oil is a hypocrite according to you; that would mean most people who want to survive and not be inundated by floods are hypocrites. You should try to sell that line to the millions who lost homes and property in Sandy.
You’re so freaking weird. Floods?! You are a joke. Sandy was a hurricane. Guess what? Hurricanes happen, not because oil, you nincumpoop.
Good one!
Too bad the Pope-endorsed Santa doesn’t think so: No pie for GW deniers! You get a coal in your stocking instead – a worthy symbol of your enduring “marriage” to dirty coal fired power plants/industry/gasoline-based economic model..
If it was real global warming, it would have eaten her as well.
Maybe Santa ate it – since everyone knows all GW deniers are very bad boys who don’t deserve Mamma’s pie..
Excellent! Unfortunately that’s what constitutes scientific proof to a politically indoctrinated warming alarmist. I laugh watching them shove groceries into their green reusable bacteria farming bags at check out.
Hey, I think this climate change stuff is natural and the earth is going to heat and cool differently as it wobbles on it’s axis. I do use the reusable grocery totes because they are stronger, bigger and I wash mine regularly . Plus, do we really need more plastic that is very slow to break down on this earth, piling up in landfills and in the ocean and driving the price of oil up?
I bet you have a halo. Is it visible in daylight?
Nope, it’s covered in smog from the truck I drive.
Get a new muffler, you gross polluter. All your brownie points are cancelled and you have a big black mark against you. Get a Prius and beg forgiveness.
Do I beg to you or Al Gore?
Oh no, no, no. Al will not tolerate any begging…only cash and certified checks.
…and DNC votes.
Progress in combating pollution is always difficult for big business to accept – since it means millions will have to be spent in cleaning up dirty industry. Look at the landmark anti-fracking decision in NYS – and XL. Do we really need to keep polluting the Earth – especially when more and more people are turning away from cars?
LOL. Best to park it and go ride a bike instead… pretend like you never bought it… anyway, the heyday of motor vehicles powered by gasoline/diesel is probably drawing to a close (finally).
California is often in the vanguard of progress. Just wait until California’s emission standards are adopted by the other States.. then who will have the last laugh? The Prius owner!
LOL. Not in California.. with the strict emissions standards – exceeding Federal regs and all..
No – but it’s probably a solar-powered glow of health – as opposed to the smog/soot that must accompany you everywhere you go…
The reusable totes need to be washed as often as you wash your clothes. But, I guess the GW deniers don’t wash their clothes too often, so they wouldn’t understand that. Maybe they are the biggest “spawners of bacteria i.e. toxic ideas?”
Yuck it up – your views are unfashionably yucky. Respect for the environment, along with evolution, are taught nationwide in schools today.
Respect for the environment has been taught since the days of Teddy Roosevelt. It used to be called conservation of natural resources. It just wasn’t taken to the ridiculous end of the world / human beings are a pestilence extremes of today. BTW, no arguement that Evolution was part of God’s plan. Happy New Year and yuck yuck yuckety yuck yuck!
Well, because in TR’s day the environment had not yet been thoroughly trashed. If TR was a conservationist then, no doubt he’d be an environmentalist today.
Astute observation KM. The socialists tried to pivot to “climate change” which seemed to play well to the uninformed majority. However, common sense (the principled application of logic) tells us that the earth has been changing climate for millions of years.
(In the voice of Chevy Chase’s Fletch’s “Gordon Liddy” the airplane mechanic) Come on, guys, maybe you need a refresher course. It’s all global warming these days!
MAN BEAR PIG !!!…. IT’Z COMIN !!!…
No – Sandy is global warming. You should have been on the E. Coast when Sandy occurred and you would have been convinced in a flash of the reality of global warming. Sandy disaster and its continuing after-effects don’t lie.
Except that much of it is scientifically linked to global warming….and we are warming
That is quite simply a bald faced lie, and I’m sorry there are people like you that buy into it.. When these faux scientists create a model that allows them to adjust the data and the results from it, well, how in the world can that go wrong? Fact is, the earth has warmed in the past and that caused the CO2 levels to rise.. When it cooled they decreased.. I can make my models too sweety..
Well, if you have all the answers, then let’s talk about the mass extinction of millions of wooly mammoths and about 30 other mammals that went extinct just after the last ice age of 15 to 20 thousand years ago. Climate changers incessantly hang on to increases of CO2 which even if doubled is still a trace gas. Please don’t let yourself be Grubered.
Love it. BTW, can you conjugate the verb “to gruber”?
I grubered, you grubered, he/she/it grubered.
We grubered, you (all) grubered, They (all) grubered
That’s past tense. Start with I gruber…
Using Gruber is well stated
I’m not sure I understand your response. But this is what I’ve posted before;
// Anybody that thinks this global warming scam is about anything other
than a massive redistribution of wealth is playing into their hands..
That is all this is about period…It is the attempt at global
government with global laws which loosely translates into ransacking the
US and giving that wealth to a global oligarchy.. Simple.. Thats why
they will never let it go. Never..//
Yes the climate changes.. Always has and no one needs a “model,” to know that.. I am simply pointing out that the whole premise of man made CO2 pollution is a myth just like the rest of it.. The, “scientists.” that came up with this crap got it backwards.. CO2 doesn’t drive the climate.. The climate drives CO2..
There is no example of their doing so in Earth’s history for the obvious reason that the ability to measure it was not yet available. I imagine though that the polar ice cap was shrunken during the Medieval Warming Period, a time of great cultural and economic flourishing when average temperatures are estimated to have been 3-5 degrees Celsius higher than the scare scenarios of the warmists for the end of this century. And by the way, humans had NO effect on that development. That period was followed by the so called Little Ice Age.
because we do not, just as the flea rarely is noticed by the elephant, 20,0000 years form now no one will know we were here
You seem to have not read the article, CB. Try again and you will see that there is more sea ice today than ever recorded before.
Think about what you just stated. CO2 has increased from 290 – to 400 ppm, and temperatures have dropped over the past 2 decades. That is only 2 decades, you might say. But, if there is a causation of warming by CO2, then the temperatures should have increased. Unless this is a religion to you, that is the only conclusion that can be logically reached.
Then stop yapping so much. You are spewing CO2 every time. Shees…
So what exactly is your solution? You’re so sure of the cause, you must certainly have a solution. Please enlighten us.
Uhh…I’m sure it involves higher taxes.
If it weren’t for global warming, this exchange of opinions wouldn’t be taking place, as a large portion of the northern hemisphere of this planet was under a very large ice sheet 10-15k years ago. I am all for global warming.
Yes, thank goodness the cave men had SUVs or we’d still be freezing.
More CO2 is OK: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2891432/Carbon-dioxide-emissions-help-tropical-rainforests-grow-faster-Study-shows-trees-absorb-greenhouse-gas-expected.html
There is this thingamajigger called Photosynthesis. I learned about it in the 4th grade, maybe you slept through that part. more CO2 = more plants = more O2.
Common Core?
Was higher 2-4.6 million years ago. All evidence melted.
Actually, the core data shows that the changes in atmospheric CO2 lagged behind the changes in global temperature, and that by an average of about 200 years. That data therefore says exactly the opposite of what the AGW people say. It says that changes in atmospheric CO2 were caused by changes in average global temperature, rather than changes in average global temperature were caused by changes in atmospheric CO2.
Yep. But try telling that to the Kool Aid drinkers
Keep looking for that missing heat CB, it’s got to be around here somewhere.
In the meantime, I’m going to buy two or three pounds of dry ice just to watch it sublimate. Then I’m going to fire up the grill and release some more carbon dioxide (plants love that stuff, ya know), and cook some steaks from Brazilian cattle that were raised on a pasture that was once rain forest.
Just so you don’t antagonize the AGW nut jobs, make sure your Brazilian beef is certified fart free.
Did you bother to consider the data included in this article? Man-made global warming is propaganda, pure and simple. Goebbels would be proud. The doctrine of man-made global warming is as essential to plans for global governance and wealth redistribution as the doctrine of evolution is to providing cover for immoral lifestyles. Both doctrines are propagated by the state and its so-called “public education system”.
Exactly right, CactusPatch, and well said.
How much has man increased
corn over its natural level. We should never have started messing with fire n’ stuff like that.
Have you studied it? Turns out CO2 increases lag warming. It’s an effect, not a cause. Pick up a book. Read. Please
HEY, ATILLA! Don’t confuse the putz with facts, okay?!
I apparently did not grasp the meaning of the above article or you did not even take the time to read it. Also your graphs have 9 years of history as opposed to the millions of years that the earth has been here.
So how do we decide what is “normal” for Co2 and ice mass?
This is the exact opposite of what this article says and a new study has come out saying that increased co2 is good for the rain forests growth. Don’t you like rain forests?
We don’t decide. They decide. We, the uneducated masses could never muster the complex thought patterns to decide “normal”. Much like paying your “fair” share. They will decide what is fair for us to pay.
hey dumbass. Have you done any ice core samples recently…heck, ever? I can name lots of scientific articles the liberal media doesn’t talk about since it doesn’t increase any hype.
How about looking at oh, any ice core sample that goes back a thousand years or so to way back 100,000 years ago and you will start seeing a pattern, fluctuations, that show higher and lower CO2 levels. While we’re talking about ice core samples you can research how in the past 20 plus years ice has been melting at one pole and being redistributed at the other pole. But all you dumbass liberals like to show are pictures of one spot in Greenland or one spot in Antarctica that is losing ice. Sheesh. What kind of an idiot are you? Do you ONLY read what some dumbass liberal on tv talks about or do you actually read the studies regardless of bias? Maybe if you did that you’d get the whole picture and not just the picture you want to portray.
Oh…and tell NOAA that many of us Geologists were laughing at their hocus-pocus waaay before it was reported as fraudulent. It just doesn’t make sense when you look at other planets and AMAZING….those planets temperatures are fluctuating too. Makes me think its solar…not human….in basic cause. Yeah…the SUN. Try proving the Sun is our fault too.
If CO2 is high as the result of burning “fossil fuels”, how is such burning not just putting back into the atmosphere that which was previously there and sequestered by those long dead plants (fossils). The idea that the earth can not sustain much higher levels of CO2 is demonstrably absurd.
As I understand it, the problem is that we are burning in a very short period of time that which took a very long period of time to accumulate as fossil fuels.
On the other hand, if the CO2 was in the atmosphere to begin with to be “sequestered” by trees and grass and unicorns frolicking in the meadow then how can putting it back even in a “very short” period of time destroy the planet (as global alarmists clearly believe).
Focus your energy on deforestation and pollution of the seas (Fukushima?) where it belongs so the rate of re sequestering can keep up if your only issue is one of rate, rather than CO2 being a pollutant as the EPA tells us it is.
*Snicker*
CO2 levels have been much higher than 400ppm in the past. The fact is, we have already seen the most of the warming that 400ppm will produce. Additional increases in CO2 will have much smaller impacts on global warming. An increase to 640ppm will have about 10% of the impact that the initial 120ppm increase had. Most people are ignorant of this fact.
Scientists have now also shown that CO2 levels have nothing to do with causing global warming.
YOU SOUND LIKE AN ARROGANT LEFT WING LOON. WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THE “EARTH’S HISTORY”? THE EARTH IS 4 AND 1/2 BILLION YEARS OLD. EVERY 20,000 YEARS THE SAHARA DESERT BECOMES A LUSH FORREST. EXPLAIN THAT??? MAN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. LOONS LIKE YOU IGNORE THE FACT THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO GLOBAL WARMING FOR TWO DECADES AND THERE IS RECORD ICE COVERE AS WE SPEAK. CO2 ALSO IS ESSENTIAL TO LIFE AND IS SPURRING RECORD GROWTH IN THE RAIN FORRESTS. HERE IS THE BOTTOM LINE—THE EARTH HAS BEEN COVERED IN ICE AND THEN LOST ALL OF ITS ICE SCORES OF TIMES LONG BEFORE MAN EVER EXISTED. EXPLAIN THAT ONE MS. LOON???
Cherry pick much?. You have to use all relevant data associated with the subject. If you want to be believed on a specific subject at least use all available information. Doing otherwise, you sound as though we need to add bleach to the shallow end of the gene-pool. I’m only spitballing here, but, it seems as if you missed class the day they taught earth science.
Boolsheet. Mentiroso. Pendejo.
CB, I’m trying to understand your chart. If it is a chart that shows how much the ice mass changed per year, it would indicate that in most years the ice mass went up from the year before. If that is the case, even if the mass went up by less in one year than the year before, the mass is still going up even if the chart shows a downward trend. Correct? If so, even in the short trend that you posted, it appears that there would be an overall increase in mass. It also would make little sense for the mass to endlessly rise every year or we would at some point be in another ice age. If you look at your chart, it increased most years from 2002-2007, then decreased in years 2007-2009 when the chart ends. Without looking at current charts, I believe it did lose mass for a couple years after but has made a huge gain in the last couple years, as the article claims. Nobody wants to kill the planet but they have good reason for skepticism now that science and politics have become completely intertwined on this subject. Keep an open mind. look carefully at this issue before you allow the blowhard politicians to steal your personal and economic freedom.
here’s and inconvenient truth for ya:
plants grow MUCH better with 1200-1500ppm CO2 — this is why grow-houses increase CO2 inside… and guess what, there is no need for air-conditioning as a result.
Also, 290ppm is dangerously low. Increasing to 400ppm is a good thing, even though humans had nothing to do with it. The amount of CO2 we output is extremely minuscule in the grand scale of the atmosphere. The sun and water vapor are the primary drivers of climate.
http://plantsneedco2.org/html/CarbonStarvation.gif
More CO2 = more food = less hunger
Less CO2 = less food = more hunger = less us
And so the real goal of AGW is exposed –> population reduction, a high goal of the elites.
congrats, you are tool and useful idiot on behalf of the elites.
All vegative life hits saturation CO2 between 1k-2k PPM we could easily double our current concentration and the only effect would be…..more plant growth
An 8-year chart?? bwahahahaha
Indeed. A perfect illustration of something one of my physics professors warned us about 60 years ago: “…the unwarranted extrapolation of insufficient data.”
In the age of dinosaurs when no humans existed, the CO2 level of the atmosphere for 100s of million of years were between 500 ppm and 1400 ppm. Lush Vegetation EVERYWHERE. Animals growing to huge sizes. The bountiful earth giving forth life everywhere. Stop believing CO2 is something “bad” for you.
If people are the problem, why don’t you kill yourself? Hypocrite.
Take another look at algores giant graph of ice cores (CO2 vs. Temp), you will see that the rising global temps PRECEED the rise in CO2 (and SUVs were not even around back then), so when the earth warms (from SOLAR radiation), the oceans give off more CO2 into the atmosphere (and hence the ice core samples).
Also
The area of sea ice on Earth has moved into unprecedented territory. When it was declining, they blamed it on global warming. Now that it is increasing, they blame it on global warming.
Parts per million. Get real
This is an example of your lunacy. It’s complete scientific speculation.
So let’s declare Carbon Dioxide a pollutant and stop buring all fossil fuels. Then when 7.1 of the 7.2 Billion humans die (because without fossil fuels, nobody eats, has a place to escape the weather elements, no medicine, no transportation, no Internet, no iPhones, no Tweeting, you get my point), the Earth will finally be “in the balance”. What a crock!
The earth has been hotter with more co2 in the past. To support dinosaurs, specifically the plant eaters, vegetation should need to be prolific and the temperature of the planet much warmer to support cold blooded animals of that size. Simple observation to anyone who’s ever kept reptiles really.
“If it’s so likely that polar ice caps will be able to withstand CO₂ so high, why isn’t there a single example of them doing so in Earth’s history?”
IF the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is as high as you claim it is currently then we have the proof you seek right now. The polar Ice caps are still there aren’t they?
Yes, they are still there. Are you disputing the graphs that show land ice melting?
It seems simple that land ice melting would cool the sea and result in more sea ice in the winter. This is not surprising.
10000 years ago my house would have been under 10-20 feet of water. was it AGW then? Drone.
It’s absolutely laughable that you post graphs with no data later than 2008. Over the past six years, nature has demonstrated that there is no basis for your projections of unceasing ice loss, and therefore no clear link between higher CO2 levels and temperatures.
And there were times when temperatures were warmer pre-industrial revolution. I don’t see that in your 8 year graphs. Nice try at skewing data, meanwhile, I’m putting on a coat.
Shhh… stop flappin… yer makin too much CO₂…
And I suppose solar storms and volcanoes had absolutely nothing to do with your charts, its all man-made, right? By the way could you give me a chart that shows what the ice mass change was for 640,000 years ago when the Yellowstone Supervolcano, the Lava Creek eruption, put about 240 cubic miles of particles into our atmosphere? (Even though I don’t believe the guesstimated age of this eruption since the earth is only about 6,000 years old.)
Sure there are examples from prehistory. Old atmospheres are examined using bubbles trapped in miles of ice cores, drilled from the ice pack. Way back when, CO2 was many times todays concentration. What does that tell us? – that permanent ice was being laid down at vastly higher CO2 concentrations than we have…. Relax, get a life…..
Well, I can tell those charts didn’t come from the NSIDC. The Antarctic sea ice coverage has set all time record high levels the last 3 years, and is even showing that in the charts used for this article. Making up charts from your behind and posting them here does not make it ay more science than when Al Gore did it.
OK, good, now do some thinking on your own. Calculate the weighted, specific heat capacity of the atmosphere before and after the CO2 changes. CO2 contributes such an insignificant role in the atmosphere’s ability to hold energy, it doesn’t make a damn difference if you quadrupled CO2. CO2’s specific heat capacity value is amazingly unimpressive. CO2 is also .035% of the atmosphere. Hell increase it 1000%. Did all of you global warming scammers skip chemistry 101?
“We have increased CO₂ from 290PPM before the industrial revolution to 400PPM today.”
and the *temperature* has gone up a whopping 0.8 degrees as a result. That’s right, not even *one* degree.
Why is this alarming?
Don’t you believe in doing research of your own ? First of all there has been no significant warming in almost 2 decades. http://linkis.com/www.climate.gov/news/99xxE . Second, I hear people saying that this is the warmest decade ever! Try the 1930s, they blow this decade away! http://www.c3headlines.com/2012/07/extreme-climate-change-severe-weather-events-1933-1938.html . Arctic sea ice shrinking ? It shrinks, grows, shrinks, etc..as in a cycle. If you can read a map, you can see the cycle http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/detect/ice-seaice.shtml . Here’s something for you. Some people are happy about the sea levels shrinking: http://www.porttechnology.org/technical_papers/dubais_wonderland_developing_a_coastline_one_grain_at_a_time/ Finally, only because I have better things to do than teach warmers about reality, 11 http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/09/23/antarctic-sea-ice-hit-35-year-record-high-saturday/ . I hope all these links work automatically. If not just copy and paste.
Riddle me this….What is the SINGLE largest source of CO2 emissions?
And, as a bonus, What percentage of the Total Global CO2 is NOT man-made?
Look these two facts up and get back to us about how Man is causing Global warming via CO2 emissions.
Hint: I know the answer and will cite the source if you are afraid to…..
Natural sources:
Ocean-atmosphere exchange = Annually this process creates
about 330 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions.
Plant and animal respiration = Annually this process creates
about 220 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions.
Soil respiration and decomposition = Annually this process
creates about 220 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions.
Volcanic eruptions = Annually this process creates about
0.15 to 0.26 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions.
Added together – 770.15 to 770.26 Billion tonnes
Man made sources:
Fossil fuel combustion/use = 33.2 billion tonnes of carbon
dioxide emissions worldwide.
Note: This is 87% of ALL
Man made CO2.
The site remains vague about the total “Man-made” CO2 and
includes such things as land use.
“From 1850 to 2000, land use and land use change released an
estimated 396-690 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.” In 150 years man crated the equivalent of 1.5 years of the amount occurring NATURALLY in the Oceans alone.
A little math and we can deduct that the other Man Made CO2
created by ALL other sources after fossil fuels equals 4.3 billion tonnes.
That makes 37.5 billion tonnes per year.
Or, as a percentage of the total: 770.15 Billion (natural) /
37.5 Billion Man Made = 4.84 % of the total CO2.
This from the Global Warming fear monger site http(colon)//whatsyourimpact(dot)org/greenhouse-gases/carbon-dioxide-sources.
The climates change. Greenland was a lush “green land” when it was named. I guess there were too many cars and heavy industry 900 or 1100 years ago. England used to be known for their fine wines (before the climate change). The Mayan calender predicted today’s climate change 5000 years ago based on repeating cycles of climate, not cars and industry.
The Mesozoic Era had CO2 Values in excess of 2,400 ppmv for several stretches exceeding 20 Million years. None were due to Human activity.
Polar ice caps have melted and grown many times across millennia. Even in the past 500-600 yrs. Greenland was called that because it was actually green…. well before the Industrial Age. Arctic and Antarctic ice caps are growing, not decreasing. The global as a whole has not warmed for over 18 yrs.
http://testclimate.wpengine.com/2014/12/30/global-sea-ice-breaks-all-time-record-high-antarctic-sea-ice-also-breaks-all-time-record-high/
“Global Sea Ice Breaks Record High For The Day – Antarctic Sea Ice Also Breaks Record High For the Day”
The power of earth and it’s systems is unspeakably powerful- far beyond what we know now. The “people are a pox on the earth” just make me so tired..
It’s leftwing lunatics, communists, fascists, Nazis and assorted criminals who are a pox on this earth. What a wonderful world it would be if none of them existed.
Absolutely. Orwell should be Man of the Century (20th)(ironic that he was a socialist – God works in strange ways). Add mozilms to your mix of people with FITH Syndrome.
Problem is: what to DO about it is always left hanging, even by brilliant and courageous commentators like Daniel Greenfield. We are not yet at the precipice; the tiger is not yet fully awake.
I suspect that it will take a major event such as an EMP or some other act of terrorism 10+ times worse than 9-11-2001, or perhaps a partial or complete collapse of the U.S. economy before enough people wake up. I Guarantee that the first day after the welfare checks and other batches of other people’s money don’t get tranferred to the takers, riots will erupt across the nation and that will result in falling into the precipice. It will be quite a show for those prepared for it and a nightmare for the rest.
But that’s the plan, don’t you know. Cause the whole house of cards to come tumbling down, the masses demand that the government DO something and presto-change-o: Socialist Utopia. It’s the Cloward & Piven plan.
The presto chango is technically known as the Hegellian Dialectic Thereom. This is the lever that social engineers use to affect change over and over and over again.
Unfortunately, some folks, far too many, will never wake up until they are no longer capable of doing so.
Far too few people realize how little separates us from barbarism and a new “dark ages”.
If an EMP event hit America, official estimates are 90 casualties within one year primarily due to starvation when the food distribution network breaks down, and later due to unsanitary conditions because of little things like no more indoor toilets.
I used to watch Star Trek, those huge, graceful starships, and think, that’s the dream of the West. Then the announcement that warp drive is theoretically possible got me excited. Then ISIS came. And I began looking into history, how classical civilization continued in the Eastern Empire even though Rome fell in the West. But then Islam came, and attacked it in the 7th century and destroyed it in the 15th with the fall of Constantinople. And I realized that the dream of the West isn’t going to happen, because Islam is going to kill it. And maybe us, as well.
Ahhhhhem, the Arabs had paper and other technologies first, which the West did not acquire until the Crusades where they invaded the region. That right there helped break Europe out of the Dark Ages.
I have been reading diar predictions from right wing economic snake oil salesmen for the past 7 years. None of Obama’s policies have caused our collapse, infact 6 years on, our economy is stronger than ever, gas prices have dropped to decade lows, and yet you continue to scream doom and socialism. Hell, we could probably use more of what you dolts consider socialism. What’s funny is that some Scandinavian countries have started litterally handing out money as a minimum living stipend. Their economies are doing great and they have a higher quality of liVing than the US.
1) “Dire.”
2) “Literally.”
3) The price of gasoline is a) the result of Saudi trying to undercut both us and Russia and b) is STILL higher than it was the day he took office.
4) Socialism is a pyramid scheme, and eventually you run out of other people’s money. Or else you start printing it and giving THAT away. Germany and Rhodesia can tell you a lot about that method.
5) Scandinavia also does not have a permanent underclass which has become rooted and bonded to government handouts and criminal/gang culture. Although they are starting to catch up, with their growing population of Middle Easterners*. Read up on Scandinavian crime statistics. Read up especially on rape in Norway.
6) “None of Obama’s policies have caused our collapse.” Huh? I thought the “obstructionist Congress” has kept him from getting ANYTHING done. Make up your mind, you can’t have it both ways.
7) How’s that whole business of race relations coming along?
*Yes, that’s dog-whistle code-word for Moslems.
Uh oh. Someone’s been paying attention. I name you…the ANTI-GRUBER!
Anti-truth person?
1, 2. Who cares about spelling these days?
3. The reason it was so far down was because the economy and demand collapsed. Before that it was at record highs. Presidents don’t have much impact on prices.
4. You meant to say Ponzi scheme, which it isn’t.
5. Way to blame the poor and minorities for our problems.
6. He is referring to all the Obama doomsday sayers, and those prophecies are false.
7. Race relations are fine. The media blows it out of proportion, both left and right.
“1, 2. Who cares about spelling these days?”
Says it all, folks, says it all.
The U.S. is doing that now. Going deeper in debt. & spend more than we take in on junk.
You can thank fracking technology and oil company ingenuity in navigating the EPA barricades erected by obama’s administration the past 6 years. In addition to obama’s misguided opposition to the Keystone pipeline. New technologies and low oil prices have spurred the economy and job growth. Nothing obama has done has built this economy. Nothing.
Sure he didnt. I gus it’s true what they say about you repub tools; you Blame the black guy when he’s cleaning up your conservative pig mess, but demand credit when things are finally working thanks to 6 years of democratic governance.
You are out of your mind.
And you apparently think you can burn billions of gallons of oil and release all that into the atmosphere with no consequence.
Do you understand why the gas prices are dropping and what it means long term?
I bet you do. Please enlighten us, O Wise One of Infinite Knowledge.
Oh, and I am wise and I do have infinite knowledge, but if you want to pretend I’m an idiot, Google “petrodollar” and see what you find.
Google “Communist fool”. See what you find.
Yeah, Putin suffers. Obama wins again.
Socialist Utopia Venezuela suffers (they’re in a depression now because of it)– and they can no longer keep Cuba afloat with aid. Thus– Obama bails out Cuba (loosening restrictions so people in the US can subsidize the Communist regime).
That is Baseless.
Obama has had little to do with it. The Saudis are deliberately flooding the market with excess oil to tackle the issue with Russia (yes, a nice side benefit), but also to knock the legs out from under our natural gas industry which will not survive if the price/barrel stays below $60 for much longer. Our “recovery” is shouldered by the natural gas boon. When it collapses, so does the dollar. But I’m sure you knew that, right? Love the arrogance of you lefties. But makes it all that much more fun to watch your mental gymnastics when the wheels come off the bad policy.
“Blame the black guy. Take the credit.” Did your white Supremacist majority whip think this up?
Such an easy, no-thought, inaccurate assessment. Dispute what I said with tangible fact. Stop name calling. Otherwise, you have no credibility whatsoever.
First, as usual, your rightwing analysis of the situation is wrong. Fuck natural gas, it’s environmentally damaging and I see no reason to support it since it only benefits degenerate red states. Electric is the future. Gas is just a stop gap.
Maybe. But a necessary stop gap to get to the future. And electricity has to come from somewhere. And, with no money, who do you assume will get you through that stop gap? But glad to see your civility is well in tact.
Unless you have a lot of hydro, electricity is either generated from dirty coal, nuclear, or natural gas. Clean burning natural gas is the future for electricity.
You missed thermal, solar, wind, and emerging technologies. Ever hear of the sun?
No I did not. They are not economically viable.
Yes moron. It’s called solar power, not electric.
USMC2010, I’m not going to be mean to you because i genuinely think you may have a learning disability. Solar power generates electricity. It’s the same thing.
Every other power source I mentioned can also be converted to “electric” so by your logic all of the actual sources I stated are the same thing. You are a moron.
Yeah, because the future is only 90 years long? That’s how long til it runs out.
How do you figure that?
My God you are a moron. “Electric” is not a power source. Coal, oil, NG, nuclear, wind and solar are power sources. “Electric” is one of the products for consumption. Here’s electric for you…you are a 5-watt light bulb. Not so bright.
USMC2010, I’m not going to be mean to you because i genuinely think you may have a learning disability. Solar power generates electricity.
Gee…solar generates electricity…really? I guess they built the Hoover Dam to generate moonbeams. Wonder what diesel generators produce…perhaps butterflies. Idiot.
Like I said; Learning disability.
You really are weak. A man could admit an error. Solar is a source…electricity is a product from EVERY SINGLE POWER SOURCE WE UTILIZE. Those following the thread know how dumb you sound trying to justify such a dumb initial assertion that, “electric is the future.” But, then again, liberals are known to be weak, illogical and just plain stupid.
Only an idiot could misread/misinterpret what I said. You’re twisting in the wind.
Electric car?
Ignorant and off topic. Stay up…we were talking about his assertion that the best future power SOURCE was “electric.”
Off topic, and austerity measures don’t usually work well and can be senseless
Orwell’s political ideas changed several times during his life.
Animal Farm was much more a critique of what Stalin did with Communism, rather than Communism itself. And of course 1984 is largely apolitical — totalitarianism can spring up from any quarter.
His first political orientation was Anarchist. He later became a Socialist writing a book called, “The Road to Wigon Pier”. He went to Spain where he ended up fighting communists in Barcelona. He returned to England as a Conservative and wrote, “Coming Up For Air”. He went through a period where he was a sort of a Libertarian while turning once again to Socialism. He became the editor of a left-wing socialist newspaper, but his experience in Barcelona fighting communists left him with a lifelong dread of Communism. Only after that, he wrote Animal Farm and 1984.
Maybe, AND you.
STFU you pile of shiit.
Make better arguments and you won’t find yourself swearing as much
That would be true if I encountered fewer rabid fanatics like you. They’re so annoying and so full of bullshiit.
By bullshit you mean facts, evidence, and concern for our future?
That’s why I can’t really oppose abortion or gay marriage. Good conservative people don’t engage in that. We should be having as many kids as we can. The bed wetting moonbats can abort and swallow themselves out of existence.
That’s funny!
Good saying.
I’ve come to that conclusion, too, but you say it well.
Opposition to abortion should be based on the fact that a human life is being taken (murder) If you support abortion, you’re in favor of wanton murder. Just my opinion
You are just murdering future liberals. No loss there.
AL GORE IS A LIAR, THIEF, FRAUD AND HYPOCRITE. HIS GLOBAL WARMING POSITION IS A LIE THAT HE HAS USED TO DEFRAUD PEOPLE OUT OF HUNDRED OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. FRANKLY, IN BELONGS IN PRISON RIGHT NEXT TO PONZI SCHEME KING, BERNIE MADOFF.
Isn’t the Social Security system we have in this country the ultimate Ponzi Scheme?
The US should get out of the disability and health insurance business.
Except that other industrialized nations often do a better job than what we or the private industry could do.
Billy Ray sees the IRS, USPS and public housing as shining examples of how a big, overreaching government can do a better job of managing our environment.
What a fool.
You love corporations so much that you’re willing to hand them the keys to the kingdom.
SS do not count on it, Best to put away money through the underground economy that is now about 20 % of total GDP.
With the internet it is quite easy to sell and save 10 to 20 k a yr. buy and sell what you have a passion for.
He owns a magnificent beachfront hacienda in Santa Barbara and is probably bravely battling gnarly surf dudes who want to surf on his beach. He really hates peasants.
And you hate logic reason and science, so gfy.
No I don’t. Stop telling lies and making stuff up.
yer stoopit.
LOL. You’re such a pleb.
Pleb? Language dictates thought goofy, and you are someone who believes that your basic lefist moral superiority equals mental superiority. Nice try.
2014 was the hottest year ever recorded. You are arguing with the thermometer.
2014 was hottest only to those who will not actually look into the facts. Taking your facts from the media will make you think how the people that own the media want. Doing your own research will always lead an honest informed citizen to see human caused warming as the FRAUD that it is.
WRONG.
Last year was only the 6th warmest of the new century — sixth, out of 14 years.
Now the alarmist crowd has resorted to outright lying, since they don’t have credible facts.
Gee- such powerful, rational scientific argument, geek.
2014 was the hottest year ever recorded.
repeating a lie is a socialist/nazi tactic……..satalite records do not agree with you.
…Says Richard repeating a lie,
That must explain the record ice expansion. Wake up. Google “ClimateGate”
Actually, 1934 was. In addition, global warming trend is now broken. Climate is more closely correlated to solar activity than any crackpot Liberal theories. There’s a reason that your progressive masters have retreated and are now calling it “Climate Change.” That way, no matter what happens, they’re right :-). I passed by Al gore’s oceanfront house in Montecito, CA, right on the ocean :-). Wonder why he bought it if it’s gonna be inundated soon. Sounds like you’re the “plebe” geek :-).
Wow, maybe if you could just get this schlock through peer review you would win a Nobel Prize! Lol.
2014 was the hottest year ever recorded.
As if.
It wasn’t, but even if it was:
I am the tallest I have ever been. I am 6’2″ tall, and by your silly logic, that means:
a) I was always this tall, and
b) I will surely get taller [globaloney warming will only get ‘worse’]
Really, the alarmist cult is now using pathetic arguments. And they are simply lying because they don’t have credible facts.
Perhaps I don’t have data, but scientific american does.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/2014-to-be-hottest-year-ever-measured/
Yeah like yours is any better?
Is this an elementary school playground?
This is a serious issue whichever side you are on and deserves far more maturity than you are showing.
Actually yes. The grown-ups have been showing the hyper-greens some facts hey’re not hearing in their echo chamber. I’ve heard it all after many years in Sierra Club. When I started seeing the other side, I started doing some checking and found ouit GW was being vastly overhyped. Then ClimateGate got exposed.
So you think the sun doesn’t affect temperature? am I reading that right?
Um no, you are not reading that right. Obviously the sun plays an important role in our climate. What kind of doofus derives that from what I said?
You can’t even spell it right, troll.
My phone is shit for quick typing.
How about trying to make the better argument? Or do you have no argument?
BloodAxe does not have an argument.
People who yammer dementedly about Al Gore prove they know nothing about climate science and furthermore, are not interested in what’s true!
Nothing Al Gore could possibly do would change the effect of CO₂ on planetary temperature.
Here’s a little common sense for those who worship at Al Gore’s altar: If the seas are rising from global warming why isn’t he selling his beach house? I will tell you why…because he wants YOU to sell YOURS so he can buy up the property. For a guy whose home uses enough electricity to power a small town you actually believe him? You are EXACTLY the type of person Jonathon Gruber talks about.
Al Gore didn’t discover CO₂ warms planets. John Tyndall did… over 100 years ago:
earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Tyndall
Are you saying he was founding a cult that all scientists on Earth have been a part of for over a century?
Is that actually what you believe?
ALL scientists DON’T believe it. THAT IS WHAT I AM SAYING! The ones who do are mostly government scientists trying to keep their jobs. You need to do a little more research, fella. Your ‘ hypothesis’ is fuckedup.
…but all scientists do believe it.
…and they believe it, because we can actually see CO₂ warming the planet from space:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/schmidt_05
You have access to the entire internet.
Why don’t you know this?
Whatever is going on is natural. It has nothing…zero, zippo…with any kind of change. And no..REAL scientists don’t believe Al Gore and his wing nut theorists. Most of their hysterical data comes from computer models. Garbage in; garbage out.
You are correct…scientists do not look to Al Gore to form their conclusions on Climate Change. They look at their data.
I think garbage in garbage out applies to your comments.
Green thinker says it all; Which means you DON’T think. And your stupid assumptions are being proved wrong daily. You and your ilk are very, very foolish people.
Your comment does not make sense.
Who and what are you talking about?
YOU do not make sense.
Simple answer is that it’s a lie. //…but all scientists do believe it.// That is a lie on it’s face!! In fact it is a ridiculous lie, easily exposed by the list of legitimate scientists who have signed documents refuting anthropogenic climate change!! Please at least make an effort at accuracy..
Show me this document.
Show you the document?
OK. No problem:
http://oism.org/pproject
More than 31,000 American scientists have co-signed that document, saying that CO2 is harmless, and beneficial to the biosphere.
Since that COMPLETELY debunks your alarmist nonsense, I fully expect you to deflect to something else.
“Its face,” not “It’s face.” It’s means “it is.”
Ouch..
You say it is easily refuted.
Please show me the document.
I would like to see.
CB says:
…but all scientists do believe it.
Anyone who makes a baseless assertion like that is either a fool, or completely ignorant. Maybe both…
The OISM Petition was co-signed by more than 31,000 American scientists, every one of them named, and every one of them was required to have a degree in one of the hard sciences. They do not agree with your nonsense, so your comment above was insanity. At least you said “believe”, wghich shows where you’re coming from.
Next, you emit:
…and they believe it, because we can actually see CO₂ warming the planet from space:
Preposterous nonsense. If that were true, the debate would have been over long ago. Here are some empirical, testable FACTS:
There is NO scientific evidence that measures any warming cause by CO2. None at all. But there is a mountain of scientific evidence showing conclusively that changes in temperature are THE CAUSE of subsequent changes in CO2.
Thus, the original alarmist premise — claiming that rising CO2 will cause a measureable rise in global temperature — is flatly debunked.
The truth is that rising temperature causes rising CO2. That has been observed on all time scales, from months, to hundreds of millennia.
When you begin with a wrong premise, you are sure to arrive at the wrong conclusion. That is waht happened to the alarmist cult. But being their religion, they cannot admit that they were wrong.
But everyone else can see it.
Me loves me my Internet Performance Art!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
This hapless, clueless comedy makes me LOLz!
Best,
D
More evidence-free nonsense.
Clueless rube embarrasses itself for our amusement!
Best,
D
Still not one fact from the ‘dano’ a-hoe. Only hot air.
Keep that up, and we might really see some global warming.
Thank you for that limp response to your limp defense of the comical OISM – Gono is always good for a laff!
Best
D
We do have empirical evidence of the world with higher CO2 levels. Almost the entire Mesozoic Era was characterized by CO2 level at least six times what they are today – on a planet wide scale. At 2,400 ppmv the Earth was lush with vegetation and critters. The Mesozoic lasted more than 100 Million years. I call that empirical evidence.
So it’s Back to the Future and the Flux Capacitor? Actually, satellite and balloon data show no global warming at all.
.
You will not get the truth about it from the Washington
Post, the New York Times, or the rest of the self-regarded
“establishment” media. They are trying to pretend that there is no
legitimate scientific debate over whether mankind’s use of low cost, reliable
energy from oil, coal and natural gas portends catastrophic global warming that
threatens life on the planet as we know it.
.
Recently, the AGW alarmists tried to revive flagging public
respect for their fading message of doom. The occasion was massively overhyped
and misrepresented reporting of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST)
project. But all that was new from that project was the departures from the
official catechism. Reporting on the recorded temperature history since 1950
from stations on land, which covers less than 30% of the earth’s surface,
Berkeley University Earth Surface Temperature project leader Professor Richard
Muller reported in a Wall Street Journal commentary on October 21, that after
obtaining and reviewing “more than 1.6 billion measurements from 39,000
[land based] temperature stations around the world… the result offered no
independent assessment of the question of “how much of the warming is due
to humans and what will be the likely effects.”
.
But that is the whole issue in the global warming debate.
Muller also honestly admits that “The [land based] temperature station
quality is largely awful,” noting that “A careful survey of these
stations by a team of meteorologists showed that 70% have such poor siting that,
by the U.S. government’s own measure, they result in temperature uncertainties
of between two and five degrees Celsius or more. We do not know how much worse
are the stations in the developing world.” He adds that, “The margin
of error for the stations is at least three times larger than the estimated
warming, and that one-third of land based temperature stations worldwide show
cooling rather than warming.”
.
These concessions are important to recount because weather
satellites measuring atmospheric temperatures worldwide, over land and water,
which are not subject to the above troubles of land based weather stations,
show no warming since their record began in 1979, and before that there was
actually global cooling dating back to 1940. The satellite record regarding
atmospheric temperatures is independently confirmed by weather balloons.
Moreover, the computer based climate models utilized by the UN’s own
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and the atmospheric theory
they rely upon, all insist that if man’s use of carbon based fuels was warming
the planet, the atmosphere must be warming faster than the surface.
.
In addition, the scientifically recognized temperature proxy
data from tree rings, ice cores, lake and ocean sediments, and stalagmites also
show no warming since 1940. Note that the warming before1940 is attributable to
the global recovery of temperatures from the Little Ice Age, and even the land
based records show no significant warming over the last 18 years.
.
It is very likely that the reported warming during 1978-97
[from land based weather stations] is simply an artifact – the result of the
measurement scheme rather than an actual warming. When a letter to the editor
by Prof. Julius Singer was sent to the global warming cheerleading Washington
Post, pointing out the above anomalies and his conclusion, he reports the
peculiar response that “they were willing to publish my letter, but not my
credentials as emeritus professor at the University of Virginia and former
director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service. Apparently, they were concerned
that readers might gain the impression that I knew something about
climate.”
.
But there is more. Even the land based temperature record is
not consistent with the theory of man-caused global warming. That record does
not show persistent warming following persistent growth of CO2 and other
greenhouse gases. Rather, it shows an up and down pattern of temperatures more
consistent with natural causes. Those include solar flare and sun spot cycles,
and the periodic cycling of warm and cold water in the oceans from top to
bottom, particularly the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO).
.
The truth is a vigorous global scientific debate persists
over whether man’s use of carbon-based fuels threatens to cause catastrophic
global warming, and the media not reporting that is not performing journalism.
The most authoritative presentation of this debate can be found in the 856 page
Climate Change Reconsidered, published by the Heartland Institute in 2009. This
careful, thoroughly scientific volume co- authored by dozens of fully
credentialed scientists comprehensively addresses every aspect of global
warming, and indicates that natural causes are primarily responsible for
climate patterns of the last century. Heartland has just published a follow up
416 page Interim Report updating the debate.
.
When you run across an AGW alarmist, ask him for his
rebuttal to Climate Change Reconsidered. You will find the response is
something derogatory about the Heartland Institute, showing that he hasn’t read
the report. Liberals don’t need no stinkin’ facts; their minds are made up.
They know that the Heartland Institute’s report is wrong because someone told
them so.
.
Indeed, the latest and best work actually provides scientific
proof that the man-caused global warming catechism is false. Fully documented
work by Roy Spencer, U.S. Science Team Leader for the AMSR-E instrument flying
on NASA’s Aqua satellite, and Principal Research Scientist for the Earth
Systems Science Center at the University of Alabama at Huntsville, shows using
atmospheric temperature data from NASA’s Terra satellite that much more heat
escapes back out to space than is assumed captured in the atmosphere by
greenhouse effects under the UN’s theoretical climate models. This explains why
the warming temperature changes predicted by the UN’s global warming models
over the past 20 years have been proved to be false.
.
In August, 2011 came the results of a major experiment by
the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), involving 63 scientists
from 17 European and U.S. institutes. The results show that the sun’s cosmic
rays resulting from sunspots have a much greater effect on Earth’s temperatures
through their effect on cloud cover than the UN’s global warming models have
been assuming. This helps to explain why the historical pattern of temperature
changes seems to follow the rise and fall of sunspots, rather than the
concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. This further confirms what Heartland’s
Climate Change Reconsidered argues – that natural causes have the dominant
effect on Earth’s temperatures, not greenhouse gases.
.
Finally, the UN’s own climate models project that if man’s
greenhouse gas emissions were causing global warming, there would be a
particular pattern of temperature distribution in the atmosphere, which
scientists call “the fingerprint.” Temperatures in the troposphere
portion of the atmosphere above the tropics would increase with altitude
producing a “hotspot” near the top of the troposphere, about 6 miles
above the earth’s surface. Above that, in the stratosphere, there would be
cooling. But higher quality temperature data from weather balloons and
satellites now show just the opposite: no increasing warming with altitude in
the tropical troposphere, but rather a slight cooling, with no hotspot, no
fingerprint.
.
So the scientific foundation for shutting down our modern,
21st century, industrial economy has been obliterated. But that is not stopping
religious crusaders, due to the extremist ideology and special interests
driving the global warming charade.
You tinfoil hat guys, with your “man-made
CO2 increase causes global warming” can’t explain how, during the fastest increase
in CO2 ever, from 1940 to the early 1970s (the industrialized world went on an
armament-making spree in WWII, then lots of steel production for post-war
reconstruction and infrastructure, plus consumer durables like cars and
refrigerators in the post-war boom, 95% powered by coal-burning power plants)
………… and global temperatures went down for all 30+ years. Went down
enough for the predecessors of today’s AGW nuts to predict, with equal
confidence, the coming of a New Ice age, and suggest such remedies as
increasing particulate emission to help the greenhouse blanket, and even
covering the poles with soot to attract more sun’s heat. Read that again.
During the fastest increase in atmospheric CO2, global temperatures went down.
In fact, global warming and more atmospheric CO2 would be beneficial to the
world’s population. The 2 or 3 degree temperature rise that the AGW alarmist
industry keeps babbling about (well, they were babbling about it 18 years ago;
not so much now) would open up hundreds of thousands of square miles of
currently frozen tundra to agriculture.
.
Speaking of agriculture, the other scare tactic the AGW nuts use; eight years
after the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
warned of mass starvation from global warming caused by high levels of
atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), emissions of the greenhouse gas are at record
levels. The IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report, which was edited by chairman Dr.
Rajendra Pachauri [see** note at the bottom] and released in 2007, predicted
with “virtual certainty” that crop yields would plummet in some areas unless
industrialized nations immediately adopted stricter limits on CO2, which the
IPCC said was causing “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate
system. By 2020, in some countries, yields from rain-fed agriculture could be
reduced by up to 50%,” the report predicted.
.
But last year, a record level of atmospheric CO2 coincided with farmers reaping
record-breaking harvests worldwide. In fact, 2014 signified an all-time record
grain production. Oops. According to a report also released by the U.N.’s Food
and Agriculture Organization, “world cereal production [wheat, corn, oats,
barley, rice, etc.] in 2014 is at a new record of 2,532 million tonnes, 7
million tonnes above the previous peak.” That includes a record level of wheat
production worldwide, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The
study stated that the CO2 “fertilization effect is now a significant land
surface process” and has created “a greening of the globe over recent decades.”
That greening effect includes a growth spurt among redwoods and giant sequoias
in California [don’t tell the AGW featherbrains in Hollywood.]
.
Claims that global warming and more atmospheric carbon dioxide are harming crop
production have been proven preposterous by the real-world, objective data. We
know that in recent decades, we’ve seen an actual tripling of production of the
most important staple crops: corn, wheat, and rice. There’s been a record
production of wheat in the past year in much of Asia and Africa, and throughout
the world where the wheat harvest is important. Instead of diminishing crop
yields, high levels of CO2 actually help to increase them.
.
As we add more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, it can be expected that that’s
going to benefit crop production because carbon dioxide is not a
“pollutant,” as the IPCC and AGW loons say, but aerial plant
fertilizer. Horticulturalists pump CO2 into greenhouses to facilitate plant
growth. Just as people have demonstrated in greenhouses that plants that are
artificially fed more CO2 grow more rapidly and are more productive, the same
happens in the natural environment when we’ve had more atmospheric carbon
dioxide. The link between high levels of CO2 and record crop yields worldwide
was never discussed at the UN’s climate change conference in Lima last month
(surprise!) To the extent that crop production is discussed at any United Nation
meetings, it continues the claim, despite this evidence, that global warming is
wreaking havoc on crops.
.
Understand that the IPCC is a government body with government appointees. Some of
them are scientists, but most, including the bureaucrats in control, are not.
And even those who are scientists tend to work for environmental activist
groups such as The Sierra Club, the Environmental Defense Fund, Greenpeace,
World Wildlife Fund, etc. (The IPCC has even been exposed as including,
verbatim, propaganda handouts from one of these environmental groups in its
reports, with bogus claims of snow disappearing from the Himalayas and
destruction of rain forests because of global warming – then having to retract
them when exposed.) They have an agenda to push. It’s very little objective
science. It’s 99 percent politics from an environmental activist agenda. And
the Summary for Policy Makers that the IPCC non-scientist bureaucrats issue
every few years is often in total contradiction to what their own scientists
have reported. Unfortunately, in that environment, the facts simply don’t come
out if people aren’t doing their own research. If we’re just listening and
reading the UN press releases, we’re going to believe that a world exists that
is exactly opposite from what the real world really is. [**Update: IPCC
chairman Pachauri has been forced to resign after accusations of sexual
harassment.]
There is not the slightest factual data to prove that rising atmospheric CO2 raises global temperatures. In fact, quite the opposite. The fastest increase in atm. CO2 occurred during the WWII years and reconstruction/durable goods boom after – 1940 to the early 1970s. And global temperatures went down, steadily, for the entire 30+ years. Down to the extent that the predecessors of today’s global warming hoax were warning of a New Ice Age, and suggesting incresing greenhouse gases and even covering the poles with soot to absorb more sun’s heat.
Algore’s lying An Inconvenient Truth showed a graph with lines of CO2 concentration and global temperatures superimposed, with the conclusion “more CO2 means warmer planet.” Scientists and statiticians immediately showed that Gore had deliberately faked the data, by altering the time base. What the data actually showed was the reverse, that higher temperatures cause more CO2. Of course they do, they speed up dead plant decay, which produce methane and CO2.
You’re just parroting the AGW hoaxters’ propaganda without looking into the facts.
They are simply gasses that are opaque to various wavelengths of long wave infrared. Gasses that absorb heat expand and rise. Adiabatic lapse causes the rising gas to cool without the loss of heat. At some point the gas will reach a temperature for which it is transparent to long wave infrared. At that point the gas gives off the heat it absorbed in all directions – some to space.
Whether it is water vapor or CO2, the gas absorbs heat near the surface, rises and releases the heat at altitude. That is all there is to the greenhouse effect.
CO2 levels have historically been much higher than they are now with no harm to flora, fauna, and sea life. The Mesozoic Era had stretches of time longer than 100 Million years during which the CO2 level exceeded 2,400 ppmv. Life thrived and the planet was just fine.
You’re a special kind of stupid, ain’t ya
Global temperatures have far more correlation to solar activity than anything else. In fact, those temperatures have cooled since 1998.
Bringing logic to a liberal argument…. Shame on you, CM. 🙂
CB you made no arguement and your assertion is superficial.
Quote CB, “Nothing Al Gore could possibly do would change the effect of CO₂ on planetary temperature.”
OK, why is that? Because the physical phenomenon affecting global weather are so huge that they dwarf any human action and therefore anthropogenic global warming is unlikely? I don’t think this is where you were going. So Al Gore is just one person so his global warning impact is immeasurable and can therefore be disregarded? Or, Al Gore buys carbon credits and this cancels out his profligate consumption? This is my vote for what you meant. Or, you actually believe in anthropogenic global warming but don’t believe one person makes a difference? So how about two people, two hundred people, when does it start to matter? Or is it that you are enthralled and just believe that some people are so imperial that they reach a state in which there excrement fails to produce odor?
@CB:
Where did you find those fabricated charts? They are totally bogus.
Please stop emitting misinformation. It is too easy to debunk. For example, global ice cover is at an all-time high. So how could ice be declining like that?
If it were not for their lies, the alarmist crowd wouldn’t have anything to say.
This is a perfect example of the phrase “how to lie with statistics.” Your cherry-picked graphs end in 2010. Arctic ice mass ncreased 60% 2012-13, an area equal to half of Europe. Antarctic ice increased similarly. Remember the Ship of Fools, the global warming so-called scientists who set out to prove that the Antarctic ice was shrinking last year, and got stuck in ice so thick that the world’s most powerful ice breakers couldn’t reach them?
As for that lying bloated hypocrite Algore, if you want to know how his much-touted “An Inconvenient Truth” slide show, that he has made $millions showingf to gullible people round the world, has been totally discredited – destroyed, in fact – see this. After the show was shown to schools in Britain, parents and Members of Parliament complained to the High Court that children wer having nightmares about polar bears drowning and that they themselves would be either drowned in rising seas or burned by out of control temperatures. The High Court issued an order that children must be shown the contrary evidence, and also issued a total refutation of Gore’s assertions in Inconvenient Truth. Download the link, then click on the pdf format box:
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html
You obviously didn’t understand my earlier reply to your claim about Algore. If you’re having difficulty in comprehending, have someone explain it to you.
It doesn’t take a lot to make a better argument than making a point, and having someone go, “that’s irrelevant.” You don’t clarify why you think those points are unrelated to what you see the core issue as being. You just dismiss everything as categorically irrelevant.
So, speaking of the ‘better argument’, you might practice what you preach. Offer something of actual substance.
Because there are many arguments being made here that don’t have anything to do with the problem, or the deniers are resorting to ad hominem attacks rather than attempt intellectual debate. Here’s some reading for you: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/09/why-is-antarctic-sea-ice-at-record-levels-despite-global-warming It could very well be a combination of increases in fresh water due to the melting from the undercurrent, a decrease in the ozone (which acts like a greenhouse gas), and an uptick in weather activity. It makes some sense, but weather activity is very complex and tough to understand so there could be other factors. Much of global warming is counterintuitive to the ill informed, like you have global warming actually being partly responsible for the blizzard in Buffalo this past November (the warming waters of Lake Erie led to increased lake effect snow). It also leads to strange events, like hurricanes washing away the middle of Vermont,a state with no sea or ocean coastline. It also has more devastating but not heard of effects like NYC getting flooded and NJ getting washed away by Sandy, and droughts that have dried up the Mississippi River and the state of California and wildfires that burn up the West (All of which would be almost impossible without Global Warming, Keep in mind too, in regards to the Arctic, I believe it was 2012 where we had shocking records of low ice. Also, events have been shown to be influenced by global warming. http://www.climatecentral.org/news/hansen-study-extreme-weather-tied-to-climate-change-14760
Now, instead of someone actually debating me, I get hit with ad hominem insults or excuses that “global warming is a hoax; it’s a socialist government power grab”. I, as a businessman, actually view it not as a political issue but a business risk (see the costs of the droughts and the billions spent cleaning up Hurricane Sandy, or even the businesses in Vermont shut down for good by Hurricane Irene).
You want debate? I doubt it..
Globval ice has recovered nicely, which debunks the ‘disappearing ice’ scare.
‘Counterintuitive” = “unscientific”
Vermont is a small ocation. Note the debate is about global warming
Global warming stopped many years ago
Every other example you give is cherry-picked confirmation bias, by showing locations, not global effects
Quoting the Guardian alone loses the argument. It shows you are commenting based on politics, not based on science.
Sea ice or land ice? Two different things. The land ice is disappearing. The sea ice is more volatile but is also under threat due to warming waters. Counter-intuitive means that the science behind it seemingly defies what on its surface seems logical, but which isn’t actually so or is much more complicated. Global warming rate hit a bit of a “plateau” but that does not mean it stopped; it is still going up and 2014 is likely to be the hottest year on record. The measurements are based on global results, not geographic. I can pull many other signs of evidence of global warming; there really isn’t much evidence to the contrary, or any evidence at all once you factor out what can be dispelled. Global warming is occurring, which there is no doubt about that it is happening. The only questions are how much if any influence human activity has on it, which the evidence points to greatly, and along with that is how much of a threat it is, which seems to be variable but serious.
Lastly, that was just one article that I pulled from the Guardian. I could pull the same type of data from many other sources. There are still plenty of conservatives out there that are concerned and that hate false propaganda. I could care less about the political issue; it’s a major business and environmental concern; just today I heard a story about how susceptible and exposed to risk our area is to brown-outs and loss of power due to global warming issues that have already and will continue to happen.
Easy goes it Al.
Al Gore is right about climate change.
really…..tell us more, moron!
I love comedians!
No…you hate logic!
Sure. I hate logic. You showed me.
well, put your tiny little mittens on because you are about to get cold, little Gore groupie. Logic obviously escapes you!
LOGIC , REASON & SCIENCE ALL SAY GLOBAL WARMING IS A FRAUD .
AGW IS THE MODERN VERSION OF THE FLAT EARTH SOCIETY .
YOUR FIRST CLUE SHOULD BE WHEN THEY SAY THAT THE
“SCIENCE IS SETTLED” .
WHENEVER SCIENCE SETTLES , IT HAS STOPPED BEING SCIENCE .
TYPING IN ALL CAPS MAKES YOU LOOK ANGRY & CRAZY.
TELLING PEOPLE HOW TO TYPE MAKES YOU LOOK INTOLERANT
AND UNACCOMMODATING .
THE POLICY GEEK HAS SPOKEN , IT’S MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY .
ABSOLUTELY! THAT’S WHY I ALWAYS SHOUT MY MESSAGES!! IF YOU CAN’T GET PAST THE SHOUTING, YOU ARE INTOLERANT AND UNACCOMMODATING!!! LOTS OF EXCLAMATION POINTS ARE GOOD TOO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
TAKE IT UP WITH THE POLICY GEEK .
Caps=yelling. That’s basic internet etiquette. I’m just trying to help you not look so stupid, but do what you like.
you should really read ALL the pieces on CLIMATE DEPOT , not just the ones you like.
I’ll waste my time reading real science sites. Not garbage denialist propaganda.
You can start by reading:
WattsUpWithThat.com
It has won the internet’s Best Science & Technology Award for the 3rd year running, and it has well over 200 million unique views in only 7 – 8 years. And it has more than one million reader comments. It posts articles all the time, by climatologists, physicists, engineers and scientists. Best of all, it doesn’t censor different points of view.
But alas, you probably read low-traffic blogs like realscience, and the climate propaganda blog ‘skeptical’ science [run by a neo-Nazi]. No wonder you emit so much misinformation.
You know what else is settled science; that the earth is round and revolves around the sun. Back when those ideas were new, Conservatives tried to crush those ideas too.
WATER IS MADE OF HYDROGEN & OXYGEN AND GRAVITY KEEPS US
ON THE THE EARTH . WHAT ELSE CAN CAPTAIN OBVIOUS TEACH US TODAY ?
THE AGW PROPONENTS CANNOT TELL US WHAT THE TEMPERATURE SHOULD BE . IS IT TOO COLD OR TOO HOT ?
THEY HAVE FAILED TO SHOW IF INCREASED CO2 CAUSES HIGH TEMPS
OR IF HIGHER TEMPS CAUSE CO2 .
PLEASE LEARN TO SEPARATE WHAT IS OBVIOUS FROM WHAT IS NOT .
( GREAT IGNORANT STAB AT CONSERVATIVES BY THE WAY )
WHAT IS OBVIOUS TO ME IS THAT THE GLOBAL WARMERS ARE THE FLAT EARTHERS OF OUR DAY . TO MANY PARALLELS TO IGNORE .
So your argument is because an error occurred 500 years ago (actually it didn’t occur but your history is as good as your physics) a similar error proves your case today. It’s called conflation and is a standard leftist “intellectual” tool.
2014 was the hottest year ever recorded. You are arguing with a thermometer.
You are repeating some one else’s lie….repeating a lie does not make it true
Actually it is true. Why do you hate science?
No, we’re arguing with a geek. 1934 has the record.
STOP IT.
Last year was the SIXTH warmest year of the new century/millennium. Sixth — out of only 14 years.
Thus, your lame argument crashes and burns. All you have left is a lie. Stop it. We know better.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/2014-to-be-hottest-year-ever-measured/
Well, your wrong. But even if it had been the 6th warmest, that’s still a big red flag.
Some of the same people who push global warming were pushing global freezing a few decades ago,. Whatever gets the grant money. Google ClimateGate, geek.
Climategate was a really stupid right wing meme.
So you did not read the e-mails??? or do you have no concern for integrity???
Not even a fraction as stupid as AGW, the biggest wrongheaded diversion of resources in history, geek.
Nah, Iraq war trumps all.
Hey troll: Even more than a simultaneous 2-front war against the Germans and Japanese? Even more than QE? Even more than $18 trillion debt and $120 trillion in unfunded liabilities. propel;led by a runaway govt.? Even more than a lose-lose amateur foreign policy? No.
I was not in favor of Iraq war, but are you aware that 65% of the Senate voted for action against Iraq, including your Shrillary?
You would label everyone who disagrees with you a troll, Im sure. Repubs started Iraq. Obama spent the past 6 years cleaning up after your shit storm.
You really are a fool
1. I’m not a Republican
2. 75% of the Senate voted to take action against Iraq, including Hillary, Chuckie, Harry, etc.
3.and yes, since you’re on Climatedepot, you would be a TROLL.
It’s really unfair for me to be engaged in a battle of wits with you when you are clearly unarmed. Living in your mother’s basement and being a troll must be depressing. Get some gumption in 2015 and go out and get a job. Wait- you have no skills except AGW trolling? Not a good future, slacker. Learn something productive.
Hardly a “meme” and hardly right wing. It’s a major coup of facts and exposing/discrediting of the lies you so fervently embrace. Happy new year, ciao and may you come to your senses in 2015. You’re off to a poor start 🙂
people who use the term “settled science” are ignorant of what science is. A sure sign of an ill informed fool is using the term settled science, as SCIENCE IS NEVER SETTLED, it is always open to new facts or proofs!!!!!
Science is never settled. That is simply an alarmist tactic to try and shut down debate.
Didn’t work, did it?
So explain to me how the following scientific facts remain unsettled;
● the earth is round.
● the earth revolves around the sun
It’s not a tactic. It’s fact. Debate has already been shut down by science.
I HEAR THAT IF YOU PUT YOUR BULLSHIT IN CAPITALS, IT BECOMES TRUE.
THEN YOU CLEARLY HAVE A PRETTY LOW STANDARD FOR THE TRUTH .
That’s not how science works.
SCIENCE WORKS ON WHAT IS PROVABLE , GRAPHABLE , REPEATABLE & PREDICTABLE .
AGW IS NONE OF THOSE THINGS . OK , THE HOCKEY STICK WAS A GRAPH BUT IT WAS DEBUNKED .
TO YOU GUYS WITH THE “SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS” SCIENCE IS A POPULARITY CONTEST .
Yup. Climate data is graphable and others have duplicated the results. But you guys are so retarded that you think it’s liberal black magic. This shouldn’t be a partisan thing. It’s readings on thermometers. 2014 was the hottest year ever recorded.
ACCORDING TO THE READINGS ON THERMOMETERS ,
THE HOTTEST YEAR WAS 1934 .
THEY HAD LESS POLAR ICE BACK THEN TOO .
http://www.snopes.com/politics/science/globalwarming1922.asp
AS FAR AS PREDICTABLE , THE AGW “SCIENCE” PREDICTED FLOODED COASTAL CITIES AND OPEN SEAS OVER THE NORTH POLE BY NOW .
WITH 18 YEARS OF COOLING , MOST PEOPLE HAVE FIGURED OUT THAT THE SKY ISN’T FALLING & HAVE MOVED ON .
IT REALLY ISN’T THAT WE THINK OF IT AS LIBERAL BLACK MAGIC .
IT’s JUST THAT YOU KEEP LOOKING LIKE YOU HAVE NO IDEA
WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT .
Sorry, but it simply isn’t true, for reasons already laid out on this thread.
Maybe the geek would like to go argue with Snopes about the hottest year.
For me, I’m an engineer, immersed in the technical end of the global warming issue. It is crystal clear to me that man-made global warming is complete nonsense. There may, possibly, be a minuscule amount of AGW. But it is too small to even measure [my specialty; Metrology].
The proof? There are NO MEASUREMENTS quantifying AGW. NONE. Thus, when you hear about man-made global warming, it is nothing but a conjecture — an opinion.
Basing national Policy on nothing more than an opinion is extremely foolish. Isn’t it?
Where are the deluges you predicted, Geek? Did you know that even if te entire N Pole cap melted, it would make almost no difference in sea levels? Do you know why? Why is it that hardly any AGW fans really understand “the science” and those that do are bought off by Govt. to parrot the line. Why did 30,000+ scientists sign a letter debunking AGW?
You really think if all the ice melts, sea levels won’t be affected? You really are stupid.
I’m an engineer, stupid. You act like you have a degree in ethnic studies, basket-weaving or just hanging around. If you can shut up for a second, ‘;ll teach you something. Will you try it?
Get a large glass, add water and ice. Measure the water level. Make a mark at the water level. Go back when the ice melts. It will be the same level.
The vast majority of the north pole ice cap is on water . get it now?
Please explain why we weren’t already inundated by the 200+ yr warming period which melted most of the cap (at one time).
Do you know what the actual sea rise has been? Didn’t think so.
It shows your an engineer: you’re closed minded, lack imagination, and you think you’re way smarter than you actually are. You constantly misread the facts and can’t see what’s directly in front of your face. You may be good at math, but you suck at interpretation.
That’s all you have is imagination and BS- no education, no brains, no worldly knowledge. Please try the experiment idiot … and look at a map- or is that too constraining to you? You DO know how to read a map, right?
I’m obviously way smarter than you.
I’m a corporate director and working on my masters at Harvard. I’m not impressed by your engineering degree. Go build a concrete slab you flunky.
You sure don’t act or think like one, so I’m quite dubious. I owned my own company, a fairly “creative one :-))- sold it before I retired. Currently doing a startup for my amusement. I had MBA’s and MS’s working for me, but I wouldn’t be dumb enough to have hired the likes of you. Worked for the company Snowden did early on.
Seriously, you don’t show that you even know how to think. Regurgitating discredited pablum does not constitute thinking. Until you can answer some of the challenges put forth to you, your credibility is zero with 90% of the people on this site.
Lol, I couldn’t care less about validation from the dingbats on this site. This is just my sparing practice on a long weekend.
You obviously need far more practice, weak sister.
I liked your post. I want you to know that. I wouldn’t want you to miss it or mistake that like as being from someone else. It’s me.
LOL- have a good weekend.
Lol, I couldn’t care less about validation from the dingbats on this site. This is just sparring practice on a long weekend.
IF that is the case, then Harvard has fallen far lower than even I suspected.
Really, based on your comments, you don’t know nothin’…
…at least about science. And keep in mind that we could have gone to the moon without scientists. But not without engineers.
Ill spell it out for you: it isn’t the water ice, it is glaciers in Greenland, the artic, and Antarctica that sit on land. They melt too.
You really ARE stupid- and terribly uninformed.
1 The vast majority of polar ice cap is on water
2. Greenland’s not nearly as large as it looks on a Mercator projection. You DO know what that is, right?
3. Antarctic ice has been growing for a long time.
4. North Pole ice is growing again.
5. Lastly, explain why melting hasn’t already inundated the algore’s house in Montecito. All your mendacious models said that would already happen. I’ll ask you again, how much has the sea risen, Mr. Smarty pants?
WHY YES I DO . ANY ONE KNOWS THAT ICE FLOATS BECAUSE IT HAS EXPANDED .
THE DENSITY GOES DOWN AS THE VOLUME GOES UP AND THE AMOUNT OF THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG
IS EXACTLY PROPORTIONAL TO THAT EXPANSION .
THIS IS SIMPLE SCIENCE DESPITE HOW STUPID IT SEEMS TO SOUND TO YOU .
EASY TO PROVE & WORKS EVERY TIME .
IN OTHER WORDS , THE LEVEL WILL NOT CHANGE AT ALL WHEN THE ICE MELTS .
AL GORE HAS PROVEN HE HAS NO IDEA WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT NUMEROUS TIMES &
NOW SO HAVE YOU .
ICE OVER LAND IS ANOTHER MATTER . THE VOLUME OF ICE IN ANTARCTICA IS STAGGERING .
BUT THIS TOO IS STAYING PUT WHILE FLOATING ICE AROUND THE CONTINENT IS INCREASING
DESPITE THE WARMIST’s PREDICTIONS .
AT SOME POINT YOU WILL HAVE TO WAKE UP AND REALIZE THAT YOU HAVE BEEN HAD .
He said: IF THE NORTH POLE ICE MELTED…
That would, IN FACT, have no impact on sea levels.
Fifth graders know that, and they know why, because thet’s when they learn about Archimedes.
Go back to the 5th grade, you have some catching up to do, ‘geek’.
The north pole is a coloquialism that would include land masses in the artic circle.
I CAN’T BLAME YOU FOR TRYING TO COMPARE REAL SCIENCE WITH WHAT YOU ARE PEDDLING .
TROUBLE IS , IT DISAGREES WITH YOU . FOR MANY YEARS NOW THAT IS WHY THEY HAD TO DITCH “GLOBAL WARMING” AND CALL IT CLIMATE CHANGE .
SEEMS LIKE A SAFE HEDGE SINCE THE CLIMATE ALWAYS CHANGES , IT CAN’T BE DISPROVEN .
BUT THAT DOES NOT GET THE FEARFUL REACTION NEEDED TO ENACT LEGISLATION AND
MAKE MONEY SO THEY CHANGED IT AGAIN TO “CLIMATE DISRUPTION” .
WHAT ABOUT THE PREDICTABILITY ? YOUR 2014 WARMEST YEAR IS BASED ON NOAA DATA FOR OCEAN TEMPERATURES BUT THIS FORUM IS DISCUSSING RECORD ICE FORMATION AT BOTH POLES !
EITHER THEY HAVE REPROGRAMMED WATER TO FREEZE AT 38°F OR SOMETHING IS SERIOUSLY
WRONG IN CLIMATE CHANGE LAND .
HAVE ANY OF THEIR PREDICTIONS PANNED OUT ? THEY PREDICTED MASSIVE FREQUENT STORMS .
DATA SAYS THAT STORMS HAVE DECREASED WORLDWIDE . HURRICANES , TORNADOES AND CYCLONES ARE ALL DOWN .
THEY PREDICTED RISING SEA LEVELS AND MASSIVE COASTAL FLOODING . I HAVE BEEN TOP THE BEACH & IT LOOKS THE SAME . DATA CONFIRMS THERE HAS BEEN NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES .
PERHAPS OBAMA REALLY DID STOP THE RISE OF SEA LEVELS .
TEMPS ARE DOWN WORLDWIDE FOR AT LEAST 18 YEARS . SO WHAT IF IT WENT UP LAST YEAR .
DON’T YOU GUYS KEEP SAYING THAT ONE YEAR DOESN’T MATTER BUT N OW SUDDENLY IT DOES ?
SO YES , I CAN’T BLAME YOU FOR TRYING TO HITCH YOUR WAGON TO ANY REAL SCIENCE THAT’s YOU CAN CLAIM . WHAT I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IS THAT YOU KEEP TRYING TO DRIVE THE SCIENCE
AND PLAY THESE STUPID SHELL GAMES WHEN YOU FIGURE OUT IT IS GOING THE OTHER WAY .
geek says:
Climate data is graphable…
Allow me:
http://postimg.org/image/4ew9uoiqj/
Typical leftie reply… Don’t bring anything to the conversation, and start being obnoxious from the moment you enter.
I’ve brought science to the table and just like always conservatives rejected it.
Horse hockey. You may have brought your version of science to the table. The interesting thing about Gruber, the economist, is that he revealed that science with an agenda is not really science. Your science of global warming was founded on a FRAUD. But, since so much money and so much academic effort floats around global warming, the FRAUD was ignored. Global warming is a left wing political movement to create an excuse to increase control on individuals. It is not science.
There aren’t “versions”. There’s the scientific consensus, and the lies Glen beck tells you to believe.
CONSENSUS IS THE HARBOR FOR FOOLS WHO CAN’T UNDERSTAND THAT SCIENCE AND CONSENSUS ARE OPPOSITES
So what you’re saying is there’s no such thing as facts. And when it comes to something observable like climate change, you shouldn’t believe your lying eyes.
2014 was the hottest year ever recorded. I guess the librals must have faked that too you paranoid doofus.
THERE IS PLENTY OF FACTUAL INFORMATION ON THE ADJUSTMENTS TO TEMPERATURE ( LAND BASED ) THAT HAVE BEEN GOING ON TO MAKE THE LIE YOU KEEP TELLING FOOL PEOPLE LIKE YOU WHO WILL NOT CHECK OUT THEIR FACTS FROM INDEPENDENT SOURCES. DO YOU PRETEND THAT SATALITE DATA DOES NOT COUNT???
So Why don’t any scientists support your globbed up ideas. OMG it must be a Left wing conspiracy ya’ll!!!! Call Glen Beck!!!
At least 30,000 have signed a letter repudiating the AGW lie.
mmmkay. I’m sure you’ll make a world wide impact. Lol, best of luck!
Your petition gets a mention in this article. Apparently it includeded the respected minds of “the spice girls” and several star wars characters.
http://billmoyers.com/2014/05/…
Including the spice girls and several star wars characters according to this article.
http://billmoyers.com/2014/05/16/eight-pseudo-scientific-climate-claims-debunked-by-real-scientists/
Here’s the working link. http://billmoyers.com/2014/05/16/eight-pseudo-scientific-climate-claims-debunked-by-real-scientists/
As I said before, my Galaxy S5 is a piece of junk. It messes up copy paste and the auto-correct/auto-type regularly changes correct words to garbage. I am posting this as a general info.
Galaxy S5=crap
I switched from an old I-phone to Galaxy S-5 a few months ago. Lots of raw power, great screen, apps, but I HATE the texting software. Overall, I-phone had a better user interface.
Re: The Moyers piece- mostly propaganda and full of untruths. I had Monckton speak at one of our events- very entertaining, but does no real research of his own- collects, analyzes papers. He didn’t originate the 1998 warming halt story. It’s based on the discovery that not all station reports are being used and some station are in areas which have gotten much more urbanized (hotter) and skew the data. Bottom line- false data- no longer representative.
As far as the Santer stuff- he lost all credibility when he said it IS man-made., He has zero proof, only some correlation (there is FAR better correlation with solar activity.).
If you really want to learn I;ll lead you, but I suspect you’re a”true believer.”
You still haven’t told me how much you think the sea has risen. Until you can answer- and correctly at that- you have zero credibility.
You still haven’t acknowledged that the climate “models,” “projections,” guesses,” whatevah, are all way, way off- wrong, wrong wrong.
I stopped after I read the first two whoppers in that link.
One more
“There have been three studies, using different methodologies, that have shown that almost all working climate scientists — 97 percent — accept the consensus view.”
One does not get work as a client scientist unless one buries ones ethics and buys in to an unproven theory 100%. Again, over 30,000 scientists have repudiated it.
Yeah, this is total bunk and gets mentioned in this article. Apparently it was signed by such dignitaries as “the spice girls” and several Star Wars characters.
http://billmoyers.com/2014/05/16/eight-pseudo-scientific-climate-claims-debunked-by-real-scientists/
geek, whenever more than 30,000 people sign something, there are bound to be a few fakes.
But funny thing, I couldn’t find the Spice Girls, or a single Star Wars character in the list.
So you are lying again. Aren’t you?
If not, show us those names… liar.
Ill show you reports. Not that it will open your closed mind.
http://www.desmogblog.com/oregon-petition
http://respriv.org/tag/petition-signed-by-the-spice-girls/
Had this been open to the general public, I might agree, but since it was supposed to only be scientists who signed it, the fact that there were so many fakes should be troubling to anyone attempting to use it to prove their point.
Every time you say that 2014 was the hottest year EVAH!! you are lying.
You tell lots of lies, don’t you?
I echo the news.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/2014-to-be-hottest-year-ever-measured/
You babble hot air.
You guys love to throw around “you lie!” like some kind of retarded congressman at a state of the union address, but FYI, I don’t make claims I can’t back up.
you do not seem to understand that science is always about challenging the consensus any more than you seem to understand that consensus is a political term and there is NO equivalent term in science. People who say “CONSENSUS” or “THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED” ARE USING POLITICAL RHETORIC AND ARE NOT DISCUSSING SCIENCE. THEY ARE DISCUSSING POLITICS. THEY ARE PROPAGANDISTS. Policygeek must learn the difference if he is ever going to play a meaningful role or be able to engage in fact based discussions. On this thread he reads as an ignorant fool who gets his science from his tv set.
Better than getting it from Sean Hanity.
Losing an argument? Strike off in a different direction! Conservatives don’t walk in lockstep with commanding overlords. That’s a Leftist thing. You can only condemn Hannity when you talk about Hannity, and no one else was. He is merely a commentator with Conservative leanings, and not a particularly good one, at that. The beauty of being a free thinker is being able to assimilate facts and come to our own conclusions about what makes sense and what doesn’t. If you believe all te propaganda your masters feed you, how will you know when one of them is lying? Why are questions raised about your ideology met with aggressive hostility? If your cause was just and tenets true, you should welcome the chance to explain you point. Might doesn’t make right, as your union goons and other professional protesters may believe. Physical domination is not a rational debate strategy, but a dishonest bully tactic. Think about why that is such a large part of your movement’s activities.
Meanwhile the Clintons invest in Beachfront DR land, you stupid ill educated peasant.
Logic and reason show the whole anthropogenic climate change scientist pool are a bunch of frauds and liars protecting their grant money.. Adjusted numbers.. Fluid models.. You can get a computer to tell you anything you want it to.. And that is exactly what these corrupt “scientists,” are doing.. You people seem to think that when you use the words,”settled science,” that that means the argument is over.. And you want it over on your terms.. NO!!!
And your still fighting on an online thread from over a month ago. Loser.
All irrelevant
Yes, you are.
You forgot the word “correct”.
How might anything Al Gore does change the effect of CO₂ on planetary temperature?
He owns a fleet of SUVs, while lecturing us to use bicycles. He uses 20X more electricity than the average American family, ng us to be conservationists, and flies round the world to give his $100,000 speeches (no questions allowed) in his polluting private jet.
Uh huh, and if Al Gore did own a fleet of SUVs, how might that change the effect of CO₂ on planetary temperature?
earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/CarbonCycle/page5.php
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2380af6ac2b092cc85baa6b23b54164a96dab505bc80f7850d76cabbb159e4d2.gif
REALLY? Why would their commitment of resources not signal their real views?
The same hypocrite who forecast some years ago that by now the sea would have risen to engulf coastal areas, like wher he built his hacienda. The same Algore who uses 20X more electricity than the average American family, and flies round the world to give his $100,000 speeches (no questions allowed) in his polluting private jet. The same loon who forecast in 2007 that ALL arctic ice would be melted by 2014 (instead, it grew by 60% 2012-13.)
Haha, crazy conservative.
Shut up fool.
Your mind is so far gone you can’t even recognize the truth when it’s right under your nose.
Go out in the street and be run over. Wait for a trash truck.
Typical of you right wingers. Always trying to silence disent.
policygeek, you global warming alarmists are the ones trying to silence dissent. And you’re all left wingers. And I base this on your false belief that 98% of the worlds climate scientists all agree that man is the cause of climate change even though the climate has been changing for billions of years before humans even existed.
Now that’s plain stupid. But, it’s also hilarious because you actually believe you know more about it than any of us do, when you’ve done no experiments yourself that have proved any of what you claim is true.
Scientists have proven global warming is fact but you don’t believe them so why would you believe me? Now when the scientists say they all agree it’s a fact, why do you doubt them.
Bwahahahahahahahaha!
The scientists that make their living by garnering grant money?
The ones that know the government is all for the lie because it gives them more control?
The ones that are living large on the billions of dollars spent to try to prove what has not been proven?
What should the temperature be little troll?
They don’t know.
They will only say “cooler”.
But it is getting cooler, and they say it is due to warming.
Anyone with a brain sees that they are lying.
Anyone willing to NOT depend on the neo-communist media has seen that real scientists are jumping off the bandwagon in droves.
There has been “Global Warming throughout history- and cooling too.
There is zero proof that the current round of GW (in remission since 1998) was man-caused. Zero. There is a stronger correlation to solar activity to warming than anything else.
In addition, it has been proven that the “climate models” are all discredited. They don’t work.
Actual warming has not taken place since 1998.
It is also now clear that data were fudged- cherry-picked temperature recording stations, some in areas which have become more urbanized over the years.
Google ClimateGate, Luddite,
I don’t need to. This ol right wing meme has been debunked.
2014 was the hottest year ever recorded. You may now attempt to explain that away.
1. No 1934 was silly.
2. If 2014 was, how come the ice expanded so much?
You’re an engineer- figure it out.
I never ask a fool like you a question I don’t already know the answer to. YOU need to figure it out, slacker.
http://theconsensusproject.com how’s this for “under your nose”… you have to be wilfully ignorant to deny climate change.
No, you just need to be a realist. Global warming and climate change is merely a scam meant to enrich its proponents while exploiting liberal idealists. The world warms and cools because of sunspot activity and there is no way for taxes to regulate the sun’s cycles. Emissions amount to nothing. In fact, tropical rain forests are benefiting from CO emissions and are growing at a fantastic pace and are producing oxygen for our planet.
If these Global Warming evangelists want any credibility, they should start by turning over all their global warming wealth to their countries green initiatives. Like that would ever happen. Al Gore and David Suzuki love their high carbon footprint lifestyles.
Do You know how retarded you sound? This is why librals laugh at you. ” damn what the actual scientists say, i know what im talking about!”
And I guarantee you that people in your real life laugh at you behind your back. We really do think you are stupid.
Let’s pretend for a moment that counting votes who believe or don’t beleive is actually a valid sceintific pursuit in anything outside of politics.
Let’s talk about your assertion that the 2% (whereever you got that number from) are paid to do so by the oil and gas industries. Let me introduce you to Dr. Roy Spencer who is climatologist, Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, and the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer (AMSR-E) on NASA’s Aqua satellite. He has served as Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center. He also is a skeptic of manmade climate change the way it is pushed on us by alarmists.
I don’t know if the site will allow me to post a link or not, so just to not take a chance, I have given you his name and his titles. You can see that what I posted about him comes from Wikipedia. On his site, you can also find his credentials.
So here is one that blows up your nice, neat little world where people who don’t believe in catastrophic manmade global warming are all anti-science people, or else on the payroll of oil and gas companies.
This is just the beginning. Once you see that your scientific law doesn’t hold, it should be on you and your scientific curiosity to find that there are others, and what the science is behind their thinking. Either that, or you can continue to substitute the word “Scientist” for the way that others use “Priest” and continue to use “science” the way others use “Bible” without knowing what either actually mean. It’s up to you. It might lead you to less laughter behind people’s backs if you know more about skeptical scientists, so you have a trade-off, I suppose.
One skeptic does not make a trend. The difference between your religious assertion is that science is observable and not dependent on blind faith.
Gee. That was 75 self-selected government-paid “scientists” from 13,500 who were surveyed, wasn’t it? That is the 97% “climate scientists” was 75 out 77 – out of 3,500 who returned the survey, then the rest were filtered out.
This is what people ALWAYS say when they are unable to account for their own cognitive processes, even. It’s much harder than someone may guess to account for such things. It comes into play when your job security is at stake, or grant money may be at stake, too, and so it is essential to look at what may play into someone’s cognitive processes.
You attempted this when you said that the scientists that did not believe in global warming were only 2% (something that doesn’t add up any way I am aware of) and that they are paid to do so by the oil and gas industry.
I showed you the first one that was not. This disproves your assertion. If there is one, there are probably others, right? So do you search and see if there is a measurable trend, or do you now go into defense mode for your pre-conceived idea that there are only 2%, and that those are all paid-for by the oil and gas industry.
It seems at that point, you lost your curiosity, and reverted to your faith.
Look, I know it’s convenient to believe that everybody who is “Scientific” agrees with you. The simple fact is, that is incorrect. So if not all do, then it becomes necessary to know a little bit about the measurements, who makes them, whether or not they are adjusting them, how the measurements are taken over time, how they are analyzed, how the projections are made, etc. I’ve spent a little bit of time on this, and my thought at this point is that there is plenty to question. There are a lot of people using such appeals to authority as “Scientists say … ” then they continue on without really knowing what any scientist says, or how any other scientist counter-claims. That’s easy to do. However; the un-adjusted data is inconclusive, and the sattelite data is both very short term, and not showing the same thing that the land-based measurements are showing. So science deals in something measurable … when it is measured properly.
And of course, there is plenty of question about the models that are built. When you can hindcast, but cannot forecast with a model, that is going back to what your algebra teacher in the 7th or 8th grade got onto you about when you didn’t show your work: Getting the right answer for the wrong reason. The climate models have proven unskillful in forecasting, even when made to be able to hindcast. Likely they are programmed into hindcasting to the point of overfit (something data scientists will understand well, but someone who puts blind faith in scientists may not). Whether it is faulty association, overfitting, or something else, models, quite simply, have not proven skillful thus far in forecasting climate conditions, and they take very few conditions and parameters into account in a system as large as earth’s climate.
I think there is plenty to question, and there are climate scientists who think the same.
You know what makes a trend? 9,135 of 9,136 Recent Peer-Reviewed Authors recognize that Global Warming is happening and the burning of fossil fuels is the cause. http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/01/08/why-climate-deniers-have-no-scientific-credibility-only-1-9136-study-authors-rejects-global-warming
http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Powell%20Pie%20Chart%202.png
At some point in the neAR future, you guys are going to have to recognize that there is nothing “conservative” about climate change denial.
Roy Spencer is not an independent scientists and works for skeptical organizations, even political ones. http://www.skepticalscience.com/skeptic_Roy_Spencer.htm
GASP!
Oh wait! By that definition, we may not have any climate scientists we can believe. After all, there may be some that work for non-skeptical political organizations. If we have to disqualify one, then we might need to disqualify those, too, right?
My reply was directed to someone that asserted that there were only 2% of scientists that did not “believe” in manmade global warming, and that those were paid for by the oil and gas industry. I found him one that did not fit with his assertion.
Now to you: Are you familiar with the “Science” that Roy Spencer does? It seems that NASA respects it. What part of it is wrong? Just the part where he doesn’t support global warming with hisurement and processing of data that you can point to that is incorrect? or that doesn’t support the conclusions he asserts?
…says the man-child who previously said that “electric” was the best future power source.
Sunspots have been disproven as the main cause of global warming. The government also has no interest in lying about the issue.
Those anonymous and unknown government-paid “scientists” reviewing government-selected papers running government programs inside government bureaucracies using government computers in government labs with government grants issued by government bureaucrats promoted by government policies have 1.3 trillion dollars a year in new taxes and trillions more in “carbon credits” trading issued by government-favored banks and insurance companies that crave government approval?
Please talk science and not paranoia. It is not in the government’s interest to lie on this issue.
Your democrat politicians have a n intense psychological hate-filled need to destroy the energy and oil companies they hate, the need to control the population and the population’s energy supply of low-cost fuels and food, and most of all – a need for the 1.3 trillion dollars in new tax revenues to fund their programs. Your CAGW beliefs are all based on the politics of the energy situation, and NONE on the science nor the measurements.
Sunspots have an impact on the earth’s climate. Being the main cause has not been proven or unproven.
Obama’s administration lies about everything. Why should global warming be an exception?
And you don,t believe this story Sparkey???Call me..I can make u a deal on buying New York..No money down and I will throw in New Jersey if u call tonight..
Leave New Jersey out of it and you’ve got yerself a deal!
I agree. Deniers are willfully ignorant. It is an environmental issue, not a political one. Also, much of the problem is from overpopulation. The Earth simply can’t handle 7.2 billion people very well.
It could but would require extensive regulating.
You are more than welcome to round up as many people as you want and follow the lead of Reverend Jim Jones and the Peoples Temple from back in 1978. I understand some concern about overpopulation but saying ridiculous things like that 5 billion people on the planet basically need to disappear (as you wrote below) is insane. You sound like a despotic leader who actually justifies the killing of millions because it benefits the “greater good,” whatever that specifically is in their mind (e.g., rid the world of another tribe, race, religion, etc.). You’re a psychopath in training.
Right, because 7.2 billion is so sustainable….
Did you know that the worlds population could all be put in Texas, give everyone a large yard, a car and have room for all to drive on the highways? The world is a pretty big place and sparsely populated in many areas. The argument should not be what should we do about warming or cooling, but about using the energy resources we have in responsible ways until better and more efficient forms of energy are developed. Developing countries that are denied carbon fuels now and in the near future will be harmed greatly by even more poverty. No matter what the U.S. Does in this matter, China, India, South Africa and others will still burn their dirtiest coal with impunity.
The world’s population could fit into Texas but it would have the density of NYC, so no extra space, plus you have to figure in still meeting the food, energy, water, and other resources needed. Managing a world population of1 or 2 billion would be easier.
FACT: “Climate change is constant because the Earth is a dynamic, and has been occurring long before people and will continue to do so long after we’re gone.”
Yeah, no it wasnt, not like this. We have ice cores that prove it.
Ice cores prove what? It’s been much hotter and much cooler in the past. The funny thing is that your global warming religion can’t even explain the ice ages with any certainty. Not to mention you can barely predict next weeks weather.
The greenhouse gas effect is proven. The more gas the more heat that gets retained.
Ice cores are NOT continuous records like tree rings. They record the cold years, but the warm years melt away and are not recorded.
Looks like we’ve got an artic expert here! Look out!
YOU ARE AN ARROGANT LIBERAL FOOL. NO ONE ON EARTH DENIES CLIMATE CHANGE. IT HAS BEEN CHANGING FOR 4 AND 1/2 BILLION YEARS. LONG BEFORE MAN EXISTED, THE EARTH HAS FROZEN OVER AND THEN THE ICE ALL MELTED AND THEN IT FROZE AGAIN, ETC. THIS WILL CONTINUE UNTIL OUR SUN DIES BILLIONS OF YEARS FROM NOW. THE SAHARA GOES FROM DESERT TO LUSH FOREST EVERY 20,000 YEARS. MAN HAS ZERO TO DO WITH ANY OF THIS. YOU ARE A DISGUSTING ARROGANT ASSS FOR NOT REALIZING THAT YOU ARE THE ONE WHO HAS ABSOULTELY NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. SO GO VISIT URANUS NOW WITH YOUR LIBERAL FRIENDS AND LEAVE THE ADULTS ALONE.
Real adults don’t use all caps and can present an argument.
I JUST DID AND IT DESTROYS EVERYTHING YOU HAVE SAID. FACE IT—–YOU ARE IGNORANT AND A LIBERAL HYPOCRITE WHO CAN NOT DEAL WITH OR COUNTER REAL “FACTS”.
You can’t make one argument that I can’t counter with something more compelling. Your credibility is hurt by your use of all caps
This website is for third graders. Proves nothing. Says very little. Pathetic!
Then do new reading on the facts and research.
How about a counter argument instead of name-calling?
THE TRUTH HURTS DOESN’T IT LOON??? NO WARMING FOR MORE THAN 2 DECADES. RECORD SEA ICE ALL OVER THE WORLD. YOU BETTER DRESS WARM BECAUSE YOUR LIBERAL CHARADE IS COLLAPSING LIKE A HOUSE OF CARDS.
You clearly have no understanding how this stuff works.
Neither do you. You’re a cut & paste copycat, a stupid little parrot endlessly squawking the latest leftist hogwash.
Have a peanut.
Nor do you.
Yeah, actually I do. leftwithrightbrain already explained it in this thread.
Cut the ignorance and the all caps. 2014 was hottest year on record, and statistically speaking all the recent weather events and disasters would not have happened without global warming.
KEEP DRINKING THE LOONEY TOON KOOL-AID BECAUSE NO ONE WITH A BRAIN BELIEVES YOU ANY MORE. THE WORLD IS NOT WARMING. THERE IS NO LEGITIMATE SCIENCE TO BACK YOU UP. YOU RELY SOLELY ON “SCIENTISTS” WHO WILL GET NO FUNDING UNLESS THEY SAY THAT. NO HONEST SCIENTIST AGREES. DRESS WARM LOON. WE WILL FREEZE BEFORE WE GET HOTTER.
2014 was the hottest year.
What disasters? Was Florida swept away and I missed it? Floods, tornados, hurricanes, droughts…all have been occurring for some time. Pretty sure they’ll continue.
Utter nonsense. This is not the Liberal AGW echo chamber, kid.
Al Gore raised awareness of a major environmental issue. Where did he lie in that video?
Where did algore lie? For starters… He said man made globull warming was a fact. Next he said the solution was to pay taxes to solve it. Guess who would make massive income if these taxes got past the congress?
Global warming essentially is fact. Carbon taxes can be effective and the revenues can be used to clean up the mess and invest in better energy technology.
Free market economies and capitalism really seem to be your pet peeve. So much for rights.
No it’s not a fact, a lot of common beliefs are not facts. Scientist will tell you the planet has experienced periods where the Earth was much warmer than it is now, before, industrialization, and much colder than it is now again before industriazation (I prefer warmer, from what I have read the Ice Age sucked, pardon my vernacular). Imagine an ice sheet that extended as far south as Washington State. Much of the geography in the Northwest was caused by the Missoula Floods, huge ice dams created vast lakes into Canada and during brief periods of warming gigantic floods covered the Northwest. The planet gets warmer and the planet cools and it will continue to do so long after we’re gone.
Gimme a break. Isn’t it time to break out of the polluting model of an oil-based economy? You really don’t think human ingenuity can come up with less polluting alternatives? We should just wait around and see what will happen – and meanwhile the entire planet gets poisoned? I think you’re short-changing man’s ability to change, adapt, invent.
atomic energy for starters. There simply isn’t anything that produces as much energy as a drop of oil. Some day in the long-distant future, there will be efficient solar systems, but not in this century. The physics won’t allow it.
I don’t know for sure but I think our Solar System us pretty efficient.
The green energy boondoggle is simply the most effective means liberals like obama and gore have to redistribute money and then launder it back through the economy to their chosen entities – themselves and the democrat party.
She says, posting on a computer made from plastics and heavy metals, using power straight from a coal fired plant, eating food that was delivered by truck, staying warm with that natural gas. It’s so good to be a hypocrite!!!
Your idiocy is on a remarkable level.
And I think you don’t know crap about what you are talking about.
Currently, all the gushing idiots who think Solar and Wind power are reasonable alternatives to coal, oil, gas, and nuke power are just that, Idiots. You can’t generate enough power for present day society using any of the so called “Green” technologies. They’ve had almost 100years to improve refine, and make them feasible, but they have failed. Why? They can’t do the job period. You want an energy source that doesn’t pollute, fusion is the only technology being evaluated today which has a hope of doing so.
So let me get this straight, it is okay to ruin the lives of billions of people because you are afraid of something you don’t even come close to understanding? Right!
Also, CO2 isn’t a pollutant! You people make it easy for your masters to take your money, destroy your economy, and ruin billions of human lives.
The technology is available and improving constantly. The impediment is lack of political will. In the US, our elected representative are, for the most part, “owned” by the fossil fuel lobbies and do their bidding. The ensuing climate chaos has already shown how it will “take your money, destroy your economy, and ruin billions of human lives.”
This alternative energy technology has been available for 100 years, IT ISN’T CAPABLE OF PROVIDING OUR NEEDS, IT ISN’T EVEN CAPABLE OF PROVIDING 15% OF OUR NEEDS! Do you understand?
If it were 5 times better, it still wouldn’t be capable or good enough.
Solar won’t do it, and neither will wind.
Name one technology that is as easy to generate, transport, and power equipment as fossil fuels. It also has to be able to produce the same efficency of fuel-to-power that fossil fuels generate.
The whole reason why we rely on these polluting technologies is that there is, still, nothing else that competes with them for efficiency.
If you’re so convinced that techs can come up with a better mouse-trap, sink your money into a company, develop it yourself, and enjoy all the riches that will beat a path to your door.
95% of oil pollutants have already been eliminated via technology of refining, engines, filters, catalytic converters, etc.. As better methods come on stream, they will be used.
In any case, they aren’t causing “Global Warming,” which is far more correlated with solar activity than anything else.
Making a few extremely extremely wealthy
You mean, like Solyndra and most of obama’s other failed ‘enterprises’?
“Despite the program’s failures, the department now projects a profit of between $5 billion and $6 billion over the next 20 to 25 years. Overall, 20 of the program’s 30 enterprises are operating and generating revenues so far, according to the department.”
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/us/article/Program-that-backed-Solyndra-now-showing-successes-5983233.php
1. Why believe anything the department projects, as it has been so wrong?
2. The projected profit is based on how much investment? What would alternative investments have generated.
I love it when Liberal Arts majors talk technological and investing issues.
no, it’s not. no, they can’t be effective. see how easy it is just to ‘state a fact with no proof’? even i can do it. the only difference is that i see how stupid it really is, but you think you’re a top-notch debater.
Boolsheet.
You sound like a smart-ass know-it-all 16 year old that , in reality, knows nothing.
God, you have guzzled gallons of the Kool-aide haven’t you?
“Essentially”? Please explain.
500 years ago, they said the world was flat. Did they have a flat tax? Just asking.
The courts in the UK have established 29 separate and specific lies that Gore made in his video. And another 14 some-odd exaggerations and projections – that will not come true. It has now been steady global average temperatures for 18 years, 3 months. The earth has NOT warmed since 1996, despite a 35% percent increase in CO2 levels. Antarctic sea ice set a record high in June this year at 2.06 million “excess” square kilometers – the same reflective area as the ENTIRE land area of Greenland (2.16 Mkm^2).
Excess sea ice, not land ice, is not inconsistent with global warming. Al Gore was broadly accurate http://www.skepticalscience.com/al-gore-inconvenient-truth-errors.htm
False: The continental average Antarctic air temperatures have NOT risen (instead, have declined slightly) since 1979, so the twisted “logic” of land ice diluting the 20 million sq kilometers of sea water around Antarctica that “causes” is proved wrong because the change in sea water salinity is too small to matter. Loss of arctic sea ice between August and April each year leads only to increased heat loss from the open ocean – compared to the insulating effect of the sea ice cover.
ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
And, you are “broadly” sycophantic.
People that said that the world was flat were considered broadly accurate 500 years ago. Now they’re just considered morons.
Being “broadly accurate” that there would be more sea ice (which is the only kind of ice at the North Pole) jibes with his prediction that there would be no ice at the North Pole by,… what was it now?, 2012 or 2014?… how again?
Arguing with idiots can be very frustrating.
You’re a special kinda stoopit, ain’tcha?
Did Al Gore leave his wife for you? Come on, you can tell us.
lol
The courts in England decided he did lie and so have ruled against his movie being shown in schools.
Algeria raised awareness in the same way that the Ferguson thug protesters are raising awareness of racial discrimination by burning and looting.
Everywhere. From beginning to end. There isn’t a grain of truth in it. Not a molecule. Not an atom.
Right on !!
Al Gore has become completely irrelevant. The last thing I remember about him after he left his wife is that he was standing next to a masseuse and pointing down and saying, “What are you going to do about this?”
Only a small problem for her to solve.
IT IS MUCH WORSE THAN JUST THE MONEY HE HAS TAKEN .
REAL POLLUTION PROBLEMS ARE IGNORED AS THEY TRY TO FIX SOMETHING THAT ISN’T EVEN A PROBLEM .
MONEY AND RESOURCES THAT COULD HAVE BEEN USED TO CLEAN
THE ENVIRONMENT HAVE BEEN SQUANDERED ON REDUCING CO2
WHICH IS A NATURAL , NECESSARY & VERY SMALL PART OF THE ATMOSPHERE .
AL GORE IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL CRIMINAL WHO HAS HARMED
THE EARTH WHILE HE HAS BEEN HELPING HIMSELF .
Comments like this win you no love. Keep it up.
So classy.
Right, because it’s ok to murder liberals… Also who said the parents or the fetus were liberal?
I believe Hitler had similar thoughts and plans.
I could not possibly agree more, and gay marriage is better yet; no spawn, and no murder
Just like you can’t presume that a baby whose mother does drugs will go up to be a drug user, you can’t pass on the sin of liberalism/socialism to an innocent child.
It’s not old enough to support a political ideology, so we can’t lay the burden of tyranny at his/her feet.
Innocent lives deserve protecting. Particularly defenseless innocent lives.
It’s a zygote, etc. Not a baby yet.
tough call, the types who choose abortion based on having a child being inconvenient probably result in one less abused fatherless child.
Take, say, a 12-year-old raped by her mother’s boyfriend. Would you force her to endure nine months of being reminded, every day, of the violent act? Would you take care of the new baby? Take a mother – probably a Catholic – becoming pregnant and giving birth year after year because the Church forbids effective contraception, until her body can’t stand the strain any more. And now she’s pregnant again, and her doctors sday it threatens her health. You would compel her to go through the birth again? And probably more until it kills her? How about a woman with an ectopic pregnancy. Don’t know what that is? It occurs in about one in 200 conceptions; the fertilized ovum nidates (attaches) to the fallopian tube wall instead of reaching the uterus. It is, always, inevitably fatal to mother and fetus; it’s just a question of time. A timely operation to remove the fetus is needed, unless the mother is to die in unspeakable agony. Technically, because at the moment it means removing a living fetus, it’s an abortion. You would forbid that, calling it murder?
Good job bringing up exceptions., which may account for .5-1% of pregnancies. Also kudos for calling it a fetus. Does that make you feel better?
I guess you missed the point, which is that certain extremists, especially the Roman Catholic church and its hierarchy (who are unlikely to become pregnant) dig their heels in and declare “no abortions, ever, for any reason.” Yet, its concurrent forbidding of its members from using effective birth control itself is responsible for millions of abortions, worldwide. (Don’t even think of citing “natural” family planning, the so-called “safe period” method. A woman using only this during her fertile years will on average have five unplanned pregnancies.)
.
And, as in so many things, the Church is the arch-hypocrite when it directly affects itself. My uncle was a member of Medecins sand Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders) in Afrca in the late 50s and early 60s. He was in the Congro in 1960 when the Congolese army mutinied, killed its officers and went on a rampage of murder and rape. Many nuns in missions in the country were raped, and many became pregnant as a result. They were, with few exceptions, quietly aborted by the mission doctors. Catholic nuns. Catholic doctors. What they did was merciful and right, but it directly breached a Church law. No doubt they were absolved by the priests.
.
It didn’t have to be this way. Did you know that a commission set up by an earlier pope recommended by a large majority that the Chuch make an exception to its anti-contraception law with the “pill.” Of course you didin’t.
.
The story begins with the Second Vatican Council in the early l960s and the decision of two popes to re-examine the
church’s position on birth control. Pope John XXIII had intended to begin that re-examination, but he died before he
could begin the process. His successor, Pope Paul VI, appointed a Papal Commission on Population and Birth Control. It consisted of 79 members, cardinals, bishops and lay experts representing a variet of disciplines. After two years of study, the commission – with majorities from both the lay and clerical groups – voted 69 to 10 to change the position on birth control using the “pill,” because it did not involve any kind of physical barrier, and, more important, because it was the right thing
to do.
.
Oops; not what the pope had expected or wanted to hear. Luckily for him, a dissenting minority report was later submitted, co-authored by a Polish archbishop, Karol Wojtyla, who later became Pope John Paul II. A Roman Catholic historian and theologian, August Bernhard Hasler, tells the story in his 1979 book, How the Pope Became Infallible. He provided the following quotation from that minority report, which was the one accepted: “If it should be declared that contraception is not evil in itself, then we should have to concede frankly that the Holy Spirit had been on the side of the Protestant churches in
1930 (when the encyclical Casti Connubi was promulgated) and in 1951 (Pius XII’s address delivered before the Society of Hematologists). “It should likewise have to be admitted that for half a century the Spirit failed to protect Pius XI, Pius XII, and a large part of the Catholic hierarchy from a very serious error. This would mean that the leaders of the Church had condemned
thousands of innocent human acts, forbidding, under pain of eternal damnation, a practice which would now be sanctioned. The fact can neither be denied nor ignored that these same acts would now he declared licit on the grounds of
principles cited by the Protestants, which popes and bishops have either condemned or at least not approved” (page 170).
.
Dr. Hasler concluded: “Thus it became only too clear that the core of the problem was not the pill, but the authority, continuity, and infallibility of the Church’s magisterium.” In conformity with this minority report, Pope Paul VI issued his 1968 encyclical, Humnae Vitae, in which he condemned every form of contraceptive birth control. Hasler wrote: “After the
promulgation of the encyclical. . . the Church conducted a massive purge of its key personnel wherever it could” (page 283). In other words, the problems associated with countries that are overpopulated and the political campaign in the United States to deny reproductive freedom to women are all due to the papal decision to protect the authority and “infallibility” of the papacy.
.
Hans Kung, arguably the world’s leading Catholic theologian, wrote: “This teaching [against contraceptive birth control] has laid a heav burden on the conscience of innumerable people … for the people in many under-developed countries, especially in Latin America, it constitutes a source of incalculable harm, a crime in which the Church has implicated itself” (cited in Stephen Mumford, The Life and Death of NSSM 200, page 203).
.
Unfortunately the Vatican was not content with applying its dogma against contraceptive birth control to members of the Roman Catholic Church. Pope John Paul II in his Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation declared that Catholic teaching must become law. The Instruction states: “Politicians must commit themselves,
through this intervention upon public opinion, to securing the widest possible consensus on such essential points.” They are expected to enact into law “appropriate legal sanctions” for violations of the law. The Vatican wants to outlaw contraceptive birth control because of its stance that there should be no interference with conception [and an uninterrupted supply of new Catholics.].
.
These strictures, if enacted into law, would put the majority of the population, which is non-Catholic, along with non-conforming Catholics, into the position of being law breakers. Non-Catholics even today are affected if they use Catholic hospitals and compliant physicians. since these are forbidden to provide information about contraceptives or to prescribe
or apply them – even emergency contraception for a raped woman.
.
The problem with papal infallibility, aside from its requirement that Catholics are expected to accept it without question, is that
no human being is free from error. We are all creatures of our culture, our education, our vested interests and our prejudices. The pope tries to avoid this criticism by insisting that he is the vicar or spokesman for God or Christ; yet he was an ordinary
man, elected by vote to his exalted position by other ordinary men, and “proves” his authority to speak for the Almighty by the circular argument that it is so because he says it is. Yet the very fact that he asserts infallible authority over millions of people who must obey him is a radical departure from the teachings of Jesus, who told his disciples: “You know that those who are supposed to rule over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you; but whoever would be great among you must be your servant.” (Mark 10:42-43) Also: “In vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrine rules made by men.”
.
One could with justification say that in rejecting the conclusion of the overwhelming majority of his own commission, Paul VI, and successive popes, are directly responsible for millions of abortions worldwide, and also child deaths from malnutrition in underdeveloped countries unable to feed their populations, and early deaths from exhaustion by women unable to stem multiple closely-spaced births. One can add to this list a proportion of the millions of deaths from AIDS, especially in Africa, and the millions of consequent orphans, because the Church also bans the use of the only reliable means to prevent the spread of the disease, the condom.
Democrats are “tolerant” of everything, so they say, except an unborn fetus. This they cannot tolerate, kill it, abort it. There may be medical reasons for an abortion but birth control isn’t one of them. For criminals it’s “you do the crime, you do the time” in other words, we, society will make you responsible for your actions. Not so with pregnancy, you are not responsible for your actions so we will provide you with an abortion. Responsibility by selection, the democratic way.
You’re funny.
I should be I went to funny school.
Have you ever considered, like a very conservative Christian recently told me, that abortion as bad as it is, is like ‘weed killer’ for future Democrats and future welfare recipients.
The African American community is destroying their future voting base
That might be a good argument– but (Liberal) Democrats aren’t necessarily created in the womb. They’re created in public schools.
Ignorant and off topic
Oh, so THAT explains the recent major importation of future Democrats.
Ignorant and off topic.
Off topic and ignorant.
Off topic.
Greyfox, Democrats aren’t very tolerant of black conservatives. Neither are they tolerant of Christians in general. They only tolerate people who agree with them and their junk science.
Their science is junk because it’s ripe with fraud. That’s why I don’t believe anything they say any more.
The scientists have always claimed throughout my lifetime that milk was good for the body.
But, I saw a report recently that said milk does more harm to the body than it does good.
And In the 80’s, eggs were demonized by the scientific community because of cholesterol. Cholesterol was causing heart attacks and clogging of the arteries. But, in the past few years we are now being told that eggs aren’t as bad for us as was thought.
So, the science was not settled on eggs and milk either, I guess. Even though you could read ads and hear commercials on the tv and radio telling us to lower our cholesterol intake and drink plenty of milk.
How did that settled science end up being debated on decades later. Because of new research and more advanced equipment and methods? Probably. So, in science, the debate is never over. I’m talking to you Al Gore.
We’re on the same page, but I would make one slight change and suggest that perhaps most democrats fit the template you described. As far as the scientific community is concerned they are always ,on most things, coming up with new findings. Some things are absolute but many things are still up for debate. As far as food is concerned, eggs, milk etc, moderation is the key word. My only thought on Al Gore is: Al Gore is a putz, a liar and an egotistical jerk. He cares only about Al Gore. Remember this, when experts disagree, everyone becomes an expert. Have a great New Year.
I wonder why China climbed to the #1 spot on Earth – at least as measured by wealth and size of their economy – with a State-enforced strict 1-child limit. Doesn’t seem to make sense, does it?
Cheap labor and huge exports = booming economy. There, that was easy.
Don’t forget: No EPA or OSHA or Labor laws.
What’s funny is you’re advocating for the US to be more like China in what is quite literally one of their worse aspects. (Their piss poor working conditions for average workers)
I’m not advocating anything, just stating facts. You’re reading something that simply isn’t there. That’s how the telephone game in a group of people works.
So you agree we are better off thanks to the EPA and labor laws then?
Hence they have marathoners running marathons with masks on.
Low wages yes – but nobody has families of 14 or 15 to support either. Meanwhile, the wages are inching up, they’re bound to.
1) Slave labor
2) That 1 child limit is NOT as strictly enforced as one might think.
3) With more than a billion people over a huge patch of prime real estate, it’s a sign of the failure of Communism that it’s economy has been such a basket case for so long. Its only the fact that The Party has begun allowing something like a modern industrial economy exist at all that they are beginning to advance.
4) Compare the mainland with Hong Kong to truly appreciate the difference between a government regulated slave-labor economy and Western-style free markets.
That can’t make sense. Wasn’t the US #1 until just recently without slave labor?
In general, the 1 child limit is enforced.
Communism didn’t result in prosperity, it resulted in universal poverty/want, but the system did keep their country together and the communists did eject imperial Japan (as well as the other Western imperial powers that had footholds in China) despite their “poverty.” You have to admire the rag-tag communists prevailing over industrial, genocidal, cruel imperial Japan.
And, at one point in the war, the US backed Mao.
So Mao is still venerated in China, just like George Washington is venerated here.
Industrialization and investments are allowed in the special economic zones.. whole new cities have sprung up as well. As Deng said: What difference does it make if a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice. The Chinese approach is pragmatic, flexible, rather than doctrinaire. I suppose you could say that they have abandoned their “paranoia” about the West encroaching on their country again – as long as they can continue to play off Russia vs. the US, what do they care? They are happy to rake in money to build up their country.
HK? An ex-UK colony? How is HK supposed to be “representative” of capitalism? Or maybe you feel colonialism is the way to go.. exploitation of a “native” population by a colonial power, such as the UK. Isn’t that system anathema to us, though, as ex-UK colonies ourselves?
There are 1 billion, 350 million Chinese. Over 1 billion of them live in abject poverty, squalor and servitude under the Communist yoke. Maybe 1% of them have a standard of living equal to our middle class. I used to catch plenty of them sneaking across the border. Ever notice how no one wants to sneak into Red China? Does that suggest anything to you?
Most of what they make is cheap junk.
Why do you think your kids will not be liberals?
Read a study years ago the said most abortions end up aborting future liberals. So no great loss to humanity there.
There will be no more gays if they keep aborting.
Wait.. how does that work.
lol
7.2 billion people is at least 5 billion too many
I have this distinct feeling that in this generation and the generation to follow we’ll see one race or one tribe or one country abort itself out of existence. For example, the USA, which may be rescued by Catholic Hispanics.
Interesting final solution. I think someone had the same idea before only they added Jews to the list. Thanks for posting Adolf.
GFY asswipe.
I guess you don’t understand sarcasm or you agree with Hitler.
You guessed wrong on both counts.
What about normal left-wing people? (not the lunatic kind).
Look at the victory last year of Mayor de Blasio in NYC. He won by a land-slide. By that measure, we would have to say that the overwhelming majority of the largest city in the US are on the left, or at least progressive politically. Does that mean that the majority of the people in the most influential city in the US are wackos?
LOL! A landslide among the 24% of eligible voters of NYC is not really something to crow about.
Just like the 2014 elections.
Well ditto on that: You could have hardly expected the electorate to vote for someone like Romney – out of touch with the masses. Remember: Republicans may have money, but they don’t have the electoral edge, the votes. Republicans can buy politicians but they cannot buy every American voter.
That sounds like sour grapes to me. Accept it: Your ideas are rejected by the majority of the people of the most influential city in the US.
And that sounds like delusional to me.
If you think 70% of 24% of eligible voters equals “the majority” you have bigger problems than clinging to the sinking ship of human induced Gorebull warming.
And the idea that burning fossil fuels had anything to do with Hurricane Sandy (that wasn’t even a hurricane when it came ashore) or reducing the use of fossil fuels would have prevented the storm strays into the land of people who are locked up before they hurt themselves.
The US has not had a hurricane make landfall in 9 years. Do you realize how much money has been actually saved in that time?
Accept it, .7 of a degree Celsius of warming (if we accept that a measurement that small, worldwide over 120 years is even significant) and 50ppm of additional CO2 in the atmosphere (even if it was all attributable to the activities of man, which NO expert does) has resulted in 8 to 10% more vegetation cover of the planet according to NASA, fewer hurricanes, fewer wildfires and fewer tornadoes.
I forget, what was the problem again?
Correct, and yes.
My oh my – the airy conclusions we draw. Because we want regs on businesses so they are less polluting, then the population of the entire E. seaboard is considered “wacko.” Luckily for the survival of the US, we have learned the lessons of Sandy, although you would have us remain ignorant of the truth. Regs on business are the logical answer to climate change.
They’ve renamed themselves as Conservative. Classical liberal were what we consider the Tea Party now. People think the Tea Party is evangelical. They’re not. They are looking for small government, personal freedom, fewer taxes. The GOP hijacked the movement, as did the socialists. It’s why those of us who understand the mess have such a quandary in 2016. Bush and Clinton are the same candidate. In this, I will give Obama credit. He has officially created a one-party system.
A world without political parties… well, you could try living in China or Cuba, which effectively have outlawed all parties except for the communist party. A one-party state is more or less like living with no political parties. Or are you advocating anarchy perhaps?
Sorry, he didn’t say that.
They disabled the down arrow to spare airheads como tu unbearable embarrassment. Too bad. You’d be rackin’ ’em up by the score.
So you have run out of arguments and resorted to name-calling. Tsk tsk tsk.
Meanwhile – expect arguments from all sides, when it comes to dirty oil. The US is not a one-party State. Just sayin.’
I have only one argument and it is this: The so-called “Theory of Global Warming” or, in its latest incarnation, “Climate Change” is the biggest fraud, the biggest crock of shiit to come down the pike in the entire history of man. That’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it.
You can cut & paste all the latest leftwing talking points you want. It is all bullshiit. That means bovine excrement. It means it is a pack of lies and has no value whatsoever.
Don’t be a fool. It’s unbecoming.
Don’t forget Gaia cultists. Any human activity is raping their Mother.
See, from our perspective it looks like your love of exploitative capitalism and materialism is threatening both the economic wellbeing of our nation’s middle class and communities across the country. The investor class has bounced back from the great resession of 07-08, but the middle and working classes havent seen any of the growth; only stagnant wages. It’s the perfect illustration of the failure of trickle down economics.
You come across as a communist fool, a complete, total and utter ass of stupidity and a wannabe mass murderer. GFY you a-hole.
Will do, “bloodaxe”. Aka D-bag.
Get to it, jerk. Make it hurt.
Why DO you guys have all these wierd rape-y fantasies?
I can only speak for myself- I have no such fantasies. I merely consider it my civic duty to insult lowlife leftist scum in the vilest possible terms. They deserve it. Someone has to do it. So piss off, you hateful little creep.
Lol, try a little harder.
Those with graduate degrees are more likely to be liberal
Make an argument. Not a personal attack
No. I refuse. I like making personal insults against various obnoxious jerks whom I deem deserving of mockery, scorn and contempt. You’re one of them and you can take your stupid climate change charts and shove ’em where the sun don’t shine.
It’s colder than a witch’s tit outside and this is Sandy Eggo!
If you don’t like my comments don’t read ’em.
That’s only because you can’t make an argument.
The “investment class” bounced back from the housing bubble because the Fed was/is printing $85B per month and shoving it into the stock market.
Now who’s idea was that?
Seems to have worked. Are we arguing over who should get credit?
Yes… and the Community Reinvestment folks were real happy with the numbers of home loans created by lowering standards. Until it tiped over because the people who took the loans were unable to pay for them.
The danger of printing money is that money represents labor (what you do to produce something). Printing it out of thin air ultimately devalues the rest of the money in circulation (it is inflationary because it doesn’t represent anyting of value). Ultimately, widening the income gap and making life harder on the middle to lower end.
So where’s the runaway inflation your conservative overlords have been screaming about? Nowhere.
Lets see what the BLS and USDA have to say….
Consumer price index (CPI) An inflationary indicator that measures the change in the cost of a fixed basket of products and services, including housing, electricity, food, and transportation. The CPI is published monthly. also called cost-of-living index.
CPI Jan 2009: 211.143.
CPI Nov 2014: 236.151 (increased 11.84% since the recovery)
Median Income 2009: 26,558 dollars
Median Income 2013: 28,829 (increased only 8.55% since the recovery)
Food stamp enrollment 2009: 33,490,000 persons
Food stamp enrollment 2014: 46,536,000 (increase 38.95% since the recovery)
Ahhhhem…KKK? A conservative group? Also ISIS is conservative
Go take a swim in Brooklyn’s Gowanus Canal if you feel the Earth, its air, and waterways are so “…unspeakably powerful…” The Earth isn’t self-cleaning or self-correcting. Do you have any idea how many tons of chemicals have to be dumped into your drinking water to disinfect it and make it potable? That isn’t because it’s “pure” to begin with.
No, Miss Kitty. Tell us all about the various chemicals and the tonnages of each dumped into our drinking water. We breathlessly await your detailed report.
Certainly there is pollution- I would never deny that and it needs to be stopped and cleaned up. But, how about the millions of dead fish that wash up on the shores because of algae?? It’s completely natural. How about the huge number of deadly plumes of thousand year old NATURAL Methane and Hydrogen sulfide that bubble up from the bottom of the ocean? There are approximately 30 volcanoes going off on the earth every given day. How about the sulfur dioxide and other deadly gasses coming out of them? Pyroclastic flows? Any idea of what this does to our oxygen and water? Look up “The year without a summer”. OF COURSE we need to do a better job in many places but we already have in many more places. Please also read my reply to Billy Ray, above. 2015 is going to be the year of debunking all of this hysteria about people destroying the earth. Unfortunately, it won’t stop our politicians from using the hysteria to steal more of your tax money in the guise of “healing the planet”. GAWD, what a racket.
Oh? And we don’t pollute, litter, or destroy?
Yes, of course we do. I never would deny that there is bad behavior. However, this idea that people are bad for the planet is just embarrassingly ignorant. I could write 30 pages on this but instead, I will put it into perspective for you, in a brief way. The land mass of earth is about 29%. The rest is water. Some parts of that water are 25 THOUSAND feet deep. Human beings take up about 7% of the land mass of earth. Earth is ENORMOUS, mostly unpopulated and incredibly powerful- FAR more powerful than we are. The ocean contains an enzyme that eats petroleum. The Gulf, that was supposed to have been spoiled forever is now TEEMING with fish. Global warming is a freaking joke and now it’s being proven that greenhouse gas is GOOD. In the 1960’s & 70’s, we used to have 3rd stage smog alerts in Los Angeles. The air here is now SOOOO much cleaner. So, maybe stay off the liberal sites and get some real science so you can feel OK about being human and having built that pipeline in Alaska that provides so much warmth that the Caribou population is exploding.
Its, not it’s. It’s means “it is.” The next poster, Guest, uses it correctly.
You’re right. Thanks for taking the time to point out my error. 🙂
Much ado, not “to do” – apparently you are neither a scholar of Olde English or Shakespeare.
“Mother” nature, it has been said, is nothing more (or less) than the laws of chemistry, biology, and physics creating new equilibriums when previous equilibriums have been disturbed. The earth is incapable of “intend”ing to do anything. The last laugh will be on our species, not from it.
correction: “much ado about nothing”…G-D promised never to destroy the earth again after the Great Flood. I believe Him!!!
In other words, you believe in God.
The notion that humans can control nature in any way is nothing short of extreme arrogance. I agree with you, btw. And with that I add that climate science is no different than religion and can only be proven or disproven with the death of humans. I’m not advocating such. I just find the irony humorous given how many environmentalists would strip religious freedom first if given the chance.
It isn’t just global warming and the effects of global warming such as Sandy. It’s also what development run rampant has done to the environment. The biggest culprits in that regard were the ecocide of the old Soviet Union and E. Europe under communism, and now the rape of the Earth’s environment by the hybrid capitalist-communist economic system of China.
Well, I’m sure there’s a solution to be found somewhere in the middle if the climate were to start changing catastrophically.
Its all about tax dollars…
GOD is in charge of the climate and everything else on Earth even if Liberals don’t want to admit it.
Much worse. We will be alive, but hindered for a long time. It’s already happening
Well said!
Exactly.
Jesus taught us to give with a glad heart.
How glad is your heart when you are giving away >39% taken by force by the jackboots known as the IRS and WASTED on things like studying the sexual habits of snails?
Or used to support liberal progressive dogma via NPR.
Yes, a bit like Obamas ‘wealth redistribution.” Take from the worker and give to the drone.
Its called extortion 😉
Yep, like a forced apology…it means nothing.
Excellent point. The Catholic Church in particular has masked Marxism as charity.
C’mon – what do you think our own system of taxation, as well as tax systems around the world represent: Legalized transfer of great wealth from those that have to those that don’t, enforced by the force of arms (the State). If you don’t like paying taxes to support the social safety net, you should go off the grid, and go live in an uncharted part of the Earth. There is no way to evade taxation otherwise.
“Forced charity” is also called extortion. Or robbery.
Jesus wants us to take care of the Earth and not bury our heads in ignorance!
Billy Ray, who is opposed to taking care of the earth, and who put you in charge of defining it?
The deniers are opposed.
Yes, He does, which is why, as good stewards of our environment, we should examine the claims on their merits and evidence, not blindly accept the proclamations of those who are invested in the Green Energy companies.
Windmills and solar panels have a marginal impact on our power production, by some estimates less than 10%. However, they are having a major detrimental impact to bird populations, including endangered species like the Bald Eagle. The blades literally knock the birds out of the skies, and solar reflectors can burn them to death as they fly over.
Ethanol, it turns out, actually has a greater Carbon footprint to manufacture than Gasoline manufacture AND use has. It’s also causing food price increases across the board, since farmers are using farm land to grow fuel crop instead of food crop. Ethanol is also less efficient, so when mixed with gas it actually causes more gallons to be consumed per load than pure gas does.
Battery manufacturing on the scale necessary for Electric cars causes massive amounts of chemical pollutants, which can contaminate ground waters and other water sources.
All other so-called “Green Energy” technologies are still in the test-tube phase, and not nearly ready for ‘prime time’.
In addition, the very reason that these technologies are being developed is being increasingly thrown into debate.
All of the predictions that the Global Warming models have generated over the past 30 years have missed the mark by miles. We are actually setting record cold temperatures in many areas, and the Global Warming scientists have recently been reduced to throwing theories against the wall to see what sticks. The actual evidence doesn’t support any of their theoretical models.
Oh good. So you’re saying that religious morality is no longer morality when it is enforced by the state, correct? In that case, you should agree that abortion and gay marriage are individual choices and individuals who want to engage in those activities should not be subject to laws restricting them.
Um…huh? Charity is a voluntary endeavor, by its very definition. When something is forcibly taken from you (i.e. taxes), it is, by definition, not Charity, since you don’t have the choice in the matter. Whether or not that confiscated income is for a just and moral purpose, such as feeding the poor or caring for the sick, or if it is instead being used to fund the drowning of kittens, that is irrelevant to the fact that, since it is law, you don’t have the choice in supporting it. Therefore, it is, by definition, not Charity.
As I’ve said before in other places, if the Government were to structure their social programs such that they were entirely funded by voluntary donations, as opposed to required taxation, I would have zero issue with it. That, actually, would be in line with Christian teachings.
And, by the way, your own sarcastic (and completely irrelevant to this discussion) logic on morality doesn’t hold weight. Murder and rape are individual choices, too. I’m assuming you’re not advocating for neutralizing laws pertaining to those, simply because some people might believe these are acceptable behaviors.
Global warming is a tax to make politicians rich not make the poor less poor. AND how did a story of global warming influence degrade into a conversation about religion so fast??
“how did a story of global warming influence degrade into a conversation about religion so fast??”
Uhh, you’ll need to check with the Pope on that one.
Can’t wait to see what the Pope thinks about abortion.
He’s being inundated for waivers of the celebacy requirement. He’s pro gay agenda. He’s pro big government NWO types. He’s pro global warming. He’s probably pro Monsanto for Christ’s sake. Err, let me rephrase that.
Antipope. Just like the 14th century.
Seriously Harry, where have you been for the past week?
Because both Catholocism and global warming are religious sects. The difference is that at least there is proof that Jesus existed, unlike global warming data.
Where is this proof you speak of? And if you have any proof that he actually did miracles I would like that too. No, text in a rewritten book aimed at controlling the masses does not equal proof. You are beginning to sound like the AGW believers.
Seriously though, I have been searching for the proof my whole life.
I thought “S Johnson” was Bill Clinton’s nick-name.
Yep. Look at Al Gore. How rich has he become profiting from Global Warming, his tours, books, etc…?
But that’s not from him somehow getting the taxes collected in the name of Global Warming. HIS money comes from idiots paying him to hear his tripe.
“There’s a “devotee” born every minute”
Big fat Al’s partner at Generation Investment Management is David Blood…Blood and Gore…http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/11/03/blood-and-gore-making-a-killing-on-anti-carbon-investment-hype/
That JET of his spews a TON of horrible carbon…Al, Al, how COULD you?
He is a Jesuit.
He left the Jesuit order to take on a parish. However, upon becoming a cardinal he became the authority for the Jesuits in Argentina, but within two years as a cardinal, the head of that Jesuit region petitioned the pope, I believe Benedict XVI, to remove him as their authority. It was granted and that responsibility was striped from him. Simply put, he is practicing Liberation Theologian that was forged by the last five decades in Argentina.
The Pope said so!
LOL! “The rich” don’t get Global Warming tax! It’s just spent by government.
LOL! You’ve got to be kidding… Where does the money get “spent?” Why do you think Warren Buffett strongly opposes the Keystone pipeline? Because his fleet of tankers carry the oil now! Obama’s biggest bestest friend has made a fortune being a crony of the Kenyan Interloper. Multiply this by 1000 and maybe we approach the magnitude of corruption in the Obama administration.
Actually, it’s because of the fall of the oil prices. Buffett is losing a fortune on his oil futures. The Keystone Pipeline would make oil prices crater even more than the Dakotas operations already are.
With the Keystone built, it would be obvious how much we’re paying in taxes, and that’s the last think liberals want the public aware of. Oil gets down to $10/barrel, yet gas is still averaging $2/Gal, someone’s gonna have some ‘splainin to do….
Right, just like all those temporary taxes that are only there long enough to get us past whatever trumped up catastrophe is in the headlines.
“AND how did a story of global warming influence degrade into a conversation about religion so fast??”
Because the Pope just openly declared war on us, and vowed to use everything he’s got to cram Global Warming Theory down our throats. That’s current events, not “degrading” the conversation.
I agree, Smiddy, and I’m a Roman Catholic.
AND how did a story of global warming influence degrade into a conversation about religion so fast??
The Pope threw his hat into the ring earlier this week.
Not only against the teachings of Jesus, but the Ten Commandments as well.
Commandments nine and ten:
16 “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.” Exodus 20:16-17 (KJV)
So don’t lie and don’t covet anything that isn’t yours. That pretty much eliminates the Liberal agenda.
No wonder they hate God, the Bible and especially Christians.
Yes. It is based on envy- not fairness.
Covet: yearn to possess or have (something).
Short version: Your NEED is not a claim upon MY productivity.
What about my neighbor’s wife’s ass? Can I covet that?
Someone needs to tell the Pope that. I’m sure he wouldn’t want millions to blindly follow something and subjugate themselves to someone else’s authority. I mean, he’s the Pope. Wait, what?
Bingo!
There you go. Well written.
So a rich man has the same chance as the poor man to get into heaven
Yes. Rich and poor have the exact same requirement for getting into heaven. Jesus said it was harder for a rich man to get into heaven than it was for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle. The reason it is more difficult is that wealth can give rise to the illusion of power; possession of personal power by which one can set terms. It is easier (usually) for a poor person to recognize that he brings nothing to the relationship with God and to accept the free gift of eternal life. But poverty doesn’t put a person at the head of the line.
Can you please explain how and where you think Jesus is pro capitalism and anti socialism? We would appreciate specific gospel references.
I appreciate your wording. Very telling.
When I was young, I needed everything written down in really simple terms, too.
I don’t mind giving food to the least of these, but feeding the trolls is simply a waste of time. And the bible doesn’t use have specific verses differentiating “trolls,” either.
You should try actually reading it some time.
funny I dont think Jesus ever mentions monetary charity. Rather you should take care of the less fortunate. But if it is money that concerns you “charity” can be either voluntary or enforced. Of course, given the trillions floating on Wall Street these days you could just pay a decent wage to every one who works to fill the market with our toys before you pay millions the CEO’s and other useless ULM (to include boards of directors), and then Wall Street.
Jesus admonished people to help the poor. Notice he wanted the “people”, not government. Somehow the socialists have hijacked this message and believe the government should tax the people, subject the people, and then decide which people receive the benefit.
That’s not socialism you false flag troll. And yes, Jesus’ words are the epitome of socialism. Don’t get rich while others are starving and dying. Christ, you people are delusional.
It really depends on how you read Jesus’ teachings. The liberation theologians certainly saw a similarity in Jesus’ teachings and the teachings of socialism. The meek shall inherit the earth certainly doesn’t sound like the rich shall inherit the earth. Just sayin’.
“The problem with socialism is, eventually you run out of other people’s money.”- Margret Thatcher
Flagstaff lies like, pumping greenhouse gases into the air causes problems?
Acts 2:45King James Version (KJV)
45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
Being a scripture reading Catholic, are you now a Catholic without a Pope? Kind of throws out the whole infallible things out of the window doesn’t it? Maybe the protestants had something there?
Infallibility thing? That’s been spoiled since…well…back when PJP admitted that there just might be something to this whole “evolution thing!” LOL! Oh yeah…and the whole “maybe homosexuality is OK after all” gambit. Oh…and the “we don’t REALLY need to eat fish on Fridays” revelation. And as if those weren’t enough…there was the whole “maybe there IS room for the existence of ET in the Catholic philosophy…”
This is DEFINITELY not the first reversal from a Pope.
My recollection of PJP was that he suggested that evolution could be a reason for adaptation of species. He did not imply that is was a substitute for intelligent design.
Don’t you dare shake their faith…
Papal infallibility does not mean the Pope is never wrong.
Papal infallibility has to do only with matters of church doctrine. You shouldn’t try to tell Catholics what their religion says.
And Catholics should not try to tell Christians what their beliefs should and shouldn’t be.
Well, you are using our Scriptures….just saying.
??? You know those scriptures existed long before the Catholic church, right? Some fables (AKA Scriptures) even existed during Sumerian times. You really should look at alternate sources of history.
Papal infallibility means that in matters of faith and morals, when teaching within the line of Catholic Tradition and within a limited scope, the Pope is infallible. (Tradition with a capital T has a specific theological meaning.)
A pope can be totally wrong on topics not related to faith and morals: science being the foremost example.
And since each Pope seems to differ in their opinion of faith and morals, they are all correct??? Wait… What?
I doubt most thinking Catholics over the decades had any misconceptions about papal infallibility. To many glaring examples that its just a myth. For hundreds of years.
His actions are that of a typical Franciscan. HIS philosophy was to be expected. It also should be understood that as a native of a third world country he expects redistribution of wealth.
He is a Jesuit! The first one. They are social justice priests.
Scripture reading Catholics is a relatively new thing It has not been all that long ago that Catholics were admonished not to read the Bible for themselves.
I was raised as a Catholic…never ever heard that…
Man…what priest were you under? I always heard that.
That is non-sense. Seriously where do you cats come up with this stuff? Sign me “A Scripture reading Catholic from a very old and long line of Scripture Reading Catholics”. And FWIW, El Papa’s credibility is spiraling fast, at least among us scripture reading Catholics.
That’s utter nonsense.
I guess you do not know Catholic history. Back when Catholics did not read the Bible, it was because not many people could read. Not many people in the world could read period. Relatively new? The USA is relatively new compared to the world. So is England, for that matter man kind when compared to the age of the earth.
Wow, sounds like you’re well-read in Jack Chick.
Here’s a brain bender: reading Scripture merits a partial indulgence.
Nothing scary about this guy. Bring in the money is the number one thing with the church. If he happens to look like an idiot doing it, then so be it.
Maybe it’s time for you to seriously consider why Martin Luther nailed the 95 theses to the Wittenburg door.
Yes except the liberal agenda has infected many churches out there Protestant included
As a scripture reading recovered Catholic, I agree with you. When he said that atheists can go to Heaven if they do good, he refuted so many of Jesus’ teachings. He said that he’d like to meet aliens (thought by some Christians to be demons) and baptize them. He needs to refresh himself on the Bible before he jumps into defending the false religion CCC (Climate Change Cult).
The Pope really said atheists can go to Heaven?
Yes and then the Vatican backtracked to try to say he was misunderstood.
He scares all true Christians.
Amen…scary scary time for the Church, and its flock.
They forced Ratzinger out. That should scare everyone.
It scares a lot of NON-catholics as well
Jesus never intended for governments to take care of the poor. His view was that charity and concern for one’s fellow man was more effective. Give freely all you can give to those in need. The socialist view is that “poverty can be eradicated.” The Biblical view is that “The poor will always be with us” (stated in some way shape or form as early in the Bible as Deuteronomy). In the past 3,500 years or so, the Bible’s view has yet to be proven wrong.
I think you said what a lot of us are thinking. I feel like Francis may be the “Obama” of popes.
I’m not a Catholic but I liked this Pope at first. He actually has some life in him.
But if he’s going to get into this warming farce…..
Amen.
It looks like the communists have managed to infiltrate the Vatican.
Really a scripture reading Catholic? Catholics you know can’t read? So you are going to repeat protestant garbage to make yourself look better? Good Job.
To be fair, as a scripture reading Catholic you’re also probably frightened by yoga.
Which scriptures? The ones based on Jesus’ teachings that the Jesuit pope is peddling or the ones that the romans put in that are often contradictory to the aforementioned ones?
Does “turning the other cheek” mean making it easier to hit all of your transgressor’s face?
Even so, I wouldn’t under-estimate his popularity. Italy itself has a large number of left-wingers. Greece is about to elect a new left-wing government. There is bound to be a “reaction” to the “austerity” imposed by the neo-liberal market capitalist system – if the austerity always is at the expense of the poor.
As a scripture reading catholic any pope should scare you, along with indulgences, Mary worship, purgatory, the confessional, etc.
hes a socialist, which is fine for a church (they aren’t taxing you), but its deadly to a govt.
Any Pope should scare everyone.
this pope will be the last pope.he is the false prophet who will help the anti-Christ rule the world for seven years.
Are you truly scared of someone who accepts gays and those of other faiths? Also which interpretation of the scripture are you reading?
Nope just scared of someone who supports the corporate and political elites to think that global warming has something to do with helping the planet is like thinking Obamacare improves healthcare or that common core is about education wake up follow the money take the red pill
Climate change and global warming are real and are problems.
Ok sure let’s say it is but just understand its fix is another money grab the players are aligned and there’s trillions at stake reminds me of some Dylan lyrics “after he took from you ever thing he could steal” how does it feel
anyway it would be great if it was some grand humanitarian effort but when you peel back the onion it will be disappointing unfortunately
I don’t understand him either.
Amen!
Me too. I wouldn’t follow this leader of ‘the flock’ across the street.
Hey a pope for the end times…..
Me too. I wouldn’t follow this ‘shepherd’ across the street.
Very well put, D New. Thank you.
The problem is Christ’s path is a personal path. As individuals we should give to the poor, who are por through no fault of their own. Jesus didn’t say force your neighbor to pay for your charitable desires, nor did he ask Cesar to pay for the poor.
I think the Pope is all about the collective? Christ is for the up lifting of the individual. Big difference.
Pope 7 of 9?
I’m not sure if I can answer. Your question, I lack comprehension. Respectfully.
Socialists have used the bible particularly the New Testament to preach social justice when in fact its more concerned with the individual and and forgiveness of his sins and place in heaven
Christ is ONLY about the individual – the Cathollic Church is about the masses (pardon the pun). There are no party reservations in Heaven – nor is there any Pope in the BIble, never mind apostolic succession…
True – Jesus did NOTHING for the poor apart from a couple lunches.
And the Pope wants you to pay for all costs associated with Global Warming, whether anything can actually be done is not his problem. See, he and the Catholic Church have invested their money (thank you for the tithe) into elaborate, ornate and very expensive gold hardware and all the trimmings. I can see how concerned they are for the poor around the world by the quantity of icons and idols they possess.
Not sure we need to bash the entire Catholic Church for disagreeing with the pope.
The implication that donations to the Catholic Church are commonly used poorly because of this example is false. The Catholic Church does a lot of good in the world today, and millions owe it a meaningful debt of gratitude.
That said, I have no use for the man. I’m as opposed to his policies as I am any big-government leader. The fact that he puts a friendly face on it and goes down and helps poor people himself doesn’t mean he’s less promoting of tyranny.
The percentage of Catholics who tithe is too small to calculate.
Just proves that the Pope is a fraud. He is supposedly the mouth-piece of God but he can’t seem to get it right. Kind of goes back to the fact that a person is not a prophet of God (Old Testament) if he gets one thing wrong. Soooooo….the Catholics need to figure out what to do because the Catholic church is now defunct.
It’s important to remember that a temporary figurehead does not render an entire organization dead.
But it does if that organization deems that “figurehead” to be “infallible” and then has it as its entire basis for much of its structure and then that “figurehead” is shown to be fallible.
Papal Infallibility does not mean the Pope is never wrong, or cannot make a mistake.
Actually, that is exactly what papal infallibility means.
Actually, Papal Infallibility ONLY applies in certain circumstances. Specifically when the Pope is speaking on matters directly related to the practices, beliefs, and/or morals of the church, whether in Council with Bishops, or when issuing an Encyclical. The Pope is allowed to profess his personal opinions about anything without it meaning that he is binding the entire Catholic population the that same belief. Here is a link to a more thorough explanation.
http://www.staycatholic.com/papal_infalibillity.htm
Excellent now explain the purpose for a Pope – is he the one that relates all the mistakes God makes? Or is that how you muppets work it – if he’s wrong it’s him if he’s right it’s God? Dishonesty insyitutionalized…
I would love to, however its obvious you would rather mock my church than try to understand it – which is a shame.
unless of course someone points that out – then the back pedalling comes and eventually the ones that tell everyone else what to do start saying “don’t tell us what to do”
it does when the entire organization is fruadulent…
I would love to see what would happen if all the Catholics at odds with the Pope’s environ’mental’ stance stopped giving to the donation tray in protest. Yes, the money goes to help that specific Catholic franchise and not to the Vatican, but it would certainly be interesting to see the uproar created by the priests.
IF the Catholic Church was based on anything at all to do with the weather, OR if the Catholic Church proclaimed that the Pope was indeed a prophet, or is somehow endowed by God with Divine Wisdom, then you might have a shot at making this argument. But since church doctrin has nothing to do with climate change, and since the Pope is not endowed with any special revelations from God regarding weather forecasting, your argument is false.
or you can’t deal with the hypocrisy in your club… wait until the second coming when Jesus says “you followed who?”
That is such a weak argument. If he is the mouthpiece of God, he would not say such statements because it is not his place.
The Pope is human and as a human has free will. He also has – as he will freely admit – the ability to commit sin. He can and does make mistakes – as I am also sure he will freely admit he has. He is not incapable of being wrong. but he is also not prevented from expressing his own opinions, regardless of topic
Whatever your profession is – are you restricted to only having opinions related to that profession? Are accountants incapable of having a opinion regarding anything outside the scope of accounting practices? This is no different. The Pope is no more an authority on climate change than Al Gore or Obama, but that does not mean he does not have the right as a world leader to express his opinions on the matter.
However, if I disagree with the Pope regarding climate change, and what to do about it – I am not at odds with the Catholic Church or Catholic doctrine. Whereas if I disagree with the Pope about something like at the core of the Catholic faith, like abortion, then I am at odds.
Actually, that’s a BIT out of context. BUT certainly the number of times popes have been wrong SHOULD have decimated the church by NOW, If the goof folk in the pew were actually awake on Sunday.
He truly pissed me off when he went to the anti-suicide Palestinian bomber wall in Israel and prayed,..for what? that more freaking suicide anti-Jewish bombers could kill more people in restaurants?l,..the Pope showed his true anti-Semitic colors then and there.
Yes. It’s all about controlling the people. Whether you are talking about politically, legally, religiously, whatever. It has always been about being able to tell someone else what to do. The Church today uses peer pressure, guilt, prophetic commands, and vicarian directive. The progressive left uses law, regulation, demonization, and ignorance.
Are you being sarcastic? That’s exactly what jesuits have done throughout history
Don’t apply that to ALL Christendom. There’s a REASON for the thesis on the door.
Someone needs to teach the Pope that his beliefs in wealth distribution is actually Fabian Socialism. In it, people are all bowing down to the socialist leaders. That is, unless, that is now his god.
Who said this?
“The processes of globalization, suitably understood and directed, open up the unprecedented possibility of large-scale redistribution of wealth on a world-wide scale…” — Pope Benedict in 2009 encyclical
I’m Catholic and you took the words right out of my mouth. This contamination of South American Liberation Theology which is Communism with the face of Christ as a disguise. I love my Pope, but he is no economist. America is not Argentina where they only have rich and poor and the poor stay poor. These are the lenses he looks through.
He’s probably one of those Liberation Theologists. They preached socialism with a thin veneer of Christianity on top to give is respectability and trick people into swallowing socialism. I rather suspected as soon as he got the nomination that he would turn out this way.
the pope is just trying to keep his church tax exempt, so he’ll say the pc bs he needs to say to keep various national gubments of his back, lol. there’s no reform going on at the vatican, they aren’t melting the papal gold down to buy food and shelter for the meek. it’s lip service, all for show….just like everything is in the 21st century new world order.
The Argentines failure culminated in 1982-83 a lost war to sure up nationalism due to an economy that was horrific…they totally collapsed in 83. Now it seems its coming full circle yet again with this kook running their nation. She just purchased bombers from Russia…but the nation as a whole has defaulted on many of its loans world wide. My point is that the Pope is no stranger to Socialist/Marxist ideals. He has seen its horrific results firsthand .
Was Jesus a capitalist? Thou shall not covet?
The church historically has been totalitarian. This pope would like to return it to that status. Of course like all liberals he wants to be in charge.
Because he wants the Catholic Church to be more for the less fortunate and the Catholic hierarchy to less regal in lifestyle?
I left the Catholic Church long ago when I heard them yapping about “social justice.” This new pope is as bad as Oblahblah.
As you’ve observed, global warming is nothing but a vehicle for wealth redistribution.
The popes are the breath of the beast.
The pope is a dope that has no worries. He will never be laid off, never get hungry, never lack medical care.
He’s a stinking Communist. I’ll never attend Catholic church again.
Religious fanatics and these Algorian lunatics are drinking from the same coolaid cup. When hard science is applied they lose all credibility.
But you haven’t lost any liberty in the USA?
Exquisitely stated!
He advocates ‘redistribution of wealth’ but won’t sell off the billions of dollars of wealth that the Catholic church has stolen through the centuries.
Very thoughtful comment. Kudos
Thank you for a thoughtful response. Elitist progressives are always leveraging policy to promote frenzied egalitarianism and transfer of wealth through taxation and regulation. The framing of climate change as a vehicle for transformative societal change is just the latest of many veiled efforts by the control freaks of the left. These principles are embedded into almost every decision or bureaucratic regulation. They will use anything, absolutely anything, toward that end. Whether the Pope is a tool or a willing participant is incidental. Natural climate variation has been redefined as humanity’s self destruction due to capitalism, greed, and excessive use of finite resources. Yes, Argentina could have been a great nation, until it veered into leftist ideology and statism. I am reminded of Cuba’s descent into poverty and loss of personal liberties. In 1950, not so long ago, Cuba’s GNP was higher than Mother Spain, as was its average wage for workers. Who knew that climatologists would soon become politicized and provide a huge boost to the progressive objectives of elitist politicians? I suppose the boredom of tedious daily climatology research can be relieved by the sublime notion that you are saving the world from the evils of capitalism, while preserving those cuddly polar bear cubs. I sense that those who profess to save the world are one in the same as those who desire to control the world. The Pope seems like a fine fellow, but is he a monkey wrench for the Greenies?
D New,
The Pope may feel great comfort with socialism, but please understand that the clergy of my church are indoctrinated with that idea, in many seminaries (Catholic Priest colleges). As a Catholic, I know that our religion does not consider a Pope to be infallible on non-religious issues. The Pope has been elevated by an elective body within my church called the College of Cardinals (those of you who saw the “Davinci Code” movie may remember the red-robed men voting for a new Pope-thats the College of Cardinals). Cardinals are the highest rank below Pope. He and any Pope can say anything and everything, or nothing, and I and most of my fellow catholics will continue to give him our love. But-especially in the American Catholic church-many catholics will be free with disagreement.
You see examples of that in news of retired American Cardinals making public comments-noted in the news yesterday-clearly disagreeing in a general way with the Pope. Neither they nor I suggested or suggest lack of love for him-but within Catholicism., American Catholic freedom of expression and thought is notorious.
We will undoubtedly see more American Catholic disagreement because the Pope comes from a land where my Church had many high and low clergy joining with socialist revolutionaries in the name or (I think this was it) “liberation theology.”
Our modern, developed “free markets informed with law and love”-no joke, Libs-school of thought can educate and erode support from the emotion laden and simplistic “give to this cause ’cause, gosh, this group and all these other groups say its a good cause” school of thought.
“…give freely to the needy in order to follow the path that Christ set forth as the way to God.”
Scripture does not teach salvation by works. It teaches salvation by faith, period. Read Paul’s letter to the Romans, 4.1-5. James also writes about works as being an eventuality in the life of a believer if he has true faith. In other words, if your faith is true, you will join God in His work for He is constantly at work around us (John 5.17). It’s like the fruits of the Spirit spoken of in Galatians 5.22. All the fruits listed will show themselves in the life of the true believer as they are “worked out” in the process of the believer’s sanctification (Phil 2.12-13).
Juan Peron was a socialist?! Plus – what would you call Bismark? The German arch-conservative was the first to introduce socialist reforms in mid-19th C Germany such as the entire suite of benefits known today as the social safety net i.e. Social Security, unemployment insurance, and so forth. I wonder why an arch-conservative would do so – maybe to pre-empt social revolution? Now, there’s an idea!
You’re right. It’s all about the money, Global warming has always been about the money.
For a discussion of climate, things escalated quickly here.
I say let the needy die out. Do we really want to let people too stupid and lazy to better themselves bring down the rest of us. Sink or swim, your choice. Let nature weed out the bad seeds.
The one thing about socialism that always holds true is that eventually they start killing people to get their way.
Right, because the Pope follows Argentinian fiscal and economic policy…
The US took the same turn but has those pesky Bill Of Rights holding up progress-ives.
I like this pope at first. I am Catholic. But there is something wrong with the whole picture of him lately. I have decided he can’t be trusted and is not a man of God….just my opinion. Not trying to get anyone riled up!
It’s really funny to see you guys walling off the pope as a heritic to your ideology. You are isolated.
I respect the Pope but they are becoming increasingly more irrelevant for most people. Probably, the last time they were relevant was when Pope John Paul II teamed up with Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher to bring down the Soviet Empire.
Free market is the most efficient producer of goods and services to ever exist on planet earth..no doubt, hands down, this is TRUE.
What is missing is controlling the wicked human heart…greed, abuse, and selfishness destroy human beings…not the free market.
The free market exists in an ethical void. One must bring ethics, morality and compassion, best demonstrated by the life, teachings and resurrection of Jesus. Combining real mercy and free market wins every time, all through the system….China now has free market, but no mercy…just central power….
I read somewhere that he is referred to as a “Peronist Marxist”. I’m no fan of him but as a Catholic I believe the church will survive him.
If this was 1943 this Pope would be having dinner with Hitler.
Somebody’s misinterpreting something here. Christ’s admonition was for individuals to give freely of themselves to help others. Not for governments to extract money from those who have in order to pass it on to those who don’t. The same thing holds for nation to nation transfers, which defeats the uplifting morality of charity which, after all, is an individual quality.
That’s why they had to change their mantra from “Global Warming” to “Climat4e Change”.
Is that the change we’re supposedly hoping for?
Al Gore’s stock broker was, anyway. It’s definitely come to fruition, and served him well.
“Global warming” to “global cooling” to “climate change” to “climate disruption” to “we can’t think of any more! Just shut up and send us a check”
How inconvenient.
The IPCC was established in the 80s. The CC stands for climate change. You don’t know what you are talking about. Why post nonsense? And just who is they you refer to?
All the fraudsters who were jetting all over the planet ranting about Global Warming and selling carbon offsets. Most notably Al Gore.
“Would somebody please forward this data along to the Pope?”
Or you could even forward it to some “scientists”.
The pope should give away the money in the Vatican Bank and sell off all their non church properties and give it to the poor. That would help his credibility.
Never gonna happen.
Yep…because Catholicism is a scam. It’s hardly even based on the Bible when you make some man the “mouth-piece of God”. If they were serious about the poor, they would give up their own money.
If you’ve ever been to the Vatican Museum and seen the incredible amount of art that is on display (we can only imagine what isn’t on display) – then you know of the incredible wealth of the church.
On the one hand it is a very valid argument that the Church should sell these works and use the money to help the poor. However, it is equally valid to argue that the Church is the custodian of these priceless works of art and to sell them to private collectors would deny the poor of our opportunity to appreciate these works by being able to visit them in person – (note: you don’t have to be Catholic to visit the museum).
You have no idea what you are talking about. Who do you follow? You have no idea whomuch money Catholic Charities gives to the poor do you? You just see with your eyes and what little information your brain knows. So why don’t you sell off everything you have and give to the poor?
A) You don’t know that he hasn’t b) More interestingly, have you? c) exactly how does his not having sold off everything excuse the Pope (or you for that matter) from being a hypocrite?
Some do. Most don’t
The Pope has foolishly bought into the global warming mantra, but he has indeed been very focused on assisting the poor and lives simply as compared to the more opulent Popes. I am not Catholic, by the way….
Duh, the fact that you are cold has nothing to do with world wide climate. Last year was the warmest on record. Scientists were shocked at the rapid increase in the ocean temperature. Last year the east coast froze while Anchorage, Alaska had its first year without below 0 temperature. Siberia was warm and Australia baked.
Wow… The we should stand outside naked when it is below zero, except for you… You should wear a thong.
Everything you stated has been proven to be untrue with just a little bit of research into information coming from sources other than liberal. It’s sad that so many of you can be so easily misled by people claiming to be scientists. The fact is, any cooling or warming that may be occurring is due to “Natural Climate Change” which has been occurring since the dawn of the planet. “Man-made Climate Change” is a myth. Absolutely. It is used as a tool of redistribution and governmental control. Go ahead and be a sheep/lemming. It’s climbing over your dead body that the left gains it’s power…
Loren, can you share your reference material?
Loren can’t share any source material because there is no source material…
Just spewing out the usual lies.
There is one simple question that all the climate change advocates will not address. If climate change is man made, why did the IPCC have to manipulate (fudge) the data to make the “hockey stick” graph work? You seem to have all of the facts, so what is your explanation?
If climate change is man made, what was man doing to cause the ice-sheets that covered North America a few thousand years ago to completely recede?
According to the AAT Ancient Astronaut theorists, this occurred because of the vast amount of power they used to make pyramids world wide! LOL
And Greenland got it’s name because it was lush green- key word “was”. Your point?
They had limited Mann-power.
You know that Global Warming (i.e. Climate Change) was first used as a scam to offset the socialist parties in the U.K. by the Thatcher parliament, right? You do know that all of the predictions on what would happen by climatologists that supported global warming were grossly off?
Oh wait, you’re just reliant on the very liberal press and your paradigm of religious bigotry in worshiping the state. Real science (the real one that relies on double blind studies and would not block out objectional views) would never play in your religion. That is why you ignore the thousands of scientists that say “wait a second, your data makes no sense”. That is why your “scientists” have to grossly skew the data to secure more funding (I use to work for one of these guys in the early 90s…it was horrible to see how we skewed the data).
You might skewer us for pointing to the facts but as Galileo said to the religious zealots of the day “and yet it moves”. You can have your religious view and worship the Earth with Al Gore and the Pope, just leave us alone and let us live in peace.
I don’t care what you say. My AZZ is cold….
Shocked I tell you!
PT Barnum comes to mind.
Lorens response. The sound of crickets chirping.
It’s because she’s a liberal. Facts don’t matter. It is how you feel. She feeeeellllls that it is warm and so it is. She feeeeelllllls for the illegal so she invites them into her neighbors home (because her compassion only goes so far and wouldn’t let them camp in her home). She feeeelllllls for the poor so she takes someone else’s money and gives it to someone else. She doesn’t respond because she can’t type feelings.
your ignorance is appalling…this year’s high school graduates will not have experienced “global warming” in their entire lifetime…
When future generations look back on the global-warming scare of the past 30 years, nothing will shock them more than the extent to which the official temperature records – on which the entire panic ultimately rested – were systematically “adjusted” to show the Earth as having warmed much more than the actual data justified.
Two weeks ago, under the headline “How we are being tricked by flawed data on global warming”, I wrote about Paul Homewood, who, on his Notalotofpeopleknowthat blog, had checked the published temperature graphs for three weather stations in Paraguay against the temperatures that had originally been recorded. In each instance, the actual trend of 60 years of data had been dramatically reversed, so that a cooling trend was changed to one that showed a marked warming.
This was only the latest of many examples of a practice long recognised by expert observers around the world – one that raises an ever larger question mark over the entire official surface-temperature record.
Watch: Climate change explained in 60 second animation
Following my last article, Homewood checked a swathe of other South American weather stations around the original three. In each case he found the same suspicious one-way “adjustments”. First these were made by the US government’s Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN). They were then amplified by two of the main official surface records, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (Giss) and the National Climate Data Center (NCDC), which use the warming trends to estimate temperatures across the vast regions of the Earth where no measurements are taken. Yet these are the very records on which scientists and politicians rely for their belief in “global warming”.
Related Articles
Barack Obama’s personal battle against climate change 23 Jan 2015
Rise in sea levels is ‘faster than we thought’ 14 Jan 2015
Homewood has now turned his attention to the weather stations across much of the Arctic, between Canada (51 degrees W) and the heart of Siberia (87 degrees E). Again, in nearly every case, the same one-way adjustments have been made, to show warming up to 1 degree C or more higher than was indicated by the data that was actually recorded. This has surprised no one more than Traust Jonsson, who was long in charge of climate research for the Iceland met office (and with whom Homewood has been in touch). Jonsson was amazed to see how the new version completely “disappears” Iceland’s “sea ice years” around 1970, when a period of extreme cooling almost devastated his country’s economy.
One of the first examples of these “adjustments” was exposed in 2007 by the statistician Steve McIntyre, when he discovered a paper published in 1987 by James Hansen, the scientist (later turned fanatical climate activist) who for many years ran Giss. Hansen’s original graph showed temperatures in the Arctic as having been much higher around 1940 than at any time since. But as Homewood reveals in his blog post, “Temperature adjustments transform Arctic history”, Giss has turned this upside down. Arctic temperatures from that time have been lowered so much that that they are now dwarfed by those of the past 20 years.
Homewood’s interest in the Arctic is partly because the “vanishing” of its polar ice (and the polar bears) has become such a poster-child for those trying to persuade us that we are threatened by runaway warming. But he chose that particular stretch of the Arctic because it is where ice is affected by warmer water brought in by cyclical shifts in a major Atlantic current – this last peaked at just the time 75 years ago when Arctic ice retreated even further than it has done recently. The ice-melt is not caused by rising global temperatures at all.
Of much more serious significance, however, is the way this wholesale manipulation of the official temperature record – for reasons GHCN and Giss have never plausibly explained – has become the real elephant in the room of the greatest and most costly scare the world has known. This really does begin to look like one of the greatest scientific scandals of all time.
Don’t worry… Just to try an help out I left both of the trucks idling in the driveway for an extra half hour this morning…
Hope that helps!!
Okay, that’s a start. Now take one of the trucks for a nice long ride on the Freeway. I’ll wave as we pass.
The oil industry thanks you for your devotion.
Rather give it to the oil industry than some leftist monkey…
Can a conservative use “monkey” and not be accused of being a racist?
No.
A Conservative is accused of racism because of their existence, not their vocabulary.
It is fitting that the Pope holds forth on Global Warming/Climate Change, since he is uniquely qualified to express opinions upon matters of religious faith.
Yes, but will they let him wear that really awesome hat, when he pontificates at The Church of Unnatural Warming?
That could be a deal breaker.
You’re not cold — you’re just shivering in denial.
the only hot air I’ve seen these days has been the stuff coming out of the warming conspirators mouths.
As can be CLEARLY SEEN from the graphs, the warm and cold peaks are a NATYRAL< CYCLIC event that occurs again and again, NOT caused by man.
The global warming morons are no better than chicken little crying the sky is falling, EXCEPT, they are making PROFIT off it at the expense of the people.
Forward this to Al Gore.
He doesn’t care. He has made so much money on this scam, it sets a new bar. Sooooooooooo much worse than Enron, since this fraud is perpetrated on the entire globe.
I am a Catholic without a Pope, next in line will be gay marriages in the Catholic Church.
It is a real shame that the Pope foolishly stuck his nose into this fraud.
The Pope’s getting up there in years. Maybe he’s due to have his infallibilty changed and his slippers rotated?
I think the Pope needs to give God a little credit for climate changes.
You can take the Pope out of south America , but you can’t take South America out of the Pope.
Fortunately the half life of Popes is quite short and a new one can’t be far behind
If I were the Pope I’d have a remote starter for my Popemobile. 🙂
The words Global Warming are NOT Found within any of the stories other than the made-up Headlines. Climate Change, Yes. You have been duped by the leftist anti-Catholic Media. What abject fools some of you bigots are.
Are you talking about that homosexual marriage approving Pope?
The Pope says Algore explained everything so now please buy some carbon credits. If you don’t know how to reach him then send me the money to me and I will pass it on (wink).
Permanent ice (4+yrsold) melts into the ocean. Desalinates the water. Fresh water freezes at Warner temperatures then salt water. Come winter you get more sea ice then normal due to the increase of fresh water, from the massive amounts of permanent ice melt. Then the warmer then normal sea pushes air currents like the polar vortex south, resulting in record snow falls and freezing temperatures for eastern North America. Global warming refers only to the upper atmosphere. Hotter summers and colder winters are a direct result of climate change.
Actually, Steve, in this current discussion of AGW, they’re talking about complete global warming, including the sea temperatures. The prediction was that we would have a dramatic increase in the number of massive hurricanes due to the rise in water temperatures (which haven’t happened.)
Further, this article isn’t about an increase in ice in winter compared to summer. This is a year over year study. Plus, you really ought to think before spouting – Antarctica is now in it’s summer, not it’s winter.
The warmists don’t say anything about the weather. They talk about the climate. Your point is akin to standing in front of an open freezer and saying “how can there be global warming when I feel cold”. Its the global measurements which matter. Its also not the extent of sea ice, but its volume which is more important. However even that is not greatly significant as ice volumes can increase in a warming world. Atmospheric dynamics are not as simple as you make out.
The pope (of long ago) changed God’s day of worship from Saturday (7th) to Sunday (1st), in order to gain influence and power in the world. This latest show of support for Evolution and Global Warming by the current pope is along the same vein.
Never mind the Pope, mention it to Algore.
Liberal demorats have found a way to professionalize lying… They are just the best at lying….
Think about it for a moment, right before they die they must think to themselves- all I can be proud of is deceit and being a liar. Their mothers would be proud…..
The Pope knows that this global warming (or is it chaos, climate change….what????) scam is just a redistribution of wealth scheme which he is in favor of. I am Catholic…and this Pope scares the hell out of me.
I think the Pope see this as an opportunity to transfer wealth to the third world, and whether Climate Change is real or not really doesn’t matter to him as this can be a tool to scratch his ‘social justice itch’ either way.
actual scientists (not agenda pushing liberal dishonest manipulative douche bags masquerading as men of science) have been forecasting that we started entering a mild ice age in the 70s
The Pope does not share your enthusiasm for evidence…
Put the poser pope in the lake, baptize the crossjacking guerrilla jesuit in the light of the truth
Wondered how long it’d take a Conservadunce to suggest killing the pope. If Jesus was alive it’d be TBaggers that crucified him while calling him a Marxist.
Current Pope speaks like a communist.
Superior had ice until like july?
The Pope? What about a staunch Republican like Michael Bloomberg – one of the biggest believers in global warming, out to remove as many cars as possible from NYC streets! There are many believers in the ills of a carbon fuel based economy in both political camps!
He was no staunch Republican, in fact he went independent. Nice try though.
So in your opinion, every Republican politician is pro air/water pollution?
Would you like a brain with that strawman?
Well, you can’t have it both ways. Either BB was a Republican Mayor of NYC who tried to crack down hard on cars – even tried to impose E. River bridge tolls – expanded bike lanes, and worked to get buildings to upgrade their oil burners so that they are no longer spewing pollution into the air – or he wasn’t. I was trying to point out that even conservatives can be pro-environment. You seem to think that unless someone is pro-oil lobby, they aren’t a Republican. That is just not true.
It is sad that the Pope has been snookered with bad data. The good thing is that although wise to strongly consider what he is saying all knowledgeable Catholics including the Pope himself would say this is his opinion and not theology and Catholics in good standing can reject this as its not a teaching ex cathedra.
(a good reading: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/122914-732485-anti-human-green-movement-is-the-antithesis-of-the-catholic-church.htm?ref=SeeAlso)
He’s too busy helping Pedophiles.
Al Gore will have to add another limousine to his global warming/climate change touring circus…after he converts to Catholicism.
last year was great for the great lakes….water levels were up 10 inches in most all of them.
The Pope knows. Also I take it you don’t live in an area hit by a drought or hurricane or flood or ice storm. 2014 looks to be the hottest year on record.
climate and weather are two different things. look it up?
Please read the data: 2014 was the warmest year on record. http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-30311816
There are many additional news articles based on the same meteorological measurements.
the pope is a dope. He is simply the head pedophile.
Popes have a very poor record on scientific issues, made even worse by directives and Inquisitions to back them up.
Impressive logic. The world can’t possibly be warming if it is cold outside of my house. The media plays with anecdotes, scientists work with data (if you don’t know the difference, please learn it). The time trend is that high temperatures are highly correlated with high CO2 levels. This relationship is robust throughout geological history and across planets (compare Earth with Venus and Mars to see for yourself). Scientists stopped debating whether global warming was happening decades ago in the face of overwhelming evidence and they are now identifying to what degree it is occurring and what its effects will be. Spoiler alert: its not looking good for us if we sit on our butts and do nothing to reduce our emissions.
How many times do we have to tell you people that your experience in one tiny part of the world doesn’t mean shit? The world, on average, is warming. Just because you had a cold winter doesn’t disprove a massive trend.
It’s easy to make a case for global warming when your just looking at the past 150 yrs of data. Look at the last 3000 yrs and tell me what you see (http://www.petitionproject.org/gw_article/GWReview_OISM150.pdf). That is unless your too scared to get your facts from science and prefer to stick with the media.
How reliable are those 3,000 years, Scott? Climate has changed dramatically several times since the time of Moses and the Bronze Age. I do have facts on my side and I am a statistically competent individual. Frankly, the media is on YOUR side in this. The problem is that the carbon based models simply do not seem to work no matter how they are tweaked to shoehorn themselves into current data. CO2, in my reasoned judgment, simply is inadequate in predicting climate changes. Then there is the political perversion in the equation. Who knew climatologists would be so easily bought by those who want to profess saving the world in order to control it. Your point man, Dr James Hanson, is an educated buffoon whose outrageous predictions are so absurd that they should have led to his scorn, ridicule, and contempt. However, he is still esteemed by those who care more of ideology than truth. On top of it all, my mature lemon trees froze to death, really ticking me off! Damn cold weather….
This must be a matter of climate change, because it can’t be global warming.
Just more evidence that ‘Global Warming’ is a BS farce. Oh wait, it’s now ‘Climate Change’ since ‘Global Warming’ is being thoroughly debunked with each passing day, right? Whatever it takes to give more power to government and green-leftists wanting to enrich themselves, and make the rest of us poor saps have to pay more just to live. Thank heavens for fracking and horizontal drilling on PRIVATE LAND, or we’d still be paying astronomical prices at the pump like our ‘dear messiah’ would prefer.
no no no you must have missed the memo. it’s called climate disruption now
That one is bombing already. How about “climate weirdness?”
it’s always something new and frightening to those that place feelings/fears over facts…in the 50s nuclear annihilation, then the Population Bomb, then New Ice Age, then Global Pandemic, then AGW, now “Climate Change (aka “Seasons and Weather”)…whatever…after 40 or 50 years of observation, it becomes repetitive and boring…these people that perpetually tout this nonsense are ignorant cowards all…
before it was global warming, it was global cooling and we were all on our way to the next ice age….al gore and his followers are as close to a dog chasing its tail as you can get
The earth is in immediate peril!!!!! Prince Charles and Al Gore have said as much. Increasing arctic ice is a clear sign of the disruptive forces of man made global warming. Its settled science, you know and those who think otherwise are ignorant southern folks.
Can you say global warming?
I can’t without laughing.
All you Global Warming deniers are flirting with the fires of hell. The Pope recently said that the UN must do more to stop Climate Change. What more proof do you need?
send your money to teh aspca instead of all gore…you will help more dogs that way.
DENIERS ? THERE ARE NO DENIERS .
THE CLIMATE HAS ALWAYS CHANGED AND IT ALWAYS WILL CHANGE .
THE TRULY CRAZY PEOPLE ARE THE ONES WHO THINK THEY CAN STOP IT .
This is good news. Now Sheryl Crow can use more than one square of toilet paper when she goes number 2.
Not for tp….
They should all be locked up like Copernicus so that the Church of Global Warming doesn’t have to listen to their heresies (inconvenient data).
This is why they changed it to climate change… But they have also been bantering around that 14 was the warmest year on record also…. don’t see how thats possible with this data.
And my climate changes every single day.
Today – Raining and 70 degrees.
Yesterday – Partly cloudy and 84 degrees
2 Days ago – Partly cloudy and 80 degrees.
3 Days ago – Sunny and 84
The sky is falling!!!!
To confuse weather with climate indicates your complete inability to apply critical thinking to your environment.
Don’t look for this tidbit of reality in the mainstream press anytime soon
TIDBITS ARE OUT .
TRUTH IS MEASURED IN “SMIDGENS” THESE DAYS .
The Word of God says satan comes to steal.kiII and destroy and so does his son gay 0bama..
BOOK OF DANIEL
The King Who Exalts Himself
36 “The king will do as he pleases. He will exalt and magnify himself above every god and will say unheard-of things against the God of gods. He will be successful until the time of wrath is completed, for what has been determined must take place. 37 He will show no regard for the gods of his ancestors or for the one desired by women, nor will he regard any god, but will exalt himself above them all. 38 Instead of them, he will honor a god of fortresses; a god unknown to his ancestors he will honor with gold and silver, with precious stones and costly gifts. 39 He will attack the mightiest fortresses with the help of a foreign god and will greatly honor those who acknowledge him. He will make them rulers over many people and will distribute the land at a price.[d]
40 “At the time of the end the king of the South will engage him in battle, and the king of the North will storm out against him with chariots and cavalry and a great fleet of ships. He will invade many countries and sweep through them like a flood. 41 He will also invade the Beautiful Land. Many countries will fall, but Edom, Moab and the leaders of Ammon will be delivered from his hand. 42 He will extend his power over many countries; Egypt will not escape. 43 He will gain control of the treasures of gold and silver and all the riches of Egypt, with the Libyans and Cushites[e] in submission. 44 But reports from the east and the north will alarm him, and he will set out in a great rage to destroy and annihilate many. 45 He will pitch his royal tents between the seas at[f] the beautiful holy mountain. Yet he will come to his end, and no one will help him.
2 Thessalonians 2:8
And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming…………
… thus the non sequiturs appear out of thin air.
It is so cold today…Where the F is that global warming?
All the smarty pants global warming nuts will tell you this is the “polar vortex” in action.
It’s only a matter of time before they find a way to collect $$ to combat polar vorteces.
Isn’t Hillary beautiful? Just look at the picture!
I’m waiting for the “scientists” to start rationalizing this inconvenient data.
One started it a few years ago when there were a few reports of possible global cooling. He said, yea maybe, but if we go into a mini ice age we won’t go as deep and when we eventually come out of it the heat will return with such force we’ll all be toast. They’ll move the prediction however far into the future it requires. They are not going allow anything to cause doubt of their dire warnings cuz they’ll change their predictions – and they have a lot of ’em, many contradicting.
I actually expect the warming trend to continue. The earth has been warming since the last glacial period, and may continue to do so for another 50,000 years. But since no one really knows what causes glacial cycles, that’s only a guess. To blame climate cycles on the activities of mankind is premature, at best.
Seems like we may be due for a mini-ice age sooner rather than later. Aren’t they on a 10-11,000 yr cycle & the current cycle has been going for about that time?
But thy Lord God Obama and Al “Jesus” Gore told us that we’re melting and will be gone in a few years if we don’t spend trillions of dollars to cool the planet. Are you trying to tell me that they are lying?
Does anyone seriously believe that the portrayal of the devil in that Jesus mini-series just COINCIDENTALLY looked like Obama? The producers SWEAR they did not do it on purpose. I believe them. Them SOMEBODY was sending us a message. Don’t you think?
Apparently there is no lack of anti-science skewed data for the ignorant to consume.
LMFAO!! and I thought that the sky was falling!! NOT!
“My oh my but what a dust storm I create,” said the fly on the wagon….
Tar and feather those that made money off the lies.
Gruber
Did they fire their photoshop crew? By now the usually have pictures of the ice missing and the world ending
The dirty secret is that “climate change” is about world control and one world socialist government, the Democrats ultimate goal. They just need more mindless idiot voters they can buy off to keep them in Power.
Why won’t 60 Minutes report this?
Global (yawn…zzzzzz) Warming.
See I told you Global Warming is real.
Crisis!! The data doesn’t fit the narrative!!
Just ignore that data it. Or maybe it is because of the poor economy, fewer cars park next to the weather sensors and they don’t get as warm
I did a like to share this on facebook but it didn’t work. Facebook blocking it?
Well since Al Gore INVENTED the internet, probably yes.
I love it when Greenies get bitten on the patootie! =0)
If our planet freezes again, we are all dead for sure. We better hope that global warming is real.
Satellite data shows that the global temperature is in a cooling trend. NASA which doesn’t use satellite data to compute their global temperature results say that 2014 is the warmest year on record. What a bunch of BS. Their computer models SUCK!!
Interesting point…NASA, the organization that brought us “space” doesn’t use satellite data. Who’d a thunk it?
0 changed their focus from space to finding scientific advances made by Islam.
What a racist planet we live on…
What is wrong with you folks? Can’t you see that Al Gore’s efforts have been successful? Global warming, er climate change or whatever they are calling it now has been eradicated! You should be dancing in the streets and sending Al and the Pope and whoever else more money…
We must stop global cooling or in ten years we will all be living in igloos and eating seal blubber.
seal blubber hater?
Ooooooohhh…..bluuuuuuuber….
Oooooooooooooohh Gluuuuuuuuuuuber?
uh…..what about that so called “global warming”??? Will man made global cooling be next crisis for the foamimg at the mouth greentards?
IF IT IS , THEN THEY HAVE COME FULL CIRCLE .
To the global warming crowd….you have a better chance at setting the earth straight on its axis than you do controlling the climate.
I remember Global Cooling back in the 1970’s. There was undeniable scientific proof that we’d be in the middle of a nuclear winter by 2000. Uh oh. Then the Ozone Hole would cook us, Acid Rain would melt us and the Rain Forest would be gone. Then Global Warming (aka Anthropomorphic causation, or something) that morphed into Climate Change. Gee, the climate is changing. Thanks. Climate change is like global sun rise. Shame on us for even listening to this anymore. Liberals remain on the wrong side of everything and are slowly being exposed for frauds because science is always in favor of the truth. Truth to Liberals is like a crucifix to a vampire, or for that matter a crucifix to a Liberal (same effect).
If you actually look at this article you’ll see that the only data shown is over the last 30 years. There is no significant statistical conclusion possible for variation in the sea ice over just 30 years.
Climate change research is based on data over 10’s of thousands of years from many sources. The most significant corollary in data is the direct connection between CO2 and mean global temperature. To have gone from 300ppm to 400ppm in a half a century is a 25% increase.
It is not theory that global extinction events over thousands of years have resulted from smaller variations in global CO2 levels. It is not theory that CO2 has rose 25% in a half century. It IS theory that the same forces that destroyed species in the past will do so in the future. Personally I believe it is reasonably sound to rely on the oft stated saying “History repeats itself” to ignore this threat to civilization.
So what happens if climate science is correct? Sea level increases of several feet will force Billions of people from their coastal homes. Where will they go? What levels of toxicity will inundate the oceans as cities are flooded? Do you really want to leave this type of planet to your children and grandchildren? Don’t they deserve better?
DOES THE TEMPERATURE GO UP BECAUSE OF CO2 OR DOES THE CO2 GO UP BECAUSE OF THE TEMPERATURE ?
THEY NEVER ANSWER THAT QUESTION .
NOT THAT IT MATTERS , CO2 IS LESS THAN 0.04% OF THE ATMOSPHERE .
THIS HAS ONLY CHANGED FROM 0.03% IN 150 YEARS SO ALL THE HUBBUB IS OVER ONE PART IN 10,000 .
THEY CALL IT A 30% INCREASE AND MEASURE IN TONS TO MAKE IT EMOTIONAL & SOUND SCARY ~
BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS REALISTICALLY , IT IS A GREAT DEAL OF NOTHING .
Please note that in the last 400,000 years CO2 levels haven’t risen above 300ppm.
We are now passing 400ppm. Of course why would anyone care about unprecedented levels of greenhouse gas?
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_400k_yrs.html
Unprecedented? Are you some kind of moron? How old is the Earth? 500,000 years?
You mean it wasn’t “created” on October 26th 4004 BC according to Catholic Dogma. It was a Tuesday if I’m not mistaken.
However, we can only speak of what we have discovered. We can be willing to reanalyze given data when new information is revealed through investigative research.
JAMES USSHER WASN’T A CATHOLIC .
YOU SEEM TO BE GETTING A LOT OF THINGS WRONG HERE .
My mistake – I get all these sects confused occasionally. C of E, C of I, Catholics – it all gets a bit confusing when new churches are formed because a king wants a bit of crumpet.
AND SO IT GOES WITH GLOBAL WARMING .
Yup, Al Gore wanted to screw America so Climate Change isn’t real.
Al Gore wanted to screw poor people, so he lobbied for a carbon exchange, where carbon credits and offsets are purchased and sold. Wealthy people like Al care not for the cost of “using” the carbon since they can easily afford the fees. But the rest of us would be paying what amounts to added taxes on our energy. I assume you know nothing about economics, as most liberals don’t, so you probably don’t understand the taxes kill wealth accumulation, keeping the wealth in the hands of the few and never in the hands of the many, but take my word for it.
well as long as I have your word for it, I guess I don’t need to research anything else.
Supply side economics is the theory that all of us will do better when the wealthy “create” more jobs because they have more money. Where are those jobs that should have miraculously appeared over the last 30 years?
Demand side economics is the theory that all of us will do better when everyone has sufficient means to purchase the goods we make – Henry Ford was the epitome of Demand Side economics when he recreated the assembly line and insisted on paying his employees enough money to buy one of his cars.
In the early 1980’s when Reagan ran on Supply Side, Bush the senior referred to that theory as “voodoo economics” – Reagan’s top economic adviser David Stockman has already repudiated Supply Side economics, will you?
Converting our economy from Carbon Based energy to renewable resources will create American Jobs – why are you against that?
Did that feel good? My, you’re insecure. The religious cult of AGW is much more pathetic, any day of the week, than Catholicism or any other religion, and that includes the pederastic Islam.
I have no idea what your going on about.
Kelly, when someone makes fun of what others believe, it is because they are insecure about themselves. If you felt strongly in your conviction that Catholicism and its followers are stupid, then you’d have no need for the sarcasm. It’s interesting you go there, too, since I didn’t (500,000 years has nothing to do with 6,000 years – a date also shared by the Jewish calendar), especially considering the status of “climate science.” Not a theory has been correct, many of the original supporters are now detractors, and the entire belief rests on thinking more powerful central governance has the knowledge and the ability to stop it. There’s nothing more arrogant for atheists than to think humanity is the pinnacle of being. And that’s what you have here: atheists thinking they can play “god” by altering the global climate. We have a better shot at relocating the Earth.
It is not “making fun” of anyone’s beliefs to use religious dogma in a discussion. If you find the dogma offensive, find another religion.
Yes, I thought you had poor reading comprehension.
Science pointing out that we’ve entered a dangerous zone of greenhouse gas levels is not trying to change the world. It is trying to inform the world of the consequences of inaction. I pity the future, when it is dependent upon the ignorant.
But see, Kelly. That’s not what they’re doing. If they were merely “trying to inform” they wouldn’t be regulating the coal industry to extinction, capping emissions on everything from vehicles to your lawn mower, and discussing massive wealth transfers to the third world in order to pay “reparations.” You really are a fool.
Regulating Coal Industry is a political decision based on science. If you disagree with the political decision vote for the GOP.
Nationally the country prefers Obama to your version of America.
Kelly? Name calling is what you do when you have no answers. Typical lib.
LIKE I SAID , AN INCREASE OF 1 IN 10,000 .
BARELY MEASURABLE & LITERALLY NO EFFECT ON THE CLIMATE
Oh, well if you say it, then it must be true. Go back to your Fox News and listen to more truth.
Nothing funnier than someone who’s done none of the work, who just reads what others have done, telling someone else they’re being spoonfed lies. See, the difference is Fox news doesn’t make a claim one way or the other. Anyone who can still think critically and independently knows to run the other way when non-scientists are telling you “science is settled.” Did you hear? A scientist recently put forth a peer reviewed paper claiming the big bang is incorrect.
Every single claim that has been about global cooling/warming/change has been wrong! The moronic koolaid drinker is the idiot who doesn’t know that.
We have 10’s of thousands of years of climate change research ?
Yes.
What? CO2 levels have steadily increased, while the temperatures are decreasing to make more ice? Your synopsis (bad example) is not working. It would be a lot better if it was warming. A lot healthier for humans. Be sides their is nothing you can do about it anyway?
Please note that in the last 400,000 years CO2 levels haven’t risen above 300ppm.
We are now passing 400ppm. Of course why would anyone care about unprecedented levels of greenhouse gas?
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_400k_yrs.html
We all know what you are about. Reparations, anybody? But what can you do about it?
It’s not what can “you or I” do about it. It’s what are we willing to do.
Are we willing to continue as a carbon based economy subservient to the political needs of an Islamic overlord? Or are we willing to invest in renewable energy infrastructure here in the U.S. freeing us from the Middle East as well as creating jobs here in the U.S.?
Of course that would mean thinking and investing rather than calling libtards and Gore/Obama names. It’s a lot easier to go on doing the same than it is to embrace change, no matter the benefits.
Let me explain, the warming theory would be like urinating in the ocean to make it salty.
Well that clears up everything. Who cares about science now that you’ve talked about pissing? Turning climate change into a pissing contest – you win.
Catholic teaching, known technically as the Magisterium, is ordered to matters of faith and morals. Hence, when a pope affirms the intrinsic immorality of murder, abortion, contraception, or even masturbation, Catholics must accept that such acts are by their very nature contrary to the natural law of God. The popes can even teach authoritatively that Catholics are bound to be good stewards of the planet and are not allowed morally to engage in economic practices that impede the honest efforts of other entrepreneurs. But when a pope tells Catholics that the planet is warming or that the planet is harmed by production of carbon dioxide, he is teaching outside the realm of faith and morals, which alone are the legitimate province of the Magisterium. Catholics must listen respectfully, but are not bound by such scientific opinions.
Moreover, the Magisterium lays down general principles, but allows that Catholics must make prudential judgments about how those principles are to be implemented. That means that while a Catholic may never commit murder, he may licitly conclude that being a good steward of the planet does not necessarily entail committing economic suicide by a cap and trade policy that is based on erroneous scientific claims.
“The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility
in virtue of his office, when, as Supreme Pastor and teacher of all the
faithful–who confirms his brethren in the faith–he proclaims by a
definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals….The
infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of
bishops when, together with Peter’s successor, ‘they exercise the
supreme Magisterium,’ above all in an Ecumenical Council. When the
Church through its supreme Magistrium proposes a doctrine ‘for belief as
being divinely revealed,’ and as the teaching of Christ, the
definitions ‘must be adhered to with the obedience of faith.’ This
infallibility extends as far as the doposit of divine revelation
itself.” Catechism of the Catholic Church, #891, 1994 edition.
At a recent United Nations conference devoted to climate change, the
Holy See’s representative said that “the critical problem of global
warming is inextricably bound to the search for authentic human
development.”
http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=23600
So please enlighten me. Is the Pope fallible and wrong? Or is the Pope capable of examining the facts before him and God and does his opinion have the Weight of the Throne of God?
You must distinguish between matters of faith and morals — and scientific opinions. The definition of infallibility pertains to matters of faith and morals solely. If the pope teaches on matters pertaining to faith and morals, even if such teaching is not “ex cathedra,” Catholics are still bound to give a religious assent of soul to such teaching. (Be cautious. Not every teaching rises even to this level.) But if his teaching pertains to some prudential matter about how much coal should be allowed to be produced in order to achieve good care of the planet, his scientific judgment, while deserving careful analysis and due respect, is not binding on individual Catholics.
The Church usually speaks only at the level of general principles, and rarely addresses, say, the morality of a particular conflict. In matters of prudential politics and economics, while Catholics must in good conscience attempt to apply those general principles, they must follow their own consciences about what are the most prudential ways to fulfill the general principles. This does not allow Catholics the “luxury” of following their own consciences, say, to use contraception or abortion, since such acts always violate the general principles of the natural law and can never be justified by “individual circumstances.”
So just like the bible, people of faith are free to use the word of God as a cafeteria and only eat that which they choose.
You see, they haven’t proven a direct connection between CO2 levels and global temperature, that’s your problem. They attempt to show a correlation frankengraphs and manipulated data. The problem is, the climate science has been wrong every single time. For decades now. It was global cooling first. YOu should educate yourself, you look idiotic. What happens if we’re wrong? Well, I’m certainly not ploanning on transferring all my wealth to the elites so they can attempt mad scientist experiments like spraying metals in the atmosphere to cool us down. The other problem with your endgame is that, the real polluters China and India don’t care! While we’re reducing out pollution incredibly, the actual polluters continue to pollute! Now, why on Earth would we bankrupt ourselves in order to placate emotions? For if the real polluters won’t stop, then there’s no point other than to do what you did, which is to claim moral superiority while spouting absolute nonsense and saying it’s fact.
Yo man, let’s get out of here
Word to your mother
Ice ice baby
Too cold
Ice ice baby
Too cold too cold
vanilla ice
The sea ice is expanding because it is storing all the excess heat.
George Bush caused this. Too much warming.
Even if you accept the premise that the earth is warming, why is it assumed that a warmer earth is bad? In fact, the only warmer period for which there is written historical evidence shows that it was a time of abundance.
You forget these are the same people who think the planet suffers from human overpopulation and desire to drastically reduce fertility on a global scale. Look no further than the “vaccination” campaigns across the entirety of the African continent. So, to them, abundance is a bad thing because it supports the “overpopulation” we have now.
warmer air increases food production. read the studies on it. its astonishing.
If Gore is worried about warm air then he should shut his pie hole as that hot air is ruining our planet.
these are the same people who says cows flatulence hurts the earth, then I think humans flatulence also is the same- so I guess we need to cork all our butts?
Prediction from 2007 – by 2014 the Arctic ice would be gone, Al Gore…… how’s that crow taste Al?……. but with all the extra millions you made scamming carbon credits you can at least have some Dom and a new G5 with that bird.
Al got stinking rich, what does he care. Oh well, you like your Ice, you can keep your ice.
He also bought a house on the beach after predicting catastrophic sea level rise. Maybe it was part of the negotiations & he got a better price.
But it’s warm ice.
Did we say it was warming? No, you misunderstood us. We clearly stated climate CHANGE. Either way, just pay the carbon gods a tithe for your carbon crimes.
Exactly. Why can’t people comprehend a simple word like CHANGE?? Global Warming is so…YESTERDAY.
Look we don’t know which direction the thermometer is going but we know there’s a catastrophic problem on the horizon and we know we are causing it. Just pay into this fund and jump through these rugulatory hurdles and we’ll take care of everything.
Yes massa, you is rite. Who does I makes da check out to?
Cash will do.
Oh, yes massa. Thank you massa. Thank you!
Sometimes “extreme weather” is better because we do have that from time to time and a lot of people don’t remember the last time it occurred.
I’m not sure what the hell this means, but I’m pretty sure it’s gonna cost a butt load of money to fix. Just sign a check and send it to the DNC. They’ll fill it in.
Why not send it directly to Ready for Hillary headquarters. She is a firm believer in Global W…er..I mean Climate Change.
Unbiased science at http://agwunveiled.blogspot.com derives a physics-based equation which calculates results
consistent with all measured average global temperatures.
1. A reference there provides historical evidence that CO2 change does not cause climate
change.
2. The two factors that do correlate with climate change are identified. The correlation is 95% with average global temperatures since before 1900; including the current plateau. The analysis also predicts the ongoing down trend of average global temperature.
3. An explanation of why any credible CO2 change does not cause significant climate change.
Been saying for years warming is a hoax perpetrated by political pundits looking for a vehicle to place there policies into and push them through. Also been saying weather patterns are cyclical meaning they will fluctuate like this. We have always been likely to go through warming and cooling spells, that could possibly last decades. The problem is humans are short lived and therefore short sighted and only notice what is running in there short lifetime upon the earth, missing the much bigger picture. Smart people know this and use it to dupe the naive people. Who remembers the story of Chicken LIttle, the analogy fits the global warming Nazis.
With all that additional ice, the global warming lunatic Marxists, and the UN fascists will finally be able to use their hockey stick.
Pope says it is wrong to equate Islam with violence
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/30/us-pope-turkey-mideast-idUSKCN0JE0AD20141130
Global warming is a tax scam. PERIOD You dammmn fools. Why do you think Al Gore and Goldman Sachs have set up carbon credits. Al plans to get stinky rich off the “stupidity” of the democrat, just as they get elected. YOU FOOLS and TOOLS !!! Wake up and stop being used.
Did Gruber also get involved with the cap and trade proposal? Albert
They used the same Algortithim that produced Obamacare. Yes, both are bankrupt but at least Jonathan can be consistent with his statements.
Al Gorski and his lackey’s gonna be mad at this !!!!!!!!!!
Now they will want to TAX us for global cooling to save off the next man made ice age. YOU FOOLS
Will I save $2500 a year like I do on my Obamacare?
Real Rocket Scientist James Hanson in 1971 claimed we were facing a new ice age in 50 to 60 years. In December 1988 he scared the foolish again into believing it was global warming. This rocket scientist was wrong before he was wrong (again!).
So, like Kerry, he voted FOR Global Warming before he voted against it?
No, he voted against global warming before he voted for it. Or maybe he voted for an ice age before he voted against it. Or maybe h…….. Who knows? Maybe he is just bewildered or just plain baffled. All I know is George Soros has funded part of his most recent unbiased, non politicized, open minded research.
Now I’m totally confused 🙁
Burn liberals to heat up the planet before we all freeze to death!
Thanks but there is enough pollution from the Chinese without that.
Algore must be turning over in his…wait for it… MASSAGE TABLE!
Hey, the poor guy had clogged CHAKRAS!
Tanning table? Albert
Time to panic. Another ice age is coming like in 1976. Oh wait, is this a natural cycle in nature? Nahhh. Time to make money in politics.
http://www.wmconnolley.org.uk/sci/iceage/nat-geog-1976-11.html
Never let a good crisis go to waste AND never let a good natural cycle look like a bogus man-made crisis.
The lack of sea ice was supposed to hamper the polar bear’s ability to hunt seals. Now we will have a seal shortage due to the extra ice being so good for hunting. “Save the seals!” will be their next war cry. And somehow they will tie that into global warming.
Yeah, that makes perfect liberal sense. In other words, it’s insane.
There must be a correlation between fracking and global cooling. To the lab!
Well everybody knows and science backs it up, that ice expands when it gets warm.
The Pope recognized this as such a great money making scam, that he joined in on it. Shrewd, them catholics.
“Farda. Can you help an old altar boy? I’m a catlick.”
I used to be a “catlick” until I was 12. Changed to Episcopalian because we don’t get down on ourselves for much of anything, especially a cool drink or 3 on a warm day.
This has been discussed in the mainstream media, BTW: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/09/why-is-antarctic-sea-ice-at-record-levels-despite-global-warming
Dictator Obama’s energy policies already showing positive results? ! LOL!
Im sure they will claim it as progress soon.
OBAMA’S FIRST ENERGY SECRETARY WANTED GAS TO GO TO $8.00 /GALLON .
So… we have to change our argument to fit the data? again?? God I hate the perpetuation of a falsehood, it’s to much work.
With TRILLIONS of dollars at stake, they will change it as many times as necessary.
“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it” Adolph Hitler
Hey, it ALMOST worked.
Matthew 19. 21 Jesus told him, “If you want to be perfect, go and sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
Pope. If you want to be perfect, go and give me all your possessions, and I’ll give the money to the Vatican Bank and I will have treasure in commercial real estate. Then come, and follow me.
Most of the money is in the Bank.
The climate alarmists now have a leader for their new religion.
Sea ice record. Must be Climate Change based …..Warming? Uh, yeah, that makes sense….
To err is human, to LIE is liberal.
It is called weather locally, climate globally. Man does not cause wild variations, but nature does.
It’s called weather daily and climate seasonally, I’d say. Climate is the trend in weather.
Climate and weather are synonyms, moron…..
https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GFRE_enUS327US327&q=climate+definition
LOL. Okay then, bucko. Publik skool?
These are all lies because I want them to be.
The governments are broke and they need more of your money. So invent a NEW tax scam. WAKE UP. The gov’t can’t even balance their own budget, somehow they will magically fix the planet if you send them more $ MORONS
Time for a new charity. Coats and booties for those poor polar bears.
The earth is not round its pear shaped. It does not rotate on its axis it wobbles. As we rotate around the sun who knows how accurate our path is, some years we may go hundreds othousands of miles outside/inside of where we were last year. Climate is not predictable. The biggest single influence on our planet is the sun not man. Global warming is a scam. Check out the mini ice age of the 16th century when man could not have influenced the weather, just like now
Some scientists believe the earth is warming, and maybe it is. Other scientists believe that other planets in our solar system such as Mars and Pluto are also warming, and maybe they are. Could it be there are influences beyond the sphere of influence of the planets, such as the sun that are causing the planets to warm? It would be wise to revamp Mankind’s primitive global warming models to more accurately model these variables. It should be obvious that it is useless to spend billions if not trillions of dollars on a global warming problem that may be beyond the control of Mankind. Albert
Right on Dr.
We are not going to change any temperatures with a carbon tax, except of course the heat under our collars.
Those pictures are really pretty!
Looks like sometimes there’s llots of ice, and sometimes there isn’t. Hmmm. Natural fluctuations or EVIL KOCH BROTHERS AND THEIR EARTH WARMING MACHINE!!!!!
Remember the old song ‘Istanbul’ by the Four Lads?
Here’s an update inspired by the topic du jour.
Climate Change was Global Warming
Now it’s Climate Change not Global Warming
Been a long time now
Old Global Warming still gives Al Gore delight
On a moonlight night
Take me back to Global Warming
No you can’t go back to Global Warming
Now it’s Climate Change not Global Warming
Why did Global Warming get the works?
That’s nobody’s business but the jerks.
So a song about a real thing changing is your basis for a song about… real things changing?
Global Warming was too easily used as a talking point to the ignorant when it snowed. Oooh it’s snowing so Global Warming isn’t real. Climate Change incorporates the observable data that overall global warming trends don’t result in localized warming for every community.
The idea that there will be “winners and losers” in global climate change ignores the reality that a mass extinction event has been observed every time climate has changed the way current models predict.
‘Climate change’ was chosen alternate to ‘Global warming’ because nearly every indicator of ‘Warming’ has shown itself to be false and embarrassing.
‘Climate change’ (antonymious to ‘Static Climate’) while self evident is non sequitur to claims of man made problems. The Global warming jerks needed a less foolish handle and the cool aid drinkers bought into it.
liberalism says global warming the reason for record ice. This from obama and friends
The earth has the flu. So sometimes it has a fever, and sometimes it has the chills.
this global warming BS is 110% BS.
first of all – has no one ever looked at core samples or mtns? areas of this planet were covered in glaciers and some were lakes then became desserts! The planet is on an axis and it changes. there have been studies on this from national geographic showing the axis and the adjustments and some deserts were once oceans. Ever look at a rock imbedded with a ocean mammal found in the dessert? even our rocks show that desserts were once oceans!
A Gore’s (carbon credit) is just bunk. Its the guilt trip imposed on each person to “pay” a penalty. He probably thought this up when sitting at the country club sipping fine Scotch trying to figure out how to make the masses guilt trip and he can get rich! But where does this penalty $$ go? the $ goes into the pockets of the people who invented the “carbon credit rule”- convenient don’t you think? These same people would not help an old lady cross the street or feed the hungry, they are only interested in getting richer and richer and greed is a demon when you forget about humans. they also don’t follow their own rules, rules are for peasants. in fact Pelosi called elderly “astro turf” because they got in her way! disrespectful hag!
there is a difference between making money and helping people and making money and greedy for more and helping no one and using your power for evil and not good.
and how does a carbon credit actual stop the axis of the planet? it does not
how does the carbon credit stop china from spewing so much toxic waste in air and water? it does not
there have been studies that if the entire planet went dark for years, not one energy ever used, it still would not correct 1 weeks of Chinas spewing waste! so don’t you think China should stop spewing chemical waste? they cant even see through their air! can you imagine what the water is like? I read their soil and water is so toxic it cant grow anything- you think those poisons wont migrate to other continents? think again.
Don’t you think all the libs would attack china for its toxic chemical use since it spews to other continents?
you see, its all about money/power/greed, if it was not then Gores and the others would allow actual scientist to debate them and Gore would not be flying his jet here and there polluting the nation.
The elitists (in power) have different rules. its basically socialism- these same people attack capitalism but they are worse than capitalism-
socialism has never worked, but the people that can taste the power high- never figure that out.
also socialism has plenty of sociopaths in power, hmmmm that word is so similar.
so live your life and don’t worry about it. because dinosaurs became extinct not from you driving your SUV but from a asteroid or some other major event, so the planet is going to do as it wishes and we don’t have any control.
However, you can live smartly- but until China and other nations make changes this is not going to make it better worldwide. Also all those nukes that the middle east is building cant be good for the world (and we know they are testing and will use them!)- but no left lib every talks about that! I bet that will kill more than a few owls and spotted squirrels.
How is this possible?! Where’s ManBearPig, I demand answers?!
I get so sick of hearing the climate changers call everyone else a denier while telling us the science is settled. When story after story has been coming out for quite a few years now that blows their claims away. Look, if there really is man made climate change happening I would be interested to know it. But YOU have to make the case. I don’t have to make the case that it’s not. The science is not settled and you are the deniers. Nothing you have claimed has been proven right.
Alright alright…what’s the question?
north korea hacked sony..no a disgruntles employee did,,,the earth is warming…no its cooling…you can keep your medicine man…you cant keep your medicine man..eggs are bad for you…eggs are good for you. everything is effed up. thank u
Because of Bush
yup..lol
Al?
Bush’s Fault.
lets believe an article we read…or not…based on our political beliefs. thanks you
Once again another of the left’s AGW assertion bites the dusk.
Bah this is just BS… it’s obviously due to Global Warming, errr I mean Climate Change, umm wait, Climate Disruption… (/sarc)
Wait a second. Last year was 2013 and the earth was ice-free, or it was supposed to be. Or something. IGNORE ALGORE
im trying to quit buing Costco smoked salmon because of fukishima radiation. im too lazy to go catch my own een tho I live in prime territory and its cheaper. thank u
I don’t feel the need to add “”sarc” to my posts. why? because I don’t give a rats what yall think about my posts…but I know you read them. I think people who add the word “sarc” to their comments have mental issues and neurosis. thank u
Couple of things: if you assert that your settled science shows the world is warming, please just stick with that. If it ends up as debatable or disproven, own it and move on. Please don’t rename it as Climate Change and hope that everyone forgets what was said in the first place. Stunts like this reduce credibility to almost zero.
My second point is that Global Warmers need to present a better solution than a global tax on industrialized nations, especially when their Dear Leader negotiates a deal with China (the WORST offender for carbon output) that exempts them for 20 years from even beginning to think about curbing carbon emissions.
Even the Communist Chinese regularly mug Obama, closely followed by the Russians, Cubans and North Koreans (and soon the Iranians).
What has happened to our once great nation?
did u try a google search for your moronic question? try doing something for yourself…just once. you are the problem!
You were hoping for integrity to appear, but sadly there is none to be found in Washington D.C.
You allowed your friends & relatives & neighbors to Vote Dem. If you didn’t Vote Republican, your vote help the Dems win.
Well stated, thank you.
To your question “What has happened to our once great nation?”
Answer: Something very close to Hey Hey Ho Ho narcissism.
The heat hiding in the oceans is making more ice, which is proof that global warming is real!
This news may not be consistent with “global warming”, but thankfully it’s fully consistent with “climate change.”
l3ets reply and ask each other what our points are…when we know but are just stupiddd and spphmoronic
SPELLING/GRAMMAR/CAPLOX NAUGHTZEES?
Are you retired from a cushy job?
We need to build more icebreakers to cut through that pesky global warming.
Did you know that climate and weather are synonyms? Yep, Climate and Weather mean the same thing…..Democrats are so stupid they have just now figured out that THE WEATHER CHANGES.,….
https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GFRE_enUS327US327&q=climate+definition
Yesterday the t@rds at CNN threw in a comment “If you don’t believe in global warming, just ask the managers who take care of removing your snow.” What kind of stupid comment is that. They were talking about snow removal and then throw in their own views. The only reason I watch is because my wife likes how they aren’t so heavy. Stupid yes.
Will someone please delete this information as it will prevent the further use of Global Climate Change as a reason for more political agenda use, regulation & taxes.
Funny how EVERY computer model was wrong but the bitter clingers, the flat eathers the champainge environements, still cling to their beliefs.
Remember the President, Leo DiCarprio, & Al Gore all said the science is closed. Like they would know!
THANKS BUSH! YOU CLOWN!
WHY don’t Demcowards want THE WEATHER to CHANGE? Don’t you idiots know how disasterous it would be if the weather stayed the same all of the time? You Democrat idiots do know that climate and weather are synonyms, right?
Democrats should run their lies by a panel of people smarter than them…..like 1st graders!!!!
https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GFRE_enUS327US327&q=climate+definition
BUSH AND BENGHAZI? DA SHRILL? MONICA? WOMENS LIB?
THANKS BLACKS!
Democrats are so stupid that they don’t even know what the word GLOBAL means…..
HOW are record cold temps possible anywhere on earth IF it is getting warmer ALL OVER THE ENTIRE GLOBE?
Democrats are too cowardly to even attempt an answer……
THEY HAVE NO GUTS EXCEPT THE GUTS OF DA UNBORNS THEY KILL!
THANKS ILLEGLES, OBAMMA AND HOLDER!
Has Gore been planning a global warming conference there recently?
GOOGLE IT LOSER
Shut yer suhk zipperhead. Get an education and serve your nation for once.
I DID FUREEK FOR 35 YEARS, NOW IM 58 AND RETIRED EFF OFF LOSER
I did. Yep. looks like a quick google search is showing record lows everywhere too. thanks for the tip!
ITS WUT I DO! HELP PEOPLE HELP THEMSELVES!
And this past year Arizona had record high temperatures most of the year for the first time in decades. I don’t care what the deniers say, I’m hot. Would somebody please forward this data along to the Pope?
You live in an interglacial dipshiit. All interglacials end.
Is it possible that last year, due to the drought in the southwestern United States, there were fewer clouds to shield Arizona from the sun? Albert
There was no drought in Arizona, but your fewer clouds idea likely had an effect in California.
-2° where I’m at. Just not feeling the warming for some reason.
10 HERE, IM GOING TO DA MALL TO STALK BARELY 18 HOTT CHIX AND LOOK AT THERE PERT NIPPPZ
That wacky warming. Just don’t know if it’s going to make ice. Must be tough in this climate trying to sell global warming when your research boat got stuck in the Antarctic Ice last year…..
It is pretty interesting Most sea ice and the Northern Hemisphere show extent approaching records as well. Must be from all the heat. 2014 is after all the hottest year ever.
Maybe folks will wake up and now realize the major weather services have been really goosing the numbers.
WHY do Democowards say the “science is settled”, but then come up with 52 NEW reasons in the last year why the earth is getting colder as CO2 levels rise?
Democrats are so stupid that they don’t even know what the word “settled” means….
Lots of posting here making fun of the Catholic Church being anti-science and clinging to its tenets. While it did take 350 years to admit Galileo was correct…lets see how many centuries it will take the Climate Change hoaxers to admit their beliefs are wrong. Climate Change believers cling to their (pseudo) religion just as dearly as they argue that the Church does.They argue heresy anytime someone wants to debate their beliefs, they excommunicate any Scientist who disproves their little hoax and castigate they “unbelieving masses”.
If computer modelling really worked, every investment house on Wall Street would bringing in a 100% ROI, every one at the race track would be a winner and crime would be eliminated, as we could predict who would be committing a crime and when and where it would happen, before it happens.
Actually, you are wrong about Galleo. They admitted he was correct right away, but just didn’t want him to widely publish his work in a book written in Italian. They said he should write it in Latin and keep it among the scientific folk. The church has actually been involved in lots of good scince, from comissiong the work that overturned Aristotle’s view of the Universe, to proving Halley’s comment theory, by fixing his mistakes (the comet came late, a bishop proved why) the church was also involved in genetics research and a priest even discover how to make carbonated water.
Actually, they didn’t admit he was correct. They just didn’t argue with it. Instead, they struggled between execution and jail. He was spared death by recanting his findings.
You have a point. Today’s church is far more accepting of science than in the past, except for Climate Change. In my opinion (and I do not wish to denigrate the Church) the Church accepts Climate Change more for the supposed sociological impact than as a scientific fact. In this respect the Church will always have the internal hearts vs. minds dilemma.
Okay, so they lie for the greater good? Hmmmmmmm…seem to remember a commandment about that.
I am not condoning the decision to lie for the “greater good”, just saying that is perhaps what the Church sees as its only option, such is the focus of organized religion. Now for governments to lie for the greater good, that is dangerous and no longer only the bastion for dictators (we see liberals and democrats do this daily). And for science to lie for the greater good (as the Climate Change hoaxers do) relegates us back to Age of Darkness an thus can no longer be termed “science”.
Back to the modelling. That is what kills me. Doing research for a living, I can’t help but role my eyes when I hear people talk about modelling as facts. I can create a model for you that shows that pigs can actually fly when the spin their tails fast enough. It doesn’t mean that it will happen. The model is very dependent upon the data and the assumptions. Doing research in GA Tech’s Earth and Atmospheric Science’s school in the early 90s, we (my professor) skewed data all of the time to secure funding for the next year. Being young, impressionable and without any real say, I just went along with it. That was a whole lifetime ago but it has definitely skewed my thoughts about all of this climate stuff.
Agreed. Garbage in garbage out. Albert
If Democrats were not allowed to lie or call names they would be silent.
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! HAHAHAHA
Stop blaming others becuase you licked your own feces from another man’s marriage tackle and got AIDS
NO. YOU DO THAT! HAHAHAHA IM WINNING!
THANKS RINOS AND BOEHNER AND THE MILITARY WHO CANT WIN A WAR AGAINST THE SANAL WEARERS WHO DRIVE OLD TOYOTAS AND CHUCK ROCKS HAHAHAHAHA
You are an idiot.
NO! U R ! THERE I TOLD U…JUS LIKE U TOLD ME! HAHAHAHA GMTA!
What kind of braindead moron blames Republicans because the Homosexual Muslim Obowelmovement surrenders to the Taliban in Afghanistan?
FREEEKZ LIKE U! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
He’s a self admitted idiot. Ignore him.
If you live long enough, you can sit back and either laugh or cry at all the various entities trying to make money from scaring the public. New agencies, research, charities, government, drug companies, religions, etc. They all want your money and the easiest way to get it is to scare you! If you read some dire news, follow it to its source and you’ll find someone profiting and gaining power from it. So predictable.
NO THANKS, BLISSFUL APATHY WORKS FOR ME. ENJOY YOUR SELF INFLICTED HELL
Sadly you are right Lorinda, but remember if there wasn’t any money in it, they would stop. P.T. Barnum was correct…”there is a sucker born every minute” and the Climate Change hoaxers have made billions across the globe.+
Every Global Warming enthusiast continues to do their very best to promote the concept and increase the temperatures. This is the reason that all of the Global Warming World Conference for the Benevolent Earth and Society as a Whole Association meets in Hawaii or some such place. Nothing like fueling up a few dozen 747’s for a cruise to combat Global Warming. Call me when they bury their SUV’s and start living in a tent and I’ll consider giving their argument more attention
“The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H. L. Mencken
Truth is timeless.
Climate (THE WEATHER) has always changed…..Democrats are so stupid they don’t even know that the definition of climate is THE WEATHER……Climate and weather are synonyms….apparently, Democrats are too stupid to know what a synonym is too…..
https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GFRE_enUS327US327&q=climate+definition
NO 1 CLICKIN DAT SHEET MORON!
Were you shaken as a baby?
NO! BUT U WERE! HAHAHA THERE I TOLD U JUS LIKE YOU TOLD ME! HAHAHAHA GMTA!
I’ll take that as a yes.
IM SCHOOLIN YOU HAHAHAHAHAHA AND WINNING
Yes, I’m learning so much. Thanks.
But Al Gore promised that the polar cap would be melted by now.
Oh well, at least I still have the health plan that I like . . . wait, what?
Liberalism is either mental disorder or a religion. Either way, it doesn’t make sense.
follow the money!
Climate = The weather conditions
Weather = The climatic conditions
Only complete morons don’t realize that weather and climate mean the same thing….don’t you Democowards even know what a synonym is?
The problem with attempting debate with Democrats is that 99% of them are illiterate buffoons who are appallingly ignorant of the definitions of common words.
But but but……
Leftists must HATE reading stuff like this.
Climate Change theory. It’s very true that science cannot predict exactly what the future holds based on observable data. That is why it is theory. We know ice ages have come and gone in the past without the influence of mankind. We also know that there is a long cycle of warming and cooling that is observable. It is believed that short term variations in the long term cycles have occurred, however why these variations have occurred is subject to debate within the climate science community. One theory is based on the global oceanic conveyer. It is believed that an inundation of fresh water when the previous glaciers retreated in the great lakes area resulting in a diversion of fresh water through the St. Lawrence seaway changed the salinity of the North Atlantic enough to temporarily shut down the oceanic conveyer resulting in a cooling period in the middle of a warming period. Cause and effect.
One current theory regarding climate change is that a sufficient melting of the Arctic Ice sheet will once again shut down the global conveyor. So yes it is very possible that a global warming trend can result in another ice age.
The following link is regarding the global oceanic conveyor, not about climate change.
http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/kits/currents/06conveyor2.html
It’s the Sun, stupid.
Nobody panic! Oil is reaching record lows, china is expanding it’s infrastructure. Should be a veritable fleet of new v8 powered cars and trucks on the road very soon. Everyone’s gotta do their part to prevent a global freezing catastrophe! I plan to do my part to help by slow roasting a 10# prime rib on the grill tomorrow! and running my kerosene heater on my deck to keep it and my friends warm. There’s also 3 cords of wood stacked up for the bonfire later for New years!
My dryer is running now empty just to help.
IM GITTIN MORONZ TO TAP OUT LEFT AND RIGHT! HAHAHA I AM KING OF ALL TROLLZ!
Your parents must be so proud.