For the AGW Faithers

[Midnight Marauder]

You have some eugenicist proclivities you're not telling us about?

You have hit on the true, thus far hidden motive for the "green" movement. For if they are correct that CO2 warms the earth, and if they reach their stated goal of greatly reducing CO2 levels in the atmosphere, we will not have a green planet at all. We will have a brown, cold, dead one that only the very few elite humans can survive on.

The real inconvenient truth of the matter is, CO2 is vital for ALL life on the planet. Eugenicists definitely believe mankind is an aberration here, and is vastly overpopulating the planet. What better way to correct this than to ban DDT so malaria continues wiping out whole populations, and to get CO2 levels down below 200 ppm so plant life (food and oxygen) is greatly reduced, leading to mass starvation and death.

They know exactly what they're doing, and it is a long-term plan that is only now starting to bear results after decades.

Sigh...I genuinely hate to see smart people buy into such horseshit. I expect it from Dud who thinks he's God's Gift to the Universe anyway, but not from you.

Show us all the horseshittiness of it.

You can't. But thanks for playing anyway.

 

[Oddball]

Sigh...I genuinely hate to see smart people buy into such horseshit. I expect it from Dud who thinks he's God's Gift to the Universe anyway, but not from you.

So much for "keeping it honest"

 

[MaggieMae]

Because under these conditions, it is no longer science and cannot rationally be called science.

Science begins with "we do not know" not with, "we DO know, now let's try to sort of prove it."

Right. One may even say that the soundest work is work done in an attempt to disprove an idea. If the falsifiability of the question is not demonstrated, there is nothing scientific about the question or the suspected answer.

Like everything else, the far-left believes science is some massive grey area, not an area of absolutes. They have NO black or white on anything, only one towering, titanic grey area. Therefore "science" is what they say it is, at any given time, and like everything else -- they have no real respect for it and therefore believe they can play fast and loose with it.

Such crap. Working for North American Rockwell during the Apollo Project, I seem to recall a few scientists who claimed Apollo 11 would crash and burn; that it never stood a chance of reaching the moon; even if it did, it would disintigrate on return to earth's atmosphere. But it didn't. Scientists argue with each other all the time, and NOBODY with an ounce of intelligence, including those evil "libs" ever suggested that science per se is a "gray area."

That said, I'm sick of this. Just as religion shouldn't mix with politics, neither should science. Your comments are politically motivated, period.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Sigh...I genuinely hate to see smart people buy into such horseshit. I expect it from Dud who thinks he's God's Gift to the Universe anyway, but not from you.

So much for "keeping it honest"

In her defense, it actually says "TRYING to keep it honest."

Which is just an outright lie. She's always trying just the opposite.

/defense.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Right. One may even say that the soundest work is work done in an attempt to disprove an idea. If the falsifiability of the question is not demonstrated, there is nothing scientific about the question or the suspected answer.

Like everything else, the far-left believes science is some massive grey area, not an area of absolutes. They have NO black or white on anything, only one towering, titanic grey area. Therefore "science" is what they say it is, at any given time, and like everything else -- they have no real respect for it and therefore believe they can play fast and loose with it.

Such crap. Working for North American Rockwell during the Apollo Project, I seem to recall a few scientists who claimed Apollo 11 would crash and burn; that it never stood a chance of reaching the moon; even if it did, it would disintigrate on return to earth's atmosphere. But it didn't. Scientists argue with each other all the time, and NOBODY with an ounce of intelligence, including those evil "libs" ever suggested that science per se is a "gray area."

You idiot.

First of all, show us where I ever said "Libs" are the far-left.

Secondly, show me where I ever said scientists never argue or disagree.

Your mindless deflections and moving of the goalposts constantly show your lack of honesty and integrity.

That said, I'm sick of this. Just as religion shouldn't mix with politics, neither should science. Your comments are politically motivated, period.

And this is why you ignored my questions about this to you from earlier in this thread?

I have no political motivation here, unless seeking the truth is now a political motivation.

 

[Oddball]

Such crap. Working for North American Rockwell during the Apollo Project, I seem to recall a few scientists who claimed Apollo 11 would crash and burn; that it never stood a chance of reaching the moon; even if it did, it would disintigrate on return to earth's atmosphere. But it didn't. Scientists argue with each other all the time, and NOBODY with an ounce of intelligence, including those evil "libs" ever suggested that science per se is a "gray area."

That said, I'm sick of this. Just as religion shouldn't mix with politics, neither should science. Your comments are politically motivated, period.

Problem there being that anyone and everyone can see a rocket crash and burn, but it takes hacks with a messiah complex, along with those gullible enough to be taken in by them, to dream up an anthropogenic cause for an ever changing and evolving global climate.

 

[saveliberty]

Fright science IS politically/economically motivated. Global warming is supposedly going to kill us because the oceans will rise up and flood us out. Even at the current pace, it will be 1,000 years before we see a one meter rise. The current warming trend (if you believe in it), is only twenty years long. Hardly something to get alarmist about. The warming trend also went level last year and will most likely be dipping this year, so the trend has reversed in the short term.

 

[Liability]

Liability, my point is "have you verified the sun is really in the center of the galaxy? Maybe its just an anti-bible conspiracy some left wingers have going on against the moral minority"* * * *

Tornado:

I know what your ATTEMPTED point was. It wasn't a mystery. We all got it. It's just that it was silly of you and repeating it again is even sillier.

We know how far away the sun is from a whole array of science which is all consistent. No matter the data sources, the math is well understood. It's all perfectly verifiable and it HAS been verified.

Some data, you see, simply is not subject to suppression or alteration.

Sadly, the same cannot be said of the global warming "data."

 

[Liability]

The AGW Faithers are (for the most part) studiously avoiding the questions posed in the OP.

That's not at all surprising. Just kinda sad.

Sad and revealing.

While on the topic of questions:

• what the HELL is up with NASA failing to comply with the Freedom of Information Law for about two years now?
  
• who the fuck gave THEM the right to withhold such data? We fucking PAY for NASA. The fucking DATA belongs to all of us. It's not a state secret. We aren't talking about national security here.
  
• why would NASA feel any need to disregard and disobey the law?

 

[Oddball]

Who knew that NASA could keep up with the FBI and ATF in the destruction of evidence and obstruction games?

 

[Annie]

Who knew that NASA could keep up with the FBI and ATF in the destruction of evidenced obstruction games?

Agreed:

Investors.com - NASA-Gate

NASA-Gate
Posted 12/04/2009 07:15 PM ET
Science: For two years, our space agency has refused Freedom of Information requests on why it has repeatedly corrected its climate figures. A leading researcher threatens to sue to find more inconvenient truths.

What's become known as "Climate-Gate" may be about to explode on this side of the pond as well. Chris Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, has threatened a lawsuit against NASA if by year-end the agency doesn't honor his FOI requests for information on how and why its climate numbers have been consistently adjusted for errors.

"I assume that what is there is highly damaging," says Horner, who suspects, based on the public record, the same type of data fudging, manipulation and suppression that has occurred at Britain's East Anglia Climate Research Unit. "These guys (NASA) are quite clearly determined not to reveal their internal discussions about this."

They may have good reason. NASA was caught with its thermometers down when James Hansen, head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, announced that 1998 was the country's hottest year on record, with 2006 the third hottest.

NASA and Goddard were forced to correct the record in 2007 to show that 1934, decades before the advent of the SUV, was in fact the warmest. In fact, the new numbers showed that four of the country's 10 warmest years were in the 1930s....

 

[Liability]

Who knew that NASA could keep up with the FBI and ATF in the destruction of evidence and obstruction games?

In all fairness, it is POSSIBLE that when the FBI or ATF declines a FOIL request, they are (a) within the bounds of the law in doing so and (b) doing so for reasons related to preventing the undermining of ongoing criminal investigations.

I don't think NASA can say anything even remotely along those lines -- at least not honestly.

 

[Oddball]

I was thinking more along the lines of Waco, where scads of evidence was destroyed and a massive coverup whitewashed.

 

[Liability]

I was thinking more along the lines of Waco.

Check.

All I said was "possible."

In SOME cases (probably not the WACO matter, of course) when the FBI or ATF invokes one of the exemptions from a FOIL Request, there is a legitimate basis for doing so.

Joking aside, I don't think NASA can make that claim -- unless, purely for national security reasons, they are covering up evidence of an invasion by ETs.

 

[rdean]

AGW Anthropogenic Global Warming
AGW Anti-Global Warming
AGW Access Gateway
AGW Atmospheric Gravity Waves
AGW Art Gallery of Windsor (Ontario, Canada)
AGW All Going Well
AGW Accelerated Global Warming
AGW Actual Gold Weight
AGW Application Gateway (telecom)
AGW Alt.Games.Warbirds (forum)
AGW A Girl's World (online magazine)
AGW Actual Gross Weight
AGW American Wire Gauge
AGW Automatic Girth Welder
AGW Autonomous Guided Weapon
AGW Allowable Gross Weight
AGW Anganwadi Worker (India)
AGW Accident Generated Water

AGW - What does AGW stand for? Acronyms and abbreviations by the Free Online Dictionary.

 

[Liability]

AGW Anthropogenic Global Warming
* * * *
AGW - What does AGW stand for? Acronyms and abbreviations by the Free Online Dictionary.

rdean's stupid "list" (above) was EDITED to reflect the already WELL-UNDERSTOOD acronym from the above list -- which constitutes (otherwise) mere static from rdean.

In fact, nobody who had already responded to this thread had any difficulty knowing what AGW stood for in this context.

 

[Zander]

It is not a religion, it is a CULT.
The Cult Of Climatology fanatics are called "THE GOREMONS".

The mainstream media have been trying to find Al Gore in order to interview him about the revelations that the research data supporting “global warming” was cooked—pardon the pun.

Here is my exclusive "interview" with him. You will find the source of his quotes at the end of this Q & A.

Q: Is it true that you lost your bid to become president because of the media?

A: I don’t want to leave the impression that the media’s unwillingness to focus on the global environment was the only reason why the issue failed to ignite serious debate during the campaign.

Q: A lot of people thought you have made too much about an environmental crisis. What do you say to them?

A: For me, the environmental crisis is the critical case in point: now, every time I pause to consider whether I have gone too far out on a limb, I look at the new facts that continue to pour in from around the world and conclude that I have not gone nearly far enough.

Q: Do you still maintain that human beings are causing global warming by burning fossil fuels, driving automobiles, and such?

A: One doesn’t have to travel around the world to witness humankind’s assault on the earth. Human civilization is now the dominant cause of change in the global environment. Humankind is now changing the climate of the entire globe to a degree far greater—and faster—than anything that has occurred in human history.

Q: So, despite the fact that it’s been revealed that scientists in England, America and elsewhere; those affiliated with the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, were falsifying their data, do you still believe in global warming?

A: The theory of global warming will not be disproved, and the skeptics are vastly outnumbered by former skeptics who now accept the overwhelming weight of accumulated evidence.

Q: So you’re still convinced, eh?

A: Siberia is one of the regions of the world that seems to be warming most rapidly.

Q: It’s that bad, eh? What role does capitalism play in all this?

A: The partial blindness of our current economic system is the single most powerful force behind what seem to be irrational decisions about the global environment. Modern industrial civilization, as presently organized, is colliding violently with our planet’s ecological system.

Q: That sounds serious, Al. What can we do?

A: The United Nations might consider the idea of establishing a Stewardship Council to deal with matters relating to the global environment.

Q: But, Al, aren’t the Kyoto Protocols based on the data provided by the United Nations Environmental Program and its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change? If the IPCC has been using phony scientific data all these years, maybe it isn’t a good idea to turn the environment of the Earth over to the UN. Well, let me finish up by asking how you feel about automobiles?

A: We now know that their cumulative impact on the global environment is posing a mortal threat to the security of every nation that is more deadly than that of any military enemy we are ever again likely to confront.

Q: Really? What do you propose we do about automobiles?

A: It ought to be possible to establish a coordinated global program to accomplish the strategic goal of completely eliminating the internal combustion engine over, say, a twenty-five year period.

Q: So capitalism is bad. Automobiles are bad. And human civilization is bad. No disrespect Al, but you sound loonier than a spotted owl.

All the quotes attributed to Al Gore were taken directly from his book, “Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit”, published in 1992.

The Earth is in a new, natural cooling cycle that began in 1998.

So far, Al Gore, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and an Oscar for his documentary, has not been available for interviews.

 

[rightwinger]

I think we need to study this global warming stuff..

Just like we need more proof that cigarettes cause cancer.....you can't be to safe

 

[Annie]

I think we need to study this global warming stuff..

Just like we need more proof that cigarettes cause cancer.....you can't be to safe

How are they connected?

 

[Liability]

I think we need to study this global warming stuff..

Just like we need more proof that cigarettes cause cancer.....you can't be to safe

Actually, despite some fraudulent efforts of the tobacco industry to falsify data (which, of course, must have bothered you enormously -- on principle, naturally), the ACTUAL scientific data does pretty well establish that cigarettes DO cause all manner of medical malady.

But you seem oddly unconcerned by the efforts of SOME other folks with an agenda to flasify or conceal the actual data relative to the alleged AGW stuff.

Your principlas must only get to work when your politics so direct you. That's to be expected from folks like you. Uber partisan hack liberoidals are not concerned with scientific validity or honesty or integrity unless its THEIR ox getting gored.