Three Big Supporters Throw Climate Hoaxers Overboard

[Mr.Fitnah]

Just like there has been no global warming since 1995.

they tried in the 70 with global cooloing ..../QUOTE]

no, they didn't.

Sure they did and before that the boogeyman was ACID rain.

 

[CMike]

I had no idea Time Magazine was a peer reviewed scientific journal.

None of this has to with true science.

It's about politics and money.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

they tried in the 70 with global cooloing ..../QUOTE]

no, they didn't.

Sure they did and before that the boogeyman was ACID rain.

You really don't have any fucking idea what you are talking about, do you?

Overall, the Program's cap and trade program has been immensely successful in achieving its goals. Since the 1990s, SO2 emissions have dropped 40%, and according to the Pacific Research Institute, acid rain levels have dropped 65% since 1976.[30][31]

Acid Rain Program - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[manifold]

What, no sticky?

 

[CMike]

Tell me more about this mass conspiracy among the a majority of the world scientists Mike?

I didn't say it's a consipracy nor do I consider them scientists.

They are simply people after money.

4 years of undergraduate school in a pure science - then move

6 years in graduate studies paid at 15k a year - then move

3-5 years as a post doctoral researcher for around 35k a year - move twice

5-7 years seeking tenure as an assistant professor for 55k a year


Then finally, at long last the HUGE PILE OF MONEY AT THE END, about 75-100k a year, and a steady job.


Yeah, really greedy people, scientists are.

A $5 million to $10 million grant from the taxpayers to study climate change because it's politically fashionable would come in handy, huh?

 

[CMike]

The acid rain hoax

http://www.freedomworks.org/reports/env-acidrain.pdf

 

[CMike]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUyh2yaZPno]YouTube - Chicken Little -The Sky is Falling[/ame]

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I didn't say it's a consipracy nor do I consider them scientists.

They are simply people after money.

4 years of undergraduate school in a pure science - then move

6 years in graduate studies paid at 15k a year - then move

3-5 years as a post doctoral researcher for around 35k a year - move twice

5-7 years seeking tenure as an assistant professor for 55k a year


Then finally, at long last the HUGE PILE OF MONEY AT THE END, about 75-100k a year, and a steady job.


Yeah, really greedy people, scientists are.

A $5 million to $10 million grant from the taxpayers to study climate change because it's politically fashionable would come in handy, huh?

I don't believe you actually understand how the grant system works and what a grant is for and how they money is spent.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Sure they did and before that the boogeyman was ACID rain.

I remember that...."All the trees will die within 5 years if we dont adress acid rain"

That was in the 80's

 

[SpidermanTuba]

The acid rain hoax

http://www.freedomworks.org/reports/env-acidrain.pdf

Bad link. You accidentally posted a link to something by "Citizens for a Sound Economy". I'm sure you meant to post something to a link containing full source information, or directly to a scientific article itself.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Sure they did and before that the boogeyman was ACID rain.

I remember that...."All the trees will die within 5 years if we dont adress acid rain"

That was in the 80's

Acid rain was addressed. Quite successfully.

having trouble remembering that quotation, though. Link pleas.e

 

[Maple]

Arrrrrrgh, mateys!

The S.S. Global Moonbat is takin' on water!!

Arrrrrrrrgh!

Three big companies quit an influential lobbying group that had focused on shaping climate-change legislation, in the latest sign that support for an ambitious bill is melting away.

Oil giants BP PLC and ConocoPhillips and heavy-equipment maker Caterpillar Inc. said Tuesday they won't renew their membership in the three-year-old U.S. Climate Action Partnership, a broad business-environmental coalition that had been instrumental in building support in Washington for capping emissions of greenhouse gases.

The move comes as debate over climate change intensifies and concerns mount about the cost of capping greenhouse-gas emissions.

BP, ConocoPhillips and Caterpillar Pull Out of Climate Partnership - WSJ.com

Does this mean that Al Gore loses his job???

 

[Jay Canuck]

and the other side has Inhofe....wow!.

 

[CMike]

Sure they did and before that the boogeyman was ACID rain.

I remember that...."All the trees will die within 5 years if we dont adress acid rain"

That was in the 80's

Acid rain was addressed. Quite successfully.

having trouble remembering that quotation, though. Link pleas.e

I was just giving yet another example of the left wing's scare tactics in order to seize government control.

 

[keee keee]

Just like there has been no global warming since 1995.

they tried in the 70 with global cooloing ..../QUOTE]

no, they didn't.

Yes they did I remember the scare tactic news stories back in the late 70's. I also remember hearing Rush talk about this some time back. He found newspaper articals going back many years showing how they pull this scare out every 10-20 years and recycle it over and over. was a hoax then as it is now!!!! waiting for the congressional investigations some one needs to hang for this fraud. they put away Berny M for fraud now go after Al Gore the fraud and liar!!!!

 

[keee keee]

so is the Ozone hole problem a hoax also? look at what they have done to the refrigerant industry, and consumers with the cost of replacement and retrofitting. Did I waste my time geting my EPA 608 card? I bet it also is a hoax!!!!

 

[CMike]

The acid rain hoax

http://www.freedomworks.org/reports/env-acidrain.pdf

Bad link. You accidentally posted a link to something by "Citizens for a Sound Economy". I'm sure you meant to post something to a link containing full source information, or directly to a scientific article itself.

I am sorry, I thought English was your first language. My bad.

From the link.


Science vs. Scare Tactics
In 1990, the federal government completed a 10-year,
$537 million study to determine whether or not acid
rain posed a threat to the environment and human
health. This study, called the National Acid
Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP), involved
700 top scientists, and was one of the largest studies
ever undertaken. This study found that special
interest scare-mongering over “acid rain” was not
based on facts, that acid rain caused very little damage
to the environment, and that it posed virtually no risk
to human health. In fact, Dr. James R. Mahoney, the
director of the study, said that: “The more extreme
views in both directions expressed by individual
scientists and the media have been rendered unlikely
to be correct.”The NAPAP study found that in the entire United
States less than 5 percent of lakes and 10 percent of
streams had high levels of acidity, and that some of
this occurred naturally. While a small number of fish
were affected by acid levels in lakes, only about onethird
of this was caused by any kind of acid rain. The
study found that forests were barely affected. Only
one species of tree affected by acid rain was identified,

...Most importantly, the NAPAP study found that
“acid rain” posed virtually no threat to human health.
The study also found that special interest groups had
simply assumed that there was a threat to humans, but
that this had not been clearly demonstrated. The
director of the study stated that any effects on human
health “appear to be important only in isolated,
unusual cases.”

 

[Misty]

The funny thing about this is this is not the first time the hoax has been revealed.


http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/22218/The_Year_the_Global_Warming_Hoax_Died.html

The Year the Global Warming Hoax Died

Environment & Climate News > November 2007
Environment
Environment > Climate: Science
Email a Friend
Written By: Alan Caruba
Published In: Environment & Climate News > November 2007
Publication date: 11/01/2007
Publisher: The Heartland Institute
When did the global warming hoax die? Historians are likely to pinpoint 2007.

It will take another decade to ensure it cannot be revived, but the avalanche of scientific studies and the cumulative impact of scientists who have publicly joined those who debunked the lies on which it has been based will be noted as the tipping point.


Hoax Not Unique

It took some 40 years to unmask the Piltdown Man hoax that began in 1912, alleging the skull of an ancient ancestor of man had been found in England. Any number of British anthropologists unwittingly contributed to the hoax by confirming the authenticity of the skull--until it was found that the jaw of an orangutan had been cunningly attached.

The unmasking of global warming has taken less than half that time.


Kyoto History

The hoax has mainly been a creation of the United Nations Environmental Program. It took off in earnest with the 1992 Earth Summit and culminated in 1997 with the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement to reduce the generation of carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas said to be the cause of an accelerated warming of the Earth.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

The acid rain hoax

http://www.freedomworks.org/reports/env-acidrain.pdf

Bad link. You accidentally posted a link to something by "Citizens for a Sound Economy". I'm sure you meant to post something to a link containing full source information, or directly to a scientific article itself.

I am sorry, I thought English was your first language. My bad.

From the link.


”[/COLOR]The NAPAP study found that in the entire United
States less than 5 percent of lakes and 10 percent of
streams had high levels of acidity, and that some of
this occurred naturally. While a small number of fish
were affected by acid levels in lakes, only about onethird
of this was caused by any kind of acid rain. The
study found that forests were barely affected. Only
one species of tree affected by acid rain was identified,

That's great. On which page number are they paraphrasing this from? I would like to look in the actual study to see what was actually written, its many many pages long - I need a page number. How convenient its not supplied.




I'm sure you can point me to the actual report and page, since I'm sure you wouldn't be using this pamphlet as the basis for an argument without first checking the sources.

 

[CMike]

The left wing environmental hoaxs

The 70s- Global Cooling
The 80s- Acid Rain
90s-Present - Global Warming