97% of Scientists agree..........Al Gore knows what he is talking about

[Mr. Shaman]

Right, the Democratic solution. If you can't logically debate them because your policies are illogical and don't work, demogog them . Then claim to be the party of science...

Lordy, lordy. Which party at the state level, in various states, is pushing the anti-evolution agenda? From a Geological Society of America e-mail;

A bill is being considered in the Tennessee House of Representatives that would allow teachers to teach the “scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses” of topics such as global warming and evolution based on the assertion that they are “controversial.” House Bill 368 , introduced in February, would require state and local educational authorities to "assist teachers to find effective ways to present the science curriculum as it addresses scientific controversies," naming only biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning as controversial topics. The bill is the sixth anti-evolution bill introduced in state legislatures in 2011. A similar Oklahoma bill (Senate Bill 554) died in committee.

I'm not a Republican, I'm a libertarian. Also, liberal indoctrination in our schools dwarfs anything conservatives are trying to do.

ooooooooooooooooooooooooo.....great examples, o' that, you offer, there, SKIPPY!!!​

 

[Seawytch]

Already posted, but ignored...

What happens when a group of climate change skeptics sets out to see what's really up with climate change?

Critics' review unexpectedly supports scientific consensus on global warming
A UC Berkeley team's preliminary findings in a review of temperature data confirm global warming studies.

April 04, 2011|By Margot Roosevelt, Los Angeles Times
A team of UC Berkeley physicists and statisticians that set out to challenge the scientific consensus on global warming is finding that its data-crunching effort is producing results nearly identical to those underlying the prevailing view.

The Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project was launched by physics professor Richard Muller, a longtime critic of government-led climate studies, to address what he called "the legitimate concerns" of skeptics who believe that global warming is exaggerated.

But Muller unexpectedly told a congressional hearing last week that the work of the three principal groups that have analyzed the temperature trends underlying climate science is "excellent.... We see a global warming trend that is very similar to that previously reported by the other groups."

Read all about it: Global warming: Critics' review unexpectedly supports scientific consensus on climate change - Los Angeles Times

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Already posted, but ignored...

What happens when a group of climate change skeptics sets out to see what's really up with climate change?

Critics' review unexpectedly supports scientific consensus on global warming
A UC Berkeley team's preliminary findings in a review of temperature data confirm global warming studies.

April 04, 2011|By Margot Roosevelt, Los Angeles Times
A team of UC Berkeley physicists and statisticians that set out to challenge the scientific consensus on global warming is finding that its data-crunching effort is producing results nearly identical to those underlying the prevailing view.

The Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project was launched by physics professor Richard Muller, a longtime critic of government-led climate studies, to address what he called "the legitimate concerns" of skeptics who believe that global warming is exaggerated.

But Muller unexpectedly told a congressional hearing last week that the work of the three principal groups that have analyzed the temperature trends underlying climate science is "excellent.... We see a global warming trend that is very similar to that previously reported by the other groups."

Read all about it: Global warming: Critics' review unexpectedly supports scientific consensus on climate change - Los Angeles Times

Did you even read the article you cited?



Inconclusive at best.

 

[skookerasbil]

All the k00ks do is talk about the "consensus"!!!!


Hmmm...........well, then why is it that from sea to shining sea, Crap and Tax legislation is firmly in the shitter???!!!

 

[Oddball]

Did you even read the article you cited?



Inconclusive at best.

Not only inconclusive, but even warmerist super-hoaxer Kevin Trenberth doesn't buy their methodology.

 

[Seawytch]

Inconclusive at best.

Yeah, that's what all the tobacco industry "scientists" said about studies on the effects of smoking.

"The church says that the Earth is flat, but I have seen the shadow on the moon and I have more faith in the shadow than in the church." ~ Ferdinand Magellan

Of course, his statement would be considered "inconclusive at best" wouldn't it?

 

[skookerasbil]

Only 33% Think Most Americans Blame Humans for Global WarmingThursday, March 24, 2011

President Obama, former Vice President Al Gore and the United Nations, among others, argue that global warming is chiefly caused by human activity. A plurality of voters recognize that this view is held mostly by liberals rather than by all Americans.

In fact, a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 33% of Likely U.S. Voters mistakenly think most Americans agree that global warming is caused primarily by human activity. Forty-six percent (46%) recognize that the view is held primarily by liberals (To see survey question wording, click here.).

Only 33% Think Most Americans Blame Humans for Global Warming - Rasmussen Reports™

 

[skookerasbil]

Skooks presence so necessary on this forum...........to remind the fcukking k00ks that this is a POLITICS forum.

Nobody gives a rats ass about the "Science" anymore on this subject.

The Deniers PWN the day politically!!!!





New Hampshire repeals cap and trade | New Hampshire House of Representatives votes to repeal cap and trade law | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment


246-104 in a lefty state in New England.............

 

[skookerasbil]

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fiw-cap-and-trade-ruling-20110322,0,7120436.story

 

[skookerasbil]

Cap And Trade, RIP?Posted by Scott Woolley
April 5, 2011 10:13 AM


A few years ago, markets for trading pollution rights were lauded by U.S. politicians of all political persuasions. No longer.

The future of climate policy panel at Fortune Brainstorm Green. Credit: Russ Curtis

FORTUNE -- The idea of setting a firm limit on carbon dioxide emissions but letting the market decide who should do the allowable amount of polluting is an environmental policy that seems to have a little something for everyone. Lefties like the hard limits. Righties like the flexible markets, or at least they used to -- and that change has thrown the future of cap-and-trade policies in doubt.

Cap And Trade, RIP? - Fortune Tech






OOOooooooooooooooooooops!!!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

People have woken up to the fact that computer model predictions of climate change are total BS..........and in this economy have zero stomach for their electric bills to DOUBLE. Only k00ks are ok with that.............

 

[westwall]

So how this consideration is granted global warming deniers, who are equally loony and willfully ignorant; That's something I just don't understand.

Because the global warming deniers have MUCH better financial backing from the corporations that want to keep us addicted to fossil fuels. Look at who the science deniers are in our elected representatives then look to see how much they get paid by lobbyists that represent fossil fuels.

\

If you want to follow the money then follow the money all the way my friend. Goldman Sachs will make over one trillion dollars if cap and trade legislation gets passed. So will a whole bunch of other companies whose sole product is paperwork. And who gets to pay? You do. Oil companies are well prepared for that eventuality as well. ENRON (you remember them don't you?) was a major player in the Kyoto protocols.

Over 100 billion has been spent on "research" trying to get cap and trade legislation passed, nothing has been spent on reducing pollution. Not one thin dime. Take a look at all the carbon tax legislation and you will see nowhere is there a requirement to reduce pollution. No, the companies can still pollute they just have to pay for the priviledge, and, of course, they pass that cost on to you, so YOU HAVE TO PAY for it.

And who gets all that money? Governments to pass out to their various cronies and of course the companies that shuffle the paper back and forth to show they are doing something, but no pollution is halted, no polluted areas are cleaned up, no technology is developed for the reduction of pollution, not one thing is done other than make you poorer.

 

[Big Fitz]

Inconclusive at best.

Yeah, that's what all the tobacco industry "scientists" said about studies on the effects of smoking.

"The church says that the Earth is flat, but I have seen the shadow on the moon and I have more faith in the shadow than in the church." ~ Ferdinand Magellan

Of course, his statement would be considered "inconclusive at best" wouldn't it?

So you're for believing still in miasma, baths and night air cause "The Flux", spontaneous generation, continental land bridges and when the ground shakes the gods are angry, eh?

 

[Big Fitz]

All the k00ks do is talk about the "consensus"!!!!


Hmmm...........well, then why is it that from sea to shining sea, Crap and Tax legislation is firmly in the shitter???!!!

From "Titanic":

Bruce Ismay (The Owner): "This ship CAN'T Sink!"

James Andrews (The Designer): "She's made of iron, Sir! I assure you... she can!"

 

[bripat9643]

Wow. You Teabaggers can always be relied-upon to find all o' that info that's hidden from everyone.....else.

No, we just aren't the kind of suckers who automatically fall for any pablum that government bureaucrats dispense through their various propaganda organs.

Nothing could be more predictable that a bunch of organizations that are purely creatures of government would agree with a theory that gives government absolute power and vast new sources of revenue.

 

[westwall]

Inconclusive at best.

Yeah, that's what all the tobacco industry "scientists" said about studies on the effects of smoking.

"The church says that the Earth is flat, but I have seen the shadow on the moon and I have more faith in the shadow than in the church." ~ Ferdinand Magellan

Of course, his statement would be considered "inconclusive at best" wouldn't it?

The evidence that there is warming globally is factual, and the globe has been warming since the end of the last ice age around 11,000 years ago. Climate however is not static and there have been may times in the recent past when the temps were warmer then they are currently. The most recent was the Medieval Warming Period and the Roman Warming Period before that.

At both times global temperatures were warmer (England for example was able to compete with France in wine production, something they could never hope to do at the current time) and Romes culture bloomed during their warming period.

The claims for anthropogenic global warming on the other hand are tenuous at best. No prediction they have ever made has actually come to fruition. In fact quite the opposite has occured.

Below is an exchange between two of the main players in the AGW cabal please note the highlighted remarks. That is not science my friend, that is political advocacy.


From: Keith Briffa To: mann@xxxxxxxxx.xxx Subject: Re: quick note on TAR Date: Sun Apr 29 19:53:16 2007
Mike
your words are a real boost to me at the moment. I found myself questioning the whole process and being often frustrated at the formulaic way things had to be done - often wasting time and going down dead ends. I really thank you for taking the time to say these kind words . I tried hard to balance the needs of the science and the IPCC , which were not always the same. I worried that you might think I gave the impression of not supporting you well enough while trying to report on the issues and uncertainties . Much had to be removed and I was particularly unhappy that I could not get the statement into the SPM regarding the AR4 reinforcement of the results and conclusions of the TAR. I tried my best but we were basically railroaded by Susan*. I am happy to pass the mantle on to someone else next time. I feel I have basically produced nothing original or substantive of my own since this whole process started. I am at this moment , having to work on the ENV submission to the forthcoming UK Research Assessment exercise , again instead of actually doing some useful research ! Anyway thanks again Mike.... really appreciated when it comes from you very best wishes

Keith
Keith
At 18:14 29/04/2007, you wrote:

Keith, just a quick note to let you know I've had a chance to read over the key bits on last millennium in the final version of the chapter, and I think you did a great job. obviously, this was one of the most (if not the most) contentious areas in the entire report, and you found a way to (in my view) convey the the science accurately, but in a way that I believe will be immune to criticisms of bias or neglect--you dealt w/ all of the controversies, but in a very even-handed and fair way. bravo! I hope you have an opportunity to relax a bit now. looking forward to buying you a beer next time we have an opportunity
mike
--
Michael E. Mann
Associate Professor
Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)

 

[sinister59]

The world temperature is currently holding steady or possibly cooling, oil is not running out, the poles are not melting (in fact quite the opposite) food is not running out, in other words the world is fine and you need to think globally and act locally. Clean up your area and the rest will follow.



Renewable Power Fail – As Usual – December 2010 « PA Pundits – International

If Al Gore Can Outgrow the Ethanol Fad, Why Can’t Conservatives?

World Climate Report » Sea Level Rise: Still Slowing Down

Peter Foster: Reason will prevail on energy | FP Comment | Financial Post

we'll kill ourselves , but denie global changes the hole time , ok with me .

 

[westwall]

The world temperature is currently holding steady or possibly cooling, oil is not running out, the poles are not melting (in fact quite the opposite) food is not running out, in other words the world is fine and you need to think globally and act locally. Clean up your area and the rest will follow.



Renewable Power Fail – As Usual – December 2010 « PA Pundits – International

If Al Gore Can Outgrow the Ethanol Fad, Why Can’t Conservatives?

World Climate Report » Sea Level Rise: Still Slowing Down

Peter Foster: Reason will prevail on energy | FP Comment | Financial Post

we'll kill ourselves , but denie global changes the hole time , ok with me .

It's spelled deny and no we don't deny that at all, we are the ones saying it happens, the alarmists are the ones who seem to think the planet is static.

 

[bripat9643]

That's what Porky Limbaugh says, huh??

No, Limbaugh never said it.

Educate yourself:

New Scandal Erupts over NOAA Climate Data

DailyTech - New Scandal Erupts over NOAA Climate Data


US ClimateGate Report: NCDC/NOAA and the Global Historical Climate Data (GHCN)

US ClimateGate Report: NCDC/NOAA and the Global Historical Climate Data*(GHCN) « The Catastrophist 2009-2010

No Apologies

 

[bripat9643]

Agreed on that. Bush was horrible for business. He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and had zero appreciation that other people worked for the money he was spending.

So Obama appreciates the working man who pays taxes?

Yeah, right.