Climate Change Deniers Debunked

[jc456]

Now THERE is that juvenile gratification that you warmers seem to crave. The expectation being that the Earth's climate system is as instantly responsive as my zero-turn mower. That because the stratosphere isn't warming INSTANTLY or "now" that somehow is all you need to dismiss the history of that parameter.

There goes flac again, invoking his magic theory that has never explained anything. It's a bit of pseudoscience he brings up when the real world makes him uncomfortable.

you need to get over this childish expectation that we are only looking at parameters that are shaped and scaled exactly like the temperature record. It would be just weird if you happened to stumble onto one or more parameters with a hockey stick shape that explained it all.

Let me remind you how science works. You create a theory to explain the observations, make testable predictions with it, and see if those predictions come true. AGW science has passing that test for decades now, which is why it has credibility. You're not doing science. You're invoking magic to explain why all those correct predictions weren't really correct predictions. If you want credibility, do some science. Create a theory and make testable predictions.

dude/ dudette, that is not how science works, one produces a theory and then compares it with observed, you have it assbackward fool. what you are describing is pseudoscience 101.

 

[jc456]

Yes, the planet HAS stopped warming. The data manipulation that the warmers have had to resort too is all the evidence you need to show that that is a fact.

Projection, prediction..... Are we arguing over what the definition of "is" is?

The temperature reading used to be. Now that there has been wholesale data falsification that is no longer true.

Who gives a shit. Consensus is the language of politics, not science.

Actually, yes it is the Suns fault.

This is correct. There currently is no global cooling. Wait a few years though and there WILL be a discernible marker.

Yes it has been MUCH warmer. So why try to hide that fact?

Yes, the Antarctic sea ice is increasing. So is most of the Ice sheet itself. The one exception being the peninsula. A small percentage of the whole continent.

This link is one hell of a fail....

If there were only some way for you to put all this information into some kind of context. I wonder who we could ask?

Context? Whatever do you mean dear child?

Context? You know, the kind of context you can get from people with actual knowledge, people with some kind of background in science. Know what I mean?

Not asked of me, but..........................when the so called who's who of Climate change get caught Lying.........time and time again...........................why the hell should anyone trust them anymore................

Is that the current FOX News version?

boooo, you can do better can't you?

BTW, you need some new material. i see you are not creative.

 

[jc456]

Trust me on this one Luminal. There is no EASY way to get to the bottom of this issue. The context is often YEARS of carefully listening to the news and research..

Keep tuned in. Let us know what background info you might need..

When I find someone who's expertise didn't come from TV or the internet, I'll be sure to do that.

So you think my knowledge of the topic comes from TV? Got news for you.. Libraries are yesterday. Today science and technology is discussed, developed and distributed by the Internet. Or didntcha notice that?

I can shop 40 university libraries and research institutes right from this very chair.. AND I do that often.. But enough about me. What do YOU believe about the hysteria and intense exaggerations of Global Warming?

And what do you think a Denier believes?

The apparent basis for your argument is that climate change deniers base all their conclusions on science, while everyone who disagrees with them has to be politically motivated or simply naive. I'm saying that no part of that argument has ever, in any way, been substantiated by anyone.

No.. Simply "deniers" are pointing out the exaggerations and claims that were DESIGNED to misleading in order to further a socio-political agenda. And it's really not hard to do.. For instance..

Do you know about IPCC? Have you read their simple "mission statement"? Do you think that they are a purveyor of OBJECTIVE Climate science with the obvious bias in their mission statement. The "agenda" ain't hidden. It's right there in your face. Every time that some politician declares that "the science is over".. The only thing that's over is the free ride these scientists have had being used and rewarded as political tools..

So then we are apparently supposed to believe that there exists an international conspiracy of scientists and governments to suppress the truth about global climate change. Is that right?

you don't have to believe anything. That's your choice. I do believe because they have been caught, it has been reported on by reporters. The people who research and make us aware. Simpletons such as yourself merely believe because you want to believe. Then leave here, I'm not here to convince you of anything. You are worthless to me. leave enjoy your life and leave us to ours.

 

[jc456]

Oh and by the way, you can't find anywhere near half of what's in print on some subjects on the internet.

And half of what's been in print is redundant. How many Thermodynamics or Calculus books do you need? How many have been in print?
(Largely the same economic scam as every new improved IPhone -- Professors gotta eat. Students shouldn't be reading textbooks by dead people and publishers need to have new products.)

No reason to suspect that an ONLINE textbook is incomplete or inferior. Otherwise, there would still be bookstores at Universities. Or haven't you discovered that there aren't any anymore (for the most part -- unless they have huge revenue on NCAA apparel and a joint deal with Barnes and Nobel..

As for citations to older journal articles. You can have somebody fetch it for you and deliver it cheap -- right over the internet.

I have a hard time getting my societies to continue to send me print versions of journals. You have a check the "I'm an old fart paper delivery" box.

How about you?

Ever been to the National Archives? I have. Can you guess what you'll find there? Millions of documents, journals and books that you can't get on the internet.

isn't that what he said, or did he studder?

 

[jc456]

So you think my knowledge of the topic comes from TV? Got news for you.. Libraries are yesterday. Today science and technology is discussed, developed and distributed by the Internet. Or didntcha notice that?

I can shop 40 university libraries and research institutes right from this very chair.. AND I do that often.. But enough about me. What do YOU believe about the hysteria and intense exaggerations of Global Warming?

And what do you think a Denier believes?

The apparent basis for your argument is that climate change deniers base all their conclusions on science, while everyone who disagrees with them has to be politically motivated or simply naive. I'm saying that no part of that argument has ever, in any way, been substantiated by anyone.

No.. Simply "deniers" are pointing out the exaggerations and claims that were DESIGNED to misleading in order to further a socio-political agenda. And it's really not hard to do.. For instance..

Do you know about IPCC? Have you read their simple "mission statement"? Do you think that they are a purveyor of OBJECTIVE Climate science with the obvious bias in their mission statement. The "agenda" ain't hidden. It's right there in your face. Every time that some politician declares that "the science is over".. The only thing that's over is the free ride these scientists have had being used and rewarded as political tools..

So then we are apparently supposed to believe that there exists an international conspiracy of scientists and governments to suppress the truth about global climate change. Is that right?

Of course !! It's not hidden. It's in your face. Now I'm gonna give you one data point. The significance of that data is the following. Once you read the quote below -- you can honestly claim to be totally ignorant of ANY statements admitting the true socio-political agenda behind the Global Warming Extravaganza.

The guy is a lead "investigator" for the IPCC. A "Climate Economics" specialist. And he sits in approval meetings for the scientific "consensus" statements coming out of that grand body..

Climate Talks or Wealth Redistribution Talks

NZZ: De facto, this means an expropriation of the countries with natural resources. This leads to a very different development from that which has been triggered by development policy.

Edenhofer: First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

Poof -- If youre honest -- you are innoculated from your innocent view of Global Warming hype.

Feel free to explain how nearly every civilized nation on earth officially agrees with the science of global climate change. How did that happen? Did they all meet one day at Applebees to plan this diabolical conspiracy? Have the real scientists been silenced and the truth suppressed?

wow, you are really playing with your stupid cards right? You have no idea how, hmmm ever hear about the United Nations?

 

[jc456]

Feel free to explain how nearly every civilized nation on earth officially agrees with the science of global climate change. How did that happen? Did they all meet one day at Applebees to plan this diabolical conspiracy? Have the real scientists been silenced and the truth suppressed?

Nope.. They meet at the UN every few years to present ONLY the Climate science relevent to MAN-CAUSED Global Warming. Then they all try to mug the industrialized world for money.

These "position statements by professional society are never voted on by the membership. They are drafted by the front office to ADMIT their bias and pledge their loyalties to all their sponsors. Like the BILLIONS of research dollars available IF --- you can swallow your pride and make your work SOUND like their prepackaged conclusion that man is wrecking the planet and money and power is required to fix that.

In fact -- 2nd data pt. The Geological Society of Australia had a Global Warming/Climate Policy Statement for YEARS.. Revised several times all without input from the membership. Last time they tried to revise it -- the membership demanded to be involved. They no longer HAVE a policy statement on Climate Change. Worthless as a Congressional Investigation I tell you.. Not like in the movies where the society members all meet in the Old Harvard lecture hall and hammer out a proclamation of truth.

I sense you're not really interested in learning this kind of conflicting information. Seriously,

DID you really think those policy positions are NOT political?

That must be why the military planners of all the industrialized nations are making contingency plans based on global climate change scenarios. Maybe they just don't have anything better to do, you know since they aren't concerned about terrorism or Chinese expansionism, or Russian resurgence. They must be thinking about stuff like that because it's stylish and trendy. You know how liberal those military guys can be.

Obviously, you're oblivious to the model of inefficiency that is our Federal Govt. Good bet would be that you LOVE yourself more of this kind of "military preparedness"..

That plan is right up there with the Alien Invasion Contingency Plan and the Return of Jesus Plan that Ronald Reagan required of them.

Are you that naive? Do you not know the effect of mandate requiring all Federal Agencies to address and be sensitive to a myriad of "favorite memes of the day"..

Do you really think the Coast Guard cadets that had to suffer thru 1/2 an hour of Obama explaining to them why Global Warming was one of their most serious missions?

The day the Defense Dept develops a battle cross for meritorious service in the Climate Change cause because those CG cadets got a sunburn on patrol --- send me a PM.... 0.5degC change in your lifetime and you believe this is a military crisis? ARE YOU DAFT?

See, I knew we had an expert on military planning here.
Looks like we're back to conspiracy theories then.

I know right? I was in the military too. Funny.

whooptido, did you get a medal for a sunburn?

 

[jc456]

No.. Simply "deniers" are pointing out the exaggerations and claims that were DESIGNED to misleading in order to further a socio-political agenda. And it's really not hard to do.. For instance..

Do you know about IPCC? Have you read their simple "mission statement"? Do you think that they are a purveyor of OBJECTIVE Climate science with the obvious bias in their mission statement. The "agenda" ain't hidden. It's right there in your face. Every time that some politician declares that "the science is over".. The only thing that's over is the free ride these scientists have had being used and rewarded as political tools..

So then we are apparently supposed to believe that there exists an international conspiracy of scientists and governments to suppress the truth about global climate change. Is that right?

Of course !! It's not hidden. It's in your face. Now I'm gonna give you one data point. The significance of that data is the following. Once you read the quote below -- you can honestly claim to be totally ignorant of ANY statements admitting the true socio-political agenda behind the Global Warming Extravaganza.

The guy is a lead "investigator" for the IPCC. A "Climate Economics" specialist. And he sits in approval meetings for the scientific "consensus" statements coming out of that grand body..

Climate Talks or Wealth Redistribution Talks

NZZ: De facto, this means an expropriation of the countries with natural resources. This leads to a very different development from that which has been triggered by development policy.

Edenhofer: First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

Poof -- If youre honest -- you are innoculated from your innocent view of Global Warming hype.

Feel free to explain how nearly every civilized nation on earth officially agrees with the science of global climate change. How did that happen? Did they all meet one day at Applebees to plan this diabolical conspiracy? Have the real scientists been silenced and the truth suppressed?

Nope.. They meet at the UN every few years to present ONLY the Climate science relevent to MAN-CAUSED Global Warming. Then they all try to mug the industrialized world for money.

These "position statements by professional society are never voted on by the membership. They are drafted by the front office to ADMIT their bias and pledge their loyalties to all their sponsors. Like the BILLIONS of research dollars available IF --- you can swallow your pride and make your work SOUND like their prepackaged conclusion that man is wrecking the planet and money and power is required to fix that.

In fact -- 2nd data pt. The Geological Society of Australia had a Global Warming/Climate Policy Statement for YEARS.. Revised several times all without input from the membership. Last time they tried to revise it -- the membership demanded to be involved. They no longer HAVE a policy statement on Climate Change. Worthless as a Congressional Investigation I tell you.. Not like in the movies where the society members all meet in the Old Harvard lecture hall and hammer out a proclamation of truth.

I sense you're not really interested in learning this kind of conflicting information. Seriously,

DID you really think those policy positions are NOT political?

That must be why the military planners of all the industrialized nations are making contingency plans based on global climate change scenarios. Maybe they just don't have anything better to do, you know since they aren't concerned about terrorism or Chinese expansionism, or Russian resurgence. They must be thinking about stuff like that because it's stylish and trendy. You know how liberal those military guys can be.

you got a book you could lend me to show me this military change in policy?

I know you would never provide any details from the internet since it is outdated and useless .

 

[jc456]

Of course !! It's not hidden. It's in your face. Now I'm gonna give you one data point. The significance of that data is the following. Once you read the quote below -- you can honestly claim to be totally ignorant of ANY statements admitting the true socio-political agenda behind the Global Warming Extravaganza.

The guy is a lead "investigator" for the IPCC. A "Climate Economics" specialist. And he sits in approval meetings for the scientific "consensus" statements coming out of that grand body..

Poof -- If youre honest -- you are innoculated from your innocent view of Global Warming hype.

Feel free to explain how nearly every civilized nation on earth officially agrees with the science of global climate change. How did that happen? Did they all meet one day at Applebees to plan this diabolical conspiracy? Have the real scientists been silenced and the truth suppressed?

Nope.. They meet at the UN every few years to present ONLY the Climate science relevent to MAN-CAUSED Global Warming. Then they all try to mug the industrialized world for money.

These "position statements by professional society are never voted on by the membership. They are drafted by the front office to ADMIT their bias and pledge their loyalties to all their sponsors. Like the BILLIONS of research dollars available IF --- you can swallow your pride and make your work SOUND like their prepackaged conclusion that man is wrecking the planet and money and power is required to fix that.

In fact -- 2nd data pt. The Geological Society of Australia had a Global Warming/Climate Policy Statement for YEARS.. Revised several times all without input from the membership. Last time they tried to revise it -- the membership demanded to be involved. They no longer HAVE a policy statement on Climate Change. Worthless as a Congressional Investigation I tell you.. Not like in the movies where the society members all meet in the Old Harvard lecture hall and hammer out a proclamation of truth.

I sense you're not really interested in learning this kind of conflicting information. Seriously,

DID you really think those policy positions are NOT political?

That must be why the military planners of all the industrialized nations are making contingency plans based on global climate change scenarios. Maybe they just don't have anything better to do, you know since they aren't concerned about terrorism or Chinese expansionism, or Russian resurgence. They must be thinking about stuff like that because it's stylish and trendy. You know how liberal those military guys can be.

Obviously, you're oblivious to the model of inefficiency that is our Federal Govt. Good bet would be that you LOVE yourself more of this kind of "military preparedness"..

That plan is right up there with the Alien Invasion Contingency Plan and the Return of Jesus Plan that Ronald Reagan required of them.

Are you that naive? Do you not know the effect of mandate requiring all Federal Agencies to address and be sensitive to a myriad of "favorite memes of the day"..

Do you really think the Coast Guard cadets that had to suffer thru 1/2 an hour of Obama explaining to them why Global Warming was one of their most serious missions?

The day the Defense Dept develops a battle cross for meritorious service in the Climate Change cause because those CG cadets got a sunburn on patrol --- send me a PM.... 0.5degC change in your lifetime and you believe this is a military crisis? ARE YOU DAFT?

See, I knew we had an expert on military planning here.
Looks like we're back to conspiracy theories then.

I never left the conspiracy, so you're wrong. And, you obviously have nothing of interest for the debate on here so you can take your ball and go home.

 

[jc456]

Nope.. They meet at the UN every few years to present ONLY the Climate science relevent to MAN-CAUSED Global Warming. Then they all try to mug the industrialized world for money.

These "position statements by professional society are never voted on by the membership. They are drafted by the front office to ADMIT their bias and pledge their loyalties to all their sponsors. Like the BILLIONS of research dollars available IF --- you can swallow your pride and make your work SOUND like their prepackaged conclusion that man is wrecking the planet and money and power is required to fix that.

In fact -- 2nd data pt. The Geological Society of Australia had a Global Warming/Climate Policy Statement for YEARS.. Revised several times all without input from the membership. Last time they tried to revise it -- the membership demanded to be involved. They no longer HAVE a policy statement on Climate Change. Worthless as a Congressional Investigation I tell you.. Not like in the movies where the society members all meet in the Old Harvard lecture hall and hammer out a proclamation of truth.

I sense you're not really interested in learning this kind of conflicting information. Seriously,

DID you really think those policy positions are NOT political?

That must be why the military planners of all the industrialized nations are making contingency plans based on global climate change scenarios. Maybe they just don't have anything better to do, you know since they aren't concerned about terrorism or Chinese expansionism, or Russian resurgence. They must be thinking about stuff like that because it's stylish and trendy. You know how liberal those military guys can be.

Obviously, you're oblivious to the model of inefficiency that is our Federal Govt. Good bet would be that you LOVE yourself more of this kind of "military preparedness"..

That plan is right up there with the Alien Invasion Contingency Plan and the Return of Jesus Plan that Ronald Reagan required of them.

Are you that naive? Do you not know the effect of mandate requiring all Federal Agencies to address and be sensitive to a myriad of "favorite memes of the day"..

Do you really think the Coast Guard cadets that had to suffer thru 1/2 an hour of Obama explaining to them why Global Warming was one of their most serious missions?

The day the Defense Dept develops a battle cross for meritorious service in the Climate Change cause because those CG cadets got a sunburn on patrol --- send me a PM.... 0.5degC change in your lifetime and you believe this is a military crisis? ARE YOU DAFT?

See, I knew we had an expert on military planning here.
Looks like we're back to conspiracy theories then.

I know right? I was in the military too. Funny.

Me too. Why weren't we told about these ongoing conspiracies to conceal the truth about climate change? Maybe we just weren't high enough in the chain of command to have access to that kind of classified information. I wonder if Edward Snowden could tell us?

because you weren't invited, are you really that naive?

 

[edthecynic]

And yet only the adjusted data sets show warming... If you take the raw data and analyze it we have been cooling since the mid 1970's

Whom to believe.. Data manipulators and activists or the raw unaltered data....???

Again there has been no warming for over 18 years 6 months..

And the satellite Data confirms it.

View attachment 41608

A perfect example of how the deniers LIE!
They lie that we have been cooling since the 1970s and then compound that lie by lying that the satellite data "confirms" it, but only post cherry picked data starting 2001, not the mid 1970s because they know they are lying. Deniers are premeditated liars!

There is not one single satellite data set, raw or otherwise, starting in the 1970s that shows cooling!

The reality is there has been no statistically significant global cooling for 115 years and 5 months.

^ Chart shows no warming the past 2 decades

Bullshit!

Climate at a Glance National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And yet only the adjusted data sets show warming... If you take the raw data and analyze it we have been cooling since the mid 1970's

Whom to believe.. Data manipulators and activists or the raw unaltered data....???

Again there has been no warming for over 18 years 6 months..

And the satellite Data confirms it.

View attachment 41608

A perfect example of how the deniers LIE!
They lie that we have been cooling since the 1970s and then compound that lie by lying that the satellite data "confirms" it, but only post cherry picked data starting 2001, not the mid 1970s because they know they are lying. Deniers are premeditated liars!

There is not one single satellite data set, raw or otherwise, starting in the 1970s that shows cooling!

The reality is there has been no statistically significant global cooling for 115 years and 5 months.

^ Chart shows no warming the past 2 decades

Bullshit!

Climate at a Glance National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

Use all the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! you want, the chart is flat since the late 1990's

 

[Liminal]

If there were only some way for you to put all this information into some kind of context. I wonder who we could ask?

Context? Whatever do you mean dear child?

Context? You know, the kind of context you can get from people with actual knowledge, people with some kind of background in science. Know what I mean?

Not asked of me, but..........................when the so called who's who of Climate change get caught Lying.........time and time again...........................why the hell should anyone trust them anymore................

Is that the current FOX News version?

boooo, you can do better can't you?

BTW, you need some new material. i see you are not creative.

You have yet to produce anything that looks like a rebuttal based on any kind of evidence. I'm apparently supposed to take your word.

 

[Liminal]

Context? You know, the kind of context you can get from people with actual knowledge, people with some kind of background in science. Know what I mean?

Not asked of me, but..........................when the so called who's who of Climate change get caught Lying.........time and time again...........................why the hell should anyone trust them anymore................

Is that the current FOX News version?

boooo, you can do better can't you?

BTW, you need some new material. i see you are not creative.

You have yet to produce anything that looks like a rebuttal based on any kind of evidence. I'm apparently supposed to take your word.

and you present nothing to be here. I have nothing to share with someone who doesn't know anything.

So then you're just too damn lazy to read links.

 

[jc456]

Of course !! It's not hidden. It's in your face. Now I'm gonna give you one data point. The significance of that data is the following. Once you read the quote below -- you can honestly claim to be totally ignorant of ANY statements admitting the true socio-political agenda behind the Global Warming Extravaganza.

The guy is a lead "investigator" for the IPCC. A "Climate Economics" specialist. And he sits in approval meetings for the scientific "consensus" statements coming out of that grand body..

Poof -- If youre honest -- you are innoculated from your innocent view of Global Warming hype.

Feel free to explain how nearly every civilized nation on earth officially agrees with the science of global climate change. How did that happen? Did they all meet one day at Applebees to plan this diabolical conspiracy? Have the real scientists been silenced and the truth suppressed?

Nope.. They meet at the UN every few years to present ONLY the Climate science relevent to MAN-CAUSED Global Warming. Then they all try to mug the industrialized world for money.

These "position statements by professional society are never voted on by the membership. They are drafted by the front office to ADMIT their bias and pledge their loyalties to all their sponsors. Like the BILLIONS of research dollars available IF --- you can swallow your pride and make your work SOUND like their prepackaged conclusion that man is wrecking the planet and money and power is required to fix that.

In fact -- 2nd data pt. The Geological Society of Australia had a Global Warming/Climate Policy Statement for YEARS.. Revised several times all without input from the membership. Last time they tried to revise it -- the membership demanded to be involved. They no longer HAVE a policy statement on Climate Change. Worthless as a Congressional Investigation I tell you.. Not like in the movies where the society members all meet in the Old Harvard lecture hall and hammer out a proclamation of truth.

I sense you're not really interested in learning this kind of conflicting information. Seriously,

DID you really think those policy positions are NOT political?

That must be why the military planners of all the industrialized nations are making contingency plans based on global climate change scenarios. Maybe they just don't have anything better to do, you know since they aren't concerned about terrorism or Chinese expansionism, or Russian resurgence. They must be thinking about stuff like that because it's stylish and trendy. You know how liberal those military guys can be.

you got a book you could lend me to show me this military change in policy?

I know you would never provide any details from the internet since it is outdated and useless .

Feel free to use your amazing powers of internet research to refute it.

refute a false position? show me how that's done. you show me your proof, it's simple right?

 

[jc456]

Not asked of me, but..........................when the so called who's who of Climate change get caught Lying.........time and time again...........................why the hell should anyone trust them anymore................

Is that the current FOX News version?

boooo, you can do better can't you?

BTW, you need some new material. i see you are not creative.

You have yet to produce anything that looks like a rebuttal based on any kind of evidence. I'm apparently supposed to take your word.

and you present nothing to be here. I have nothing to share with someone who doesn't know anything.

So then you're just too damn lazy to read links.

you don't provide crap s0nnY

 

[Liminal]

That must be why the military planners of all the industrialized nations are making contingency plans based on global climate change scenarios. Maybe they just don't have anything better to do, you know since they aren't concerned about terrorism or Chinese expansionism, or Russian resurgence. They must be thinking about stuff like that because it's stylish and trendy. You know how liberal those military guys can be.

Obviously, you're oblivious to the model of inefficiency that is our Federal Govt. Good bet would be that you LOVE yourself more of this kind of "military preparedness"..

That plan is right up there with the Alien Invasion Contingency Plan and the Return of Jesus Plan that Ronald Reagan required of them.

Are you that naive? Do you not know the effect of mandate requiring all Federal Agencies to address and be sensitive to a myriad of "favorite memes of the day"..

Do you really think the Coast Guard cadets that had to suffer thru 1/2 an hour of Obama explaining to them why Global Warming was one of their most serious missions?

The day the Defense Dept develops a battle cross for meritorious service in the Climate Change cause because those CG cadets got a sunburn on patrol --- send me a PM.... 0.5degC change in your lifetime and you believe this is a military crisis? ARE YOU DAFT?

See, I knew we had an expert on military planning here.
Looks like we're back to conspiracy theories then.

I never left the conspiracy, so you're wrong. And, you obviously have nothing of interest for the debate on here so you can take your ball and go home.

Yes, I can see why you'd like to make all the rules to suit yourself.

I want to be like you all.

You don't have any idea about what you know, what you believe, or why. You only know what you're told.

 

[Liminal]

Feel free to explain how nearly every civilized nation on earth officially agrees with the science of global climate change. How did that happen? Did they all meet one day at Applebees to plan this diabolical conspiracy? Have the real scientists been silenced and the truth suppressed?

Nope.. They meet at the UN every few years to present ONLY the Climate science relevent to MAN-CAUSED Global Warming. Then they all try to mug the industrialized world for money.

These "position statements by professional society are never voted on by the membership. They are drafted by the front office to ADMIT their bias and pledge their loyalties to all their sponsors. Like the BILLIONS of research dollars available IF --- you can swallow your pride and make your work SOUND like their prepackaged conclusion that man is wrecking the planet and money and power is required to fix that.

In fact -- 2nd data pt. The Geological Society of Australia had a Global Warming/Climate Policy Statement for YEARS.. Revised several times all without input from the membership. Last time they tried to revise it -- the membership demanded to be involved. They no longer HAVE a policy statement on Climate Change. Worthless as a Congressional Investigation I tell you.. Not like in the movies where the society members all meet in the Old Harvard lecture hall and hammer out a proclamation of truth.

I sense you're not really interested in learning this kind of conflicting information. Seriously,

DID you really think those policy positions are NOT political?

That must be why the military planners of all the industrialized nations are making contingency plans based on global climate change scenarios. Maybe they just don't have anything better to do, you know since they aren't concerned about terrorism or Chinese expansionism, or Russian resurgence. They must be thinking about stuff like that because it's stylish and trendy. You know how liberal those military guys can be.

you got a book you could lend me to show me this military change in policy?

I know you would never provide any details from the internet since it is outdated and useless .

Feel free to use your amazing powers of internet research to refute it.

refute a false position? show me how that's done. you show me your proof, it's simple right?

If it's not a fact then you must have means at your disposal to disprove it. Do I have to hold your hand and walk you through this?

 

[jc456]

Obviously, you're oblivious to the model of inefficiency that is our Federal Govt. Good bet would be that you LOVE yourself more of this kind of "military preparedness"..

That plan is right up there with the Alien Invasion Contingency Plan and the Return of Jesus Plan that Ronald Reagan required of them.

Are you that naive? Do you not know the effect of mandate requiring all Federal Agencies to address and be sensitive to a myriad of "favorite memes of the day"..

Do you really think the Coast Guard cadets that had to suffer thru 1/2 an hour of Obama explaining to them why Global Warming was one of their most serious missions?

The day the Defense Dept develops a battle cross for meritorious service in the Climate Change cause because those CG cadets got a sunburn on patrol --- send me a PM.... 0.5degC change in your lifetime and you believe this is a military crisis? ARE YOU DAFT?

See, I knew we had an expert on military planning here.
Looks like we're back to conspiracy theories then.

I never left the conspiracy, so you're wrong. And, you obviously have nothing of interest for the debate on here so you can take your ball and go home.

Yes, I can see why you'd like to make all the rules to suit yourself.

I want to be like you all.

You don't have any idea about what you know, what you believe, or why. You only know what you're told.

sure I do.

 

[jc456]

Nope.. They meet at the UN every few years to present ONLY the Climate science relevent to MAN-CAUSED Global Warming. Then they all try to mug the industrialized world for money.

These "position statements by professional society are never voted on by the membership. They are drafted by the front office to ADMIT their bias and pledge their loyalties to all their sponsors. Like the BILLIONS of research dollars available IF --- you can swallow your pride and make your work SOUND like their prepackaged conclusion that man is wrecking the planet and money and power is required to fix that.

In fact -- 2nd data pt. The Geological Society of Australia had a Global Warming/Climate Policy Statement for YEARS.. Revised several times all without input from the membership. Last time they tried to revise it -- the membership demanded to be involved. They no longer HAVE a policy statement on Climate Change. Worthless as a Congressional Investigation I tell you.. Not like in the movies where the society members all meet in the Old Harvard lecture hall and hammer out a proclamation of truth.

I sense you're not really interested in learning this kind of conflicting information. Seriously,

DID you really think those policy positions are NOT political?

That must be why the military planners of all the industrialized nations are making contingency plans based on global climate change scenarios. Maybe they just don't have anything better to do, you know since they aren't concerned about terrorism or Chinese expansionism, or Russian resurgence. They must be thinking about stuff like that because it's stylish and trendy. You know how liberal those military guys can be.

you got a book you could lend me to show me this military change in policy?

I know you would never provide any details from the internet since it is outdated and useless .

Feel free to use your amazing powers of internet research to refute it.

refute a false position? show me how that's done. you show me your proof, it's simple right?

If it's not a fact then you must have means at your disposal to disprove it. Do I have to hold your hand and walk you through this?

why would someone report on nothing? you're a k00k.

 

[Liminal]

That must be why the military planners of all the industrialized nations are making contingency plans based on global climate change scenarios. Maybe they just don't have anything better to do, you know since they aren't concerned about terrorism or Chinese expansionism, or Russian resurgence. They must be thinking about stuff like that because it's stylish and trendy. You know how liberal those military guys can be.

you got a book you could lend me to show me this military change in policy?

I know you would never provide any details from the internet since it is outdated and useless .

Feel free to use your amazing powers of internet research to refute it.

refute a false position? show me how that's done. you show me your proof, it's simple right?

If it's not a fact then you must have means at your disposal to disprove it. Do I have to hold your hand and walk you through this?

why would someone report on nothing? you're a k00k.

You would.
Climate Change and National Security Pentagon Says Global Warming Is Real and Is Planning for the Worst - Living Green Magazine Living Green Magazine