Global Warming Scientific Consensus--Isn't

[Meister]

Every "climatologist" with a government grant to study "climate change" is being paid to produce support for climate change.

Since almost all climate research, whether on climate change or on anything else, is being funded by government grants, this amounts to giving yourself an excuse to dismiss the entire body of science in the field.

Having done that, you are left with nothing. Enjoy your ignorance. I understand it's bliss.

Speaking of ignorant, Dragon....you dismiss all the tainted numbers and the emails from 'your' scientists, then go on as if the science is solid. I laugh at that kind of ignorance.

Hate to bash your religion, but it is what it is.

 

[bripat9643]

Every "climatologist" with a government grant to study "climate change" is being paid to produce support for climate change.

Since almost all climate research, whether on climate change or on anything else, is being funded by government grants, this amounts to giving yourself an excuse to dismiss the entire body of science in the field.

Having done that, you are left with nothing. Enjoy your ignorance. I understand it's bliss.

Speaking of ignorant, Dragon....you dismiss all the tainted numbers and the emails from 'your' scientists, then go on as if the science is solid. I laugh at that kind of ignorance.

Hate to bash your religion, but it is what it is.

Dragon quotes the GISS, but a neighboring thread shows how Hansen has been doctoring the GISS data.

The warmist cult members studiously avoid any evidence that doesn't reinforce their delusions. They show all the signs of a cult.

 

[Dragon]

you dismiss all the tainted numbers and the emails from 'your' scientists, then go on as if the science is solid.

It is solid.

BBC News - Global warming 'confirmed' by independent study

The emails in question did in some cases call the behavior of those involved into question. However, their scientific conclusions have been independently confirmed, and analysis of the actual scientific impact shows it to have been nil.

"Climategate" is used for propaganda purposes by those who wish to evoke an EMOTIONAL response. On a RATIONAL level, its implication is nonexistent.

 

[skookerasbil]

Stupid-ass sheep...........

Some people in this world will gladly pay $1,000 a pop for a bag of dog doo if its packaged just right. The alarmist k00ks would be among them.


No record, but January may be one of coldest ever in Fairbanks; average temperature -24.6 | The Republic

 

[Dragon]

Dragon quotes the GISS, but a neighboring thread shows how Hansen has been doctoring the GISS data.

GlobalAirTemp

Global Warming and Predictions of an Impending Ice Age: Global Warming Since 1998 — A blog on Environmental Happenings by Dean Bill Chameides

What has global warming done since 1998?

One need not be limited to a single data source.

You know, there's an interesting pattern to denialist assertions. They read like a lawyer's brief, not a scientist's argument. Here's what I mean.

A lawyer in court to defend a client might say, "My client was not at the scene of the murder. But if he was, the murder weapon was not his. But if it was, it was stolen by the real killer. But if in fact my client pulled the trigger, he acted in self-defense."

Now, these assertions are in some cases mutually exclusive. If the accused was not at the scene of the murder, then he could not have killed the victim in self-defense. But they are all united by a single goal: to achieve a verdict of innocent.

Similarly, the denialist assertions go something like this.

"The planet is not warming. But if it is, then human activity is not the cause. But if human activity is the cause, the results will be trivial. But if the results will not be trivial, then they are beneficial. But if the results will be bad, we cannot do anything about it without destroying the economy. But if all of the data are against us, then there is a huge conspiracy to defraud the public in order to gain government grants."

Of course, one must wonder how a Congress controlled by the Republican Party over many of the years in question found itself funding this conspiracy, and what the party and their fossil-fuel industry donors got out of doing so. But in any case, when the argument descends to the level of claiming an Illuminati-scale global conspiracy exists, I would call that a move of desperation.

 

[skookerasbil]

Dragon quotes the GISS, but a neighboring thread shows how Hansen has been doctoring the GISS data.

GlobalAirTemp

Global Warming and Predictions of an Impending Ice Age: Global Warming Since 1998 — A blog on Environmental Happenings by Dean Bill Chameides

What has global warming done since 1998?

One need not be limited to a single data source.

You know, there's an interesting pattern to denialist assertions. They read like a lawyer's brief, not a scientist's argument. Here's what I mean.

A lawyer in court to defend a client might say, "My client was not at the scene of the murder. But if he was, the murder weapon was not his. But if it was, it was stolen by the real killer. But if in fact my client pulled the trigger, he acted in self-defense."

Now, these assertions are in some cases mutually exclusive. If the accused was not at the scene of the murder, then he could not have killed the victim in self-defense. But they are all united by a single goal: to achieve a verdict of innocent.

Similarly, the denialist assertions go something like this.

"The planet is not warming. But if it is, then human activity is not the cause. But if human activity is the cause, the results will be trivial. But if the results will not be trivial, then they are beneficial. But if the results will be bad, we cannot do anything about it without destroying the economy. But if all of the data are against us, then there is a huge conspiracy to defraud the public in order to gain government grants."

Of course, one must wonder how a Congress controlled by the Republican Party over many of the years in question found itself funding this conspiracy, and what the party and their fossil-fuel industry donors got out of doing so. But in any case, when the argument descends to the level of claiming an Illuminati-scale global conspiracy exists, I would call that a move of desperation.

A move of desperation??

Can I laugh my balls off any harder? s0n......you have the political IQ of a small soap dish. The contingent of deniers is decimating the alarmists in the court of public opinion.......and thats all I give a fcuk about. In fact, so much so that this forum is getting boring in the past two years or so. Every year the plaight of the alarmist nutters grows more pathetic.......almost daily there are new news reports of green energy getting a kick in the balls and efforts to curb carbon in 2012 = ZERO Nobody gives a shit and its not even debatable anymore.

Desperate???!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.


Absolutely nobody gives a flying **** about the science except the internet OCD k00ks.



Poll: Global Warming Ranks Last in Public Concern | Heartlander Magazine


And that was 2009...........ask yourself...........how much climate legislation has even been brought to the floor in the past two years???????

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[skookerasbil]

Editorial: Obama has greens squirming a bit | obama, oil, president - Opinion - The Orange County Register