What passes for Republican Science

[konradv]

Geological cycles. We're but a pinprick.

What geological cycle is increasing the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere?

 

[tjvh]

It really should be in science shouldn't it?

Why are Republican thugs making climate change a political issue?

Have to protect Big Oil at all costs

When Politics enters the realm of science, the result is scientists passing emails about purposely manipulating FALSE data to reflect their agenda... Sound familiar? Democrats have been politicizing science for years to have their environmental issues pushed through... Those who believe the science behind those issues is suspect, are not allowed to voice their disagreement? Apparently they are not... In your wind driven perfect world. The next time you start up your car remember the word "HYPOCRITE".

No it doesn't sound familiar because independent investigation showed it never happened. More GOP thuggery to discredit climate change

Got a link to a non partisan site proving that it was discredited?

 

[rightwinger]

When Politics enters the realm of science, the result is scientists passing emails about purposely manipulating FALSE data to reflect their agenda... Sound familiar? Democrats have been politicizing science for years to have their environmental issues pushed through... Those who believe the science behind those issues is suspect, are not allowed to voice their disagreement? Apparently they are not... In your wind driven perfect world. The next time you start up your car remember the word "HYPOCRITE".

No it doesn't sound familiar because independent investigation showed it never happened. More GOP thuggery to discredit climate change

Got a link to a non partisan site proving that it was discredited?

Debunking Misinformation About Stolen Climate Emails in the "Climategate" Manufactured Controversy | Union of Concerned Scientists

Investigations Clear Scientists of Wrongdoing

Six official investigations have cleared scientists of accusations of wrongdoing.

A three-part Penn State University cleared scientist Michael Mann of wrongdoing.
Two reviews commissioned by the University of East Anglia"supported the honesty and integrity of scientists in the Climatic Research Unit."
A UK Parliament report concluded that the emails have no bearing on our understanding of climate science and that claims against UEA scientists are misleading.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Inspector General's office concluded there was no evidence of wrongdoing on behalf of their employees.
The National Science Foundation's Inspector General's office concluded, "Lacking any direct evidence of research misconduct...we are closing this investigation with no further action."
Other agencies and media outlets have investigated the substance of the emails.

The Environmental Protection Agency, in response to petitions against action to curb heat-trapping emissions, dismissed attacks on the science rooted in the stolen emails.
Factcheck.org debunked claims that the emails put the conclusions of climate science into question.
Politifact.com rated claims that the emails falsify climate science as "false."
An Associated Press review of the emails found that they "don't undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions."

 

[buckeye45_73]

Why don't all the manmade global warming hysteric types just kill themselves and save the planet?

It always cracks me up that those who cry man made global warming the loudest are also the ones who still are exacerbating the problem. Please, GW LOLberals, just kill yourself and save the planet.

How are the ones crying the loudest exacerbating the problem? Flying somewhere isn't proof of anything. You're assuming you know the ins and outs of the lives of people you don't know. What evidence do you have that people haven't changed their habits in a myriad of ways? This is about cutting down on our effect on the environment, not the elimination of anything having to do with the modern world.

Yeah cutting down our effect is to let the rich liberals do as they please and the rest of us have to lower our standard of living. To that I say HELL NO.
IU dont see any of those rich liberals lowering their standards. IN FACT, people at a Brazil conference called Richard Branson out on being a hypocrite.

 

[Si modo]

Anyone, seriously anyone, who thinks the UCS is non-partisan is an idiot.

Although pressured to join, never. Ever.

 

[tjvh]

Why don't all the manmade global warming hysteric types just kill themselves and save the planet?

It always cracks me up that those who cry man made global warming the loudest are also the ones who still are exacerbating the problem. Please, GW LOLberals, just kill yourself and save the planet.

How are the ones crying the loudest exacerbating the problem? Flying somewhere isn't proof of anything. You're assuming you know the ins and outs of the lives of people you don't know. What evidence do you have that people haven't changed their habits in a myriad of ways? This is about cutting down on our effect on the environment, not the elimination of anything having to do with the modern world.

Cutting down our effect is one thing, destroying the Coal, and Oil industries without already HAVING a viable Green replacement to them is quite another.

 

[tjvh]

No it doesn't sound familiar because independent investigation showed it never happened. More GOP thuggery to discredit climate change

Got a link to a non partisan site proving that it was discredited?

Debunking Misinformation About Stolen Climate Emails in the "Climategate" Manufactured Controversy | Union of Concerned Scientists

Investigations Clear Scientists of Wrongdoing

Six official investigations have cleared scientists of accusations of wrongdoing.

A three-part Penn State University cleared scientist Michael Mann of wrongdoing.
Two reviews commissioned by the University of East Anglia"supported the honesty and integrity of scientists in the Climatic Research Unit."
A UK Parliament report concluded that the emails have no bearing on our understanding of climate science and that claims against UEA scientists are misleading.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Inspector General's office concluded there was no evidence of wrongdoing on behalf of their employees.
The National Science Foundation's Inspector General's office concluded, "Lacking any direct evidence of research misconduct...we are closing this investigation with no further action."
Other agencies and media outlets have investigated the substance of the emails.

The Environmental Protection Agency, in response to petitions against action to curb heat-trapping emissions, dismissed attacks on the science rooted in the stolen emails.
Factcheck.org debunked claims that the emails put the conclusions of climate science into question.
Politifact.com rated claims that the emails falsify climate science as "false."
An Associated Press review of the emails found that they "don't undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions."

I specifically asked for a "non partisan" source. But thanks for trying.

 

[rightwinger]

Why don't all the manmade global warming hysteric types just kill themselves and save the planet?

It always cracks me up that those who cry man made global warming the loudest are also the ones who still are exacerbating the problem. Please, GW LOLberals, just kill yourself and save the planet.

How are the ones crying the loudest exacerbating the problem? Flying somewhere isn't proof of anything. You're assuming you know the ins and outs of the lives of people you don't know. What evidence do you have that people haven't changed their habits in a myriad of ways? This is about cutting down on our effect on the environment, not the elimination of anything having to do with the modern world.

Cutting down our effect is one thing, destroying the Coal, and Oil industries without already HAVING a viable Green replacement to them is quite another.

Nobody is advocating shutting down coal or big oil without something to fill the void. But we do have to get off of our addiction to fossil fuels at all costs. If not for environmental reasons than economic reasons.
There are limited fossil fuels available....in time, we will cut out own throats

 

[Si modo]

How are the ones crying the loudest exacerbating the problem? Flying somewhere isn't proof of anything. You're assuming you know the ins and outs of the lives of people you don't know. What evidence do you have that people haven't changed their habits in a myriad of ways? This is about cutting down on our effect on the environment, not the elimination of anything having to do with the modern world.

Cutting down our effect is one thing, destroying the Coal, and Oil industries without already HAVING a viable Green replacement to them is quite another.

Nobody is advocating shutting down coal or big oil without something to fill the void. But we do have to get off of our addiction to fossil fuels at all costs. If not for environmental reasons than economic reasons.
There are limited fossil fuels available....in time, we will cut out own throats

I agree. Let science do what it does best so that the state of the science can help us.

Forcing facts, data, observations, etc. to fit policy is not science.

 

[rightwinger]

Got a link to a non partisan site proving that it was discredited?

Debunking Misinformation About Stolen Climate Emails in the "Climategate" Manufactured Controversy | Union of Concerned Scientists

Investigations Clear Scientists of Wrongdoing

Six official investigations have cleared scientists of accusations of wrongdoing.

A three-part Penn State University cleared scientist Michael Mann of wrongdoing.
Two reviews commissioned by the University of East Anglia"supported the honesty and integrity of scientists in the Climatic Research Unit."
A UK Parliament report concluded that the emails have no bearing on our understanding of climate science and that claims against UEA scientists are misleading.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Inspector General's office concluded there was no evidence of wrongdoing on behalf of their employees.
The National Science Foundation's Inspector General's office concluded, "Lacking any direct evidence of research misconduct...we are closing this investigation with no further action."
Other agencies and media outlets have investigated the substance of the emails.

The Environmental Protection Agency, in response to petitions against action to curb heat-trapping emissions, dismissed attacks on the science rooted in the stolen emails.
Factcheck.org debunked claims that the emails put the conclusions of climate science into question.
Politifact.com rated claims that the emails falsify climate science as "false."
An Associated Press review of the emails found that they "don't undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions."

I specifically asked for a "non partisan" source. But thanks for trying.

LOL

Associated Press
Factcheck.org
Politifact.com
UK Parliament

If you were only going to accept FoxNews and Breitbart as non partisan sources, you should have said so

 

[flacaltenn]

It is what passes for science within the Grand Old Party

Republicans can't counter with data of their own and with 92% of scientists agreeing with global warming they have to do something. So they fall back on their usual tactic of harrassment, threats and intimidation to get their way

Science is not done by consensus.

Shitbags like you soil it. Let science do what it does best - science.

Hacks like you getting involve simply ruin it. YOU and your likes are enemies of science.

I agree

The potential threat of climate change is too important to be soiled by politics. Let the scientists hash it out without the harassment and intimidation by Republican thugs

You TRIED -- but you failed to make this a DEM -- REP issue.. The supoenas and FOIA documents and what you call harrassment is because the high priests of AGW sitting in protected govt sponsored institutions won't share their data with other researchers.

And everytime they DO -- they get caught cherry-picking tree rings or marking up thermometer readings without a cause..

If you think science means that you win if you control the means to publish and the data set that you're using --- then you don't understand the process.. ESPECIALLY if you think the warmers are being persecuted primarily by Republicans and without a just cause.

Maybe you ought to look at the DEM motivation for making climate change political. Certainly shouldn't take you too long to find HUGE connections there.. IF -- you could be objective about it... "Green Jobs"? "Carbon Tax"? "Sustainable Development"? "Global Equity"?

Nope -- nothing under that rock...

 

[flacaltenn]

BTW RightWinger:: Posting on another thread just now that I voted against the Leftist State of California going into the EMBRYONIC Stem Cell research business just to spite those "anti-science" Republicans..

$BILLs that the state could not afford wasted to make a political statement. You want MORE examples of Democrat science fantasies --- or should we consider this a draw?

 

[flacaltenn]

OR --- we could stay on your faulty topic and ask you why Dems are constantly trying to ram thru their views in violation of free speech principles be it campaign financing or science..

I suppose when Al Gore speaks -- we should all STFU and swallow it...

An Inconvenient Verdict for Al Gore - ABC News

One day before Friday's announcement that he was a co-winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, a British High Court judge ruled that Gore's global warming film, "An Inconvenient Truth," while "broadly accurate," contained nine significant errors.

The ruling came on a challenge from a UK school official who did not want to show the film to students. High Court Judge Michael Burton said that the film is "substantially founded upon scientific research and fact" but that the errors were made in "the context of alarmism and exaggeration."

Burton found that screening the film in British secondary schools violated laws barring the promotion of partisan political views in the classroom. But he allowed the film to be shown on the condition that it is accompanied by guidance notes to balance Gore's "one-sided" views, saying that the film's "apocalyptic vision" was not an impartial analysis of climate change.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Lets cut to the chase here

Why are climate scientists being harassed?

Is it because some people disagree that man is influencing the environment or because there is an immense amount of money being made off of fossil fuels and they don't want to lose the golden goose?

"BBC - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming

Phil Jones: Yes..."

From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,mann@xxxxx.xxx, mhughes@xxxx.xxx
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.briffa@xxx.xx.xx,t.osborn@xxxx.xxx
Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or
first thing tomorrow.
I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps
to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from
1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline. Mike’s series got the annual
land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land
N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999
for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with
data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.
Thanks for the comments, Ray.

"But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy." - IPCC

Read more: UN IPCC Official Admits 'We Redistribute World's Wealth By Climate Policy' | NewsBusters.org

 

[rightwinger]

OR --- we could stay on your faulty topic and ask you why Dems are constantly trying to ram thru their views in violation of free speech principles be it campaign financing or science..

I suppose when Al Gore speaks -- we should all STFU and swallow it...

An Inconvenient Verdict for Al Gore - ABC News

One day before Friday's announcement that he was a co-winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, a British High Court judge ruled that Gore's global warming film, "An Inconvenient Truth," while "broadly accurate," contained nine significant errors.

The ruling came on a challenge from a UK school official who did not want to show the film to students. High Court Judge Michael Burton said that the film is "substantially founded upon scientific research and fact" but that the errors were made in "the context of alarmism and exaggeration."

Burton found that screening the film in British secondary schools violated laws barring the promotion of partisan political views in the classroom. But he allowed the film to be shown on the condition that it is accompanied by guidance notes to balance Gore's "one-sided" views, saying that the film's "apocalyptic vision" was not an impartial analysis of climate change.

So you are saying that the British say that global warming is occurring just the world will not end tomorrow

Got it....no reason to lift a finger until death is knocking on our door

 

[NoNukes]

Your proposition that a wisp of CO2 is: melting the ice caps, making the oceans rise, turning the oceans to acid and starting forest fires, is just plain fucking stupid and self-ridicules

Are you denying that the oceans are being destroyed by mankind?

 

[NoNukes]

As long as the Oil and Gas lobby has undue influence over our legislators, Climate Science is going to be political.

Open your eyes, sandwich....it's not Oil and Gas that runs the show....it's Big Green: the Sierra Club and the other Leftisties.


Two words: "Keystone Pipeline."


Does your care actually have a bumper-sticker "Oblivious to the Obvious"?

Always finding a way to blame everything on the lefties makes you someone not to be taken seriously.

 

[flacaltenn]

OR --- we could stay on your faulty topic and ask you why Dems are constantly trying to ram thru their views in violation of free speech principles be it campaign financing or science..

I suppose when Al Gore speaks -- we should all STFU and swallow it...

An Inconvenient Verdict for Al Gore - ABC News

One day before Friday's announcement that he was a co-winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, a British High Court judge ruled that Gore's global warming film, "An Inconvenient Truth," while "broadly accurate," contained nine significant errors.

The ruling came on a challenge from a UK school official who did not want to show the film to students. High Court Judge Michael Burton said that the film is "substantially founded upon scientific research and fact" but that the errors were made in "the context of alarmism and exaggeration."

Burton found that screening the film in British secondary schools violated laws barring the promotion of partisan political views in the classroom. But he allowed the film to be shown on the condition that it is accompanied by guidance notes to balance Gore's "one-sided" views, saying that the film's "apocalyptic vision" was not an impartial analysis of climate change.

So you are saying that the British say that global warming is occurring just the world will not end tomorrow

Got it....no reason to lift a finger until death is knocking on our door

Let's ponder this.. I live in LogicVille. So if AGW WAS a huge threat to mankind --- WHY is it that DEMS (primarily) aren't BEGGING for 120 new nuclear reactors in this country to cut carbon emissions?

Because it's just a game to them? Or because they want to IMPOSE a reduced energy society on the rest of us?

The fear of the Earth melting is somehow NOT SUFFICIENT to get them to consider a scientifically legitimate solution to the crisis.. Or is it just IGNORANCE of science/engineering on their parts. Maybe leftists like NoNukes can't tell the diff between a bomb and a power plant that would "save the planet".

 

[Avatar4321]

Global warming is a crock. Junk science isnt real science. It's not a coincidence that all the solutions for global warming is socialism. Nor is it a coincidence that no matter what happens with the climate, that is evidence for it. Nor is it a coincidence that they had to change the name from global warming to climate change.

After all, it's hard to convence people that the earth is in crisis from man made global warming when the tempature goes down. And if there isnt a crisis then how do politicians dupe naive people into surrendering their liberty so politicians and their friends can get rich?

 

[Avatar4321]

Your proposition that a wisp of CO2 is: melting the ice caps, making the oceans rise, turning the oceans to acid and starting forest fires, is just plain fucking stupid and self-ridicules

Are you denying that the oceans are being destroyed by mankind?

absolutely.