In one corner, we had very organized and well scripted Democrats pushing mindless dishonest global warming propaganda. On the other side (with a few exceptions) we had clueless, disarmed Republicans mumbling incoherently against the EPA regulations.
The Democrats had numerous present and former EPA administrators verbally backing up their claims. The major claims were :
- 97% of scientists agree that global warming is real, imminent and dangerous
- Heatwaves are becoming more common
- Severe weather is becoming more common and extreme
- Sea level is rising due to global warming and threatens coastal regions
There isn’t one shred of evidence to support the idea that most scientists believe global warming is imminent and dangerous. The Democrats tack those words on to a completely benign (and obvious) finding that most scientists believe humans influence the climate. It is beyond my comprehension why Republicans repeatedly let them get away with that.
The EPA’s own data shows that heatwaves are not becoming more common in the US, and peaked 80 years ago.
Heat waves in the 1930s remain the most severe heat waves in the U.S. historical record (see Figure 1).
The Republicans could have discredited the EPA administrators by simply showing this graph, which is prominently displayed on the EPA web site.
Extreme weather is not becoming more common or more severe. Obama’s presidency has seen the fewest US hurricane strikes of any president since at least 1850. There have been three US hurricane strikes since Obama took office, compared to twenty-six while Grover Cleveland was president.
The last two years have had the lowest number of US tornadoes on record.
The frequency of severe tornadoes peaked forty years ago.
All US short term rainfall records were set a long time ago.
There isn’t one shred of legitimate evidence to back up the claim that the weather is becoming more extreme.
As far as sea level goes, it has been rising for 20,000 years, and is 400 feet higher now than it was when the first Americans walked across the Bering Strait from Asia.
More recent observations of sea level show that there is no human influence. Sea level on the East Coast (blue below) appears to have been rising at a steady rate since the start of measurements in 1850. It shows no acceleration as CO2 increased, indicating that there is no human influence on sea level.
On the west coast (red below) sea level rise rates are much lower, indicating that what is being observed on the East Coast is land sinking, rather than oceans rising.
None of the scary Democrat/EPA claims are backed by evidence, and are nothing more than carefully planned, well versed propaganda – yet the Republicans remain incapable of mounting a coherent response. If the Republicans were educated and organized, they would be able to shut this scam down in a matter of days.
The best evidence we have of the 97% consensus is Cook et al 2013. You might be interested in my thoughts about it here: http://dereksorensen.wordpress.com/2014/06/18/ninety-seven-percent/
My point is they are tacking “imminent and dangerous” on to what ever the actual number is.
Exactly. That’s the point I make in the blog.
The boxer idiocy.
Derek, did you actually critically evaluate the methodology of the “study,” and are you aware of skeptical scientists noting that their skeptical studies were misclassified?
And why hasn’t Cook et al released all his data for scrutiny?
Such a study would never be accepted for publication in a medical journal.
Never as never.
Who cares about climate change consensus?
http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/behavioural-insights/climate-change-consensus-who-cares
“It is beyond my comprehension why Republicans repeatedly let them get away with that.”
The legacy press will slay them if they speak up. The press supports the Dem agenda. Or do the Dems support the press’s agenda? Hard to tell which came first, the press or the Democrat.
The Republicans, for good reason, are afraid of people who buy ink by the barrel.
I love it how you say “no evidence” when you really mean “no evidence that I don’t have a inane excuse to ignore.”
Present your evidence.
Speak to a climatologist. They’ll give you plenty.
I speak with climatologists almost every day. I want to know why you believe the nonsense you believe.
*crickets*
Asking “Jayden Smith” a question is pointless because it isn’t a real person. Robots can’t answer questions their programmers didn’t think of. I mean, they don’t even know what the “average temperature” they use to calculate “anomaly” is, why would it be able to answer any other question? There is only one possible thing to do when getting thread bombed by such an obvious “Unintelligent Agent”: /ignore
Speaking with the voices in your head doesn’t exactly count as a climatologist.
Then stop doing it.
You’re right Dougmanxxx. It is pointless asking me questions. Because I have openly admitted that I am not here to try to convince any of you of anything. I’m here to listen to the crazy arguments that climate denialists make.
You are not listening either. You are merely issuing juvenile ad hominems, infantile insults, and childish pejoratives.
Another lie from the queen of liars.
It’s pointless to ask you questions because you can’t answer them. Offering up your lame excuses only makes you look more idiotic.
*Offers darwin more lame excuses*
You are not even offering lame excuses. I guess you ran out of them.
Well at least you admit it.
My lame excuses are at least slightly less lame than the excuses you guys use to deny science.
You are the only one denying science. No one here is. Science 101 – remember? You still have not stated it.
So you’re saying it’s verboten to question science?
Should scientific work conducted on the taxpayer dime, or which may have enormous impact on society be open to examination?
Should fellow scientists who question AGW be fired, censored or threatened?
Please answer those questions.
Oh look, my name is Darwin and I use straw-man arguments and German words to make myself seem intelligent.
You cannot even use words to make yourself look intelligent. Nor would you know what it looks like.
“I’m here to listen to the crazy arguments that climate denialists make.”
Most of the world’s greatest scientific minds were considered crazy denialists. That’s pretty much a compliment and badge of honor for scientific minds and independent thinkers. People with great minds have no problem with ad hominem as that is a sign that those using ad hominem have lost the argument. Your comments get progressively funnier and I thank you for the laughs.
I’m simply asking you to answer those questions. They’re not difficult.
You’re welcome Sundance. I’m finding this all pretty damn funny too.
yes, we see insane people laughing hysterically at nothing all the time. You are merely the latest looney tune.
Oh crap. It’s back. Idiocy once again on parade.
As usual, when it comes to answering simple questions Jayden flees. Typical liberal.
Sorry, no. They do not release their data (see Mann vs. McIntyre). Since they are not making stupid statements like you, they have nothing to prove here. You do. Put up or shut up.
Jayden took a science course once. He took “Environmental Science for non-science students” on a pass/fail basis, to earn credits for his BA in Humanistic Studies. He got a P.
Bravo Jayden.
Thanks Morgan!
Is this true Jayden?
No, unfortunately not. I failed. But at least it was better than the “ungraded” mark that Steven Goddard received because he was too busy going off on rants about not being willing to listen to any information that comes from a publicly funded school.
There is always next year.
You’re not actually paying a debate teacher for these 8th grade type rebuttals, are you? Your argument, as it is, is basically putting your hands over your ears and shouting “I have more people on my side! I have more people on my side….!”
The whole time Jayden has been here he’s refused to present a piece of evidence which support his claims and instead says “go here” or “look here”. If you’re (Jayden) going to disagree with what Steven or anyone else has to say, why not produce some evidence which supports your claim, rather than parroting the 97% consensus claim which has been proven false?
Yep. A parrot. He’s a grey parrot who gets his information by taking crackers from the political studies students at ESU who smoke dope and attack the pet stores all over town, teaching the parrots how to type with their beaks. That explains all the misspelled words as well.
I meant ESF at SU
No, he got an O – he just thinks it is close to a P.
No, he means no evidence. You have provided none. You have not even tried to provide any. But you go ahead and try.
According to NOAA, the worst tornado outbreak in US history was the 1965 Palm Sunday outbreak. See http://www.livescience.com/6968-40-years-today-worst-tornado-outbreak-history.html
Quoting from the above source:
“It was unusually hot in the Midwest on April 11, 1965 — Palm Sunday. Temperatures climbed into the 80s. Storms began to develop as a strong low-pressure system sliding through Wisconsin drew warm, humid air into southern Michigan. Cooler and drier air high in the atmosphere mixed with moist, warm air near the surface.
The conditions were ripe for tornadoes.
Other single tornadoes have proved deadlier, but the outbreak 40 years ago this date was the worst in U.S. history, according to NOAA, parent organization of the National Weather Service. By the end of the day, 250 people would die and 1,500 would be injured.”
A tornado outbreak in 1884 had more deaths and injuries and seems to be ignored by NOAA, the Weather Channel and others.
Greeley in his book American Weather says:
“On February 9th, 1884, an unparalleled series of tornadoes occurred from Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Illinois, eastward to Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. There were more than sixty separate tornadoes after 10 A. M. of that disastrous day. Over ten thousand buildings were destroyed, eight hundred people killed, and twenty-five hundred wounded.”
I would say this was the worst one day toll in US history, but no one ever mentions it in their lists of worst tornadoes.
Bwaahk . . . Jayden want a cracker.
Squawk – “Temperatures are rising”
Squawk – “We’re all going to fry”
Squawk – “give me your tax dollars”
Squawk – “You don’t want to see me cry”
Give him the cracker … he’s well trained.
.
Squawk – “We’re all going to fry”
=======
Not me. I plan to die before 2100.
I plan to fry, maybe some chicken or potato strips (French Fries) this weekend … Frying *can* be good.
So .. Jaydee Schmidt joins other notable assess like David ‘Apple’, Joshua, Web ‘Double’ Telescope and William X-Box Connelley on the web.
Let them strand as examples as what true asses look like.
.
stand, not strand … typo.
Strand works – if you are in Myrtle Beach. 😉
You put him in appropriate company.
Concern trolling is easy to win when you’ve trained your audience to despise your target (i.e., “Big Business”).
Republicans know they will ultimately benefit from the increased government power and interference with the economy to fight ‘climate change’. Nor do they want to face the social consequences of not going along with the herd. At the same time they want to retain office and votes. Hence their behavior makes perfect sense.
It’s like democrats complaining about spying on americans when Bush was in office but not really doing anything about it. Once they had the whitehouse it was all just fine.
There are good extremes and bad extremes. Fewer tornadoes and hurricanes is a good extreme. But propogandists leave it at “extreme” because of the outsized panic they create.
I believe the Republicans have become the party of the Stupid. The Democrats are the party of Self Esteem. Quite a rediculous scenario we have up in DC.
“The Party of the Cowed” (as in to ‘cow’, from ‘cower’ or cow-tow to from say, intimidation); any possibility of ‘bad press’ sends them into a stampede for the exits. A ‘no guts’ condition; gutless, as in “gutless wonders”, no ‘stomach’ for the truth.
Gutless Wonders, from the “Catalogue of Organisms” may also refer to:
The Acoela are a distinct assemblage of marine worms ranging in size from the microscopic to a little over a centimetre in length. The name ‘Acoela’ means ‘without a cavity’, and refers to the lack of a proper gut in these animals. Instead, the mouth (which is situated on the underside of the animal) leads to a central vacuole surrounded by a syncytium (a multinucleate mass that is not divided into individual cells) that takes in nutritive particles by phagocytosis (engulfment by membrane folding, like how an Amoeba feeds). In many of the larger acoels, feeding is supplemented (or even largely superseded) by the presence of endosymbiotic algae that provide nutrients for their host worm (it is the algae that give the worms in the photo above their bright green colour). One particular family of acoels, the Solenofilomorphidae, live in anoxic sulfide sands, an environment that until the late 1960s was thought inimicable to animal life.
.
No, not stupid – just cowards.
Over at the BBC there is a report on some work by real scientists who have discover their models got it wrong. Planck
‘Data trumps models’
At his lecture at University College London, Prof Pryke explained his team’s lowered confidence: “Real data from Planck are indicating that our dust models are underestimates. So the prior knowledge on the level of dust at these latitudes, in our field, has gone up; and so the confidence that there is a gravitational wave component has gone down. Quantifying that is a very hard thing to do. But data trumps models.”
and later another gem
“We’re going to need confirmation by independent groups. That’s the way things work in science. We don’t believe things because somebody says they’re true; we believe them because different people make the measurements independently and find the same results.”
Read it here
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-27935479
Republicans = Controlled opposition
“The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.” ~ Vladimir Lenin
It’s IMPOSSIBLE to have a well-known leader be real. That person would be compromised very quickly as we saw happen with Ron Paul and Herman Cain.
A brilliant take-down, Steve,