President Obama says that global warming is the biggest problem Earth has ever faced, based on the opinion of about three or four flaming morons he considers to be the world’s top scientists. He also says he doesn’t have time to debate the “Flat Earth Society” – which by his definition would include this guy.
In 2008, Dr. Ivar Giaever joined over 70 Nobel Science Laureates in endorsing Barack Obama for president, but seven years later the Nobel Prize winner now stands against the president on global warming.
“I would say that basically global warming is a non-problem,” Giaever, who won the Nobel for physics in 1973, told an audience at the Lindau Nobel Laureate meeting earlier this month.
Giaever ridiculed Obama for stating that “no challenge poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change.” The physicist called it a “ridiculous statement” and that Obama “gets bad advice” when it comes to global warming.
“I say this to Obama: Excuse me, Mr. President, but you’re wrong. Dead wrong,” Giaever said.
Giaever was a professor at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute’s School of Engineering and School of Science and received the Nobel Prize for physics for his work on quantum tunneling. Giaever said he was “horrified” about the science surrounding global warming when he conducted research on the subject in 2012.
Ironically, just four years earlier he signed a letter with more than 70 other Nobel winners saying the “country urgently needs a visionary leader” and that “Senator Barack Obama is such a leader, and we urge you to join us in supporting him.”
But by 2011, Giaever left the American Physical Society because it officially stated that “the evidence is incontrovertible … [g]lobal warming is occurring.” The Society also pushed for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
“Global warming really has become a new religion,” Giaever said. “Because you cannot discuss it. It’s not proper. It is like the Catholic Church.”
Giaever argued that there’s been no global warming for the last 17 years or so (based on satellite records), weather hasn’t gotten more extreme and that global temperature has only slightly risen — and that’s based on data being “fiddled” with by scientists, he said.
“When you have a theory and the theory does not agree with the experiment then you have to cut out the theory. You were wrong with the theory,” Giaever said.
Nobel Scientist Says Obama’s ‘Dead Wrong’ On Global Warming | The Daily Caller
Obama has to focus all his attention on instructions from those planning the UN’s big IPCC celebration in Paris!
Only 46% of Nobel Laureats Support Climate Change Initiative
A couple of days ago we reported on the Mainau Nobel Conference, on Friday, 3 July, over 30 Nobel laureates assembled on Mainau Island on Lake Constance signed a declaration on climate change. Problem was, there were 65 attendees, and only 30 signed the declaration. As is typical of the supression of the alternate views on climate, we never heard the opinion of the 35 who were in the majority.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/07/07/deniers-in-their-midst-all-is-not-well-in-nobel-prize-land/
As the dominos start to fall, the Nobel Prize winners supporting the AGW scam will flee like rats from a sinking ship.
Were these who signed guys Nobel PEACE laureates or were they actually science or related subjects laureates?
Darn it.. meant to type….
Were these guys who signed ……
It appears these were all science prize recipients.
http://www.mediatheque.lindau-nobel.org/laureates/meeting-2015#page=1&sort=2&opt=asc&pagesize=3
They don’t really count, then. We all know the peace prize is the only one that matters. Just ask Mikey, or Jimmy, or Al. They won their prize with work that real people could understand. They didn’t hide behind a bunch of numbers, and formulas, and stuff. They came right out and said, “Is it hot in here?” after they sabotaged the air conditioner.
Why do you hate peace?
It is “peace without victory” that I hate.
Imagine a crowded room with Obama at the centre. Now imagine a serious smelly gaseous emission and the crowd as one “finds itself further away”.
That is what Obama is looking like now on climate.
Everyone is being polite, but we all know where the hot air came from.
Great analogy! But the gaseous emission came the UN’s IPCC. Poor Obama is just the “fall guy.”
Obama is not a fall guy he was groomed for the position. If anything he HATES the USA.
Hey Gail! Here we agree 100%. Putin may be (is) evil, but at least he does not work against the interests of his own country. Obama is the biggest pile of meadow muffin I have ever seen.
My apologies to meadow muffins.
Agreed Gator,
At this point I rather have Putin. At least he is working for his country’s interests and he is darn smart and crafty.
He is now cozying up to China and Greece (warm water ports with gas and oil offshore) which is not a good thing for us.
I really really want to kick the rears of the Donkeys (both flavors) in DC. Worldwide Interdependence is a fool’s dream and we are going to be the fools sitting under the big crapper in the sky when China or Korea decides to flush. Meanwhile the Donkeys in DC keep poking sticks at the Russians. Luboš Motl has a decent write-up about the politics that I was not aware of Ukraine. link
To make matters worse the stock market in China just took a nose dive. I really really hope TPTB is not planning on getting us into WWIII.
So Gail,, why did the majority of Americans fall for Obama twice; are they masochists?
Who said Americans actually voted for Obama the second time around?
From New Zealand: How To Rig An Election In The United States
Hundreds of potential Cases of Voter Fraud Uncovered in North Carolina
This is the most telling piece of information. Why target this woman unless you have something to hide?
True the Vote was targeted by the IRS for selective persecution and harassment.
I even have to use the Wayback Machine to find her most critical post.
How Widespread is Voter Fraud? | 2012 Facts & Figures
Why target voter groups from the other side? I thought this was a free country.
Study finds IRS suppression of Tea Party swung 2012 election
Gail, the “bansksters” I worked for were not Obama supporters.
Gator,
I should make it clear that there are “Banksters” aka the International banking cartel and the other guys. As E. M. Smith mentioned the name of the game is to have a monopoly.
Since the Federal Reserve act went in the independent bankers have been the target of the Banking Cartel.
And that Gail, is why I object to the term “banksters”, because it smears an entire industry when in fact it was a collusion of a few men and our government. We should be focusing our fire on the real enemy, which is the government, and we provide cover for them when we direct criticism at anything else.
I used to work at RPI in Troy! In the computer fabrication laboratory.
Congratulations, professor! Kisses! Now, like my famous astronomer dad, he will be shunned, attacked and abused. I hope he can withstand this in the future. Bravo.
My best buddy (another caving chemist) graduated from RPI.
RPI is being DESTROYED.
This is why I was fired. The battles that rage there!!! The place is being looted.
My uncle runs the machine shop, and over the past several years, he has relayed that the professors are not happy with how the school is being run by the administrators.
Reblogged this on Tallbloke's Talkshop and commented:
The US President seems to be doing a Lord Nelson, turning a blind eye…
http://jonathangifford.com/april-2nd-1801-i-see-no-ships-horatio-nelson-turns-a-blind-eye-at-the-battle-of-copenhagen/
This blog takes shots at Democratic politicians a lot. As a radical libertarian I can agree with you most anytime you take a shot at a pol. They all are crooks and thieves. Obama is truly worthy of any abuse you can heap upon him — just tell the truth and he will think you are giving him hell. (h/t Harry Truman)
But I take to my keyboard today to write to you and suggest we work on the real strength of the blog. I was reading this: “NOAA’s Data Debacle …Alterations Ruin 120 Years Of Painstakingly Collected Weather Data” … http://notrickszone.com/2015/07/07/noaas-data-debacle-alterations-ruin-120-years-of-painstakingly-collected-weather-data/ … and it came to me that it would be nice to be able to find the posts you have done by category somehow. What I am trying to say is that it would be nice to look up “data tampering by NOAA” or whatever real fast.
Or maybe a long post that is an “executive summery” of data tampering with links to the original posts. I think that an “executive summery” might be damn nice to refer to and to show the low information people who have not studied the issue.
Think it over Mr. Heller.
OK Gator, I will modify that to the International Banking Cartel. Remember it is the Banking Cartel (and other cartels) that own our politicians and not the other way round.
Top Senate Democrat: bankers “own” the U.S. Congress
That is the lobbyists.
You can also look at the top donors to political campaigns and find, aside from all the unions donating $1,201,214,350 to the dems, banks/financial institutions donating $365,135,131 Between the two that is $1,566,349,481 or $10 for every person in the civilian work force.
In February, the civilian non-institutional population – consisting of all citizens 16 or older who were not in the military or an institution – was 249,899,000 “Of that number, 157,002,000 (62.8 percent of the population) participated in the labor force by either having a job or actively searching for one, according to BLS data….the labor participation rate of the next age group, those who are 55 years and older, was just 32.4 percent…The last time the labor participation rate dropped below 63 percent was 37 years ago, in March 1978 when it was 62.8 percent” — Also not good.
Here is a sampling:
#8 National Assn of Realtors – $68,683,359 -49% to Dems, 52% to Repubs
#15 Goldman Sachs – $52,230,718 – 54% to Dems, 47% to Repubs
#19 Soros Fund Management -$44,442,608 – 98% to Dems, 2% to Repubs
#27 Citigroup Inc $35,378,135 49% to Dems, 52% to Repubs
#28 JPMorgan Chase & Co $34,652,053 48% to Dems, 52% to Repubs
#29 American Bankers Assn $34,593,894 35% to Dems, 65% to Repubs
#45 Bank of America $29,532,005 41% to Dems, 59% to Repubs
#49 Morgan Stanley $28,557,117 43% to Dems, 57% to Repubs
There are a heck of a lot of medical industry types listed too. It is an interesting list to read. For example Las Vegas Sands, the largest casino firm in the US is #7. Not surprising given the crack down on corruption in China.
High rollers with known ties to the Triad, China’s mafia, have been chased off the island recently. Even the once-untouchable relatives of Macau’s casino scions are getting busted for illegal activity. It’s a new world in which kings are getting overthrown… “We know that Asian high rollers have been very important to Las Vegas,”
Following up on the major shift in power from individuals to the corporate cartels:
When Lobbying was Illegal
Too bad we no longer have those Supreme Court justices. Instead we have the traitors that gave corporations not only personhood but the ability to pour unlimited funds into influencing ‘our’ representatives.
Also SEE: Significant U.S. Court Cases in the Evolution of Corporate Personhood
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/corporate_logo_flag_new-500×333.jpg
I am a capitalist but I agree with E.M. Smith
Also see E.M. Smith’s “Evil Socialism” vs “Evil Capitalism”
Although I agree with the concept of minimal government it does need to be able to bust trusts, have some ability to regulate the market and generally be able to keep a level playing field so that those that have cannot oppress or abuse those that don’t.
We have gone so far beyond that though I don’t see a path to ever going back.
RAH, note that E.M. addresses the “the agenda of those who collude, form trusts, and want monopoly power”
Also our government initially addressed the issue by giving corporations a 20 year life span at which point they had to ASK for renewal. This included the central bank.
See Hidden History of Corporations in the United States for the history of the fight to control corporations that we, the People, have resoundingly lost.
Gail
I might agree with the prohibition on corporations, but what about unions? I thought the decision on corporations was because it offset the rights of unions to make contributions. Probably don’t understand it as well as you seem to, but are you suggesting that only individuals, by themselves, should be allowed to contribute, and is there an individual cap there as well?
Thanks
What is stopping skeptics from publishing kick-ass science? Is it the sinister conspiracy again?
What is stopping you from posting intelligent comments?
1350+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarmism
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html
Please provide even one peer reviewed paper that refutes natural variability as the cause of recent, or any, global climate changes.
There is nothing unusual or unprecedented about our climate, or how we got here. For 4,500,000,000 years climates have always changed, naturally. This means there has been a set precedent, and the burden of proof falls on natural climate change deniers like yourself.
What is stopping grantologists from publishing kick-ass science that refutes natural variability? Is it the sinister conspiracy again?
Beat me to it Gator. (Don’t you feel like you are kicking a whiny toddler though.)
No, I don’t. Even toddlers learn eventually, we are kicking a wilfully ignorant POS.
Each of its posts further demonstrates the breadth and depth of its ignorance. Obviously from this latest post, it has never bothered to rersearch the actual arguments of both sides.
Careful you do not stub a toe on the concrete.
https://img1.etsystatic.com/048/0/5653735/il_570xN.689760903_rai6.jpg
Jo Nova refutes cfgj’s comments on skeptic scientists (See the body of the text and the links) and brings good news. It looks like there maybe some politicians Down Under with intestinal fortitude. (China and Greece doing a nose dive will hopefully light a fire under their buttocks.)
Climate scientists: More scared of an inquiry into the science than they are of climate change
He may be a Nobel laureate, but anybody could have predicted BHO’s reaction to someone that disagrees with the official BHO sanctioned AGW BS. With BHO support is a one way street.
It makes the Nobel laureate look a little foolish to have ever supported BHO.
This was covered by Dennis Prager on his radio show today.
http://www.dennisprager.com/add-another-nobel-prize-winner-to-skeptic-global-warming-scientists-list/