The most vexing barrier to engaging in honest debate about climate change is that most climate change zealots have embraced their ideology absent any research that questions the one-sided dogma of Al Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth” in all its incomprehensible glory.
Al Gore says the world is doomed because of man-made global warming. Then, with like-minded grant-hungry climatologists (including chief cheerleader Dr. James Hansen of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies) and social-engineering, left-wing politicians shilling for the cause, the lockstep media pushes this agenda down the throats of mankind, ever mindless of even one iota of contrary fact or opinion.
While our planet undeniably heats and cools in periods of fluctuation —- think 9th century Medieval Warm Period and 17th century Little Ice Age, for example —- there is absolutely no scientific evidence that any of history’s climate fluctuations have been due to man’s influence.
In fact, scientists can no more accurately predict long-range future climate shifts than they can predict earthquakes, volcanic eruptions or drought; in the same way science cannot definitively account for past ice ages, meteor strikes or the Big Bang. Theories, yes; facts, no.
I have tried to learn both sides of the argument and am convinced beyond a doubt that Gore and his ilk are foisting history’s greatest fraud upon mankind.
I’m not alone. There are countless highly respected scientists and climatologists who refute the “findings” of the climate change lobby.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Al Gore’s Arctic Forecast
- Mann Says He Was Correct
- “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- “carbon emissions may have now peaked”
- Record Arctic Sea Ice Growth
- “4th Hottest Summer”
- Killing Joshua Trees To Save Them
- NASA Sea Level
- “getting smaller”
- “Permanent Shift” In Antarctic Sea Ice
- Rapidly Accelerating Sea Level Rise
- Technology Advances
- “The Hour Of Decision”
- “fair & equitable”
- Michael Mann Continues His War
- Time Travelling Satellites
- Time Traveling Satellites
- Adult Content On X
- The Climate Of 1923
- Arctic Report Card
- Green Colorado
- Hottest Summer Ever
- “Sea ice could be gone by 2012, scientists warn”
- Record CO2 Growth
Recent Comments
- D. Boss on Mann Says He Was Correct
- Michael L Dee on Al Gore’s Arctic Forecast
- Bob G on Mann Says He Was Correct
- conrad ziefle on Mann Says He Was Correct
- Mike Peinsipp on Mann Says He Was Correct
- Mike Peinsipp on Mann Says He Was Correct
- Disillusioned on Al Gore’s Arctic Forecast
- Disillusioned on Mann Says He Was Correct
- Gamecock on Mann Says He Was Correct
- toorightmate on Mann Says He Was Correct
It all boils down to…
…do you really believe they can get temperature reconstructions from trees
No, you are not alone, Goddard. There are other conspiracy theorists who believe thousands of disconnected scientists around the world can successfully, and independently, do science for several decades that is a “hoax” and get away with it, never raising the eyebrows of other scientists or giving away the “secret conspiracy”.
Yes, your “inside job” climate change conspiracy theory is as irrational, silly, and as nutty as those of 9/11 “Truthers” who never bother to consider the implications, plausibility, planning, or premises of such fantasies.
Science passes you by, Goddard, and history relegates your denialism to the trash bin with every other denialist movement.
Face it budgie, your religion is failing all across the globe.
Bj, who said anything about conspiracy? Its just a bunch of like minded ideologues posing as scientists. Obviously, you carry many similar traits. Have you notice, you’re the only one not discussing the science?
Dream on, bjedwards,
The CAGW proponents have been attempting to promote their “science” for nigh on thirty years. They have had it all, the funding, the backing of governments, the UN, major “green” organizations and even the support of major corporations. How could they lose? In a word, hubris. But I am sure that you are blind to what is happening, that CAGW is now in scientific disarray and now fighting a defensive battle. I eagerly await the future, to see whose “science” ends up in the trash bin. And incidentally, “conspiracy” was your word, there was no mention of conspiracy by Steven or the article’s author.
Robert,
I hate to ruin your fantasies but you missed the part that the overwhelming science demonstrates AGW is real. No manner of political attacks or denial can change that.
That you are so paranoid to not even recognize that your comment relies on an implicit belief in an orchestrated, long-term, planned conspiracy misrepresenting the science of climate change Is sad but is the case with your entire climate change denial movement.
Face it, the wingnut faction of the political Right has never faced a problem requiring the cooperation of every form of government in the world. The Right cannot deal with it philosophically or politically so they just deny the science.
But your emperor wears no clothes and the world has finally begun to realize it. You reached your peak of political influence when your phony “Climategate scandal” crashed around you and left you squirming to find another scapegoat.
Goddard whines that he never said “conspiracy” while condoning the “AGW IS A HOAX” conspiracy myth.
Get a grip on reality.
Where we stand, depends on where we sit
That’s funny. bj, flip through some of the archives. While many views of the commentators here are decidedly right-of-center, you’ll also see several views that are in conflict with the traditional “right” perspective. This site has conservatives, liberals and libertarians and everything else in between. No communists, that I know of, yet.
Why is it that warmistas blather on about science but when a skeptic wants to talk science, warmistas start blathering about political leanings?
I must have missed the part where I claimed a conspiracy.
It is easy to miss something you did not say!
I worked for a Physics Prof in college, for a research project to determine the portion of Mercurous to Mercuric Iodide in a sample. The sample was weighed, and dissolved in a solution together with a color indicator. I would titrate this sample under a nitrogen atmosphere with a standardized reagent. The objective was to find the volume of reagent that would eliminate all indication of color, and with a little math, the portion of Mercurous Iodide in the sample. I was using a large buret.
What I learned from this exercise is that you must have adequate resolution and extremely rigid controls to measure anything. When your sample size is sufficiently small, the volume you can discern in a buret is too great. And there are many factors which may affect your experiment. Such as a leak in your nitrogen atmosphere. 🙂
With such difficulty controlling an experiment in a lab, man’s tools for determining earth’s average surface temperature (particularly prior to the late 70’s), and the true margins of error in his results explicates the folly of this exercise.
Dear BJ,
Could you please listen to a true story that happens at every University seriously involved in climate study?
It’s that of the time of the year, when a fat assed Government official comes to visit and you have to grovel to him for renewal of grants, or possible new grants.
As a professor, you dread this moment with all your heart, but realize that if the meeting doesn’t go well, your job and those of your associates in the department might be seriously jeopardized.
So at this time, are you going to do or say anything that might appear even slightly out of step? Of course not! There is such a thing as survival instinct. That isn’t conspiracy, that’s life. I’ve seen it with my own two eyes.
Andy
Dear Andy,
Too bad you’ll never be a scientist. There is help for your paranoia, however.
I guess one shouldn’t be surprised that Goddard would deny the very premises and foundation of his climate change denial.
It’s the nature of the beast.
bj, what are you on about? You’re making less sense than what you did earlier this morning. Drinking, even during your lunch break, is a no-no while you’re on the job.
BJ,
So what do you think happens when the Government grant man comes by? Everyone tells him what rebels they are? How much they regret wasting Government money on a problem that doesn’t exist?
At the very least, please take off those rose colored glasses. The tooth fairy does not exit.
Your new handle when you next visit this site should be “Pollyanna”.
Andy
Andy, it must be nice to live a life unburdened by reality.
It’s not a conspiracy, doesn’t have to be. It’s just a big bandwagon. As Mike over in the UK, “global warming is very plastic” which means it fits a lot of different agendas. There are the anti-oil people, the anti-capitalist, people who are concerned about oceans, lakes, trees, otters, whales, coral reefs and a thousand other things. There are scientists studying everything from disease to frogs that grab the grants under “global warming”. What do you need a conspiracy for? Whatever you need money for, just add global warming in the grant request and you got it. Besides there are billions to be made while having the warm fuzzy feeling of “saving the world”….conspiracy that’s so unnecessary. Pay for your sins…….
If not,…….then….the rains will be more “frequent” and more “intense” and so will the droughts. If you hate snow, it will snow a lot. If you love snow, then it won’t snow. Weeds and bad things will profligate. NO good things will happen when it warms. In other words, the same things that have always happen will happen again, except NOW, they have been made catastrophic and it’s all your fault as when in the past, it was just nature.
The main premise of AGW….”more frequent” and “more intense”….whatever it is that’s bad. Absolutely NO good things happen when it warms. Imagine right at this moment if it was 2-3 degrees warmer wherever you are. You are in trouble!
More frequent which is????? More intense which is measured how?? Global warming the fuzzy science of we are sure it’s going to be bad, not much else. 97 out of 10,156 are somewhat sure.
You’re completely off your rocker, gofer.
Science cannot be a conspiracy. It cannot function as one. It cannot promote crap under the eyes of other scientists, much less the thousands of scientists from multiple-disciplines that inform the science of climate change.
But that is what climate change deniers implicitly have to assume (and most explicitly declare it as so) in order for you to go around off your rockers claiming “AGW is a hoax”.
There are no “warmists”. There is no “AGW hoax”. There is no conspiracy to “take away your rights, steal your money, and make it a ‘one-world government’ run by the U.N.” You all fall for the most hideously stupid political propaganda, pretend that your so-called “Climategate” is the smoking gun “proving” your conspiracy theory rather than the absolute defeat for your paranoid fantasies that it is, and go on repeating debunked nonsense endlessly.
HOW one responds to a problem is a policy issue. Deliberately denying the science overwhelmingly demonstrates AGW is real Is intellectually indefensible, morally bankrupt, and political suicide. But denial of the science is your choice.
As such, you have voluntarily removed yourselves from participating in the debate on HOW best to respond to a problem the rational world does not deny. You sit on the sidelines as charlatans, whining that the real world is addressing the problems in ways you don’t like but in which you offer nothing because you don’t want to participate.
Talk about your blatant stupidity.
No matter how much you kick and scream the science of climate change has passed you by. It ignores you and the world is beginning to see how you tried to hoodwink it. The Tea Party has done more to show its real colors since its candidates have taken office that already calls to “throw the bums” out are being heard from Republicans nationwide.
You and Goddard blew it already. You just don’t realize yet how badly you did yourselves in.
The continents can’t move. 99% of scientists said so.
You should take your show on the road!
I think you actually believe what you are spouting. When I read folks like yourself the Peoples Temple comes to mind as they also believed in their agenda.
Keep crying as it will help the healing process!!! Grief is a sad thing to watch and probably tough to experience so I would suggest you seek professional help of a grief counselor as you appear to not be coping very well!
Personally I say “Tough Shit” Live with your bumbling Bull Shit and go live in a cave somewhere. I hear Greenland is expecting nice weather this year for camping out in your tent! If you hurry you can beat the Summer Rush and enjoy the company of the Cuddly Polar Bears in private!
BJ,
What about Oxycontin? That was “crap” produced under the “eyes of scienitsts” and determined to be a safe, non-addictive drug.
The result-whole comminities hooked, millions of lives ruined, thousands of lives ended prematurely. It’s just not me saying that, there was $600 million class action settlement with its producer, which they never would have agreed to if they were innocent.
So, even with peer review and Government scrutiny, scientists can mislead. It has been known to happen.
Andy
Sorry about the typos. My eyes tend to go this time of night.
Hey BJ!
So let’s take a trip down Factual Boulevard for a minute and not discuss the “ravings” of “deniers” and just deal in facts, shall we?
1. Steve McIntyre discovered that two important datasets proving there was no run-away global warming and that earlier in our history there was a period that warmed more than in the 1990’s (pre-industrial) were deleted from the infamous hockey stick graph. In other words, they didn’t just hide the decline, they exterminated all records of it. Ask the CRU, considering they didn’t bother to keep the raw UNADJUSTED data for the last 150 years. Oops!
2. Al Gore purchased a big expensive mansion right on the same shoreline he says will be destroyed by rising sea levels all around the world. Research currently shows that there was no sea level rise the last century. Of course, Mr. Gore might not have read it, jetting around in gasoline powered private jets to warn of impending doom from the CO2 his own plane and mansion emit.
3. Despite the consensus claimed by you and your ilk, I checked up on the actual numbers involved in the “consensus” – Unsurprisingly, less than 5% of survey responders about climate change were actual meteorologists or climatologists – in other words, approximately 95% of the individuals responding weren’t qualified to conduct an analysis.
4. You claim that science cannot be a conspiracy and that scientists disconnected all around the world cannot come to the same conclusion. What about the Earth being flat? What about all the medical professionals who attested that Accutane was a safe product? Did you remember once that the sun was thought to revolve around the Earth in the scientific community?
5. ClimateGate never ended. The results of a new Gallup poll indicate that global warming/climate change/whatever you guys call it this week is 9th out of 9 environmental concerns. More people are concerned about urban sprawl and the loss of open spaces: Global Warming Least Worries Americans
6. The only frauds are in your circle. Take a look at this latest report blaming global warming on a once in a lifetime rain in Australia, only it turned out the pro-AGW writer manufactured the data! Dam Operator Caught In Fabrication And this isn’t even the first one TODAY.
7. You claim there is no fraud whatsoever, yet the last two winters have been frigid and full of snowfall your crowd claimed wouldn’t occur outside of “rare” moments. I had around 60 inches of “rare” moments on my lawn the last four months. It even snowed in the Amazon and Australia during their summer seasons!
Interestingly, whenever record lows are set around my area, the stations don’t cover it. But if a record high supposedly is reached, they put it on the top news. Oddly, none of the stations around here actually have the same temperature for the same small town of less than 40,000 people – it ranges by ten degrees Fahrenheit depending where you look despite the town being so small you can cross the entire length of it in five minutes. And a website locally that had 2010 listed as an above-average temperature year but NOT the warmest or tied for warmest year on record was no longer used for weather forecasts.
Is it a hoax? The answer is both yes and no. Yes, because climate cycles are natural and exist independantly of people and no, because some people really believe the crap you people are spewing without researching it. I spent some time with pro-AGW believers, showed them some sites such as this one right here, and within five to ten minutes they no longer believed in global warming. Scientists, however, receive funding for anything that would catch the attention of their government: Rapidly warming temperatures and rising sea levels would do a good job of that. It is when the predictions fall flat that countries toss the myth aside, as they have been doing around Europe with failed wind and solar plants. The people who say there is nothing to worry about have NOTHING to gain – they are not given massive funding or Nobel prizes for proving the world is the same as it always was.
Do a little research of your own.