The View From Inside The Bubble
-
The Koch pawns hear one thing they like and just ride with it. I'm gonna move on.
-
I just thought I'd throw it out there yet again. Not everyone in here is operating on Cal's level of ignorance. Maybe they'll read it and realize that this is a big misinformation campaign, driven by people who want to believe what they already believe, or hope is true. I mean, when James Inhofe wants his own investigation - because for some reason he doesn't trust the four previous ones - and even they come back and tell him there was nothing there ...then maybe people will start to realize that, you know, there's nothing there.
And when Fox News comes out and writes that only a few days after the latest investigation to exonerate those scientists was released, maybe they'll start seeing what the point of Fox News is.
Or maybe they'll ask for a sixth investigation. Done by Glenn Beck. Like an injured athlete who goes doctor shopping.
Fox News really is the difference maker here. It's how you can get so many people on the right to hold beliefs that are factually inaccurate (I.e. Obama is a Muslim) all while claiming that its you who don't know the truth because you get your information from the "mainstream" news media outlets.
It's frustrating, because being able to start from generally agreed upon facts is important for a democracy. Having two different realities makes things harder.
Global warming is a perfect example. We're not arguing the best way to address it like we used to. They mounted a campaign to deny that it was happening, or that scientists even think so, and so that's where the argument shifted to.
Guys like Lindsay Graham and John McCain, who used to be able to believe in the science, now have to pretend they don't because their voting base is filled with people screaming about things like Climategate.
And so nothing will get done.
-
Let's say you're right Heck.
Why do you think Republicans want to destroy the planet?
Spite? Greed?
WSS
-
Why do you think Republicans want to destroy the planet?
Being green is more costly than not being green. Many (dickhead) corporations tend to only act such that their profits are maximized. People in this business push bullshit science to mainstream news and voters who don't understand science believe it. Republicans and the right tend to be backed by and support these companies (Not that people on the left aren't, it's just way more prevalent on the right). These companies piss me off. Because right wing morons like Rush and Beck support shit like this, they piss me off. Therefore, Republicans piss me off.
No one wants to destroy the planet, but the right's idea of environmental policy is a joke.
-
Science must be without bias. The climate gate emails showed clear bias. Please explain why that is OK.
-
Let's say you're right Heck.
Why do you think Republicans want to destroy the planet?
Spite? Greed?
WSS
Let's say you're right Heck.
Why do you think Republicans want to destroy the planet?
Spite? Greed?
WSS
I wrote a long response to this and it didn't post. It gave me an error message.
Anyway, you're framing it wrong. They've convinced the base that they're not destroying the planet at all, and what they're doing is actually noble - they're stopping some leftist conspiracy to screw capitalism.
They're not spiteful because they want to destroy the planet, though Republicans don't take environmental issues seriously. The spite part comes in to play because global warming, or environmental issues in general, are seen as Democratic issues that must be opposed. So global warming must be false because Democrats think it's true. I think it's tough to understate how reflexive this impulse is on the right. See: the response to Michelle Obama's bland, uncontroversial campaign to suggest we fight obesity and healthier and get more exercise.
What I'd like from you is an acknowledgement that the "Climategate" scandal wasn't anything that tainted global warming science, and was completely misrepresented by the right for political reasons. You've read about the five investigations. So far we've had two people on the board take in this information and dismiss it immediately, and without understanding the issue, which is exactly the point of this post.
I'm hoping you can be different than that, Steve.
-
It posted.
WSS
-
No, it didn't.
What's your answer, Steve?
-
Odd
It was on the Droid but not here on the computer.
Oh well.
I'll go read the question.
WSS
-
What I'd like from you is an acknowledgement that the "Climategate" scandal wasn't anything that tainted global warming science, and was completely misrepresented by the right for political reasons. You've read about the five investigations. So far we've had two people on the board take in this information and dismiss it immediately, and without understanding the issue, which is exactly the point of this post.
I've been pretty clear.
Yes I accept the idea that the planet is warming.
Yes I accept the theory that man plays a part in that.
Is it also caused by perfectly natural causes?
Probably.
Is it cheaper for some businesses to not pay big taxes for some kind of GW plan?
No doubt.
Will some other businesses make out like a bandit if we do install that tax hike?
You betcha.
Will all this green stuff develop on it's own thanks to promises of profit?
Yeah.
Do I doubt the US will do anything drastic enough to make a difference even if the alarmists are correct?
I sure do.
Do I think the alarmists are overplaying their hand? Is that "WOLF!!!!" I hear?
You call it cynical I call it realistic.
That's how I see it.
WSS
-
Oh sorry.
And no, Climategate doesn't disprove the premise.
Cold and snowy winters don't either.
Lots of "AH HA" stuff while fun isn't definitive.
And to my question.
You say greed right?
The Republicans actually realize we face a crisis and choose to let the planet die for a few bucks today.
Correct?
WSS
-
Thank you.
-
Heck,
It's ignorant for you to constantly pretend mmgw is an indisputable fact.
Truth is - it's a liberal, Democratic (which isn't the Democratic party anymore) party vote getter,
tax everything rally cry, share the wealth, make Al gorish mega rich... FREAKIN THEORY.
It's dimwitted for you to keep on pretending mmgw is absolute fact.
I was correct when I challenged you guys on it. It is no fact.
It's your silly, self-serving political wedge, and you won't give it up.
You're worse than Linus and his blanket.
At least Linus' blanket was real, and that is a fact.
Fact - is what you don't get, Heck.
-
Global Warming
The Washington Post
The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.
Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds. Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.
This report was from November 2, 1922. As reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post - 88 years ago!
-
Cal, I'll put the same question to you. After five separate investigations have now found that the "Climategate" scandal did not do anything to damage the scientific case for global warming, would you accept that the "climategate" scandal is not about what you've been alleging it was about for all of these months?
Let's see how this goes.
-
A cool animation.
-
Love the Armageddon soundtrack!!!
Somebody got one for world population?
WSS
-
LOL. Yes, that was cool. And yes, I am absolute correct, that cutting down rainforests, expanding city and town development around the world,
fewer and fewer natural areas of plains and forests, contribute to CO2 increase. That's pretty much fact.
However, by your graph, it should be about, oh... somewhere around 400 degrees F. today. It's 28. ROF,LMAO !!! You changed the subject that YOU started this time...
BTW, your "studies" are self-serving. There have been plenty of analysis that debunks your silly hockeystick, Edgar. I mean, when
ARE you going to start trying to have serious conversations? Let me know... @@
-
Although, I must admit - that you do have a lot of people on your mmgw side.
Seriously, I can't refute that. Including Sheply:
************************************************************************************
Who Support Al Gore (and his global warming)
Alanis Morissette, High School Diploma
Bill Maher, B.A. English (no science degree)
Bono (Paul Hewson), High School Diploma
Daryl Hanna, B.F.A. Theater (no science degree)
Ed Begley Jr., High School Diploma
Jackson Browne, High School Diploma
Jon Bon Jovi (John Bongiovi), High School Diploma
Oprah Winfrey, B.A. Speech and Drama (no science degree)
Prince Charles of Whales, B.A. (no science degree)
Sheryl Crow, B.A. Music Education (no science degree)
Sienna Miller, High School Diploma ABC - Sam Champion, B.A. Broadcast News (no science degree, not a meteorologist)
CBS - Harry Smith, B.A. Communications and Theater (no science degree)
CBS - Katie Couric, B.A. English (no science degree)
CBS - Scott Pelley, College Dropout
NBC - Ann Curry, B.A. Journalism (no science degree)
NBC - Anne Thompson, B.A. American studies (no science degree)
NBC - Matt Lauer. B.A. Communications (no science degree)
NBC - Meredith Vieira, B.A. English (no science degree)
Al Sharpton, College Dropout
Alicia Keys, College Dropout
Alicia Silverstone, High School Dropout
Art Bell, College Dropout
Ben Affleck, College Dropout
Ben Stiller, College Dropout
Billy Jean King, College Dropout
Brad Pitt, College Dropout
Britney Spears, High School Dropout
Bruce Springsteen, College Dropout
Cameron Diaz, High School Dropout
Cindy Crawford, College Dropout
Diane Keaton, College Dropout
Drew Barrymore, High School Dropout
George Clooney, College Dropout
Gwyneth Paltrow, College Dropout
Jason Biggs, College Dropout
Jennifer Connelly, College Dropout
Jessica Simpson, High School Dropout
John Travolta, High School Dropout
Joshua Jackson, High School Dropout
Julia Louis-Dreyfus, College Dropout
Julia Roberts, College Dropout
Kanye West, College Dropout
Keanu Reeves, High School Dropout
Kevin Bacon, High School Dropout
Kiefer Sutherland, High School Dropout
Leonardo DiCaprio, High School Dropout
Lindsay Lohan, High School Dropout
Ludacris (Christopher Bridges), College Dropout
Madonna (Madonna Ciccone), College Dropout
Matt Damon, College Dropout
Matthew Modine, College Dropout
Michael Moore, College Dropout
Nicole Richie, College Dropout
Neve Campbell, High School Dropout
Olivia Newton-John, High School Dropout
Orlando Bloom, High School Dropout
Paris Hilton, High School Dropout
Pierce Brosnan. High School Dropout
Queen Latifah (Dana Elaine Owens), College Dropout
Richard Branson, High School Dropout
Robert Redford, College Dropout
Rosie O'Donnell, College Dropout
Sarah Silverman, College Dropout
Sean Penn, College Dropout
Ted Turner, College Dropout
Tommy Lee (Thomas Lee Bass), High School Dropout
Uma Thurman, High School Dropout
Willie Nelson, High School Dropout
-
And it isn't just me, or several of us who have smarter, critical thinking kind of common sense, that disagree with your sill man made global warming cult, Heck.
***********************************
Global warming labeled a 'scam'
By Al Webb
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
March 6, 2007
LONDON -- With a packet of claims that are almost certain to defy conventional wisdom, a television documentary to be aired in Britain this week condemns man-made global warming as a myth that has become "the biggest scam of modern times."
The program titled "The Great Global Warming Scandal" and set for screening by TV Channel 4 on Thursday dismisses claims that high levels of greenhouse gases generated by human activity causes climate change. Instead, the program suggests that the sun itself is the real culprit.
The documentary, directed by filmmaker Martin Durkin, is at odds with scientific opinion as outlined in a United Nations report in February, which blames mankind for global warming.
In his program, Mr. Durkin rejects the concept of man-made climate change, calling it "a lie ... the biggest scam of modern times."
The truth, he says, is that global warming "is a multibillion-dollar worldwide industry, created by fanatically anti-industrial environmentalists, supported by scientists peddling scare stories to chase funding, and propped up by compliant politicians and the media."
Channel 4 says that the program features "an impressive roll-call of experts," including nine professors, who are experts in climatology, oceanography, meteorology, biogeography and paleoclimatology.
It also says the experts come from prestigious institutions such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Pasteur Institute in Paris, the Danish National Space Center and universities and other schools in London, Ottawa, Jerusalem, Alabama, Virginia and Winnipeg, Canada.
"It's very rare that a film changes history," says Martin Durkin, "but I think this is a turning point, and in five years the idea that the greenhouse effect is the main reason behind global warming will be seen as total bunk," he says.
His program collides sharply with the premise outlined in former Vice President Al Gore's Oscar-winning documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth," which presents a bleak picture of how a buildup in greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide affects the global climate, with potentially disastrous consequences.
"Al Gore might have won an Oscar," says Mr. Durkin, in a preview of the documentary, "but the film is very misleading, and he has got the relationship between [carbon dioxide] and climate change the wrong way around."
One of the filmmaker's experts, paleontologist professor Ian Clark of the University of Ottawa, says that global warming could be caused by increased activity on the sun, such as massive eruptions, and that ice-core samples from Antarctica show that, in fact, warmer periods in Earth's history have come about 800 years before rises in carbon dioxide levels.
One of the filmmaker’s experts, paleontologist professor Ian Clark of the University of Ottawa, says that global warming could be caused by increased activity on the sun, such as massive eruptions, and that ice-core samples from Antarctica show that, in fact, warmer periods in Earth’s history have come about 800 years before rises in carbon dioxide levels.
Mr. Clark’s findings appear to contradict the work of other scientists, who have used similar ice-core samples to illustrate that raised levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have accompanied the various global warming periods.
“The fact is that [carbon dioxide] has no proven link to global temperatures,” says Mr. Durkin. “Solar activity is far more likely to be the culprit.”
Scientists in the Channel 4 documentary cite what they claim is another discrepancy involving conventional research, saying that most of the recent global warming occurred before 1940, after which temperatures around the world fell for four decades.
Mr. Durkin’s skeptical specialists view this as a flaw in the official view, because the worldwide economic boom that followed the end of World War II produced more carbon dioxide, and therefore should have meant a rise in global temperatures — something he says did not happen.
“The Great Global Warming Swindle” also questions an assertion by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s report, published last month, that it was backed by some 2,500 of the world’s leading scientists.
Another of Mr. Durkin’s professors, Paul Reiter of Paris’ Pasteur Institute, an expert in malaria, calls the U.N. report a “sham” because, he says, it included the names of scientists — including his own — who disagreed with the report and who resigned from the panel.
“That is how they make it seem that all the top scientists are agreed,” he says. “It’s not true.”
Mr. Reiter says his name was removed only after he threatened legal action against the panel. The report itself, he adds, was finalized by government appointees.
Yet another expert in the Durkin documentary, Philip Stott, professor emeritus of biogeography at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, is more circumspect.
“The [climate] system is too complex to say exactly what the effect of cutting back on [carbon dioxide] production would be or, indeed, of continuing to produce [carbon dioxide].”
“The greenhouse effect theory worried me from the start,” Mr. Stott says, “because you can’t say that just one factor can have this effect.”
“At the moment, there is almost a McCarthyism movement in science where the greenhouse effect is like a puritanical religion, and this is dangerous,” he says.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login