UN 95% certain that climate change is caused by humans

[AndyDufresne]

http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2014/01/0 ... both-ways/

--Andy

[_sabotage_]

Player,

That's great news! You have been doing research for 20+ years (based on your previous post) and now we have easily widely available solutions to climate change being implemented worldwide with the support of government, business and charitable organization. We are saved. Thanks Player, you're a star.

Or they took your years of work, did nothing practical with it except used it as a line on a powerpoint to spread the agenda of global warming.

I treeplanted in northern BC over the summer. There were crisscrossing patterns of lingering and spreading trails caused by planes going back and forth. The water was brackish and an odd brown color everywhere we went. We were told it was gas residue from when they cut the trees. Maybe your experience can confirm this?

Being a nut case, I might think that geoengineering was taking place. You know the patented idea from the early 90s which consists of spreading 20 billion tons of toxic heavy metals across the sky to reflect a small amount of solar radiation?
This is called a conspiracy theory in most circles, and yet... they admit to having practiced it over long periods, admit that researching it isn't necessary to put it in place, admit that Monsanto already has a patent to allow plants to grow in the "new" environment, and suggest that since it is already being done that it should have an official channel, ie it can stop being officially denied.

Fortunately we have your research, which no doubt will provide a scientific background to: save the planet without geoengineering or provide the data to prevent geoengineering. It won't be used to back up climate change and allow geoengineering to take place. Your rationed voice and reasoned research would never be used to enact the very thing you should despise, or will it? Good thing all those politicians are there to keep us safe, aware and in the debate.

But perhaps adding waste to the environment, the very thing which has brought us to this supposed brink, is the solution. We might have to relocate some people, forego organics, create some new illnesses but isn't that good for government control and GDP? Isn't it a nice way to promote the freedom we will travel half way around the world to impose at the cost of nearly a trillion dollars each and every foreseeable year?

This is the outcome and like many other outcomes you can ignore it and respout the propaganda used to impose it even though none of the proposed benefits actually occur. I wouldn't suggest you start supporting self sufficiency, because that would have you placed on a terrorist watch list, but then again according to the FBI memo delivered to police stations a few months back, you are probably already on it. Let's see: "libertarian philosophies," "Second Amendment-oriented views," interest in "self-sufficiency," "fears of Big Brother or big government," and "Declarations of Constitutional rights and civil liberties." Guess not, you are of the good sheep. To the other half of the population, maybe we can make a risk board out of cigarette packs to play in the enemy combatant detention centers between getting tortured.

[Dukasaur]

I would not say I'm super keen on that daily mail site, though they do seem quite interested in boobs, so they can't be all bad.

I dislike Daily Mail. They have an article indicating that the "bikini bridge" is the successor to the "thigh gap" (which I simply refer to as "the gap"). Piss poor writing! Nothing beats the gap.

EDIT

What in the f*ck?!?!?!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... media.html

I just read the article. They aren't even referring to the gap.* They are referring to the thigh gap, which is actually a completely different thing.

* What I'm referring to as the gap is the space right underneath a woman's crotch, before the thighs. If there is a gap there and then the thighs meet later, it is pleasantly wondrous.

Yeah, the gap, or thigh gap, still refers to the gap, the same thing that you (and many of us) admire. When they say the bikini bridge is the new thigh gap, they don't mean that it's replacing it anatomically, only that it is replacing as the symbol of a woman's status, much in the same way that the Lexus has replaced the BMW as a symbol of a yuppie's employment.

[PLAYER57832]

.....yet his movie is shown in science classes all across America.
.....which means school boards have approved the science he is promoting, which turned out to be wildly incorrect.
.....which means the PHD's he hired were using flawed science
.....probably because their science is politically motivated

We all had dated, and even flawed, PBS and Nat Geo programs in our science class growing up. You just don't like this because of politics.

I'm assuming you're even correct about the science being wrong, because I don't care about your silly pictures.

It probably got skimmed and I can't blame anyone for that. I posted a link to a story about "scientists" getting trapped in the Ice of both hemispheres, because it has come earlier and been thicker this year than it has for a very long time.

Winters have been very harsh this year (except here in FL, ). I'll hunt down your link later.

No. I'm just saying back the hell off fundamentally transforming our country and our economy with the implied 'next to 100% certain" of the science considering climate change.

See, here is the problem. You STILL seem to think that Al Gore is some kind of research scientist instead of just a politician who happened to latch onto this issue.

The RESEARCH to which Neoteny, myself, others here refer has nothing to do with Al Gore.

Also, we have told you this many times.. but you prefer your fiction that this was created by Al Gore, to the reality that there actually is real science out there disputing what you believe.

But maybe you aren't aware of the public discourse surrounding the essence of this issue, and that is banning anything that disagrees with the climate control narrative. Have you heard about this? I think it was Reddit that bans any opposing views or perspectives or even common on differing science results, and I have already shown a few times in other place where University professors basically bully students who have opposing views, calling them 'crazy' and 'lunatics' and publicly ridiculing them, even accusing them of having blood on their hands.

Are you aware of the bullying and manipulation and straight banning of any opposing views?

LOL.. SCIENTISTS will always act "the bully" when people try to put forward falsehoods as reality. Also, accepting criticism is pretty much what all REAL scientists do every day. in fact, a big part of the process of getting things published involves SEEKING OUT criticism. In general, publications that have not been sufficiently reviewed and critiqued or that don't pass muster with enough scientists are left out of publication as a matter of course. Ironically, the exceptions have involved allowing some creationist and climate criticisms to be published, even when they were not really up to normal standards, in attempts to silence the critics.

It hasn't worked, mostly because so many people have no interest in truth, only in putting forward their opinions. You definitely fit that mold...so I suppose its no wonder you remain ignorant of the real data that is out there showing that the Earth's climate is changing.

[Night Strike]

See, here is the problem. You STILL seem to think that Al Gore is some kind of research scientist instead of just a politician who happened to latch onto this issue.

The RESEARCH to which Neoteny, myself, others here refer has nothing to do with Al Gore.

Also, we have told you this many times.. but you prefer your fiction that this was created by Al Gore, to the reality that there actually is real science out there disputing what you believe.

But since probably all of those (including yourself) who believe that climate change is due to humans also say that large governments (national or international) are the only ones capable of addressing the problem, shouldn't we also be paying attention to what politicians (those who run the government) are saying and doing about how those remedies would be implemented?

[Symmetry]

See, here is the problem. You STILL seem to think that Al Gore is some kind of research scientist instead of just a politician who happened to latch onto this issue.

The RESEARCH to which Neoteny, myself, others here refer has nothing to do with Al Gore.

Also, we have told you this many times.. but you prefer your fiction that this was created by Al Gore, to the reality that there actually is real science out there disputing what you believe.

But since probably all of those (including yourself) who believe that climate change is due to humans also say that large governments (national or international) are the only ones capable of addressing the problem, shouldn't we also be paying attention to what politicians (those who run the government) are saying and doing about how those remedies would be implemented?

Do you think Al Gore runs the US government?

Your denial gets more bizarre with every post.

[Night Strike]

See, here is the problem. You STILL seem to think that Al Gore is some kind of research scientist instead of just a politician who happened to latch onto this issue.

The RESEARCH to which Neoteny, myself, others here refer has nothing to do with Al Gore.

Also, we have told you this many times.. but you prefer your fiction that this was created by Al Gore, to the reality that there actually is real science out there disputing what you believe.

But since probably all of those (including yourself) who believe that climate change is due to humans also say that large governments (national or international) are the only ones capable of addressing the problem, shouldn't we also be paying attention to what politicians (those who run the government) are saying and doing about how those remedies would be implemented?

Do you think Al Gore runs the US government?

Your denial gets more bizarre with every post.

No, not currently. But he tried to in 2000.

[thegreekdog]

I would not say I'm super keen on that daily mail site, though they do seem quite interested in boobs, so they can't be all bad.

I dislike Daily Mail. They have an article indicating that the "bikini bridge" is the successor to the "thigh gap" (which I simply refer to as "the gap"). Piss poor writing! Nothing beats the gap.

EDIT

What in the f*ck?!?!?!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... media.html

I just read the article. They aren't even referring to the gap.* They are referring to the thigh gap, which is actually a completely different thing.

* What I'm referring to as the gap is the space right underneath a woman's crotch, before the thighs. If there is a gap there and then the thighs meet later, it is pleasantly wondrous.

Yeah, the gap, or thigh gap, still refers to the gap, the same thing that you (and many of us) admire. When they say the bikini bridge is the new thigh gap, they don't mean that it's replacing it anatomically, only that it is replacing as the symbol of a woman's status, much in the same way that the Lexus has replaced the BMW as a symbol of a yuppie's employment.

Okay, but I still think they are referring to something different than me. I don't find it attractive for a woman to have exceedingly thin legs (i.e. where there is a gap from the crotch to the feet). I find it extremely attractive for a woman to have a small gap from the crotch to the top of the thigh. I guess this signifies wide hips and in shape legs (but not skinny), but I haven't done extensive analysis.

[Symmetry]

See, here is the problem. You STILL seem to think that Al Gore is some kind of research scientist instead of just a politician who happened to latch onto this issue.

The RESEARCH to which Neoteny, myself, others here refer has nothing to do with Al Gore.

Also, we have told you this many times.. but you prefer your fiction that this was created by Al Gore, to the reality that there actually is real science out there disputing what you believe.

But since probably all of those (including yourself) who believe that climate change is due to humans also say that large governments (national or international) are the only ones capable of addressing the problem, shouldn't we also be paying attention to what politicians (those who run the government) are saying and doing about how those remedies would be implemented?

Do you think Al Gore runs the US government?

Your denial gets more bizarre with every post.

No, not currently. But he tried to in 2000.

I see. 14 years ago he didn't become President, so that means he's in charge of the US government.

Huh. I withdraw my statement about your bizarre beliefs. You are perfectly sane.

[Neoteny]

Yes. We can trust this man to the free market. Go in peace, Night Strike.

[Night Strike]

I see. 14 years ago he didn't become President, so that means he's in charge of the US government.

Huh. I withdraw my statement about your bizarre beliefs. You are perfectly sane.

So there is exactly no politician currently in power in any country that doesn't have similar if not the same views as Al Gore?

If you had any reading comprehension, you would know that my comment about "politicians who run the government" was generic, not specifically saying Al Gore ran the government today.

[Symmetry]

I see. 14 years ago he didn't become President, so that means he's in charge of the US government.

Huh. I withdraw my statement about your bizarre beliefs. You are perfectly sane.

So there is exactly no politician currently in power in any country that doesn't have similar if not the same views as Al Gore?

If you had any reading comprehension, you would know that my comment about "politicians who run the government" was generic, not specifically saying Al Gore ran the government today.

I stand by my comments. You are completely sane in your analysis of global politics. Your comments about Al Gore were meant as generic about all politicians, or none of them, whichever suits best the totally sane point you're making.

NS= sane.

If anyone suggests that your fixation on Al Gore is weird, tell them that you are completely rational. Really emphasise that point. Hammer it home.

[_sabotage_]

Player,

Please stop misquoting me. That was PS quote you used, not mine.

Al Gore did not invent global warming due to CO2, that was done by Edmond de Rothschild at the 4th International Wilderness Conference in 1987. Since then, thousands of scientists have tried to link CO2 to increased temperature and they have successfully and continually shown that CO2 follows temperature by about a thousand years, with one study saying merely hundreds of years.

Gore has just married into the dynasty, his daughter marrying a Schiff, the Schiffs who lived in the same house while working for the Rothschild's for 80 years, then funded by them to create their US banking empire. Again the same Rothschilds who managed the carbon credit scheme in Australia, who own the largest weather information institute in the world, who have one of their heirs, David Rothschild preaching climate change at the UN, who own the conservation banks that have acquired up to 30% of countries' land through the agenda.

But whatever, we wouldn't expect them to co-opt the debate, they don't need to, they created the debate. And they are raining shit across our land because of it.

It must be nice to be ignorant. To see a pattern time and again and then just say, well they are doing their best. They are; doing their best at screwing the world for their own agenda and benefit.

[The Voice]

Player,

Please continue misquoting me.

That's a very odd request.

[Metsfanmax]

See, here is the problem. You STILL seem to think that Al Gore is some kind of research scientist instead of just a politician who happened to latch onto this issue.

The RESEARCH to which Neoteny, myself, others here refer has nothing to do with Al Gore.

Also, we have told you this many times.. but you prefer your fiction that this was created by Al Gore, to the reality that there actually is real science out there disputing what you believe.

But since probably all of those (including yourself) who believe that climate change is due to humans also say that large governments (national or international) are the only ones capable of addressing the problem, shouldn't we also be paying attention to what politicians (those who run the government) are saying and doing about how those remedies would be implemented?

1) Why is this conversation still happening when I demonstrated that Al Gore did not say what he is accused of saying?

2) Everyone here understands that the market is necessary to actually solve the problem. The market just needs an incentive to do so, one that it currently does not have.

[Agent 86]

Al Gores Carbon footprint = Huge

[Metsfanmax]

Al Gores Carbon footprint = Huge

From his Reddit AMA:

Cvasquez12: What specific things are you doing in life to lower your personal carbon footprint? And what is the biggest one specific thing I as an individual can do to reduce mine?

Gore: I use only carbon-free electricity. Have 33 solar panels on my roof, seven deep geothermal wells under my driveway, LED lights and highest-grade energy-saving windows, max insulation, hybrid plug-in car, etc. No fountains, btw.

He also buys carbon offsets for the parts of his energy usage that he hasn't been able to eliminate carbon emissions from. How many of us have taken that step?

[_sabotage_]

The market has incentives up the wazoo. Big oil would be getting much better margins and much greater overall profit in both the short term and long run were oil use restricted. What you are suggesting is penalize the buyers of oil because oil and big government has effectively entrenched the marketplace and buried competitors. Why bother upsetting the masses by restricting oil through OPEC when you can get the UN to mandate, propagate and enforce it for you?

Gore, the other half of Blood and Gore INC, who stand to be the world's first carbon credit billionaires? Those solar panels are set to give an amazing ROI.

Seems like a lot are set to benefit, how about you and billions of others, because the few's benefit is going to come from somewhere.

[thegreekdog]

Al Gores Carbon footprint = Huge

From his Reddit AMA:

Cvasquez12: What specific things are you doing in life to lower your personal carbon footprint? And what is the biggest one specific thing I as an individual can do to reduce mine?

Gore: I use only carbon-free electricity. Have 33 solar panels on my roof, seven deep geothermal wells under my driveway, LED lights and highest-grade energy-saving windows, max insulation, hybrid plug-in car, etc. No fountains, btw.

He also buys carbon offsets for the parts of his energy usage that he hasn't been able to eliminate carbon emissions from. How many of us have taken that step?

Does he fly in airplanes?

Unrelated, I heard an advertisement for some airline where Matt Damon did the voice over. My first thought was, "Matt Damon is a giant hypocrit."

[PLAYER57832]

Player,

That's great news! You have been doing research for 20+ years (based on your previous post) and now we have easily widely available solutions to climate change being implemented worldwide with the support of government, business and charitable organization. We are saved. Thanks Player, you're a star.

Try again. I did not do direct climate research. I HAVE worked with marshes, habitat, etc. These things were not, are not '"pie in the sky" dreams like the ideas you feel have been so ignored.They work, are being used. Just because someone comes up with ideas that sound great doesn't mean they really are...most of what you put forward appears to fall into that category.

My overall point was that you need to do a bit more real investigating instead of just leaping onto the first likely sounding ideas.

And.. most conspiracy theories, (including a lot of what you voiced above), build up a whoe fictitioous "history" based on minimal understanding of facts. in the case of the JFK assassination,it is unlikely the theories will ever be disproven (or proven), because, barring a time machine,the evidence is just gone. In the case of our planet..the data is very much out there and actually pretty available. Available, but requiring some basic understanding of science (in most cases) if you want to go past "is Al Gore an idiot" and into real data and science.

Or they took your years of work, did nothing practical with it except used it as a line on a powerpoint to spread the agenda of global warming.

You surmised all that based on what? Your lack of understanding of my research?

I treeplanted in northern BC over the summer. There were crisscrossing patterns of lingering and spreading trails caused by planes going back and forth. The water was brackish and an odd brown color everywhere we went. We were told it was gas residue from when they cut the trees. Maybe your experience can confirm this?

Confirm what? That post-logging, you often get increased runoff and loss of topsoil that can muddy water? Could be, though I beleive even BC has required streamsdie buffers (uncut areas of trees and other vegetation) around all streams (definitely around all fish-bearing streams,particularly those supporting anadromous populations.)

OR, are you talking about the natural "tea color" that comes from tannins in most conifers (and which can actually be a sign of a very healthy stream, though a lot of non-biologists intially assume otherwise.)?

And, the irony is that I worked with the Forest Service (in addtion to some other jobs) for quite some time.

The part that makes me think you had less than stellar sources is your comment that blank spaces were caused by airplanes flying overhead. You will have to explain that theory. It doesn't match anything i know about.

Being a nut case, I might think that geoengineering was taking place. You know the patented idea from the early 90s which consists of spreading 20 billion tons of toxic heavy metals across the sky to reflect a small amount of solar radiation?
This is called a conspiracy theory in most circles, and yet... they admit to having practiced it over long periods, admit that researching it isn't necessary to put it in place, admit that Monsanto already has a patent to allow plants to grow in the "new" environment, and suggest that since it is already being done that it should have an official channel, ie it can stop being officially denied.

Sounds like you are trying to explain to us why an apple is really an orange, because they mix -- instead of just admitting its a fruit salad.

You have a few facts, but they don't add up the way you think they do. And believe me, I am no fan of Monsanto...but spouting off the above idiocy does nothing to deal with the very real and dangerous problems Monsanto causes.

Fortunately we have your research, which no doubt will provide a scientific background to: save the planet without geoengineering or provide the data to prevent geoengineering. It won't be used to back up climate change and allow geoengineering to take place. Your rationed voice and reasoned research would never be used to enact the very thing you should despise, or will it? Good thing all those politicians are there to keep us safe, aware and in the debate.

Then again, maybe you could try reading some real science instead of whateverfiction you think passes.


A lot of people CLAIM to be "put upon" and ignored scientists. Some actually are. The irony is that those with credibility generally elt their data speak for itself. They get frustrated, angry, but don't start lecturing on how the "world is against them". AND, while a lot of those guys are just hardworking,but mistaken individuals, a few wind up finally being vindicated, maybe even with Noble prizes. A Velliger larvae is so-named because it was long thought to be a parasite, not a larval stage of crustaceans. More recently, a couple of guys got the Noble prize for showing that at least some ulcers are caused by bacterial invections. They were even honorable enough to make mention of another scientist who began the research,.but who had to give it up to pursue other things when funding was lost.

The folks you point to are plain loonies, but you apparently don't understand enough about either science or how the natural world actually works to get that.

But perhaps adding waste to the environment, the very thing which has brought us to this supposed brink, is the solution.

Hmmm... you propose sending it where, exactly?

And, you have to define "waste". Most natural things are useful in the environment when controlled. For example, most streams can handle a certain amount of manure. in some cases, it can add necessary nutrients. In other cases, mostly depending on the quantity, it can cause a great deal of harm.

This is the outcome and like many other outcomes you can ignore it and respout the propaganda used to impose it even though none of the proposed benefits actually occur. I wouldn't suggest you start supporting self sufficiency, because that would have you placed on a terrorist watch list, but then again according to the FBI memo delivered to police stations a few months back, you are probably already on it. Let's see: "libertarian philosophies," "Second Amendment-oriented views," interest in "self-sufficiency," "fears of Big Brother or big government," and "Declarations of Constitutional rights and civil liberties." Guess not, you are of the good sheep. To the other half of the population, maybe we can make a risk board out of cigarette packs to play in the enemy combatant detention centers between getting tortured.

Newsflash, you definitely are looney if you think that last paragraph is true.

[Metsfanmax]

Al Gores Carbon footprint = Huge

From his Reddit AMA:

Cvasquez12: What specific things are you doing in life to lower your personal carbon footprint? And what is the biggest one specific thing I as an individual can do to reduce mine?

Gore: I use only carbon-free electricity. Have 33 solar panels on my roof, seven deep geothermal wells under my driveway, LED lights and highest-grade energy-saving windows, max insulation, hybrid plug-in car, etc. No fountains, btw.

He also buys carbon offsets for the parts of his energy usage that he hasn't been able to eliminate carbon emissions from. How many of us have taken that step?

Does he fly in airplanes?

Yes (which is presumably the main target of his carbon offset purchases).

[thegreekdog]

Al Gores Carbon footprint = Huge

From his Reddit AMA:

Cvasquez12: What specific things are you doing in life to lower your personal carbon footprint? And what is the biggest one specific thing I as an individual can do to reduce mine?

Gore: I use only carbon-free electricity. Have 33 solar panels on my roof, seven deep geothermal wells under my driveway, LED lights and highest-grade energy-saving windows, max insulation, hybrid plug-in car, etc. No fountains, btw.

He also buys carbon offsets for the parts of his energy usage that he hasn't been able to eliminate carbon emissions from. How many of us have taken that step?

Does he fly in airplanes?

Yes (which is presumably the main target of his carbon offset purchases).

How much do carbon offsets cost?

[PLAYER57832]

See, here is the problem. You STILL seem to think that Al Gore is some kind of research scientist instead of just a politician who happened to latch onto this issue.

The RESEARCH to which Neoteny, myself, others here refer has nothing to do with Al Gore.

Also, we have told you this many times.. but you prefer your fiction that this was created by Al Gore, to the reality that there actually is real science out there disputing what you believe.

But since probably all of those (including yourself) who believe that climate change is due to humans also say that large governments (national or international) are the only ones capable of addressing the problem, shouldn't we also be paying attention to what politicians (those who run the government) are saying and doing about how those remedies would be implemented?

Yes, but there is an old saying in political activism. "think globally, act locally". We have little influence over national leaders, but a lot more on local leaders. Political power can very well trickle up.

Also, you were talking about proof, not action. PROOF, evidence of climate change comes from scientists. Seeing that change is real, OTHER scientists work on various solutions -- some ideas seem great and fail, some seem ridiculous, but eventually wind up working and still others come out about as expected. People, paying attention then take that data and convince politicians to act upon it . In some cases, politicians see and act on the data directly.

Al Gore is a politician who saw some data, understood it imperfectly. Then, depending on your viewpoint either decided to try and use his influence to do some good... or thought he had found the "latest and greatest"thing that would help make his political career. In EITHER case, he was just a SELF appointed spokesperson, not someone the scientific community truly recognized. Many scientists tolerated him, like they tolerate many others who are able to take research and put it into forms the public finds more exciting than dry research. However, that tolerance waned as scientists began to see more and more problems with what he was saying.

That you insist on putting him forward again and again as a scientists, even the "originator" of the idea of climate change just shows that you have no interest in truth AT ALL. You definitely do not understand science... and somehow seem to think that should be a point of pride, instead of shame.

[Agent 86]

Al Gores Carbon footprint = Huge

From his Reddit AMA:

Cvasquez12: What specific things are you doing in life to lower your personal carbon footprint? And what is the biggest one specific thing I as an individual can do to reduce mine?

Gore: I use only carbon-free electricity. Have 33 solar panels on my roof, seven deep geothermal wells under my driveway, LED lights and highest-grade energy-saving windows, max insulation, hybrid plug-in car, etc. No fountains, btw.

He also buys carbon offsets for the parts of his energy usage that he hasn't been able to eliminate carbon emissions from. How many of us have taken that step?

How many can afford too? Al Gore is a hypocrite..He has put more pollution into the atmosphere in 1 year than I will in my entire life time.

[The Voice]

Al Gores Carbon footprint = Huge

From his Reddit AMA:

Cvasquez12: What specific things are you doing in life to lower your personal carbon footprint? And what is the biggest one specific thing I as an individual can do to reduce mine?

Gore: I use only carbon-free electricity. Have 33 solar panels on my roof, seven deep geothermal wells under my driveway, LED lights and highest-grade energy-saving windows, max insulation, hybrid plug-in car, etc. No fountains, btw.

He also buys carbon offsets for the parts of his energy usage that he hasn't been able to eliminate carbon emissions from. How many of us have taken that step?

Does he fly in airplanes?

Yes (which is presumably the main target of his carbon offset purchases).

That's an interesting concept. Do you know what the carbon offset purchases fund exactly?