Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Environment

Environment Environmental Politics Forum - Environmental issues, global warming, pollution, and proposals


Thanks Tree38Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 15th, 2016, 07:56 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Twisted Sister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Brown Township, Ohio
Posts: 10,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChemEngineer View Post
Fraud Passed Off as Science



“Valid criticism does you a favor.” – Carl Sagan, Demon Haunted World, p 32

Summary

A procession of academics, bureaucrats, “activists,” and corporate shills tell everybody else that global warming is manmade. Fudging figures, publishing biased papers and extremely misleading graphs, and otherwise engaging in very unscientific practices are routinely practiced in order to prove their hysterical claims. Then, they proceed to claim causation on the basis of correlation, as if umbrellas cause it to rain.

Those who promote fear through misinformation focus almost exclusively on CO2, and ignore the enormous concentration of water vapor, the dominant greenhouse gas, which is some forty times more concentrated in the atmosphere than CO2. While flying across Canada, I took photographs such as the one above without ever seeing land for hours.

Promoters of The Global Warming Fraud are raking in billions of tax dollars for research grants by means of increasingly outlandish and emotionally biased one-sided claims.

If you read no further, please just scroll down to see first The Scary Graph and then The Scary Graph More Honestly Presented.

It is important to note that the widely quoted “97% of scientists” who are claimed to support anthropogenic global warming actually consists of 79 scientists hand-picked by a graduate student for a paper she published. This is not science, it is the anti-intellectual instigation of fear for pay.

______________________________

“One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.” – Ottmar Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015

Another Climate Alarmist Admits Real Motive Behind Warming Scare | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD

______________________________

The long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.” – United Nations International Panel on Climate Control, 2007

______________________________


Relevant Details, Perspective, and Discussion

Newspapers, magazines, television programs, classrooms, and conversations all over America are awash in fraud which is being covered by the mantle of “science.” The birth of The Global Warming Fraud can be traced to a conference organized by anthropologist Margaret Mead, in 1975. You can read the paper documenting the conference here. Anyone who dares to challenge this sacred majesterium of “science” is a heretic and an ignoramus, according to advocates of The Global Warming Fraud. Nobody wants to be called stupid, much less really be stupid. So why not just humor those who keep repeating their obnoxiously redundant, and untrue mantra of “consensus.” Take the easy way and agree with them… or else.

“We’ve got to do something,” we are endlessly told. Not necessarily. There are at least seven caveats the global warmers must address before “doing something” remotely as extreme as proposed. They must provide:

1. Conclusive evidence of a long-term increase in global warming,

2. Compelling evidence that increasing concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide is causing global temperatures, not the reverse,

3. Compelling evidence that the anthropogenic component of carbon dioxide increases is indeed critical to CO2 increases.

4. Compelling evidence that the global effects of an increase in a few degrees will be as devastating as has been and continues to be claimed.

5. Compelling evidence that the anthropogenic component can be sufficiently reduced to effect a material reduction in future warming and consequent devastation.

6. Compelling evidence that earth’s inhabitants can and will reduce the global human carbon footprint to 80% of 1990 carbon dioxide emissions, without catastrophic consequences far worse than the effects of a degree or two or three increase in average global temperatures.

7. Compelling evidence of their own integrity, honesty and lack of bias everywhere, including doing research, presenting data objectively, and avoiding even the appearance of bias.

Observations which lay bare the Global Warming Fraud

1. The claimed long-term increase in global temperatures is simply not happening.



On February 1st, 2014, NOAA and NASA held a joint press conference in which they released data about 2013’s global surface temperature. They made reference to a “pause” in the temperature that began in 1997. Dr. David Whitehouse, science editor for the BBC, noted that “When asked for an explanation for the ‘pause’ by reporters, Dr. Gavin Schmidt of NASA and Dr. Thomas Karl of NOAA spoke of contributions from volcanoes, pollution, a quiet Sun, and natural variability. In other words, they don’t know.”

Henrik Svensmark, the director of the Center for Sun-Climate Research at Denmark’s National Space Institute, believes that “World temperatures may end up a lot cooler than now for 50 years or more.”

The global mean temperature has increased 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1880. This is a trivial amount considering the passage of 135 years.

2. Carbon dioxide is the effect, not the cause.

“Do I need to tell you that this graph does not reflect man-made carbon dioxide production?” – Murry Salby

`soil temperature, moisture drive global CO2 emission

Heat increases carbon dioxide, not the reverse.

The following map shows sources of carbon dioxide worldwide. They are NOT in American industrial areas, but in the hot, humid tropics of equatorial South America and Africa. CO2 sources worldwide

3. The anthropogenic component is insignificant.

Human caused carbon dioxide is 3% of the total, with 97% coming from natural causes.

http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/1605/archive...t/pdf/tbl3.pdf

The basis of global warming/climate change/human Armageddon is, they claim, a “rapid increase” in the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide worldwide caused by humans burning fossil fuels. An annual increase of 1.3 parts per million is not a “rapid increase.” The Scary Graph below was drawn in this manner to evoke emotion, not reason, not fact.



390 ppm divided by 1,000,000 equals a carbon dioxide concentration of .000390.

The knee-jerk reaction is, “We’ve got to do something (to reverse this trend in the Scary Graph)!” The trouble is, that “something” will cost many trillions of dollars more than it has already cost the world. Not so fast. Science should not mislead, but mislead the Scary Graph (Keeling Curve) does, here and now, and very badly. Fraud is the criminal act of intentionally misleading others to take their money.

To clearly demonstrate why the Keeling Curve is fraudulent, consider this graph showing a population “explosion”:



It is not an “explosion” at all, this increase of 1/1,000,000. Here is the population “explosion” much more honestly presented, in comparison to the misleading graph:



The Scary Graph misleads and distorts, which science should never do. It misleads and distorts in more ways than just the scale of the graph.

To be more precise – as science must be – the 1.346 parts per million annual increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, from 1958 to 2010, is about 96.6% naturally occurring. This leaves a truly insignificant .04573 parts per million annual increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, produced by humans. In other words, it takes humans almost 22 years to increase carbon dioxide by 1 part per million. One part per thousand is 0.1%. One part per million is 0.0001%. The Scary Graph is a construct spanning fifty years. It is not going to change substantially for decades.

Water is by far the dominant greenhouse gas, not carbon dioxide. Adding just the 1.5% water component (1.5% of 1,000,000 is 15,000) flattens the scary graph curve more than any of the other preceding factors.



Can you imagine learned people demanding a worldwide economic depression on the basis of this graph, which is far more informative and comprehensive than any of those above it? The greater warming power of water vapor and clouds (15,000 ppm) as compared with carbon dioxide (400 ppm) is experienced on a cloudy night, when temperatures are much warmer than on a cold, clear night. `Water predominant greenhouse gasNo one has begun to explain how an annual increase of 1 part per million of carbon dioxide drives earth’s climate when total carbon dioxide is 400 times as great and total greenhouse gas is 15,500 times as great.



4. Effects of global temperature increases have been dramatically overstated. Why?

There’s money on the table if you can prove that CO2 increases the temperature, said British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. The Royal Society then formed the International Panel for Climate Control (IPCC). Thus began the distortion of science for billions of research dollars, which emphasized drama, not science.

-“Antarctic Sea Ice Reaches New Record Maximum” – NASA, Oct 7, 2014

Antarctic Sea Ice Reaches New Record Maximum | NASA

antarctic_seaice_sept19_1

September 27, 2013 Former UN IPCC Lead Author Richard Lindzen: “In attributing warming to man, they fail to point out that the warming has been small, and totally consistent with there being nothing to be alarmed about”.

“I think that the latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence. They are proclaiming increased confidence in their models as the discrepancies between their models and observations increase.” – Dr. Richard Lindzen

“To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest.” – Climate scientist Stephen Schneider, interview with Discover magazine, October, 1989

British environmental expert James Lovelock now admits he was an “alarmist” regarding global warming. Lovelock previously worked for NASA and became a guru to the environmental movement with his “Gaia” theory of the Earth as a single organism. In 2007, Time magazine named Lovelock one of its “Heroes of the Environment,” and he won the Geological Society of London’s W0llaston Medal in 2006 for his writings on the Gaia theory. That year he wrote an article in a British newspaper asserting that “before this century is over, billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable.” (Independent.co.uk, 16 January 2006)

“If present trends continue, the world will be … eleven degrees colder by the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.” Kenneth E.F. Watt, in “Earth Day,” 1970.

____________________________

5. Medieval environmentalists say to the third world countries, “You can only have wind and solar powered electricity.” Because of their prohibitive cost, this is really, “You cannot have electricity.”

Environmental extremists prevent development, and romanticize peasant life, even as they jet-set around the world. They are anti-car, anti-growth, anti-U.S. Communists have moved into the global warming movement because it is anti-capitalism. Their actions are cruel and oppress the poor in particular. Humans everywhere long for greater prosperity, irrespective of their current condition. To ask the world’s poorest, who live on an average of $2 per day, to reduce their ecological footprint is hopelessly unfair, unrealistic and unattainable.



“Global warming policies are having a disastrous effect on the world’s poorest people.” – Paul Diesen

4 Ecological Footprint

Is that the life you want? The life of a Cuban? If so, you and other environmental extremists are in the extreme minority worldwide. Approximately 1,200 coal-fired power plants are on the drawing board for construction. Many are in China and India, the largest and third largest CO2 emitters in the world. http://www.wri.org/publication/global-coal-risk-assessment

China builds a new coal-fired power plant every ten days, and will continue to do so through at least 2020. It will be economically and socially devastating for Americans to follow the dictates of environmental extremists and cut our carbon emissions 80% from 1990 levels, especially when the population will continue to increase. Such draconian demands will cause a permanent depression throughout the United States. Our children deserve better, particularly given the burdensome debt we are passing on to them. Let’s not make things worse.

__________________________________

6. The consequences of following the mandates demanded by global warming advocates would wreak unimaginable hardship, nationwide and worldwide. People cannot and will not acquiesce to sacrifice their freedom to travel.

Following the environmental extremism promulgated by the United Nations and President Barack Obama, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-3-05, on June 1, 2005. It requires that all Californians reduce greenhouse emissions “to 80% below 1990 levels” by 2050. As America’s population rises inexorably, this requires everyone to cut energy use by roughly 90%. Is the reader prepared to make such a sacrifice? To impose it on our children and grandchildren? Are world leaders exemplary in cutting their own carbon footprints? Why should everyone else sacrifice when world leaders show not the slightest inclination of doing so? Why are local and world leaders such hypocrites, such poor examples?

7. Bias, blatant dishonesty, misrepresentation, and hypocrisy characterize many aspects of the global warming movement.

The Scary Graph may be one of the best representations of environmental extremists’ widespread efforts to mislead everyone. Why would intelligent scientists do this? For billions of government dollars, far greater sums than “big oil” could possibly pay.

Why you are being misled, by Roy Schneider, climate scientist

2014 as the mildest year: Why you are being misled on global temperatures

Why you are being misled, by Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment, quoted by the Calgary Herald, December 14, 1998:

“No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits… Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.”

Philip E. Tetlock published the results of a study in 2005 that showed experts were no better at predictions than chimps throwing darts. “There’s an inverse relation between fame and accuracy.” – Tetlock

____________________________________


“Until a man duplicates a blade of grass, nature can laugh at his so-called scientific knowledge.” – Thomas Alva Edison
In central Ohio we are experiencing more than mild weather and when I went to White Castle had to turn on my gas guzzler pickup A/C on when there should be snow on the ground. Global Warming is in the hay mow and there she is going to stay.
Twisted Sister is offline  
Old November 15th, 2016, 10:13 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
baloney_detector's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 4,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by sites View Post
The honest data of the CO2 cycle is ambiguous. They cannot say for certain one way or the other that humankind is driving any kind of drastic changes. Of course, one might need to actually study atmospheric science, like I did, with honest professors who aren't receiving massive research grants, in order to learn this.

The only verifiable fact is that the people/companies demanding we acquiesce are proven liars and thieves out to make a buck. Scientists have been busted fudging the numbers. In the minds of the rational, this matter has long been settled.
Hmmmm...why am I not convinced that your unsubstantiated claims are true?

baloney_detector is offline  
Old November 16th, 2016, 04:46 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: massachusetts
Posts: 9,585
2016 on track to become the hottest year on record.
Surpassing 2015, which surpassed 2014....

What do we need? 50 hottest years in a row, a three foot rise in ocean levels?
Thanks from imaginethat
goober is offline  
Old December 3rd, 2016, 05:05 AM   #14
bloated wackbag
 
sites's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: fishing
Posts: 1,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by baloney_detector View Post
Hmmmm...why am I not convinced that your unsubstantiated claims are true?

Because you are an insubstantial dust mite.
sites is offline  
Old December 3rd, 2016, 05:07 AM   #15
bloated wackbag
 
sites's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: fishing
Posts: 1,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by goober View Post
2016 on track to become the hottest year on record.
Surpassing 2015, which surpassed 2014....

What do we need? 50 hottest years in a row, a three foot rise in ocean levels?
Do you have proof that humans affect it? No. Just circumstantial evidence and a hook in your mouth.
sites is offline  
Old December 3rd, 2016, 05:10 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
iolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Rhondda
Posts: 1,410
Aren't all these Yank weirdoes amazing? They will burn us all to death, but they are so stupid it is amusing all the same!
iolo is offline  
Old December 3rd, 2016, 05:14 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Twisted Sister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Brown Township, Ohio
Posts: 10,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChemEngineer View Post
Fraud Passed Off as Science



“Valid criticism does you a favor.” – Carl Sagan, Demon Haunted World, p 32

Summary

A procession of academics, bureaucrats, “activists,” and corporate shills tell everybody else that global warming is manmade. Fudging figures, publishing biased papers and extremely misleading graphs, and otherwise engaging in very unscientific practices are routinely practiced in order to prove their hysterical claims. Then, they proceed to claim causation on the basis of correlation, as if umbrellas cause it to rain.

Those who promote fear through misinformation focus almost exclusively on CO2, and ignore the enormous concentration of water vapor, the dominant greenhouse gas, which is some forty times more concentrated in the atmosphere than CO2. While flying across Canada, I took photographs such as the one above without ever seeing land for hours.

Promoters of The Global Warming Fraud are raking in billions of tax dollars for research grants by means of increasingly outlandish and emotionally biased one-sided claims.

If you read no further, please just scroll down to see first The Scary Graph and then The Scary Graph More Honestly Presented.

It is important to note that the widely quoted “97% of scientists” who are claimed to support anthropogenic global warming actually consists of 79 scientists hand-picked by a graduate student for a paper she published. This is not science, it is the anti-intellectual instigation of fear for pay.

______________________________

“One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.” – Ottmar Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015

Another Climate Alarmist Admits Real Motive Behind Warming Scare | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD

______________________________

The long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.” – United Nations International Panel on Climate Control, 2007

______________________________


Relevant Details, Perspective, and Discussion

Newspapers, magazines, television programs, classrooms, and conversations all over America are awash in fraud which is being covered by the mantle of “science.” The birth of The Global Warming Fraud can be traced to a conference organized by anthropologist Margaret Mead, in 1975. You can read the paper documenting the conference here. Anyone who dares to challenge this sacred majesterium of “science” is a heretic and an ignoramus, according to advocates of The Global Warming Fraud. Nobody wants to be called stupid, much less really be stupid. So why not just humor those who keep repeating their obnoxiously redundant, and untrue mantra of “consensus.” Take the easy way and agree with them… or else.

“We’ve got to do something,” we are endlessly told. Not necessarily. There are at least seven caveats the global warmers must address before “doing something” remotely as extreme as proposed. They must provide:

1. Conclusive evidence of a long-term increase in global warming,

2. Compelling evidence that increasing concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide is causing global temperatures, not the reverse,

3. Compelling evidence that the anthropogenic component of carbon dioxide increases is indeed critical to CO2 increases.

4. Compelling evidence that the global effects of an increase in a few degrees will be as devastating as has been and continues to be claimed.

5. Compelling evidence that the anthropogenic component can be sufficiently reduced to effect a material reduction in future warming and consequent devastation.

6. Compelling evidence that earth’s inhabitants can and will reduce the global human carbon footprint to 80% of 1990 carbon dioxide emissions, without catastrophic consequences far worse than the effects of a degree or two or three increase in average global temperatures.

7. Compelling evidence of their own integrity, honesty and lack of bias everywhere, including doing research, presenting data objectively, and avoiding even the appearance of bias.

Observations which lay bare the Global Warming Fraud

1. The claimed long-term increase in global temperatures is simply not happening.



On February 1st, 2014, NOAA and NASA held a joint press conference in which they released data about 2013’s global surface temperature. They made reference to a “pause” in the temperature that began in 1997. Dr. David Whitehouse, science editor for the BBC, noted that “When asked for an explanation for the ‘pause’ by reporters, Dr. Gavin Schmidt of NASA and Dr. Thomas Karl of NOAA spoke of contributions from volcanoes, pollution, a quiet Sun, and natural variability. In other words, they don’t know.”

Henrik Svensmark, the director of the Center for Sun-Climate Research at Denmark’s National Space Institute, believes that “World temperatures may end up a lot cooler than now for 50 years or more.”

The global mean temperature has increased 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1880. This is a trivial amount considering the passage of 135 years.

2. Carbon dioxide is the effect, not the cause.

“Do I need to tell you that this graph does not reflect man-made carbon dioxide production?” – Murry Salby

`soil temperature, moisture drive global CO2 emission

Heat increases carbon dioxide, not the reverse.

The following map shows sources of carbon dioxide worldwide. They are NOT in American industrial areas, but in the hot, humid tropics of equatorial South America and Africa. CO2 sources worldwide

3. The anthropogenic component is insignificant.

Human caused carbon dioxide is 3% of the total, with 97% coming from natural causes.

http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/1605/archive...t/pdf/tbl3.pdf

The basis of global warming/climate change/human Armageddon is, they claim, a “rapid increase” in the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide worldwide caused by humans burning fossil fuels. An annual increase of 1.3 parts per million is not a “rapid increase.” The Scary Graph below was drawn in this manner to evoke emotion, not reason, not fact.



390 ppm divided by 1,000,000 equals a carbon dioxide concentration of .000390.

The knee-jerk reaction is, “We’ve got to do something (to reverse this trend in the Scary Graph)!” The trouble is, that “something” will cost many trillions of dollars more than it has already cost the world. Not so fast. Science should not mislead, but mislead the Scary Graph (Keeling Curve) does, here and now, and very badly. Fraud is the criminal act of intentionally misleading others to take their money.

To clearly demonstrate why the Keeling Curve is fraudulent, consider this graph showing a population “explosion”:



It is not an “explosion” at all, this increase of 1/1,000,000. Here is the population “explosion” much more honestly presented, in comparison to the misleading graph:



The Scary Graph misleads and distorts, which science should never do. It misleads and distorts in more ways than just the scale of the graph.

To be more precise – as science must be – the 1.346 parts per million annual increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, from 1958 to 2010, is about 96.6% naturally occurring. This leaves a truly insignificant .04573 parts per million annual increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, produced by humans. In other words, it takes humans almost 22 years to increase carbon dioxide by 1 part per million. One part per thousand is 0.1%. One part per million is 0.0001%. The Scary Graph is a construct spanning fifty years. It is not going to change substantially for decades.

Water is by far the dominant greenhouse gas, not carbon dioxide. Adding just the 1.5% water component (1.5% of 1,000,000 is 15,000) flattens the scary graph curve more than any of the other preceding factors.



Can you imagine learned people demanding a worldwide economic depression on the basis of this graph, which is far more informative and comprehensive than any of those above it? The greater warming power of water vapor and clouds (15,000 ppm) as compared with carbon dioxide (400 ppm) is experienced on a cloudy night, when temperatures are much warmer than on a cold, clear night. `Water predominant greenhouse gasNo one has begun to explain how an annual increase of 1 part per million of carbon dioxide drives earth’s climate when total carbon dioxide is 400 times as great and total greenhouse gas is 15,500 times as great.



4. Effects of global temperature increases have been dramatically overstated. Why?

There’s money on the table if you can prove that CO2 increases the temperature, said British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. The Royal Society then formed the International Panel for Climate Control (IPCC). Thus began the distortion of science for billions of research dollars, which emphasized drama, not science.

-“Antarctic Sea Ice Reaches New Record Maximum” – NASA, Oct 7, 2014

Antarctic Sea Ice Reaches New Record Maximum | NASA

antarctic_seaice_sept19_1

September 27, 2013 Former UN IPCC Lead Author Richard Lindzen: “In attributing warming to man, they fail to point out that the warming has been small, and totally consistent with there being nothing to be alarmed about”.

“I think that the latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence. They are proclaiming increased confidence in their models as the discrepancies between their models and observations increase.” – Dr. Richard Lindzen

“To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest.” – Climate scientist Stephen Schneider, interview with Discover magazine, October, 1989

British environmental expert James Lovelock now admits he was an “alarmist” regarding global warming. Lovelock previously worked for NASA and became a guru to the environmental movement with his “Gaia” theory of the Earth as a single organism. In 2007, Time magazine named Lovelock one of its “Heroes of the Environment,” and he won the Geological Society of London’s W0llaston Medal in 2006 for his writings on the Gaia theory. That year he wrote an article in a British newspaper asserting that “before this century is over, billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable.” (Independent.co.uk, 16 January 2006)

“If present trends continue, the world will be … eleven degrees colder by the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.” Kenneth E.F. Watt, in “Earth Day,” 1970.

____________________________

5. Medieval environmentalists say to the third world countries, “You can only have wind and solar powered electricity.” Because of their prohibitive cost, this is really, “You cannot have electricity.”

Environmental extremists prevent development, and romanticize peasant life, even as they jet-set around the world. They are anti-car, anti-growth, anti-U.S. Communists have moved into the global warming movement because it is anti-capitalism. Their actions are cruel and oppress the poor in particular. Humans everywhere long for greater prosperity, irrespective of their current condition. To ask the world’s poorest, who live on an average of $2 per day, to reduce their ecological footprint is hopelessly unfair, unrealistic and unattainable.



“Global warming policies are having a disastrous effect on the world’s poorest people.” – Paul Diesen

4 Ecological Footprint

Is that the life you want? The life of a Cuban? If so, you and other environmental extremists are in the extreme minority worldwide. Approximately 1,200 coal-fired power plants are on the drawing board for construction. Many are in China and India, the largest and third largest CO2 emitters in the world. http://www.wri.org/publication/global-coal-risk-assessment

China builds a new coal-fired power plant every ten days, and will continue to do so through at least 2020. It will be economically and socially devastating for Americans to follow the dictates of environmental extremists and cut our carbon emissions 80% from 1990 levels, especially when the population will continue to increase. Such draconian demands will cause a permanent depression throughout the United States. Our children deserve better, particularly given the burdensome debt we are passing on to them. Let’s not make things worse.

__________________________________

6. The consequences of following the mandates demanded by global warming advocates would wreak unimaginable hardship, nationwide and worldwide. People cannot and will not acquiesce to sacrifice their freedom to travel.

Following the environmental extremism promulgated by the United Nations and President Barack Obama, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-3-05, on June 1, 2005. It requires that all Californians reduce greenhouse emissions “to 80% below 1990 levels” by 2050. As America’s population rises inexorably, this requires everyone to cut energy use by roughly 90%. Is the reader prepared to make such a sacrifice? To impose it on our children and grandchildren? Are world leaders exemplary in cutting their own carbon footprints? Why should everyone else sacrifice when world leaders show not the slightest inclination of doing so? Why are local and world leaders such hypocrites, such poor examples?

7. Bias, blatant dishonesty, misrepresentation, and hypocrisy characterize many aspects of the global warming movement.

The Scary Graph may be one of the best representations of environmental extremists’ widespread efforts to mislead everyone. Why would intelligent scientists do this? For billions of government dollars, far greater sums than “big oil” could possibly pay.

Why you are being misled, by Roy Schneider, climate scientist

2014 as the mildest year: Why you are being misled on global temperatures

Why you are being misled, by Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment, quoted by the Calgary Herald, December 14, 1998:

“No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits… Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.”

Philip E. Tetlock published the results of a study in 2005 that showed experts were no better at predictions than chimps throwing darts. “There’s an inverse relation between fame and accuracy.” – Tetlock

____________________________________


“Until a man duplicates a blade of grass, nature can laugh at his so-called scientific knowledge.” – Thomas Alva Edison
A few States and Countries are going to outlaw cows, methane and CO2 spewing monsters.
Twisted Sister is offline  
Old December 3rd, 2016, 05:55 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
baloney_detector's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 4,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by sites View Post
Because you are an insubstantial dust mite.
Hmmmm...why am I not surprised that your reply (above) appears to be a reflection upon the ability you have to substantiate your mere opinions regarding climate change.

baloney_detector is offline  
Old December 3rd, 2016, 06:55 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
justoneman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: chicago
Posts: 3,248
There is going to be no international global warming deal in the next four years that is for sure. Thank God for that.
justoneman is offline  
Old December 3rd, 2016, 07:32 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
locke23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,857
Someone, anyone, please kill me.

Reading that crap was just too much on my heart.
locke23 is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Environment

Tags
fraud, global, warming



Search tags for this page
Click on a term to search for related topics.
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Global Warming News - Causes & Solutions - Global Warming intangible child Current Events 53 June 10th, 2015 12:59 PM
Anatomy of a Controversy....THE GLOBAL WARMING FRAUD Uncle Han Current Events 0 June 27th, 2013 06:37 AM
Global Warming... Crazedhobo Environment 6 October 7th, 2008 12:04 AM
Global Warming Is a Lie alias Environment 68 January 14th, 2007 09:05 PM
You WILL Believe In Global Warming - OR ELSE!!! Jefferson Environment 108 December 7th, 2006 09:12 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.