Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 53

Thread: "31,000 scientists just in the USA reject 'global warming' agenda"

  1. #11
    Atypical is offline
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    If you notice John's techniques he still hasnt refuted the research that shows that Senator Inhofe's infp on "400 scientists" was embarassingly inaccurate. He never will. There were economists, weatherman, people who didnt ask to have their names on the list etc.

    He still hasnt acknowledged that the overwhelming majority of CLIMATE SCIENTISTS believe that human activity is behind the rise of temperature change and global warming.
    He never will because he cant refute it. So what he will do is try to muddy the waters or change the subject. Classic technique of someone who doesnt have a leg to stand on.

    He completely mispells one of the words AEROSOLS as airsols despite the fact that he claims to know what he is talking about on scientific matters.
    and yet constantly rails on people for supossedly being wrong in their research.

    IF THERE WAS EVER A DOUBLE STANDARD THAT WOULD BE IT.
    I have read his comments re SIRI. He seems to have knowledge about issues connected to the stock. I have noticed that his spelling is not anywhere as bad as on this board.

    One cause could be that he is in such a hurry to refute posts with which he disagrees that he is sloppy. If true, that is another indication of his interest to "kill, kill" rather than THINK about something to understand it and see if it makes sense. He obviously doesn't care about that. That's hatred at work.

    Again, very sad - and blatantly anti-intellectual. Of that, I'm certain he's very proud.

  2. #12
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Atypical View Post
    From Climate Science Watch

    Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, global warming denialist du jour on Capitol Hill
    Posted on Friday, March 27, 2009


    The bizarre decision by some members of Congress to use Christopher Monckton as their expert science witness at recent hearings on climate change shows that politically-driven abuse of science is alive and well on Capitol Hill. For those who take Rush Limbaugh as a leader, the colorful Viscount, a scientific amateur who refers to President Obama as “Osamabamarama,” might be just what they’ve been looking for.



    Post by Rick Piltz

    On March 25 the U.S. House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment held a hearing on “Preparing for Climate Change: Adaptation Policies and Programs” – the eighth thus far in a series of hearings the subcommittee has held this year as part of the development of major climate change legislation. Among the seven witnesses were Tom Karl (written testimony here), Director of the National Climatic Data Center at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and co-chair and editor of the forthcoming U.S. Climate Change Science Program synthesis report, Global Climate Change Impacts on the United States (public review draft here). Karl, along with several other government and nongovernmental witnesses, presented useful testimony to the effect that global climatic disruption will require efforts to adapt to disruptive impacts in addition to efforts to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.

    But something else that really caught my attention at the hearing was the presence, and performance, at the witness table of The Right Honourable Christopher Walter Monckton, Third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, also known as Christopher Monckton (also here), who was identified as Chief Policy Adviser, Science and Public Policy Institute.

    SPPI is a global warming denialist/contrarian operation based in Haymarket, Virginia, and headed by a long-time former Republican congressional staffer. On their web site you’ll find numerous pieces by Monckton (a recent example: “Global Warming is Not Happening”). One also finds Willie Soon, David Legates, and Sherwood, Keith and Craig Idso, joining Monckton in a recent publication, The Unwisdom of Solomon, which aimed at countering an important study by IPCC Working Group I co-chair Susan Solomon et al., “Irreversible climate change due to carbon dioxide emisions,” in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, February 10, 2009.

    This was not Monckton’s only Capitol Hill appearance this year. He was also a witness at a March 12 hearing of the House Ways and Means Committee, which is also developing climate change legislation.

    Energy and Commerce Committee Minority Ranking Member Joe Barton (R-TX) referred to Monckton, in his opening remarks, as being generally regarded as “one of the most knowledgeable, if not the most knowledgeable, experts on the skeptic side.” Mr. Barton, who has a history of warring with the mainstream climate science community, went on to say: I think the Earth’s climate is changing, but for natural variation reasons. Mankind has adapted to climate as long as he has walked the Earth. When it rains we find shelter. When it’s hot we get shade. When it’s cold we find a warm place to stay. As Lord Monckton will testify, the Middle Ages were warmer than today. Then during the Little Ice Age people responded to the cold by adapting. Adapting to shifts in temperature will not be difficult. What will be dificult will be adapting to the damage to our economy if a cap and tax bill is passed. In the name of the house of cards posing as scientific certainty, and with alarmism about global warming, the Majority seems hell-bent on….”

    You get the picture. Countering decades of advancing understanding by the leading climate scientists by going straight to the Viscount – who has zero science credentials – and manufacturing a supposed scientific debate in order to justify the usual anti-regulation policy stance. One of Mr. Barton’s fellow members said, “It’s nice to have Lord Monckton here, he was a senior policy advisor to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, so he’s a good witness to have.”

    Read his testimony here.

    http://energycommerce.house.gov/Pres...y_monckton.pdf

    And finally for those that are following this "thread" read carefully John's responses. Do they make any sense? Not if you know anything about logic, critical thinking, science, or understanding how to absorb and respond to information PROPERLY. It's about time that everyone realize that the robot just deflects, ridicules, and uses only those sources that support his positions. (and criticizes others that use sources they like.) Others here have noted his avoidance of information and questions that are uncomfortable. When in a corner attack is his MO.

    The climate problem, whatever its seriousness, is to be understood as INCREDIBLY complex. The truth is what matters not positions that are changed based on this complexity and the evolution of climate science. If one has a non-ideological interest in the science and want it to be accurate then it follows that wherever the science takes us is okay. If I learned that the problem was overstated my reaction would be "great".

    This is what John said recently when confronted with overwhelming information contrary to his position: "The problem is do you want to ruin our economy and make government bigger and pay more takes on the kind of science that they have been putting out lately. "

    THAT is what he cares about. F*** science, truth, and man's interest in protecting his world. Big government and taxes are what count not the health of the world we live in.

    How does someone become so indifferent to humanity and a slave to ideology? How does one become such a sub-human?

    Sad.


    Interesting yet there was something missing wasn't there where in that whole diatribe did you say or give evidence Lord Monckton’s paper was wrong

    What here is incorrect:

    ➢ The IPCC’s 2007 climate summary overstated CO2’s impact on temperature by 500-2000%;
    ➢ CO2 enrichment will add little more than 1 °F (0.6 °C) to global mean surface temperature by 2100;
    ➢ Not one of the three key variables whose product is climate sensitivity can be measured directly;
    ➢ The IPCC’s values for these key variables are taken from only four published papers, not 2,500;
    ➢ The IPCC’s values for each of the three variables, and hence for climate sensitivity, are overstated;
    ➢ “Global warming” halted ten years ago, and surface temperature has been falling for seven years;
    ➢ Not one of the computer models relied upon by the IPCC predicted so long and rapid a cooling;
    ➢ The IPCC inserted a table into the scientists’ draft, overstating the effect of ice-melt by 1000%;
    ➢ It was proved 50 years ago that predicting climate more than two weeks ahead is impossible;
    ➢ Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth warmed;
    ➢ In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years.


    As a matter of FACT, time has shown that your man made global warming scientist have been proven wrong and what Lord Monckton says was proven to be correct.


    Not one word on how the UNs IPCC’s 2007 climate summary overstated CO2’s impact on temperature by 500-2000% (or the rest of it).

    Not one word on how the UN lied about their projections. They have got it wrong time and time again yet you dumbasses keep believing them and not the people who got it right time and time again.


    As proof Adumbical said this:"CHANGES IF NEW CREDIBLE INFORMATION IS LEARNED." The problem is that the information has been out and been stated by people like Lord Monckton. How else do you think I got it right about the tempitures going down in the next 10 to 20 years, when I said this 6 months ago. Am I more intelligent then "Mojib Latif" on the climate, am I psychic. Hummm no on both I have common sense and logic and go by facts. So when I read that tempitures will go down for the next 10 to 20 years and read the reasons I come to a common sense and logical conclusion that they will. THE CREDIBLE INFORMATION WAS ALREADY OUT. it did not "CHANGE" and it was not "NEW" unless you where so blinded by your ideology that you missed every piece of information that went against your ideology.


    Aclear example is Adumbical still yes that right STILL is trying to put down a guy that was proven to be totally correct. So much so that even his own guy ("Mojib Latif") is now more on Lord Monckton side then he is on the man made global warming side.

  3. #13
    Havakasha is offline
    The guy who posted this petition has been discredited in a number of ways.
    Do you want me to start posting all the ways?

    You used Senator Inhofe's blog to back up a point on % of scientists opposing global warming and his info on 400 scientists has been discredited. i posted the analysis and once again you didnt refute it. You want me to post it again?

    When the hell are you going to look at the facts and admit that maybe you got somethings wrong? Never is my quess. So amazingly shocking and sad.

  4. #14
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    If you notice John's techniques he still hasnt refuted the research that shows that Senator Inhofe's infp on "400 scientists" was embarassingly inaccurate. He never will. There were economists, weatherman, people who didnt ask to have their names on the list etc.

    He still hasnt acknowledged that the overwhelming majority of CLIMATE SCIENTISTS believe that human activity is behind the rise of temperature change and global warming.
    He never will because he cant refute it. So what he will do is try to muddy the waters or change the subject. Classic technique of someone who doesnt have a leg to stand on.

    He completely mispells one of the words AEROSOLS as airsols despite the fact that he claims to know what he is talking about on scientific matters.
    and yet constantly rails on people for supossedly being wrong in their research.

    IF THERE WAS EVER A DOUBLE STANDARD THAT WOULD BE IT.

    Hey dumbass I did not put that up YOU did. If you notice I have defended my thread about the 31,000 scientist that have signed a petition against global warming. I dont even read most of your dumbass threads if I did I would waste to much time I have waste to much time rebutting your dumbass post to make sure others realize your a dumbass.


    Here in the next day I will just do what you do and not research a link and just throw up thread after thread with that link and see if you defend them all or even half. You dont even do that with the ones I do now.

    You see dumbass you cant even keep your shit straight about who put up what.


    P.S. I have made it clear about how I feel about spelling and typos on a blog. If not to you then why dont I go through your post and pull up the mutitude of misspelled words you have put up. What does that say about you since you seem to care about it more then I do.
    Last edited by john; 09-28-2009 at 04:51 PM.

  5. #15
    Havakasha is offline
    Quote Originally Posted by Atypical View Post
    I have read his comments re SIRI. He seems to have knowledge about issues connected to the stock. I have noticed that his spelling is not anywhere as bad as on this board.

    One cause could be that he is in such a hurry to refute posts with which he disagrees that he is sloppy. If true, that is another indication of his interest to "kill, kill" rather than THINK about something to understand it and see if it makes sense. He obviously doesn't care about that. That's hatred at work.

    Again, very sad - and blatantly anti-intellectual. Of that, I'm certain he's very proud.
    I agree mostly though i think it is more than sloppy. We all make mistakes when we are posting here, but for me i really think he just read something about aerosols and thought wow i can show how smart i am by mentioning aerosols and he forgot the speliing of theword and went ahead with it anyway. He certainly is arrogant about his knowledge that is for sure.

  6. #16
    Havakasha is offline
    Quote Originally Posted by john View Post
    Hey dumbass I did not put that up YOU did. If you notice I have defended my thread about the 31,000 scientist that have signed a petition against global warming. I dont even read most of your dumbass threads if I did I would waste to much time I have waste to much time rebutting your dumbass post to make sure others realize your a dumbass.


    Here in the next day I will just do what you do and not research a link and just throw up thread after thread with that link and see if you defend them all or even half. You dont even do that with the ones I do now.

    You see dumbass you cant even keep your shit straight about who put up what.
    I put it up because you used Senator inhofe to quote some facts on scientists. I showed you that his so called facts on
    change and scientists have been thoroughly refuted. Get it?

    Of course you didnt read "my dumbass threads" (there is that maturity again)because its painful to admit when someone has produced scientific research which counters your strict adherence to ideology.

    Oh yes i can keep my shit straight. i know i put up Senator inhofe's post and you put up the 31,000 post (which has also been refuted and discredited). Anger has a way of blinding people. its kind of basic to psychology 101.

  7. #17
    Havakasha is offline
    Quote Originally Posted by john View Post
    Hey dumbass I did not put that up YOU did. If you notice I have defended my thread about the 31,000 scientist that have signed a petition against global warming. I dont even read most of your dumbass threads if I did I would waste to much time I have waste to much time rebutting your dumbass post to make sure others realize your a dumbass.


    Here in the next day I will just do what you do and not research a link and just throw up thread after thread with that link and see if you defend them all or even half. You dont even do that with the ones I do now.

    You see dumbass you cant even keep your shit straight about who put up what.


    P.S. I have made it clear about how I feel about spelling and typos on a blog. If not to you then why dont I go through your post and pull up the mutitude of misspelled words you have put up. What does that say about you since you seem to care about it more then I do.

    If you read my"dumbass" post you would have seen that i acknowledge that we all make spelling and other mistakes. But the Aerosols mistake speaks to something larger for me. it speaks to your arrogance of knowledge when there are many things you really dont know. Read the posts before you make wild eyed comments. Remember the double standard mantra? Your demonstrating them again and again.

  8. #18
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    I agree mostly though i think it is more than sloppy. We all make mistakes when we are posting here, but for me i really think he just read something about aerosols and thought wow i can show how smart i am by mentioning aerosols and he forgot the speliing of theword and went ahead with it anyway. He certainly is arrogant about his knowledge that is for sure.


    It is not being arrogant it is being correct. Maybe when you two start being correct, you will see the difference. You guys think it is arrogance because you have been proven wrong so many times you think it is insulting. You have been hanging around your lefty blogs so long you are not used to people questioning your ideology, that is the arrogance you 2 are reading into me (How can this guy disagree with our ideology) unfortunately for you that is what makes you 2 the arrogant ones.


    A perfect example is you where totally wrong on ACORN and you still cant admit it. BTW, they have another video showing they where not thrown out of the ACORN office as you said they where and will be putting that one out also. They knew just how to play you guys and show just what idiots you are. They said that was exactly why they did not put them all out at the same time. He read the book "Rules for Radicals" by Saul Alinsky and used your own rules against you and now you cant stand it. I am laughing my ass off you got anymore article that are going to be proven wrong. They got shit loads of videos and every time they (ACORN) lie they put out yet another to prove ACORN lied.

  9. #19
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    If you read my"dumbass" post you would have seen that i acknowledge that we all make spelling and other mistakes. But the Aerosols mistake speaks to something larger for me. it speaks to your arrogance of knowledge when there are many things you really dont know. Read the posts before you make wild eyed comments. Remember the double standard mantra? Your demonstrating them again and again.


    Hey dumbass check out the time between your correction and my post on the subject. It will make it clear I was working on my post before you posted your comments and I did not see it. Not that what you had said would have changed what I wrote.

  10. #20
    Atypical is offline

    Still wrong and can't read or understand science.

    Dear John

    Still not reading info contrary to your positions, huh.

    What you chose to miss and ignore...

    You get the picture. Countering decades of advancing understanding by the leading climate scientists by going straight to the Viscount – who has zero science credentials – and manufacturing a supposed scientific debate in order to justify the usual anti-regulation policy stance. One of Mr. Barton’s fellow members said, “It’s nice to have Lord Monckton here, he was a senior policy advisor to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, so he’s a good witness to have.”

    How do you live with your dishonesty?

  11. Ad Fairy Senior Member
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •