By Larry JohnsoncloseAuthor: Larry JohnsonName: Larry Johnson Email: lcjohnson1@me.com Site:http://NoQuarterUSA.net About: Larry C. Johnson is a former analyst at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, who moved subsequently in 1989 to the U.S. Department of State, where he served four years as the deputy director for transportation security, antiterrorism assistance training, and special operations in the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism. He left government service in October 1993 and set up a consulting business. He currently is the co-owner and CEO of BERG Associates, LLC (Business Exposure Reduction Group) and is an expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, and crisis and risk management, and money laundering investigations. Johnson is the founder and main author of No Quarter, a weblog that addresses issues of terrorism and intelligence and politics. NoQuarterUSA was nominated as Best Political Blog of 2008.See Authors Posts (2096) on December 5, 2009 at 12:15 AM in Current Affairs
* bumped up *
The jig is up on the bullshit science pushing the global warming nonsense. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of fact.
Please take time to read this report (click here).
GREEN-HANDED!
COLD FACTS ABOUT THE HOT TOPIC OF GLOBAL TEMPERATURE CHANGE AFTER THE CLIMATEGATE SCANDAL
Lord Monckton is doing a valuable public service in taking on the climate status quo, which is pushing the dogma that the earth is warming because of human activity. Only one itsy, bitsy problem–the case is based on cooked data.
Here is a superb video of a Monckton speech:
Silence Dogood
I’m glad to see this has been exposed. Truth is necessary so humankind can make prudent choices in public policy.
maryann
la verite
donjo
Truth? How about Monckton is NOT a Lord; he is NOT a scientist, he is NOT a Nobel laureate, and he is NOT an expert on climate. He is, however a charlatan and a fraud. To see this garbage presented as something approaching the truth on this site is surely disappointing.
From someone who bothered to do a little research: Monckton IS A Delusional, Pompous Fool.
“Quite apart from this (undoubtedly incomplete) list of substantive errors, Lord Monckton further undermines his own credibility as a serious commentator by:
1. Claiming to be a climate scientist when he is not (nine of his publications on the topic come from his own think tank, while the tenth is from the letters section of a journal. He does not have a peer-reviewed publication in any scientific journal on any topic, let alone on climate science);
2. Claiming to be a scientist when he is not (see above. Monckton’s only qualifications are in classics – hence all the pretentious Latin in his presentation – and journalism);
3. Claiming to be a Nobel Laureate when he is not (Crazy, eh! Monckton says he “deserves” a Nobel Prize because he wrote a letter pointing out a decimal point typo in one table of one IPCC report, making him a “contributor to the IPCC”, which won a Nobel Prize in 2007. The IPCC, however, does not list him as a contributor, and his “Nobel Prize Pin” was made for him by a friend in New York rather than by anybody in Scandinavia. Hmmm…)
4. Claiming to be a member of the House of Lords, on multiple occasions, when he is not. (He has **run** for the House of Lords twice, but he lost both times. Perhaps he did not notice those losses?!)
5. Making ridiculous claims on other topics, such as that a ban of DDT was singlehandedly responsible for all malaria deaths in the last few decades, or that the best way to have solved the AIDS crisis was to imprison all AIDS sufferers until they died.”
I don’t know if he ever called himself Lord. All I’ve seen are non-pommies label him a Lord. He is a Viscount.
As for “scientist,” he has shown he knows more about statistics than the “climate scientists” who, by the way, are not professional statiticians, yet all of their alarming stuff derives from adjusting raw climate data.
He is arguably, and funnily, a Nobel Prize recipient because he was a contributor to the IPCC. The so-called 2,500 scientists of the ipcc include all the persons who are skeptics and contribute comments to the IPCC for their assessment reports. Funny, but true, and based on the UN IPCC’s own bluster.
Finally, articles from New Zealand should be taken with a grain of salt. They tend to be hysterical and have fully taken the bait with an ETS system that will transfer money to China. Chinese penetration into NZ govt?
donjo
Your debunking doesn’t work. He is still a fraud and a charlatan. If that’s the kind of person you wish to believe, have at it.
You say he has shown he knows more about statistics. Prove it. There’s too much stuff on the internet that gets by just because somebody types it out.
He is NOT listed as a Nobel Laureate; all he did was write a letter to the editor type of thing to the IPCC; that hardly makes him worthy of the award. But then Ozero got one for peace.
And because you say so, everything out of New Zealand is bogus? Sounds a little like killing the messenger. But then we know that everything coming out of America is the God’s Awful Truth.
mountainaires
I have to agree with you, donjo. There’s something very ODD about Monckton, in both appearance and behavior. Frankly, I think one has to be dangerously credulous to take him very seriously. He’s obsessed with Al Gore, which is disquieting; obsession doesn’t bolster Monckton’s credibility in my view. He may have some good points, but his odd behavior resembles schizo-affective disorder more than it does any secular scientific fact.
But, to say the emails are proof of a “hoax?”
Spoken like a true “DENIALIST.”
The e-mail archives stolen last month from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (UEA), UK, have been greeted by the climate-change-denialist fringe as a propaganda windfall (see page 551). To these denialists, the scientists’ scathing remarks about certain controversial palaeoclimate reconstructions qualify as the proverbial ’smoking gun’: proof that mainstream climate researchers have systematically conspired to suppress evidence contradicting their doctrine that humans are warming the globe.
This paranoid interpretation would be laughable were it not for the fact that obstructionist politicians in the US Senate will probably use it next year as an excuse to stiffen their opposition to the country’s much needed climate bill. Nothing in the e-mails undermines the scientific case that global warming is real — or that human activities are almost certainly the cause. That case is supported by multiple, robust lines of evidence, including several that are completely independent of the climate reconstructions debated in the e-mails.
“No one should be misled by all the noise. The e-mail messages represent years’ worth of exchanges among prominent American and British climatologists. Some are mean-spirited, others intemperate. But they don’t change the underlying scientific facts about climate change.
One describes climate skeptics as “idiots,” another describes papers written by climate contrarians as “garbage” and “fraud.” Still another suggests that the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, whose 2007 report concluded that humans were the dominant force behind global warming, should pay no attention to contrarian opinions.
Another quotes an exasperated Phil Jones — director of the climate center at the University of East Anglia, from which the e-mail was stolen — as expressing the hope that climate change would occur “regardless of the consequences” so “the science could be proved right.”
However, most of the e-mail messages — judging by those that have seen the light of day — appear to deal with the painstaking and difficult task of reconstructing historical temperatures, and the problems scientists encounter along the way. Despite what the skeptics say, they demonstrate just how rigorously scientists have worked to figure out whether global warming is real and the true role that human activities play.”
mountainaires
Then again, maybe the hacked emails were the hoax.
The leaked emails originally appeared on a server in the Siberian city of Tomsk, which the Russian secret service has praised before for its hacks of anti-Russian voices. Professor Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, the vice chairman of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change, is suspicious: “It’s very common for hackers in Russia to be paid for their services. It’s a carefully made selection of emails and documents that’s not random. This is 13 years of data, and it’s not a job of amateurs.” The Independent theorizes, “if it was indeed the [secret service] behind the leak, it could be part of a ploy to delay negotiations or win further concessions for Moscow.”
Larry, your fans from the dance/spin troop Minions de trolls are only 1 for 3 today with you. You granted them Afghan (because that’s how you feel), but they lost on the Economy and now the global warming hoax.
I’ll enjoy watching them try and discredit you while at the same time agree with you on Afghanistan.
Popcorn anyone?
It’s from farm-raised cage-free free-roaming no-antibiotics organic fair-trade popcorn!
barry bums a ciggie
Oh, dear. Al Gore has canceled his handshake lecture in Copenhagen.
Silence Dogood, please do pass the popcorn.
Cindy
I’ll have mine with butter!
donjo
So a few twisted out of context remarks are enough to debunk global warming? Consider the source of the “debunking.”
Silence Dogood
At a minimum, a full investigation and airing is called for regarding the emails. Let the chips fall where they may.
The US certainly should not make major changes to law until this matter is settled.
I hope we can agree on this.
Peggy Sue
At minimum is correct, Silence. What donjo refers to as a “few twisted out of context remarks” is what others have termed: The Inconvenient Leak.
Like it or not this throws everything into question. The reason I’ve remained a Global Warming skeptic is that I’m old enough to remember [30 years ago] when we were told the earth was headed for an Ice Age.
How quickly things change!
Then I started reading alternative views like Bjorg Lomborg from Copenhagen and realized this was not settled science, particularly when it comes to how we approach Climate Change.
This recent disclosure–garbage in, garbage out–only reinforces what my gut was telling me. The science, the real data had been compromised and the results tweaked, yet the politicians latched onto this idea like pitbulls, ready to sell indulgences to the faithful, a passionate quest to “save the world.” I always suspected the religious fervor of the movement.
To put it plainly: We’ve been had.
This recent disclosure will hopefully bring us back to the real science. The environment is important. We can’t spoil the nest and survive. But we need to take a deep breath, insist that the data is solid and then make decisions that are doable and viable.
I don’t know who the hacker was but he/she did the world a great service. We have a lot of problems as a global society and limited resources. We need to spend those resources wisely for the greatest benefit to the greatest number.
The Cap & Trade idea is obscene and will do nothing for the climate or the environment. It will disrupt the world’s economies and cause greater suffering to the poorest among us. Nothing more than a politician’s wetdream, another way to control and manipulate. The whole plan needs to be thrown on the ash heap, and then we need to start seriously planning how to care for the planet and her inhabitants.
As I said, the hacker who made this available deserves a kiss.
Oh, Silence. I read the post. Very nice. Thank you.
Silence Dogood
You’re welcome.
The hacker, I question it. Perhaps someone on the outside was tipped off by an internal whistle blower? Did someone hire this hacker? Etc.
Peggy Sue
I haven’t heard or read anything on the source. Originally reports said “the hacker” was from the wilds of Russia somewhere [this was the first few days after the material was released]. Then, some rumors floated around on the possibility of an inside job.
But as far as I know the info is pretty sketchy at this point.
Interesting!
Onofre’s arm
There is a more plausible possibility that there was an inside whistle blower who initially sent the information to the BBC who just sat on the info because of their vested interest in the AGW hoax. After realizing that the BBC would not proceed with the story, the whistle blower managed to disseminate the info through an alternate resource, the world wide web. It wasn’t so much of a hacker job as it was a concerned individual insider who wished the truth to be known.
Silence Dogood
The whistle blower could also be a mole. High stakes game, anything is possible.
I have zero vested interest in any of this. I want the truth, as I think most people do.
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
I had read this angle, also. The truth is, for anyone who has ever taken a statistics class, data can be bent and tweaked to reflect whatever the seekers are looking for.
In this day of photoshop, unless there are credible eyewitnesses coming forward, how do we even know out here in the collective that the alarmist photos etc aren’t just as fake? We don’t.
Remember the movie, Capricorn One?
Silence Dogood
Yes. People these days forget about that movie or never saw it. That’s where the moon landing hoax conspiracy comes from, IMO. If there really was no moon landings, it would have been wise to put that movie out there, to contain any leaks. No one would believe the leaks this way. I don’t believe in this conspiracy, BTW.
I’m pretty certain some of the tabloid stories about certain “leaders” have been put out there to contain inevitable leaks of things they’d rather not reveal. Removing my tinfoil hat now.
Goblintrain
Peggy Sue, I am old enough to emember the same. There is always an “emergency” justification, a “crises” that some how we have control to change if private citizens resign their sovereignty to the Federal Government. Al Gore is not a scientist, he is not an “authority” on Global Warming. He is a very successful businessman who made his fortune being a complete hypocrite about the gospel he has been preeching to the rest of us. However i haven’t seen who his successor is? Who do we make our co2 confessions to after Al Gore is out of the picture. What happens when we need to buy a new Carbon Credit?
You see where this is really goin. We have re-entered the Dark Ages if we follow his nonsense! TY for your comment Peggy
mountainaires
Most people see what they want to see, when they’re predisposed to have a particular ideology. Whatever the reason, it’s patently clear that jumping to conclusions on half-baked propaganda [from either extreme] isn’t a very intelligent thing to do. One can be “had” by presuming too quickly, and end up being a tool for an agenda they hadn’t intended to support. Particularly when one hasn’t taken the time to read all of the facts.
A fair reading of the e-mails reveals nothing to support the denialists’ conspiracy theories. In one of the more controversial exchanges, UEA scientists sharply criticized the quality of two papers that question the uniqueness of recent global warming (S. McIntyre and R. McKitrick Energy Environ. 14, 751–771; 2003 and W. Soon and S. Baliunas Clim. Res. 23, 89–110; 2003) and vowed to keep at least the first paper out of the upcoming Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Whatever the e-mail authors may have said to one another in (supposed) privacy, however, what matters is how they acted. And the fact is that, in the end, neither they nor the IPCC suppressed anything: when the assessment report was published in 2007 it referenced and discussed both papers.
If there are benefits to the e-mail theft, one is to highlight yet again the harassment that denialists inflict on some climate-change researchers, often in the form of endless, time-consuming demands for information under the US and UK Freedom of Information Acts. Governments and institutions need to provide tangible assistance for researchers facing such a burden.
[...]
The e-mail theft also highlights how difficult it can be for climate researchers to follow the canons of scientific openness, which require them to make public the data on which they base their conclusions. This is best done via open online archives, such as the ones maintained by the IPCC (http://www.ipcc-data.org) and the US National Climatic Data Center (http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/ncdc.html).
But for much crucial information the reality is very different. Researchers are barred from publicly releasing meteorological data from many countries owing to contractual restrictions. Moreover, in countries such as Germany, France and the United Kingdom, the national meteorological services will provide data sets only when researchers specifically request them, and only after a significant delay. The lack of standard formats can also make it hard to compare and integrate data from different sources. Every aspect of this situation needs to change: if the current episode does not spur meteorological services to improve researchers’ ease of access, governments should force them to do so.
The stolen e-mails have prompted queries about whether Nature will investigate some of the researchers’ own papers. One e-mail talked of displaying the data using a ‘trick’ — slang for a clever (and legitimate) technique, but a word that denialists have used to accuse the researchers of fabricating their results. It is Nature’s policy to investigate such matters if there are substantive reasons for concern, but nothing we have seen so far in the e-mails qualifies.
The UEA responded too slowly to the eruption of coverage in the media, but deserves credit for now being publicly supportive of the integrity of its scientists while also holding an independent investigation of its researchers’ compliance with Britain’s freedom of information requirements (seehttp://go.nature.com/zRBXRP).
In the end, what the UEA e-mails really show is that scientists are human beings — and that unrelenting opposition to their work can goad them to the limits of tolerance, and tempt them to act in ways that undermine scientific values. Yet it is precisely in such circumstances that researchers should strive to act and communicate professionally, and make their data and methods available to others, lest they provide their worst critics with ammunition. After all, the pressures the UEA e-mailers experienced may be nothing compared with what will emerge as the United States debates a climate bill next year, and denialists use every means at their disposal to undermine trust in scientists and science.
“It is not necessary to change. Your survival is not mandatory.” – W. Edwards Deming
Ferd Berfle
I agree. I have looked at the evidence as it has accumulated for years and am quite disconcerted that at least some scientists are fudging data and apparently have done a good job at the fudging. This is a completely unacceptable practice as it violates the very basis of science. A re-evaluation and re-examination of the entire set of data is in order and pronto.
Let me be clear, however, that this process of re-examination and re-evaluation should not include non-scientists, politicians, lawyers, corporations, pundits, or agenda-driven mouthpieces. I love the disciplines of the physical sciences and would hate to see them go the way of mush-headed sciences such as Economics and psychology/sociology, where anyone who can write a few paragraphs without creating a logical fallacy or two and can spin a few tall tales are considered gifted experts.
This is truly disheartening.
Signed
A Chemist
Hackie
It comes down to statistics.
And the global warming money has not purchased them, yet.
The emails are great. These tree wonks with there supposed treemometers became heros, talking about their free junkets to meetings in Tahiti, Davos, you name it.
Goblintrain
Ferd i share your concern, but i believe intellectual honesty demands the recognition that if real science goes the way of the dinosaur: truth is not about evidence it is about buying the interpretation of that evidence, we need to all go back to sleep. & no, i dont want any one to do that! You have children and Grand Children that will be spending their lives mopping up this mess. What i am seeing is that our elected officials are behaving like a 3rd world Cesspool. This is the first time i actually want to hear the term used: “Too big to fail”. We are. If the USA fails It is going to be a long time before we ever hav the kind of light that we hae enjoyed in our life times.
Onofre’s arm
It can now just as easily be said that the whole global warming fraud is based on a relatively few twisted and intentionally manipulated studies, models, reports, and graphs. AGW from it’s inception has been a completely manufactured concept by those wishing to profit from the resulting hysteria.
Onofre’s arm
Admin: the percentage of spammed posts is becoming intolerable!
Banned in Beantown
Maybe not intolerable, but definately a pain in the ass.
Docelder
The world leaders should just say they will think about enacting carbon trading when Al Gore becomes a vegetarian and moves into an off the grid yurt. It isn’t going to ever happen. Because, it never was about the Earth or the air or even the carbon. It has always been about the profit to be made from the implementation of a new world monetary standard… based not on gold or currency markets but instead on carbon and the right to use it… sold as a stock and traded in a carbon exchange market. These are evil people.
maryann
Global warming is a communist ruse to enslave via CO2 taxation.
ziggy
I’ll add that to my list of commie ruses, just below fluoridation of our drinking water…
Banned in Beantown
“So a few twisted out of context remarks”
Are you kidding? Did you read the “few” remarks in question?
First of all, they are not a few. They are NUMEROUS.
Second, they are hardly out of context. They describe in detail how the data was manipulated to create a climate model of increased warming.
The “few twisted out of context remarks” describe omiting data that actually showed several decade long periods of COOLING, including this decade, from 2000 to 2009.
This is going to be a big ugly black eye for all of the sciences, not just climate science.
This scandal is going to give rise to a new moniker for science manipulation. It will do to science what Ponzi did to investing.
The part that really astonishes me is the pervasiveness throughout the climate research community. Talk about your “Vast Conspiracies” The number of people and institutions collaborating on this manipulation is unbelievable.
hokma
Well to begin, and maybe you have not heard, “global warming” has already been debunked. Once it was determined that “global warming” was in question, they shifted gears and renamed the problem “climate change.”
The fact is that the science was never “in.” Self-serving scientists who made a living off government grants to support a false premise with the support of politicians who believed in wealth redistribution falsified and carefully filtered information and then perpetrated defamation campaign against anyone who would question the information.
That is why they refused to ever have an open debate on this. They knew in an open debate their beliefs would be debunked.
I live south of the Mason-Dixon, Buzz. Snow is forecasted for Saturday, the earliest I remember snow/ice since living down here.
And Brrrrr. It’s cold out there tonight.
Not Likely
If you are really dumb enough to think that the fact that it is snowing in Houston is some rebuttal to all climate science, it’s a marvel you’re able to operate a computer.
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
Hey, did you ever get back to me with your unmitigated findings about whatever it was you were lambasting others with other day? NO? I checked. You didn’t respond. Not Likely. So go back and do the work and perhaps you’ll garner some credibility.
Til then, you’re just a zitty fifiteen year old with a crap attitude and no real intellectual significance.
Silence Dogood
* Crickets *
Another troll in need of a diaper change since they are so full of crap.
Peggy Sue
No one’s suggesting that this year’s unusual cold temps and weather is a rebuttal to anything. But even the diehards have to admit that selling Global Warming, telling people not to trust their lying eyes makes the public suspicious.
And sorry, that’s what happens on the tail end of puffing up the data and the alarm.
Environmental issues are important, crucial to our survival. But you’re not going to convince people by fudging the stats and turning the whole thing into a political and corporate fiasco.
The climate scientists shamed themselves. And oddly enough even James Hansen [considered the Godfather of the Global Warming movement] has said he hopes the Copenhagen Summit collapses because the suggestion of carbon indulgences is a disgrace.
Climate Change is not a religion. To ask the world’s population to take this on faith is ridiculous, dangerous and will waste our limited resources.
Peggy Sue
Larry, I had another post gobbled. Will send an email.
Thanx!
Docelder
The problem is people have so much invested in this carbon trading scheme. Carbon was to be the new gold standard and the powers that be have already setup the carbon exchanges. What a ruse, charge a population of people that are forced to exhale CO2 for the right to do so. A breath tax… how purely evil is that? Forget if granny is healthy enough to breathe or worth saving medically… can she come up with the breath taxes? This should go away, but the perpetrators are going to resort first to fear, then shock and if all else fails be ready for a crisis. In the interim… Here’s Arnold with some fear. Astalavista baby.
Larry, my post was spaminated. Can you retrieve? I’ll send an email.
Thanx
Cindy
Larry—Thank you for this post! Your comments totally bring street cred to the forces and voices of truth.
Onofre’s arm
Now if we could just get Don King to arrange a cage match between Al “Carbon Crusher” Gore (Ba, 6’2″, 240 lbs), and Lord Monckton, “The Anglican Mangler” (Phd, 6’0″, 190 lbs), perhaps the debate about AGW will finally be publicly and very visibly settled.
Let’s get ready to RUUUUUUUUMMMMMMMMBBBLE
donjo
No one tweaked the data except those trying to run it down. Here’s some comments form a blog inhabited by people much more cognizant of this issue than I am:
QUOTE: (Eliminated names to protect the innocent)
lol. I love how all these articles make statements like “appear to show researchers shaving their data to conform to their expectations” without any backing evidence or context.
…
But the revelation that the raw climate data had been dumped at the East Anglia CRU was.
No, it wasn’t. Raw data is still available and the raw data set can be reconstructed. If the 1980′s were now, they would have kept it because you can put a terabyte of info on something the size of a paperback. Back then, it was probably hundreds or thousands of computer tapes. Many data repositories made similar decisions.
…
Some clown from a conservative “think” tank trying to make news.
There was a thread about the “1934″ adjustment:
The delay is processing a FOIA is probably because the guy asked for emails from everyone for several years. That means somebody has to go back and read every email and make a determination under FOIA if it is releasable. Not an easy or quick task given the volume of emails that say stuff like”Come to Frank’s retirement party.”
…
Actually I hope this guy’s lawsuit is successful and I think releasing more information is better than less. What we are seeing with the so called Climategate is a cherry picking of emails to try to paint the darkest picture possible. From following this issue for years a fuller review of all the data out there continues to support the theory that man made actions are contributing global warming.
…
This is of course true, but where is there any evidence that the media, the general public, or the national discourse can actually handle large data sets, or the idea of probability versus certainty? There we have an ongoing conundrum.
If you have one set of people playing political football, trying to “win” at all costs (I suppose to maintain their careers in buying and selling oil futures?), and another set trying to actually explain how scientists measure these quantities and attempt to create accurate models of complex processes, what results? A mess. The only resolution? Either the scientific side starts playing football (e.g. over simplifying or reducing the full complexity of the data in order to not be shouted down or spun to death by disingenuous denialists), or you hope (against all behavioral evidence and logic), that the denialists will start playing an honest game and focusing on the truth and the greater good.
Check out the CNN web piece today on Alaskan villages falling into the ocean. Ugly stuff. Alrighty, that’s one post more than I should venture in these threads.” End of quotes
Global warming or climate change, whatever you call it, is here to stay. Whether its an element of natural rhythms or man-made, it’s not up to me to decide. I don’t know. I suspect and have the opinion though that it’s probably a combination of both. We can’t stop the nature part, but we sure as hell can stop the man-made.
Guys paddling kayaks over the North Pole, watching polar bears slowly drown themselves into extinction, Greenland losing its ice cover at a rapid rate, the Antartic sloughing off ice chunks bigger than Rhode Island, glaciers disappearing, island countries in the Pacific slowly being inundated by rising sea water, and bugs and birds (and tree diseases) moving up here in the midwest from down south, is enough to convince silly me.
Docelder
Check out the CNN web piece today on Alaskan villages falling into the ocean. Ugly stuff.
Yes, first fear, then shock and if need be crisis. These people are too heavily invested to let this just slip away when they were so close. We are dealing with evil people here who will stop at nothing. There are ways to melt patches of ice in Alaska that have nothing to do with climate change. Look up HAARP. Why would ice be melting in Alaska, yet it be snowing this week in South Texas? Why let CNN decide for you how to think? Think for yourself. Carbon trading is set to replace gold and currency as the standard of wealth. This is for all the marbles. Think.
donjo
And I’m sure these conspiracy freak scientists were up there drowning polar bears and melting the ice caps – on both poles – with this gigantic bunsen burner. Give me a break.
Why would anyone bother to melt an Alaskan village off the face of the earth? Think for yourself. BTW, I don’t even watch CNN so I don’t know what you’re talking about.
Carbon trading has nothing to do with this controversy. It will take more than this to help solve the problem. However, it would be passed in a heartbeat if all the “profits” were guaranteed to the republicans.
It’s snowing here, too, but fluctuations in weather patterns have more to do with Pacific ocean currents that anything else. If the snow is still there in a few days, then you have a problem.
P.S. Where can I get me some of that carbon trading business?
Docelder
The ice isn’t melting, it is increasing. It is fluid, it always has been. It melts here and freezes there, but the volume of ice has been increasing in recent years, now that the sun spot activity has decreased. Look up HAARP, it isn’t a giant bunsen burner, it is a giant shortwave generator. Shortwave energy can produce significant heat, the whole purpose of HAARP is to heat the Earth’s ionosphere. It can melt ice, either intentionally or unintentionally.
The United States has three ionospheric heating facilities: the HAARP, the HIPAS, near Fairbanks, Alaska, and (currently offline for modifications) one at the Arecibo Observatory[citation needed] in Puerto Rico
I checked it out. The radio frequency (RF)transmitter is covered in snow and ice. And you say it is melting the Arctic Ice? And can target a specific area like a death ray?
You are as big an idiot as the jackasses that manipulated the climate data.
There are idiots galore on all sides of this issue.
Hard science would help sort the fact from fiction, but that too has been manipulated.
Docelder
The device heats the ionosphere, pushing it out and creating a temporary hole in it. The ionosphere protects the Earth under it from solar radiation. Under the hole made from HAARP more solar radiation will strike the ice. Solar radiation melts ice. HAARP melts (albeit temporarily) the ionosphere. The radiation under the hole wouldn’t be right on the top of the HAARP array. If you say I don’t fully understand everything it is doing, I will agree. I would just add that neither do the scientists who are firing it off.
Docelder
HAARP ice melt is just a theory. The same as AGW from CO2 is just a theory. Why is one theory better than the other… provided neither has to be proven to be taken as fact? All I am saying. One unproven theory is as good as another and HAARP worries me way more than CO2 does.
hokma
Just ask your “god” Al Gore.
Newsbusters was uncovering Al Gore’s financial benefit from his global waming campaign back in 2007:
“Gore helped found Generation Investment Management, through which he and others pay for offsets. The firm invests the money in solar, wind and other projects that reduce energy consumption around the globe…
Gore is chairman of the firm and, presumably, draws an income or will make money as its investments prosper. In other words, he “buys” his “carbon offsets” from himself, through a transaction designed to boost his own investments and return a profit to himself.”
Actually it is Antarctic sea ice that is growing while at the other pole, Arctic ice is shrinking at record rates.
I wonder what Antarctica was like during the last ice age. Do we know there was more ice in the south during the last ice age or are we just assuming there was?
Looks like the oil industry has finally won. And all it took was a few “hacked” emails, a compliant media, and a gullible populace.
Sometimes I think America is too stupid to survive.
Silence Dogood
“Few” emails?
Docelder
Horsehockey, the oil industry hasn’t won anything. We still aren’t drilling for new oil in the North slope where that one find has been our nations largest reserve for decades… where oil flows like artesian water wells from the Earth at 150 degrees without needing to be pumped at all. Why is it that nobody has ever tried to repeat this find somewhere else nearby? Why is it they haven’t been allowed to even try? There is no oil shortage. CO2 is not a toxin. No, the winners here will be people and nations who will remain free to live their 70 or so years of life on the planet in peace without some greedy oligarchy taxing their very right to even exist.
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
Yup, with gullible libs in charge America is in a state of too stupid to walk and chew gum.
Liberal tragedies in last fifty years:
Nuclear war!!! – never happened, although it was close. How many fallout shelters were actually used for survival? Uh, none.
Cities will burn in racial war! – some did but it did little really change the big picture. Meaning: You still are responsible for your own choices despite your skin tone.
The San Andreas fault and California will fall into the ocean by 1985…never happened. Had some healthy earthquakes, though, in all fairness.
The forests will all die: seems that re-planting and better practices have largely prevented this. Partial credit to libs for awareness.
We will all be infected with AIDS-HIV and it will spread to all demographics! Well, it jump into various populations but still seems to prefer a certain sub-group and certainly hasn’t bloomed into uncontrollable pandemic as predicted.
Ebola – whatever happened to that one as to coming to America?
South American killer bees!!!!! Seen any lately?
Swine flu, 1976, Avian flu 2000′s, H1N1, 2009 – didn’t quite turn into the pandemic as predicted – but a ton on money was dumped into R and D and manufacturing! But, hey, where were those riots to get the vaccine?
Global warming: Fluctuations in weather patterns have been detected over time. There’s probably some factual evidence that will support this but to what degree? And where is the longitudinal evidence that this is a unique event that hasn’t happened on planet earth before?
You see, once you’ve been around a bunch of libs in a very lib state you soon find out that Crisis is the thing liberals just love to stir into their coffee each day.
Silence Dogood
In fairness, the political opposites do their own share of hysteria and mouth foaming. It seems I get beat over the head either with a sixteen ounce bible or a one pound package of tofu. Both hurt equally.
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
Oh, but to get a handle on where some of the rattling and humming comes from one must look at each side individually.
Liberals love crisis.
That was the only point.
tek
Buzzisback: You are so wrong. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, et. al., started the trend of using disaster as a federal policy. Then they make undemocratic, unconstitutional proposals and tell people things are so bad, it’s the only option. Pity Republicans couldn’t see it when a Republican regime was in power; now they lash out at so-called Democrats as a means of getting more Republicans in power–no matter how corrupt and destructive they may be.
What I hated about Obama during the campaigns was that I could see his people were determined to take up this mantle and sure enough, that’s their game as well. But make no mistake, Karl Rove started this catastrophe-as-public-policy idea.
Now we have a crashed economy that requires all kinds of give-aways to Obama’s key constituencies, we have millions of illegals entrenched in the U. S. and that will require a massive general amnesty and hard-working traditional citizens will pay to support all of them, we have a healthcare crisis that requires these idiots to take benefits away from seniors instead of shutting down the Faith Based Initiative, the Neighborhood Project, subsidies to billionaire businesses, implementing E-Verify and deporting illegals. Obama is canceling healthcare for American seniors so he can fund government healthcare for illegal aliens–soon to be his main voting population after the amnesty.
Yup, it’s more of the attack problems by creating even more problems gang. By the time Obama’s term is out, this country will be irreversibly destroyed.
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
Nope. But there you go.
I’m an optimist with a jaundiced eye on liberal saber rattling in a thread of grumpy people posting their versions of h*e*l*l.
See, I used to be a liberal, I know the coffee talk that went on and the Cassandras of doom were the libs. The GOPers were always too busy working and making money to whine.
Bush and Cheney just used a tactic out of the playbook and then it got attention because the wrong side was using it.
All is universe’s way of bringing things to light and clearing out the closets of corruption.
Just like Climategate will be investigated…
Make sure you make someone smile today.
Ferd Berfle
Liberals love crisis.
Actually, Buzz, so do Neocons. They’re still in hysterics over such things as gay marriage, drug legalization, and terrorists.
This is one area where both sides are at fault. They do it because the great mass of humanity can only understand a sound bite at a time, if that much, and it makes their job of making us an unthinking herd much easier.
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
Absolutely. But the point was to separate the types of hysteria.
Never did I say I was defending anything the rightwingers do. To assume so is overreach.
Let’s isolate the climate/global warming harbingers to where they mostly fall in the political spectrum. The leftwing ie liberals.
If this thread were about gay marriage, of course there would be discussion of rightwing behavior.
This thread is about climate/global warming which appears to be a point of crisis the libs use to beat people over the head.
Simplicity in motion.
Ferd Berfle
Yep, Administrator, I lost another comment to the Comment Shredder. I wrote nothing derogatory or used any banned words. Such canning of comments does not earn this site any brownie points. Will you kindly rescue this post?
trixta
Ain’t that the truth, S Dogwood. Both sides are guilty of trying to fool the public. Didn’t the GWB team do the same when they edited scientific and government reports to manipulate the data on climate change? But it appears that scientists making the case for global warming have lost all credibility on this one. In any case, whether global warming is true or not, I’m hoping that this scandal will derail the nefarious cap and trade agenda once and for all.
mountainaires
Yeah, isn’t it CONVENIENT? Meanwhile, the perma-frost is melting, greenland is now actually green, and the climate extremes on our continent continue to shock and awe.
These emails change nuttin’ honey.
Climate change is here; it is real. We do need to rein in our carbon footprint, if for no other reason than the air we breathe, which, in some places on earth, is not fit for human consumption. Try living in Seoul, S.Korea for a couple of years. People walk around with masks on their faces, the air is so bad. That isn’t a natural or normal situation, ya know.
I have to laugh at people who think our contribution to our own demise is all a conspiracy…..some people are so easily persuaded by a little bit of propaganda–from either camp. Just open your eyes. Now, look around you. Oh, but you you gonna believe, Sean Hannity or your lyin’ [burning] eyes]?
Silence Dogood
These emails change nuttin’ honey.
One could argue this relating to the physical climate, but as to the political “climate,” it could be a game changer.
mountainaires
Everyone has a stake in the ideological/political game on climate change. That’s the bottom line. I continue to try to educate myself in facts, while dismissing that din in the background called political debate. I don’t think the hacked emails prove that global warming is a “hoax” anymore than I believe everything the deniers say. They’re all tarnished by their political/financial stake in the game.
I just don’t believe either side of the debate on “global warming.” I think there is climate change, and I know for a fact that where there is concrete instead of trees, the temperature is higher. It’s just so easy to see that the fundamental truth is that man does create warming, by virtue of his very presence in a place. We build; therefore we sweat.
I live in the country, on land surrounded by trees. The difference in temperature at the mall, and at my home is 10 degrees. Now, there is a fact one cannot deny. Where there is concrete, there is heat. The sun soaks into that concrete and it radiates its heat; ever seen the heat radiate off the highway?
Not only that, but does anyone deny that oil is a limited commodity on this earth? There is not a limitless supply you know. Thus, two facts are clear: Man does destroy the natural balance in the temperature and air; we do need to develop alternative sources to fuel our lifestyles.
Why do people think such things are a hoax? I say, stop listening to ideologues on either side, and start observing for yourself. That’s all.
http://www.sonicninjakitty.wordpress.com Sonic Ninja Kitty
Climate change and pollution are two different issues.
Docelder
Try living in Seoul, S.Korea for a couple of years. People walk around with masks on their faces, the air is so bad.
25 years ago I spent the day walking around Guadalajara, Mexico. I put on a white shirt in the morning. When I got back to the hotel that night, it was literally gray. None of this is new, but it is pollution and should be handled by emissions controls. I have never meant to belittle pollution or conservation in any way. I have had my say. I am leaving this to the rest of you now. The topic just peeves me off.
JRD
These e-mails change whether Jeff Immelt has a job. He ran GE into GE ground and desperately needs Crap and Tax to pass.
Who else is heavily invested in this BS? Oh, Goldman-Sachs going to make a fortune. Yeah, they really care about the little guy. Now you are on Goldman-Sachs side. D-uh!
ziggy
Hey, the possums survive, even though they still haven’t figured out something so simple as looking before crossing the road. There might be hope for us.
Onofre’s arm
Q: Why did the chicken cross the road?
A: To prove to the possum that it could, in fact, be done.
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
So true, Doc.
Al Gore canceling his speech says far more than a bunch of greenies blogging and watching CNN.
Silence Dogood
Eloi who think the so-called “climate change deniers” are akin to future Morlocks should immediately stop blogging! You are wasting energy via increasing greenhouse gas emissions!
See ya’ll underground. Remember to bring BBQ sauce.
Frankie
Like so many other things, it is just easier to believe this is all a hoax, than to actually confront the grave, extraordinarily complex challenges we are faced with due to real climate change.
Silence Dogood
You tell me how easy it is to believe something by telling me to believe something easily from you?
I quite frankly don’t know what to believe anymore.
Peggy Sue
Frankie, the man I referenced above, Bjorn Lomborg doesn’t deny Global Warming. He doesn’t even deny the C02 connection [although he doesn't deem it life or death]. What he does object to is the alarmist nature of the Climate movement and the approach, which will spend gazillions of dollars for very little impact.
He was just involved in a debate in Canada [I think] and his concluding remarks were as follows:
“I think it is crucial that Oxfam actually told us that in the G8 decisions, the leaders decided that they were going to be spending about $50-billion extra on climate change. They were going to take that money, it appeared at the time, mainly from overseas development aid. Oxfam’s representative said, this is terrible. If you take those $50-billion dollars, you’re essentially going to make it impossible for us to save four and a half million kids from dying.
Yet if you spend it the most effective way on climate change, you can postpone global warming by the end of the century by six hours. I ask you. What is more important — to save four and half million kids, or postponing global warming by six hours?
That is the challenge. And so to put it very, very bluntly, Al Gore talks about global warming as being our defining moment. How do you want to be remembered by your kids and grandkids? I think that is exactly the right question. How do you want to be remembered? By spending trillions of dollars to do virtually no good a hundred years from now, or by spending much less money now and making a much better world?”
To me this makes sense. This is change I can believe in.
Good comment, Peggy Sue. I appreciate contribution to knowledge; I reject the exploitation of either side of this debate. Thanks for the additional information.
Elizabeth
And what if the appeal of geo-engineering that Bjorn proposes is, as it seems, an excuse for everyone to do nothing ?? At the end of the day, reliance on carbon-based energy sources will still be unsustainable at every level. What becomes concerning as the debate filters through is how some people portray the “ease” of seeding clouds with robot ships or whatever, as though it is so simple that it takes no real time or commitment.
So maybe instead of trying to make it all easier to do, we should concentrate on educating the public about what difficult and costly but inevitable, long-term, traditional “rational remedies” of renewable energy, energy efficiency, carbon pricing etc. support for the cause of energy independence looks like.
Just a thought….I’m not necessarily reflexively opposed to geoengineering, which incidentally is totally unsalable politically at this point, but I do think it will do little but buy us a little more time.
KR
Either you do not understand science or you are lacking the latest information on the topic of the emails and CRU stating that they threw out the raw data. The scientists claiming AGW need to show the data. The burden of proof is on them.
Docelder
They claim now they didn’t have hard drive space to store it. This from universities getting millions to study global warming at a time when raid capable hard drives a terabyte in size are going for a little over $100 each. Unbelievable.
ziggy
The deletion of the raw data in question took place during the 1980s, long before the advent of dirt-cheap storage media we all take for granted today. It wasn’t even on hard drives, because there weren’t any. Back then, data was stored on magnetic computer tapes and punchcards, taking up huge amounts of physical space. If the original media still existed there probably wouldn’t be the hardware to read it.
The destruction of the original media took place after the data had been utilized, many years before climate change was a politicized issue, and long before Jones was director of the Climate Change Research Unit.
Docelder
Then since these scientists are no longer credible as sources and since they had control over the data that gave the results then there is no data period. Somebody needs to start over and be more above board and careful next time. Surely now, with the technology we have today it won’t take twenty years to get a good answer this time.
ziggy
My point was the deliberately misleading way the destruction of the data is being portrayed: as if it were done recently, for no reason other than to conceal manipulation of data–which was of course done to yield false results.
When, in fact, such destruction of old raw data on bulky computer media has generally been entirely routine, once the data has been summarized and utilized. A quarter of a century later very little such media still exists. No one expects it to.
I might as well assert that smoking doesn’t really cause lung cancer at all. When someone points to the statistics I could demand to see all of the raw data collected during the 1960s and 1970s from which the damning statistics were compiled, and insist something is fishy because there weren’t boxes kept in a warehouse somewhere.
We’re admittedly left in a who do you trust situation, but there’s no clear evidence of manipulation, either.
Silence Dogood
Docelder, the more they try to spin this with silly diversionary talking points, the deeper the hole they dig around themselves.
I think there is a false sense of security in the radical left’s abilities to contain all the malfeasance coming out. And this malfeasance is coming out at an exponential rate.
I predict soon they will be overwhelmed, just as the minions of Dubya eventually became overwhelmed when the Iraq II war and economy situations became politically untenable.
In today’s case, the overwhelming will come way way earlier!
My 2 cents.
Docelder
Yes, because if all this is hinged on thirty year old data which was collected by somebody else and which has been massaged in spreadsheets for the past twenty years and that none of the original thirty year old unsubstantiated data is even still available for review… then this thing is worse than fraudulent, it is whimsical. If this qualifies as science, then I no longer believe in it. But, I don’t think is it science.
That story is two hours old. They are kicking the fear, shock and crisis into high gear. They are now desperate, like an animal in a trap gnawing off it’s own leg to survive. Desperation. They were so close.
Docelder
In the 70′s it was an impending ice age. Then global warming… what is next? Acid oceans. But that one won’t come out until this one fails. How to monetize that one? Greed will find a way. There are more crises where this one came from.
donjo
Sort of like the “War” on terror?
Docelder
Or the war on drugs. Why is it when we declare a “war” on something it works out to be a photo-op? Maybe because people who actually do good things for the right reasons don’t declare “wars”.
Silence Dogood
In my dreams: next, something devastating comes out forcing everyone above Hillary (Order of Presidential Succession) to resign, making her president!
Cindy
Oh, if only!
Sweet dreams, Silence Dogood.
Chelsea Patriot
Entre nous, it’s the birth certificate.
Think the global warming fraud is a shock, wait until the Big Freak-Out, when it gets out that Stanley Anne did indeed birth Barky in Kenya.
Silence Dogood
I have no clue on the birth issue, but you might like this link. It appears to be a right wing blog and I would suggest verifying the details if anyone wishes to use this to bolster an argument.
Chelsea Patriot
Thanks for that fascinating Link!
If Barky wasn’t vulnerable on the birth certificate issue, there would not be this reaction from his camp!
Seriously Sick of Obama
I watched an youtube of this group greeting Al Gore at a book signing and it was ROFL!!! The group was yelling to the crowd the truth about the emails that were hacked and waited in line to get a fake book signed by Gore and then when it was there turn they began questioning him. His security detail threw them out while they yelled all the way…HAHAHA..Sorry, but I am one of the one’s that never bothered to deal with the whole global warming BS, I focused on liter in the streets and fought to clean up our highways and streets to be safe for our children. I will say it..I buy the cheap light bulbs, I don’t recycle, I use bottle water. I am of the opinion that if don’t throw it in the trash, then you do realize how many would be out of work if that job wasn’t available for them to sort through to separate what needs to be recycled? This is how I justified my bad habits, LOL!
Eastan McNeal
Valerie Jarett
elaine
All the science in the world won’t stop the wealth redistribution agenda of the radical left & their corporate pals who are already so vested in this warming concept that if it doesn’t pass they’ll go bankrupt. GE being a typical example IMO. What a bizarre alliance: economic parasites & the corporate elite teaming up to suck the last dime out of the middle class. The audacity of wanting to triple the cost of electricity on the 60% of us that pay federal taxes to subsidize the non paying 40%, who no doubt will run every appliance in their houses 24/7…sure that’ll stop warming…I’m all in for recycling, alternative energy, preserving jungles & forests, just would like to see it done with incentives as opposed to punitive measures. Ditto for population control, a gigantic problem the U.N. refuses to address. These clowns have taken their progressive tax schedules & are trying to apply them to every aspect of human life. They’ll continue to privatize the profits for an elite few & socialize the costs.
Docelder
If the global warming is defeated, they are already building “acid oceans” as the next salable crisis. Google it. The concept of it is just a couple of years old. The common thread is “carbon”. They have already invested in carbon as a unit of trade and as a new monetary unit. If warming fails, no problem… then we still need to trade carbon for the acid oceans. Trading of the carbon isn’t gong away. that is the hoax. The hoax that something of no inherent real value can replace gold and currencies. There is pollutants in hydrocarbons, sure there are. But, carbon isn’t one of them. But let the value of hydrocarbons not be in the scarcity of them, but in the right to utilize them and we will suddenly realize that there is no shortage of oil. Oil will be worth little by itself and all the cost of the oil will be in the carbon tax and those who trade and own the right to the carbon credits will have virtually enslaved the entire world for a hoax.
Silence Dogood
Acid oceans, with tangerine trees and marmalade skies!
That goes good next the shed BO built me and the pink unicorn he gave me!
Seriously, man was I wrong, both wings are a threat to society, but the radical left does seem far worse that the reactionary right!
I guess they are actually equal in destructive yield, but the left is going for a huge power grab so they are the immediate threat to our liberty. Extremism sucks.
jeremy
there is a reason why goldman sachs is one of the number one lobbyist for global warming! its all about money folks. call ur senators and say no cap and tax
Silence Dogood
This is getting really tiring!
We had an unpopular war (Iraq II) and a bad economy, so the angry mob with pitchforks comes out and we get saddled with His Royal Ineptitude BO.
Now, the economy continues to flounder, His Royal Ineptitude BO does not have a handle on the economy and this climate change fiasco comes out. Enter the even more pissed off mob with pitchforks again and god knows what kind of a Republican takes charge.
I hope its not just some replacement player from the same team as BO and Bush II.
Please excuse me for being so cynical but I don’t see much room for hope.
Peggy Sue
It is pretty wearisome, isn’t it Silence?
When this news on the Global Warming stuff came out I just held my head.
Is there no one who tells the truth anymore?
Politicians lie their eyeballs out, bankers use phony accounting standards, economists tell us the recession is turning, we cannot get decent stats out of any agency etc., etc., etc.
The Big Lie has turned into the Blob, taking over everything.
And yet, the band plays on and the pom-poms keep shaking.
Maybe we’ve gone to Hell and we just don’t know it yet.
I’ve had it for one day. The puppies and I are going to bed.
Keep the faith :0).
tek
SD: I agree. Not much hope.
Arabella Trefoil
Well, Criminy, if there isn’t much hope what should we all do?
I just get through day by day and try to take care of myself and those around me. Over the past year, I almost lost my husband due to a heart attack, my mom came down with Legionnaire’s pneumonia and almost died, I am still unemployed, but going back to school, my health insurance is about to run out etc.
I come to this site for a little information, a little discussion, and some diversion. Lately it’s been mighty strange around here.
I just did a round of clinicals (I’m a nursing student) in a nursing home with dementia patients. You want to talk about hell? You should see how these poor people have to live.
I enjoyed working with the people in the nursing home. I was able to help and comfort them. I can’t afford the luxury of despair.
And I thought 2008 was bad! Ha ha ha. There is no limit to the amount of crap life can throw at a person. Life has dumpsters and front-end loaders and box cars full of crap to pile on an individual. All we can do it try to help one another.
Shi-ite!
Silence Dogood
I come to this site for a little information, a little discussion, and some diversion. Lately it’s been mighty strange around here.
My 2 cents: many people are pissed off, even more than they were during the sham election, because they’ve been proven right and don’t feel they can do anything about it.
My self-effacing paranoid delusions of grandeur aside, I know I have something to do with this, maybe a small part anyway. Someone very close to me called me the other day an “enzyme” or “catalyst.”
Docelder
This site is read. I have seen things said here that later turned up reworded elsewhere numerous times. This site is ground zero for truth. The truth can’t do anything but to help. Places that we can find the truth these days are like gold.
Murray
…or carbon…
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
Do you get the feeling that gold is for the peons now and carbon is for the Soros types?
Docelder
Exactly, and that makes gold another big bubble right now. Bubbles are us.
trixta
Good one, Buzz!
Peggy Sue
Arabella, I’ve been to Dementia Hell. I watched both parents wither away. And yes, it’s awful.
But I have my kids and any future grandkids to worry about. I do not like what I see or hear or read right now. I don’t appreciate being lied to whether it’s politicians, economists or climate scientists. And neither do many others.
Fatigue and despair go hand-in-hand. Today is a new day. And a new fight!
Arabella Trefoil
I just don’t know what to think any more. A lot of this stuff is just plain beyond my understanding at this point.
Once the obamabots took over the Democratic party and the blogosphere, I lost any frame of reference.
I continue to fight, day by day. But yes, right now I am very tired. More tired than I ever thought possible.
But tired or not, for the next couple of weekends I’m playing Mrs. Claus. I made the costume myself. The kids seem to love it!
Peggy Sue
One of the best things about Christmas is the way it rejuvenates people, makes us feel hopeful all over again.
Playing Mrs. Claus sounds wonderful, Arabella. Have fun!
Retired
Shit, Larry, I guess I’m about to be publically busted anyway, so I might as well pump up NQ’s hits and disclose this here before Fox gets it.
It is only a matter of time before the beginning of the AGW manipulation emails are traced back to my time in London. I decided to do a little freelance conspiracy consulting because I wasn’t the CoS’s fair haired boy and another branch chief was getting all the good shit in the Middle East. I was basically left with making the shipping arrangements for stolen Russian army field rations that had to be shipped back to the Pentagon for evaluation.
I used to get up to East Anglia quite a bit, and one day I was chasing down a Ploughman’s with a pint at the Rose and Unicorn pub and fell into a conversation with some guys from the nearby university who claimed to be climate resarchers. Their passion, admittedly fueled by single malt, was intriguing: they believed that climate research could be used to remake the world into a naturalist, socialist utopia under a centralized global government. At first, I thought that they were looney, but then, like all good recruitments, I found myself strangely and inexhorably drawn to the possibilities. The problem, I told them, was that they were East Anglian climatologists and they didn’t know shit about planning and executing conspiracies. “And just what the fuck do you know, Yank?” they leered. And that’s when I did it. For the first time in my career (except for the dozen or so times that I did so as a CT in order to get laid in Georgetown), I lifted the fig leaf (actually, considering my endowment, it was more like a palm frond) and broke cover.
I told them that I was a disaffected Agency officer who had run more conspiracies than Bill Clinton had eaten Big Macs. That they didn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of ever doing anything more than getting pissed on warm beer left to their own resources, but with my professional help, weathermen would be convincing world leaders to sign a binding global government agreement on the continent before the first decade of the next century had been completed.
The rest, of course, is history. And as the press convinced the world that things were heating up, even as a foot of snow and ice shut down its most powerful city (Washington), no one suspected that it was a grey little bureaucrat in a nondescript office at Langley that was doing it all.
Well, it’s over now because some dickhead Brit didn’t renew his subscription to Norton Internet Security, but I can’t say that I’m sorry. Hollywood may have spurned my post retirement sci fi scripts, but fuck’em! I put one world government on the table at Copenhagen, and the smartest and most powerful intellectual elites have bought it and are about to sign it.
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
Maybe you should write a spy novel/screenplay called:
“Carbonfinger”.
TeakWoodKite
Damn, your good retired. So what of the sleepers?
How were they programmed?
Retired
I brought in Dave Miscavage from LA for that op, since it was kind of a specialty requirement. I really didn’t pay too much attention to what he was doing, but it seems to have worked pretty well. Just look at some of the comments on this post.
Not a bad deal, really, with Miscavage running the sleeper op. They turn all of their money over to us, and we lock them in an old shack in the desert with satellite connectivity and they spend all of their time doing our bidding on the web and asking to be let outside to pee.
L. Ron, eat your heart out!
TeakWoodKite
Gold Base to Ron…. Gold Base to Ron! Come En Ron. Ron?
my comment disappeared… just like global warming science… turns out the warming data was science fiction.
MrX
The Sun is responsible for the climate change. We’re like a floating city in the sky (the sun’s sky) and our city is called Earth.
Ferd Berfle
Not entirely true. Try Occam’s razor next time and you’ll get a smoother shave.
The issue of the sun causing warming has been debunked over and over. A 5% increase in solar output, for example, would not cause a 5% increase in the solar radiation this planet receives as the sun radiates in all directions, with the bulk of dissipating into the cosmos.
tek
Claiming there is no global warming when we see the evidence of it everyday is just irresponsible. Who could possibly doubt that the volume of fossil fuel exhaust is changing the earth’s climate? If nothing else. It may be hard to confront, but it is factual.
If you look at the measures we need to take to slow global warming, it’s all just good sense strategy anyway.
Hmm, this site is getting over the top reactionary.
Silence Dogood
Why the need to hide data then?
Global warming or not, this scientist email fiasco is a disaster! They shot themselves in the foot.
I am no reactionary. I don’t know what to think anymore, when science has perverted itself into religion.
tek
SD: Never read or watched the stories about all of Dubya and Cheney’s fictionalized science? The corporations HATE environmentalism because they make huge profits polluting the earth. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together can figure out that we can’t keep trashing the natural environment with man-made toxic crap and expect the Earth will continue to support us. We have to take environmentalism–part of which is global warming-seriously or we’ll be extinct.
The earth won’t die, but humans will not be able to survive in the toxic environment we are creating.
Silence Dogood
“Fictionalized science” is no good no matter which side uses it. That’s an argument using moral relativism, IMO.
This sucks. I’m gonna get barbs tossed at me from both “sides” of this issue since I stand inbetwixt.
Docelder
I am not saying that burning hydrocarbons doesn’t pollute he Earth. Only that CO2 is an asinine pollutant. What makes this the biggest scam ever is that it exists only to sale the carbon exchanges. The carbon exchange is the big scam here. Why does making traders of carbon the middleman in taxing everyday activities which are now a part of modern life help anybody but the carbon traders?
“The Joyce Foundation Named Barack Obama Of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland A Director.” (Chicago Sun-Times, 11/28/94)
“[J]oining The [Joyce Foundation] Board Is Valerie Jarrett, Executive Vice President of The Habitat Company…” (Joyce Foundation, “Four New Directors Join Joyce Foundation Board,” Press Release, 12/12/02)
Unbelievable. For anybody who wonders what Jarrett is doing in the administration, it is clear. She is watching
Ferd Berfle
I concur. The idea of a carbon tax or exchange is stupid, stupid, stupid. Either CO2 is detrimental to our planet and needs to be eliminated via a concerted effort in reduction or it isn’t and this is a sham. Either way, the tax is superfluous. This is where good old American knowhow (not the money-changers) can make a difference.
We have real problems to solve (which you have alluded to Docelder) and in addition, have a real problem at the Hanford site in WA. They spin a good tale about how they’re going to clean it up but I’m not convinced. The Columbia River is within sight of this highly toxic and radioactive waste.
Rick
Mr or Mrs Dogood. Just use your head , intellect, instincts. I think it’s just common sense that global warming is significantly caused by human behavior. To defer by saying “I don’t know what to think anymore is just wimping out and failing to just THINK. Please just use your brain !!!
There was a research study done on diabetes that ended in the early 1990′s. The study compared whether tight control or less stringent control of blood glucose prevented diabetic complications. Now use your head and think which group had less complications ? The tightly controlled group showed significantly less diabetic complications and the study was ended early. That’s just common sense. Now , I think it’s common sense that using large amounts of fossil fuels causes climate and air pollution problems. Remember that climate change scientists were silenced in the Bush administration.
olivia1998
Please explain how there have been wild climate changes BEFORE humans came along.
mountainaires
Why does everyone persist in this either/or debate at all?
There is climate change.
There is a difference in temperature and/or air quality wherever man over-builds, manufacturers, burns coal, etc.
There is natural and man-made climate change.
Those are facts. Whether or not climate change occurred before man arrived is irrelevant. Man creates temperature increases, that cannot be denied.
So, why don’t we just admit that we overbuild, emit CO2, and destroy the earth and air around us, and try to do something about it? I see people falling for propaganda from corporate agendas, just as much as environmental alarmist agendas.
Seems to me there is no denying that we [humans] foul our own nests like no other animal/mammal in the world.
Arabella Trefoil
I totally agree. Thank you for bringing some common sense to the table.
Docelder
why don’t we just admit that we overbuild, emit CO2, and destroy the earth and air around us
and why don’t we further setup a huge taxation scheme which revolves around the taxation of carbon and lets let a few carbon exchange houses take a cut of all activity which has become a part of modern human life? But, how does that help pollution? It will just encourage more of it, because we will have monetized it.
hokma
Another tinfoil hat cult follower.
No, the science is NOT in.
Al Gore and the money hoarding scientists are counting on the ignorance of people like you who have know understanding of Earth’s history and how many times we have gone through climate cycles.
Take a look at the billions Al Gore has been making on this hoax.
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
Uh, The Ice age and Lake Bonneville…
Seriously did they NOT teach this in HS science classes? Olivia1998 – hello?
Retired
Like Al Gore, one might subscribe to the theory that the truth, however inconvenient, is just a lie that hasn’t been discovered. This one has been discovered.
lemonv
So, Larry, what would you like us to do, then? Go back to the good(or bad?) old days where we use gasoline with abandon? And, together with that, maybe the coal companies would start lobbying Congress about giving them consessions in order to construct coal plants.
Then after the global warming has become a runaway greenhouse effect in w/c we could not do anything because it is too late, even if those advocating that global warming was a hoax would say, “Oh, sorry, we thought it was a hoax”, it would be too late for us and our grandchildren to correct the mistakes.
mountainaires
Well, at least in the “bad old days” coal was mined by people who didn’t blow off the tops of mountains to get at it, thereby destroying the earth eco-systems, water, and topography of an entire region. And, how about that TVA created disaster recently, from the fracture of a coal ash pond, which flooded the surrounding area, destroyed homes, land and lives?
We create climate change simply by virtue of the fact that we willfully destroy our own surroundings to build things. People build within FEET of the ocean, and taxpayers are forced to support them in a state-run insurance pool. Their mansions by the sea destroy the natural ebb and flow of the coastline, through erosion. We destroyed the wetlands which acted as a natural filter at the mouth of the Mississippi in Louisiana [New Orleans] so then Katrina was able to flood the Ninth Ward. The over-planting of wheat in Kansas for years in the early part of last century, created the conditions for the decade of the “dustbowl” in which people suffered horrendously. Afterward, they learned better farming methods to avoid repeating that man-made climate disaster.
So, please, use the brain God gave you. There is climate change. Some of it is caused by nature. But much of the suffering from it can be directly attributed to man.
Docelder
I will agree to everything you have said above except that CO2 isn’t our problem and that the creation of a taxation scheme for it will help nobody but the carbon traders. Fertilizer runoff, water mismanagement, pesticide runoff, drugs in the water, feminized male fish… all of this is serious stuff. We ought to devote one tenth of what we have devoted to C02 to each of these more serious problems.
Silence Dogood
I now see how the radical left wing bullies and tries and belittle your position by falsely lumping in CO2 with pollution.
Such disingenuous simpletons. Glad I am a moderate.
Many of these same folks march in goosestep with BO. Go figure.
I don’t necessarily agree with you since I am too ignorant to understand the subject, but I do defend against false argument tactics no matter which side uses them.
Silence Dogood
Larry in no way is suggesting we thwart progress. That’s disingenuous of you to assert that false argument.
He can obviously chime in if he wants, but I think it safe to say he is all for clean and renewable energy, for economic and environmental reasons. I think it also safe to say he is against being taxed into oblivion from what he feels is a hoax.
I’m not necessarily agreeing with his position, just stating my understanding of it and my disapproval of your argument premise.
Eco-friendly rational people setting public policy realize we are stuck with fossil fuel as we transition away from it. Waving a magic wand does not make this fact go away. Society will grind to a halt and you won’t be able to charge your iPod.
hokma
Your mantra is precisely the one-sided con job that Al Gore and the tinfoil hat scientists have propagated over the years along with a corrupt and very complying media.
Did it ever bother you that all Al Gore and those tinfoil hat scientists did was yell that “the science is in” and demonized as well as slandered qualified scientists you disagreed with them?
Did you ever wonder why these sanctimonious people refused to EVER debate the people who disagreed with them?
Or are you now fully vested in the global warming climate change religious cult – bowing daily to pray to Al Gore?
Maybe you should take a look at just how much money your idol Al Gore and the rest of his corrupt crew have been making.
Sassy
It’s disappointing that every aspect of life is subject to manipulation and deception, and for scientists to be the culprits compounds it.
I have never bought into the “earth is burning” exaggerations, but we do have serious problems with loss of trees and vegetation in our beautiful Smoky Mountains.
It has been attributed to acid rain, and is very evident in the higher elevations.
donjo
We’re also in the process of ruining the oceans and upsetting the food chains there.
The Garbage Patch in the Pacific Ocean has been around for decades. Check out the video in the first link and see what it look like up close and personal.
And this is from 2001. (And I think they discovered more of these recently.)
Fertilizer runoff is ruining the oceans and causing dead spots. CO2 is not. If we abandoned the monetizing scheme for carbon, maybe we might address the real problems which are endangering us. It isn’t CO2. My single point. Not that there isn’t pollution from fossil fuels, only that the pollution is SO, NO, and CO. CO2 is what plants need to breathe, it isn’t a pollutant.
Retired
Hey, no switching to the acid ocean strategy until:
1. Al Gore cancels his speaking engagement in Copenhagen, and
2. Barack Obama announces that he’s going to have to miss Copenhagen to work on the health “care” bill.
Get back on point, or Miscavage’s boys may have to drag you out of the shack and adjust your attitude.
Sassy
Wham Spam! Eight ball in the corner pocket!
Silence Dogood
I’m sure the barkeep will arrive soon to tend to your pool table’s malfunction.
How Much Longer Before Climategate Explodes?Agenda 21 is designed to destroy America’s middle-class, ruin America’s economy, steal America’s sovereignty, and abolish America’s freedom.
How Much Longer Before Climategate Explodes?
“You call it ‘Climategate,’ I call it ‘E-mail-theft-gate. …This is a crime.” —Senator Barbara Boxer
Barbara “Call Me Senator” Boxer, at least got the crime part right.
The Lame Stream Media (LSM) are doing their best to ignore Climategate, while they desperately try to come up with some consensus on how to spin it. Well guess what bozos, you can’t spin this one, it’s too big. You keep standing in its way, and it’ll squash you like a steam-roller going over a marshmallow.
This isn’t just the biggest story of the 21st century. This is the biggest fraud in world history. Good luck spinning this one away.
As Jonah Goldberg points out in a recent article, the fact that the LSM is covering up Climategate, is a scandal in its own right.
The LSM is practicing CYA, by either (like Boxer) building a “strawman” to attack, or trying to dismiss it as something beneath their notice—some inconsequential blip on the radar screen.
The LSM are not covering Climategate because;
1.they are directly, or indirectly connected to the scandal; like New York Times reporter Andrew Revkin, or
2.the company that they work for, has huge investments in “green technology” based on the global warming fraud—like the NBC/GE connection, or
3.they don’t want to get “egg on their face,” for having so vociferously and doggedly promoted, what has turned out to be a Big Lie, and
4.they have ideological blinders on—they don’t care what the truth is, they only want to push Agenda 21-style programs.
It is this last reason that is the most dangerous and troubling.
Agenda 21, as you no doubt know, is the UN’s effort to place all of the world under its control (at the behest of a Global Elite). I won’t bother to go into its history with The Club of Rome, the Rockefellers, and the UN’s Earth Summit in 1992, et al. It’s enough to be aware that Agenda 21 is designed to destroy America’s middle-class, ruin America’s economy, steal America’s sovereignty, and abolish America’s freedom.
One can only hope that a number of reporters in the LSM, wake up and say, “Hey wait a second, I didn’t sign on for THAT.”
They need to realize that they have been duped, and used as “useful idiots” by Far Left puppet masters. The LSM are moving like a horde of lemmings, in thrall to some herd instinct—humming “Deutschland Uber Alles,” as they blindly march-step off a cliff.
By being good little “greenie weenies” they have been cutting their own throats, and America’s.
In spite of the LSM’s silence, Climategate has been rapidly taking on a life of its own.
Phil Jones has resigned as the head of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia.
Michael “Hide the Decline” Mann, author of the infamous “hockey stick graph,” is under investigation by his employer, Penn State. (Personally, I think Penn State’s “Joe Pa” Paterno ought to march over to Mann, and kick his butt—on second thought, Joe should send over one of his Nittany Lions).
Climatologist Mike Hulme has suggested that the UN’s IPCC has run its course, adding that “The tribalism that some of the leaked emails display is something more usually associated with social organization within primitive cultures; it is not attractive when we find it at work inside science.”
“Not attractive?” How about: “reprehensible,” “nefarious,” or “criminal.” It should be noted that tribalism is a form of collectivism (Marxism, Fascism, Communism, et al.), so at least they’re “keeping it in the family,” so to speak.
Five members of the Australian legislature recently walked out, rather than support the Aussie version of Cap and Trade.
There are reportedly at least two lawsuits in the works against the East Anglian CRU.
The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) has sued NASA for failing to provide documents requested under the Freedom of Information Act, and for being involved with an “apparent and widespread intent to defraud at the highest levels of international climate science.”
Who can sue over Climategate? “Who do I sue over Climategate?”
It is these lawsuits that hold the key to ripping Climategate wide open.
If “we the people” start suing for damages, we will start an explosion that will blow apart this global takeover by Marxists/Communists, hiding behind the cloak of environmentalism.
I’ve been asked “Who can sue over Climategate?” and I reply, “Darn near anybody.”
I’ve been asked “Who do I sue over Climategate?” and I reply “Darn near anybody.”
The first reply is absolutely true. The second reply is only half tongue-in-cheek.
Who hasn’t been affected by increased costs and taxes, stemming directly from “green laws” based on the IPCC’s fraudulent “science?” Maybe a few folks in the hinterlands of Borneo have been exempt, but the rest of us have paid dearly for the bogus science behind AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming—“anthropogenic” meaning “caused by humans”).
Who do you sue? Take your pick, it’s a smorgasbord. Think you’ve seen some Climategate CYA-ing going on? You ain’t seen nothing yet. There are going to be so many people attempting to backpedal away from this explosion, that it’ll look like the Tour de France run in reverse.
There are government entities from the county, to the national level, that can be sued. There are pharmaceutical companies that can be sued for forcing more expensive products on the public, there are individuals (think Al Gore) that can be sued, there are corporations profiting from products foisted on an unsuspecting public. There are so many products, people, and programs ripe for litigation, that the list is pretty near endless.
Individuals can sue, and corporations can sue. Building contractors can sue, and the folks who supply building materials can sue. Magazines can be sued, and newspapers can be sued. Criminal charges can be pressed, and class action lawsuits instigated.
You get the idea.
Any rule, regulation, or law based on AGW, is based on falsehoods. The lies told about CO2 (carbon dioxide) are so off-base as to be laughable—if the results weren’t so catastrophic.
The “toxic gases” are coming from AGW windbags, and “greenie weenie” blowhards
AGW Chicken Littles have been running around screaming “the sky is falling” for many years. They point at CO2 as the chief culprit—a “toxic greenhouse gas,” whose acidic effects are destroying the oceans, forests, and the planet itself. “IT MUST BE STOPPED NOW!”
All of which is based on fabricated, manipulated, and perverted “science.” It’s a Big Lie. People need to be made to pay for all of the emotional distress, economic turmoil, and financial rip-offs. It’s international racketeering on a scale never seen before.
CO2 is a benign (actually beneficial) trace gas, which comprises around 0.03% of the earth’s atmosphere. Scientists at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), recently found that far from harming the world’s oceans, elevated levels of CO2 help lobsters, crabs, shrimps, and other shellfish, grow thicker, stronger shells.
Plants require CO2 to perform photosynthesis, and would quickly die without it. Far from being some “evil gas from hell,” carbon dioxide is a life giving, vital part of the earth’s ecology.
The “toxic gases” are coming from AGW windbags, and “greenie weenie” blowhards.
Sue them—if for no other reason then to get some of your money back.
Laus Deo. Tags:
BOXER…. YOU WERE NAMED BY AN ACORN WORKER AS SHE SAID ” SHE TALKS TO YOU EVERYDAY SWILL AS McCloud andmore.Baxer let’s see just how much you havedeling with climategate,huh ?
Share
Retired
You know, I really can’t believe that in the 4,000 pages of the Senate and House Health “care” bills that they are missing this opportunity for control. Every CO2 emitter should be licensed and monitored. CO2 emitters that emit more than their government-calculated “share” of CO2 will be eliminated, no buying “credits” from Al Gore. Humans are CO2 emitters. That would wipe out half of the population and eliminate the need for health care rationing altogether.
Problem is, in addition to being CO2 emitters, humans also pay taxes. Shit, back to the drawing board! It’s all so difficult.
TeakWoodKite
Retired, as an illegal carbon unit I am afraid.
http://theheraclitanfire.blogspot.com/ CRAIG DELLA PENNA
…and yet glaciers all over the world are retreating at accelerating rates, the Greenland ice cap is disappearing before our eyes and the arctic seasonal ice cap is vanishing.
Ah, those clever evil scientists!
This kind of theatre was inevitable once people with ‘agendas’ (on either side) got involved. The real truth is that this is very hard, very complex science. We don’t understand enough about how global climate works and we haven’t got a long enough baseline of data to make accurate predictions.
The problem is, as someone above pointed out, by the time we do know, the statement may come in the form of “We shoulda…”
What is incontrovertible is that we are dumping billions of tons of waste into the global system every year, waste which we have already scientifically determined tends to increase the environmental load on the system. At some point this will cause a change. If we resolve the problem before that point – life goes on as before, complete with all the naysayers screaming it’s all a hoax. If we don’t take appropriate action, then all our subsequent statements will begin with: “If only…”
ziggy
Scientists have warned that the Alaskan pipeline is threatened by thawing permafrost. One-third of the vertical supports over the 420 miles running above-ground are moving. Replacing just 1 vertical support costs upwards of $85,000.
Hopefully no sections will fall on fleeing polar bears.
While everyone knows northern ice is actually increasing for civilian purposes, the Pentagon has been busy planning how to cope with an ice free or diminished ice Arctic Ocean. Refer to their recently released strategy document, “The Naval Arctic Roadmap”.
Docelder
I know I was going to be done, but this is something lighter. People are now referring the summit as “Nopenhagen”. Then there is this, beyond biazarre.
Copenhagen Mayor Ritt Bjerregaard sent postcards to city hotels warning summit guests not to patronize Danish sex workers during the upcoming conference. Now, the prostitutes have struck back, offering free sex to anyone who produces one of the warnings.
“Oh wonderful, wonderful Copenhagen
Salty old girl of the sea.”
TeakWoodKite
I still a wondering about Jack Avacado
Retired
Johnny Avacado (in inreverent reference to avacado-like parts of his male anatomy). Source: Doug Trask, aka “The Greaseman,” a Washington, DC and Los Angeles radio shock jock, 1982-2008. Now retired and sailing the world.
Onofre’s arm
Ahh yes, how provincial of me not to recognize such a celebrated reference. My ignorance shames me.
~~JustMe~~
Copenhagen becomes Gropenhagen, Pokenhagen, Tokenhangen? Take your pick it’s all a smoke screen of lies till their caught with their pants down!
Words Just Words!
Retired
Jesus, even the prostitutes are idiots in socialist Europe. In America, they would’ve just offered half off (double entendre alert).
Really, this whole Copenhagen global warming thing is getting out of hand.
No, really, seriously, come on now!
Silence Dogood
This comment is new-ageish, but represents what I feel is in the air: malfeasance can no longer hide from the light of day! Excellent!
Onofre’s arm
I’m sure they’ll still accept tips!
(searching E-bay for some of those warnings)
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
Retired, I do enjoy your wit!
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
The Australians kicked the door open by refusing to sign off on Cape and Trade.
More power to them.
hc123
Excellent lecture. Thanks for posting it.
J.J. (The P.U.M.A.)
This should be a question for science, not politics. Yet, most liberals believe in global warming and most conservatives do not.
What we need is objective analysis of the evidence, without a stake in the outcome. That is why the falsified information scandal is so devastating. For me, the burden of proof is on those who want us to drastically change our way of life. If their evidence is cooked, how can you believe their warnings.
Docelder
One last thing. We for some reason need to magnify ourselves as inhabitants of this planet, as if we could change it… as if we could change it, that we would be good stewards of that change. Consider the sun. Sun spot activity has fallen in the past couple of years and we rapidly lost 0.7 degree of temperature. Here we agonize over that same degree since we started to industrialize and because the of a normal variation in the sun we immediately lose a good part of that.
the sun once went 50 years without producing sunspots. That period, from approximately 1650 to 1700, occurred during the middle of a little ice age on Earth
Seriously, we aren’t in any position to significantly change the Earth or it’s climate… even if we wanted to do that. What we do need is good science and good data. Because we are at the mercy of elements and influences that we have no control over at all.
That is the most inconvenient truth of them all.
califlefty
Larry, whatever little credibility you had on anything just went don the toilet. Welcome to your own echo chamber.
If Monckton is such a pompous fool, it should be relatively easy for the scientifically mighty Al Gore (the genius who recently claimed that rocks that are millions of degrees hot are only 2 kilometers below the Earth’s surface), to smack him down in a debate. Monckton has challenged Gore countless times to defend his position on AGW, yet Gore refuses to do so. Gosh, why on Earth do you suppose Al is so reticent?
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
Califlefty, Your credentials to say that about Larry and this thread would be…?
You’re from California? (Okay, stop laughing in the back of the room!)
You’re a lefty? (I said, “Stop laughing! Oh, go ahead.”)
califlefty
Obviously you believe that 1. No one is entitled to an opinion, except you, and 2. someones “handle” is a means of judging whether their opinion is valid.
Larry, proud of attracting ignoramuses to your blog?
hc123
I dont know, let me check with him now that you have arrived.
http://firefox AnnieCarmel
It would certainly seem you are a bit unschooled about this blog…califlefty…otherwise why would you think with a moniker like that you’d have any credibility at all?
Frankly, I don’t know and almost don’t care what the “great minds” come up with next. The only thing I can control is my and my family’s behavior and do our best to act responsibly. We’ve recycled for years; Two of us drive low mileage cars; the others have to have 4 wheel drive to get up their unpaved road (not Hummers). The trade off is they are organic, drought resistant, indigenous plant gardeners, we compost, have their own well, solar for both small family houses, built with maximum insulation (thick walls, radiant heat floors). We don’t develop our habits out of Gore fueled fear rather for SELF SUFFICIENCY. If we could live completely independent of the Big Boys, we would. Getting there takes time and planning.
But califlefty, you must grow up and begin to question authority (like Deepak used to say). Herd mentality is a promise for big disappointment. Thankfully, my time as a califlefty is in the past. And hey, I feel your pain.
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
Well put.
Who knew Big Brother would end up resembling the Democratic Party?
http://firefox AnnieCarmel
Or that they don’t seem to learn from their past. I do believe we’re about to see a re-do of 1968 when the left imploded, pretty much scattering the entire party and roamed the wilderness for 40 years…Of course, now I see that as good news.
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
You’ve got the right. It is good news with a small caveat of moderation. We don’t need anymore pendulum swings.
Retired
I sense some frustration here, but it’s ok, I’m from California, too, a native-born Angeleno. Tell you what. If you want a sympathetic ear, go to Santa Monica to the Third Street Promenade. Just pick out any watering hole, pull up a stool at the bar, and say “I want casual, no strings attached sex tonight, but it must be with someone who believes in AGW.” You will find a lot of fellow believers.
Do not, however, try this anywhere in Manhattan Beach. Not that the sufers don’t want casual, no strings attached sex, but when you’ve just come out of the water at this time of year, there aren’t a lot of believers in global warming. In fact, there may even be some iceburgs forming out there. Brrrr!
Docelder
Well it has been two weeks now, and the big three state sponsored domestic media outlets aren’t acknowledging climate gate. The problem with the big three being a team player, is they are quickly becoming irrelevant.
Climate change scoffers have obviously scored bigtime in their battle to sway public opinion. Unfortunately, they’ve done so by way of a blitz revolving around the interpretation of out-of-context comments in private e mails, and strengthened the resultant impression by way of slickly produced distributions focusing narrowly on data sets that represent only a small portion of the entire picture. If we conclude the worst about the e mails, and throw out all suspect observations, there still remains a mountain of supporting observational data to consider from widely varying sources. That’s apparently not part of the discussion.
I’ll keep my fingers crossed. It would certainly be far easier not having to worry about anthropomorphic global warming and long-term consequences. Maybe the scientists are wrong, and it is all bullshit.
One result of a victory in the arena of public opinion will be an inexpensive planetary-scale experiment to find out who’s right, which will take the form of doing absolutely nothing, and then noting after a decade or two whether or not we’ve totally screwed up.
What the hell. Let’s do that. I’ve only got another 20 or 30 years left at the most, but that should be plenty long enough to find out who was talking bullshit.
Docelder
Maybe the scientists are wrong,
No, suppose they were right. What does setting up carbon exchanges do other than to make carbon traders wealthy off the backs of everybody just going about normal and necessary modern world activities? To me, the carbon trading scheme is what tells me it is a hoax. What incentive will there be to stop using carbon once Goldman Sachs is getting filthy rich from it? What incentive is there to stop war, when Halliburton is getting filthy rich from that? Same thing really.
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
Thank-you, Docelder. The whole cap and trade deal has looked like Three card Monte all along.
http://firefox AnnieCarmel
Ditto.
lark
You made an excellent point.
http://firefox AnnieCarmel
As said earlier. No harm comes from taking responsibility for your own bailiwick. That’s all you personally can do and no matter what turns out to be the truth, no one can be hurt or have their assets redistributed by that.
I’d have more faith in global warmers if they lived responsibly in houses built to suit their needs (not Al’s monster mansion), drove cars that showed they walked the walk (not Al’s or Oprah’s fleet of SUV’s) and didn’t use talking the talk to become gizillionaires. Oh, I see how owning stock in green companies can be explained away but what’s stopping them from building solar, sustainable villages, etc? Goreville. Green Ophra Gables. I can see it now. Apparently they can’t. Self glorification (Oprah’s girl’s school in Africa…not even the country that made her rich) seems to be their mode of operation. If it’s so urgent, that would seem short-sighted.
Guess I am too dense to see how “buying” carbon credits to justify flying private jets and living in McMansions (all of the “Green” Big Shots from Gore to Laurie David) does anything to change what they say is urgent and life threatening.
So what are you personally doing, ziggy?
ziggy
Keeping my fingers crossed. Once science fully reflects the irrational divisions in our politics, we’ll be flying through the mountains totally blind.
http://firefox AnnieCarmel
Huh? Sorry, not good enough. So you let everyone else do the heavy lifting, cleaning up your droppings? Not even a recycler?
Silence Dogood
You’ll have to excuse poor zippy, she/he suffers from ideological myopia.
Hey zippy, you’re ideological myopia (and my own former ideological myopia) has been very helpful to me in figuring out something that will benefit all of humanity. Thanks. I really mean that, no snark.
VinceP
Changes to CO2 levels in the air have never impacted the air temps. And this decade proves that it’s not happening now.
Never in the history of earth.
The CO2 Hypothesis is a big loser. There is not a single shred of fact to support it.
Rick
Use your brain and look at the list of references at the end of the report highlighted in the first paragraph. Every reference is from “Science + Public Policy”. Sounds rather fishy to me. If global warming is truly made up , a legitimate report would have references from a variety of scientific journals. Shame on you Larry. I thought you were brighter than that. Looks like the “flat earthers” just don’t want to give up their SUV’s and reduce their use of gas + oil. Personally , I would rather err on the side of doing things to prevent+ slow global warming by using less resources . Wouldn’t it be hilarious if people and governments now discounted global warming because of Jesus Monckton’s comments and continued to abuse and consume resources and then a serious climate disaster happens because of that. I guess Larry and the people who are jumping on the anti-global warming bandwagon would just say oops!. Get a brain people …
Silence Dogood
If global warming is truly made up , a legitimate report would have references from a variety of scientific journals.
I take no position on global warming or not. I am neither a proponent nor a denier at this time.
That being said, assuming chunks of the data were cooked, hidden, morphed and/or massaged, how would we expect to find meaningful data and conclusions in the journals?
I’m truly honestly open on this. No spin, no axe to grind.
Quite frankly, I don’t know what to believe and feel at this time not to take a side with all this ambiguity, controversy and talking point spin flying at me in 20 directions contemporaneously.
I want to see an inquiry, not some BS whitewash commission, but a real inquiry before I take a position. Prudence and logic demands this.
What I think I am seeing here is people trying to spin what happened to the positions they had prior to the emails. I was an idiot and accepted the panic lefty point of view as truth. Now I am reevaluating, as I would hope others do as well.
http://firefox AnnieCarmel
Agree, SD. My POV is that it doesn’t really change what I do one way or another. Everyone needs to pick up after themselves and not foul our nest though since like it or not, we do have to share it…the best I can do. Sometimes I wonder just what sort cretins travel through our area when I see the stuff that has to be picked up from the sides of the highway. If they are that unconscious, think of how they live in their private worlds. And you know what? I’ll bet lefties are not exempt!
Silence Dogood
Hypocrisy does not discriminate whom it afflicts.
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
The one I really hate – disposible diapers littered in parking lots and along the freeways.
Silence Dogood
Those are from the NQ trolls, being so full of poop in their Opampers and all. Granted, it would e nice if they could use a trash can.
http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte
Yeah and they consider themselves to be greenies.
Silence Dogood
You’ll love this:
Maybe a week or two ago I saw a big huge-ass honkin’ SUV, the type you could cart around a dozen adult gorillas in. It had an Obama bumper sticker on it. I laughed at the sad irony of it all.
Cathy in Ks.
Amen! My sentiments as well. I might add, I really used to respect Al Gore. I saw his film – “An Inconvenient Truth” and thought it was true. Now I don’t know. And if he really believed his message he certainly does not show it by his lifestyle.
At one point in human history there was an Ice Age with Ice over a mile thick sitting over Chicago. We KNOW this.
Depending on the location of the Earth on its trip around the sun or ow it is tipping the Climate changes. Our Eliptical journy around the sun can become a circle and it gets really toasty.
People DO NOT CONTROL THIS.
Guys…..please humans are not some interloper–we have evolved from the natural world and are part of it. Certainly we can impact our surroundings. Fouling our nest is dumb but we are not capable of moving the magnetic north (which incidentally has moved over 700 miles under Siberia since it was “Fixed” in the age of exploration) I am just saying–this might have something to do with the change in our orbit.
Our scientific illiteracy as a population allows us to be fooled by bad science. Many Many Climate scientists (including some notable men & women) have cried out that the models are not based on good science practice but their voices were drowned out by the CLIMATE Orthodoxy. They were censured and called deniers. THIS IS NOT RELIGION!!! Questioning and sharing of data so that experiments can be replicated is the methodology–not data destruction.
We as a people must DEMAND evidence raw data and we must read and learn so we cannot be lied to again.
helenk
OT
At Raw Story there is an article about Eric Prince ” grey mailing” the government. Saying he was a CIA operative and if he is investigated he will make public a lot of info.
WOMEN WITH INTELLIGENCE AND EXPERIENCE,MEN WHO SUPPORT THEM AND COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY ALWAYS
PUMAS,BUBBAS,EQUALISTS AND THOSE PEOPLE RULE
Banned in Beantown
To all the commenters saying “it was only a few emails taken out of context” and “cherry picked”:
READ the report as requeste by Larry in the above post. Please take time to read this report (click here).
It was way more than “a few” and they’re very much in context. Data was omited and outright fabrcated.
Banned in Beantown
At what point do the researchers who received grants, based upon grant applications with cooked up data get prosecuted for criminal fraud?
My wife is solidly in the corner of global warming, and takes steps to reduce her carbon footprint. And, even she is saying the manipulators should be thrown in jail. I agree, and not just because she’s my wife.
Banned in Beantown
Man I am getting real tired of my comments being spamified.
califlety
Larry, Monckton has also suggested that the best way to have solved the AIDS crisis was to imprison all AIDS sufferers until they died, why not tout his theories on that???
Silence Dogood
According to this (see quote below) Monckton suggested that in 1987 and it was not imprisonment, but quarantine.
I have no opinion or axe to grind either way on the climate emails (other than wanting a real inquiry into the matter!), but always like more information when its available.
Emphasis mine. It should be noted Monckton denounced the 1987 idea.
I see what you are trying to do here, califlety. You failed, because you exaggerated to make your point.
Monckton’s views on how the AIDS epidemic should be tackled have been the subject of some
controversy. In an article entitled “The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS” written for the January
1987 issue of The American Spectator he argued that, “there is only one way to stop AIDS. That
is to screen the entire population regularly and to quarantine all carriers of the disease for life.
Every member of the population should be blood-tested every month … all those found to be
infected with the virus, even if only as carriers, should be isolated compulsorily, immediately,
and permanently.” Monckton has since disavowed his 1987 comments on AIDS, stating that “the
article was written at the very outset of the AIDS epidemic, and with 33 million people around
the world now infected, the possibility of doing this [isolation] is laughable. It couldn’t work.”
califlety
So how long should we wait until Monckton denounces his global warming bullshit, when his hairpiece fries?
Silence Dogood
You stepped in it the last time you made a pronouncement.
What “global warming bullshit” specifically? When did he say it? Is it contrary to a view he holds today? Source?
The hairpiece comment doesn’t bolster your argument.
I find it curious you are using Monckton to attack Larry and did it inaccurately with your first comment. Makes me suspect of your follow-up comment.
Retired
Already being done in the health “care” bills.
Goblintrain
About 150 years ago “science” told religion to shut its mouth, & here in the West, religion has been pretty mum ever since. Counter-intuitively, the myths that science promised to dispell sound truer now than science does at leat truer than what we are told is science. The premeditated effort to infuse science with a political motive has mad ita nearly intangible topic, science has become a religion itself, with Al Gore sitting at it’s head. It appears that there is no longer the criteria of objective,observed evidence, for anything that Science calls truth. Until we get a more reliable witness than the Scientific community, i think we all need to make sure that every one has equal chance to look at, evaluate, & make a call about this stuff that is passed out as factual science.
Silence Dogood
Religion and science could both use their share of reforming: both are inherently good things when the motives are not greed-and-ego/power-based.
The “pursuit of science” should not be confused with morally bankrupt corrupt scientists.
Not saying you are confused, just making a general point.
Docelder
science has become a religion itself
Science has replaced religion for the far left. I read somewhere that only 6% of scientists were republican. It seems hard to me for science not to cross into politics given that statistic. Then again, almost anything can be proven statistically.
Banned in Beantown
Einstein said “The more I learn about science, the more I believe in God.”
Science and religion, or belief in a higher power are not mutually exclusive. Only a low IQ would believe they were.
Docelder
We are all out of Einsteins, because Einsteins wouldn’t be able to get grants in the first place because they believe in GOD. The elite scientific community has become stacked. Sure a lot of smart people believe in GOD. They just will never have their opinion about global warming published. That is what I am saying here, without feeling to need to question IQ’s. But I might question whether some can even think outside of the box… outside of where they have been told it is safe to think by the official media. Outside of where the rest of the people with the “me too” existences spend their waking consciousness.
andrew
Is that surprising, when those skeptical of science seem to be drawn to the republican party? There you’ll find not only those who deny evidence for anthropomorphic global warming, but also those who deny evolution, concepts such as peak oil, etc. At the grass-roots level, the GOP is not science or intellect friendly.
http://www.FreetheGods.com David Scott
I could be paddling a rowboat down Market Street in San Francisco after the poles have melted, and there will still be conservative fanatics who deny that humans are responsible for Global Warming or that it is even real. I invite you to my web-pages devoted to raising awareness on this urgent issue: http://pltcldscsn.blogspot.com/2009/12/conservatives-still-deny-global-warming.html
While Lord Monckton struts his poppycock, the ice caps and glaciers are still melting.
Do the scientists warning the world about climate change understand every single part of the process? No, of course not.
Are there scientists amongst the proponents of climate change who are also guilty of shoddy work, or perhaps fraudulent research? In all probability, yes.
But, if you examine the work done in any large field of scientific discovery, you’ll find errors even in the work of scientists with impeccable scientific integrity and who were proven right in the main aspects of their theories, like Newton, Darwin, or Einstein.
It makes absolutely no sense to focus on small inconsistencies which can never change the overall theory. If a building has fallen down, but one wall remains standing, that wall is not proof of the structural integrity of the building.
If changing ocean currents or weather patterns cause cooling in some areas of the globe, but most of the globe is experiencing warming, the small cooler area is not proof that global warming is non-existent.
Scientists have a good understanding of how carbon dioxide causes a ‘greenhouse’ effect, and scientists now have many years’ worth of data of proof of historical carbon dioxide levels on earth, going back to the time of the dinosaurs and even prior to then, and they are showing that the levels of carbon dioxide humans are creating will most certainly bring enormous changes to the climate.
Climatologists most certainly don’t have a complete picture of all the processes involved in global climate change, but to ignore their warnings because of fools and charlatans like Lord Monckton is to join the Idiotcracy that has a foothold in many societies, but seems to be taking over America.
donjo
Hear! hear!
Shop Amazon's New Kindle Fire
We defray costs with sales and donations. Do you shop at Amazon? Click any ad here, make any purchase, and we get a percentage. Thanks!
This website and the articles posted therein are contributed by authors who have no affiliation to the website or the website’s owner/moderator. All content provided on this blog is for informational purposes only and has been contributed by the owners for no monetary compensation. The owner/moderator makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information on this site or found by accessing any website link(s) provided in a post. As such, the owner/moderator will not be liable for any errors or omissions contained in the information set forth in an authored post nor for the availability of said information. The owner/moderator will not be liable for any losses, injuries, or damages arising from any information set forth in any author’s post(s) and will not indemnify the authors for any purpose arising from or related to the author’s post. By posting an article on this blog, the author, and the author alone, expressly assumes any liability related to the post. The owner/moderator does not share personal information with third-parties nor does the owner store information collected about your visit for use other than to analyze content performance. The owner/moderator is not responsible for the republishing of the content contained on this blog on other websites or media without permission. The owner/moderator of the blog reserves the right to edit or delete any comments submitted to this blog without notice due to (a) comments deemed to be spam or questionable spam; (b) comments including profanity; (c) comments containing language or concepts that could be deemed offensive; or (d) comments that attack a person or their character. The decision to remove any comments that violate the terms and conditions herein are made at the sole discretion of the owner/moderator. The policies, terms and conditions herein are subject to change at any time and without prior notice.
Prices and availability are subject to change at any time.
(
)
Pingback: Haarp Alaska Haarp Alaska Haarp Project « What’s Popular?
Pingback: Wolfgang Amadeus Phoenix Remix Collection Haarp Alaska « What’s Popular?
Pingback: Report über den Klimawandel | Der Klimawandel - Aktuell & Wissenswert