Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
6 days ago.
by mythravere
harryanderson
#1

Thankfully, the anti-science propaganda campaign surrounding man-made climate change seems to have lost some of its effect.

Are you seeing storm clouds on the horizon? Two recent studies suggest that the latest anti-science campaign is following its forerunners--the propaganda campaigns attempting to refute science that tobacco causes cancer, that CFC's caused the hole in the ozone layer, and so on—into oblivion. Global warming denial seems to have climbed to a peak in 2010, and global warming acceptance is now climbing. This bodes well for rational public policy.

 
 

Member Comments

Tiredofit

Just dismiss the emails, nothing to see here, the Mann says it was the oil companies, good enough no proof needed.

Posted 105 days ago.

Kendall78

Back on what it means to have a concensus. In a recent poll done by Naomi Oreskes shows that 97% of Climate Scientists believe that the current trend of climate change is influenced by mankind.

They came up with this study from 928 published papers on climate change. The news story: w w w.theguardian.c om/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/may/16/climate-change-scienceofclimatechange

The study: h tt p://iopscience.iop.o rg/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article

Tired, when you can provide 928 peer reviewed papers done by climate scientists that say that climate change is not at all influenced by man, then you might have something.

Posted 105 days ago.

Tiredofit

And you believe Mann?

Posted 105 days ago.

Tiredofit

That's the second time I have been compared to Nazis who put people in ovens, wow you guys really will stoop to anything, little over the top dont ya think? I suppose I have I insulted your religion.

Posted 105 days ago.

Kendall78

Climate scientist Michael Mann called the hacking of those emails were done by, " Agents doing the dirty bidding of the fossil fuel industry know they can't contest the fundamental science of human-caused climate change. So they have instead turned to smear, innuendo, criminal hacking of websites, and leaking out-of-context snippets of personal emails in their effort to try to confuse the public about the science and thereby forestall any action to combat this critical threat."

Posted 105 days ago.

Kendall78

And out of all that blabber...NO EVIDENCE.

Tired, you are committing numerous appeal to authority. Just saying some scientist says something isn't evidence.

You need to have a consensus between scientists that specialize in climate change.

It's kind of tragic the way you behave. It reminds me of the Nizkor website that deals with Holocaust deniers. It's a vastly different topic of course but the methods that those deniers use is very similiar to what man made climate deniers use.

Posted 105 days ago.

Kendall78

"Climate is being made today."

Climate, like wetaher, is made everyday...just at varying speeds.

Posted 105 days ago.

Tiredofit

1939> Thorne/MetO: Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest. 

<3066> Thorne: I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it, which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run.

<4755> Overpeck: The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guid[e] what’s included and what is left out.

Posted 105 days ago.

Climate is being made today.lol

Posted 105 days ago.

Tiredofit

Kevin Trenberth (US National Center for Atmospheric Research). To: Michael Mann. Oct 12, 2009 "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't... Our observing system is inadequate" Prof Trenberth appears to accept a key argument of global warming sceptics - that there is no evidence temperatures have increased over the past 10 years.

Posted 105 days ago.

Tiredofit

Phil Jones. To: Michael Mann. Date: May 29, 2008 "Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise." Climate change sceptics tried to use Freedom of Information laws to obtain raw climate data submitted to an IPCC report known as AR4. The scientists did not want their email exchanges about the data to be made public.

Posted 105 days ago.

Tiredofit

Phil Jones To: Michael Mann (Pennsylvania State University). July 8, 2004 "I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"

Posted 105 days ago.

Tiredofit

Read the east Anglia emails, and lets all try to hide the decline tonight.

Posted 105 days ago.

Tiredofit

Unlike you, I realize the climate IS changing just as it always has. Ice age here, warming trend there, it's been going on for millions of years Those that derive their living from panic and fear, and those that have millions of profits to be made have little credibility with me. You are of course free to believe whatever you wish.

Posted 105 days ago.

Tiredofit

Kendall, I know I know, cooling means warming, warming means warming, hurricanes mean warming, no hurricanes mean warming, let me ask you, is there ANY weather phenomenon that you don't try to tie to global warming? Any at all?

Posted 105 days ago.

Kendall78

I also see that the deniers are getting weather mixed up with climate again.

Make a deal with us, when the temperature is below average...go ahead and deny global warming. But when the temps are above average, you have to come on here and say global warming is happening. Because based on the method you determine claimate change with daily weather patterns, that is the only way you can be honest.

Posted 105 days ago.

Kendall78

"The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s."

What evidence? Claiming there is evidence is not the same as providing it.

Posted 105 days ago.

harryanderson

Tiredofit,

I’m very interested in your contention that climate scientists’ skew their findings in order to get grant money. I would like to investigate that further. Where should I look?

How many instances can you cite in which a scientist distorted his study in order to receive a grant?

And how did those studies pass peer review from other scientists who didn't receive the grants?

Posted 105 days ago.

Tiredofit

Hunker down, we are about to warmed up tonight.

Posted 105 days ago.

Tiredofit

Hard to prove a negative, the burden of proof is on those that believe the lie. Lots of proof of natural cycles in climate, numerous ice ages and warming trends Fact is none of the predictions off doom have paanned out and now they are desperate to link cold to warming, what a laugh.

Posted 105 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or