AGW Denial, The Greatest Scam in History?

[Tonington]

I have yet to see anything that is empirical and capable of conclusively tying everything together.

Scientists know what fingerprints are associated with various forcings on the climate. They have found the fingerprint of an apparent enhanced greenhouse warming in our climate system. They know how much of our emissions are being absorbed by the oceans and terrestrial biosphere. They know what the top of the atmosphere energy imbalance is. They know which spectral bands the outgoing radiation is being trapped at, and they have confirmed satellite observations with ground observations. They can reproduce the current warming with general circulation models (Fig. 9.5a).

Empirical, and comprehensive.

The suggestion I believe that Petros made refers to a serious conflict of interest with the aforementioned individual. Further, as Eaglesmack has correctly pointed-out, the current green technologies are not capable of sustaining themselves practically or financially.

The current green technologies are rolling out faster than conventional power sources, and without a price on carbon.

Add these 2 together and I expect that you can imagine the manner in which some folks will "make a return on their investment".

Except that people are building them, and making returns on their investment. There's also the benefit of reduced price volatility in fuel. Sun and wind don't become more expensive because some despot threatens to turn off a switch.

Fair enough... Got an example we can discuss?

Pricing carbon.

 

[captain morgan]

Empirical, and comprehensive.

... But not conclusive.

"Apparent" and "associated" are not indicative of confirmation/conclusive that anthropogenic sources of CO2 are causing any significant warming effect.

The current green technologies are rolling out faster than conventional power sources, and without a price on carbon.

The point being made about the green tech is that it cannot justify it's own operations without the input of massive amounts of public money... As for the sources rolling out faster, China alone has 400 to 500 new coal-fired plants slated for construction in the near future.

Except that people are building them, and making returns on their investment. There's also the benefit of reduced price volatility in fuel. Sun and wind don't become more expensive because some despot threatens to turn off a switch.

The ROI from these investments is (essentially) an amount that is returned via gvt... Someone on these forums posted info from a solar project in Spain that was failing (financially) due to the economic difficulties in that nation... I can only imagine that Spain's budgets have been slashed and the subsidy program which finances the solar project have been cut as well which has driven the project into rough economic waters.

This is an example of the source of teh ROI for these projects.

Pricing carbon.

Great. I see a very simple solution to this. Rather than assessing a generalized carbon tax or "price" levied at the manufacturer's end, why not charge it directly tp the consumer.

Gas up your car more often than your neighbour - pay more carbon tax.

Have 4 kids and shop more often than your neighbour at a grocer that has it's goods delivered by truck/train - pay more carbon tax.

Live in a colder climate and use more nat gas, fuel-oil, heat, wood, etc (anything that emits CO2) - pay more carbon tax.

Pay based on useage... That is fair and equitable.

 

[mentalfloss]

George Bush is a running dog.. well poodle anyway.. of the Free Trade oligarchs. He's been given his marching orders.

By controlling carbon credits, and they will try to corner the market and control the world's productive capacity, if given the opportunity, they will squeeze the world with artificial shortages, especially of food... they work on desperation.

They are quite mad, of course with power lust.. but as we all know insanity is no impediment to power in the short term. Tyrants die miserable deaths.. but not before they lay waste to the world.

And all for a bunch for a conjured up smoke and mirrors masquerading as science. The ice fields are advancing in Antarctica. South America is experiencing the coldest winter in decades.

The AGW search the world for anecdotes of temporary warming, and finding them increasingly hard to come by.. to obscure the fact that the world seems to be entering a periodic cooling phase which could last decades.. or it could last centuries.. all independent of carbon.

Please lay off lord of the rings for a few days.

 

[coldstream]

Please lay off lord of the rings for a few days.

Well Tolkein did perceive the world, and the human cause, as fundamentally manifesting the battle between Good and Evil. He was smart enough to realize that what the Western world has devolved into in the modern age, one beholden to idols (like the 'environment'), infused by the most mundane and material sophistries and ambitions.. and more than anything else driven by FEAR through loss of any confidence in faith. It is these ingredients (especially fear) that the AGW forces have harnessed to an agenda that is based on greed, powerlust, lies and deep antipathy to humanity in general. That mentalfloss... would put it on the Evil side. :smile:

 

[mentalfloss]

Well Tolkein did perceive the world, and the human cause, as fundamentally manifesting the battle between Good and Evil. He was smart enough to realize that what the Western world has devolved into in the modern age, one beholden to idols (like the 'environment'), infused by the most mundane and material sophistries and ambitions.. and more than anything else driven by FEAR through loss of any confidence in faith. It is these ingredients (especially fear) that the AGW forces have harnessed to an agenda that is based on greed, powerlust, lies and deep antipathy to humanity in general. That mentalfloss... would put it on the Evil side. :smile:

Rhetoric is fine and all, but why don't you actually bring out the goods if you want to make a point.

 

[AnnaG]

George Bush is a running dog.. well poodle anyway.. of the Free Trade oligarchs. He's been given his marching orders.

By controlling carbon credits, and they will try to corner the market and control the world's productive capacity, if given the opportunity, they will squeeze the world with artificial shortages, especially of food... they work on desperation.

They are quite mad, of course with power lust.. but as we all know insanity is no impediment to power in the short term. Tyrants die miserable deaths.. but not before they lay waste to the world.

And all for a bunch for a conjured up smoke and mirrors masquerading as science.

And so nothing has changed or will change because the power hungry have been doing what they are doing for decades upon decades.

The ice fields are advancing in Antarctica. South America is experiencing the coldest winter in decades.

The AGW search the world for anecdotes of temporary warming, and finding them increasingly hard to come by.. to obscure the fact that the world seems to be entering a periodic cooling phase which could last decades.. or it could last centuries.. all independent of carbon.

*shrugs*As usual, a load of uninformed opinion without any substantiation. Nothing new there either.

Tonnington. you should take a really really indepth look into the founding fathers of the Green movement and their religious beliefs sometime. Start with Maurice Strong.

So it is friction between Strong and other people that is making things warm up? lol

I have yet to see anything that is empirical and capable of conclusively tying everything together.

.... which you either ignore or twist into something that you think fits your conclusions. So what would be the point?

The suggestion I believe that Petros made refers to a serious conflict of interest with the aforementioned individual. Further, as Eaglesmack has correctly pointed-out, the current green technologies are not capable of sustaining themselves practically or financially.

Add these 2 together and I expect that you can imagine the manner in which some folks will "make a return on their investment".

And the current system of technologies is ruining the planet. Is that good for the economies? One of your spills in the Gulf of Mexico has devastated a large section of the globe. How's that for technology?
Technology has enabled us to put the world's fresh water supply on a time limit.
The current technologies is turning the oceans into acid baths with literally thousands of tons of garbage floating around in them (the majority of the junk sinks).
Yeah, you talk about financially sustainable projects all you want, but anything you've talked about is extremely short sighted with no vision for consequences in the future. Only idiots do not plan for future finances.
Return on investment? No biodiversity to speak of, no fresh water to speak of, the biggest sources of food on the planet acidified, etc. Incredibly stupid.

 

[coldstream]

And so nothing has changed or will change because the power hungry have been doing what they are doing for decades upon decades. *shrugs*As usual, a load of uninformed opinion without any substantiation. Nothing new there either.

So it is friction between Strong and other people that is making things warm up? lol

If you're going to dismantle the industrial world, reduce billions to poverty by restricting production of food and commodities, and at the same time make trillions for a small group of traders and speculators in carbon credits by imposing tyranny and cruelty on others.. the burden of proof is on the AGW side.

And it has been shown time and time again they have no proof.. they have innuendo, credulity that has never been able to pan out into ONE reliable prediction. Their front men, like Al Gore, are nitwits but there is an evil genius behind all this.. one of utter malevolence and greed.

The Psuedo Scientific Cult of Global Warming, is a social and political phenomenon, not a scientific one. There is absolutely nothing to it. The only real thing we have to fear.. is fear itself.. and those who would use it for their own profit.

 

[captain morgan]

.... which you either ignore or twist into something that you think fits your conclusions. So what would be the point?

Show me Anna.. Show the entire world how these "associations" and "apparent" elements are conclusive, factual or support any of the AGW bullsh*t... Go on Anna, do it.

You can't Anna. All you are capable of doing is throwing out a barrage of emotionally charged, unsubstantiated rhetoric.

And the current system of technologies is ruining the planet.

Your attitude is that humanity is a parasite. That said, there is no solution that is acceptable to dirt worshipers that involves humanity in any way shape or form.

Is that good for the economies?

You tell me... Are you relegated to hunter/gatherer status?.. You like heating your home, driving a car and living with a mechanic?

One of your spills in the Gulf of Mexico has devastated a large section of the globe. How's that for technology?

Yah, that's it Anna... Everyone else in the world is responsible except you.

Technology has enabled us to put the world's fresh water supply on a time limit.The current technologies is turning the oceans into acid baths with literally thousands of tons of garbage floating around in them (the majority of the junk sinks).

Says who?... You?

just more unsubstantiated rhetoric from a representative of a group that has no argument whatsoever.

Yeah, you talk about financially sustainable projects all you want, but anything you've talked about is extremely short sighted with no vision for consequences in the future. Only idiots do not plan for future finances.

Then you pay for it... You and the Sierra Club, WWF and Greenpeace. maybe you can convince these folks to give up their salaries, homes and the odd ocean-going boat and they can donate to the cause.

Lemme guess, you don't actually believe in it that much to put your money where your mouth is.

Typical.

Return on investment? No biodiversity to speak of, no fresh water to speak of, the biggest sources of food on the planet acidified, etc. Incredibly stupid.

More rhetoric... There's a big surprise.

 

[coldstream]

Poor attempt to try and shift the responsibility for yourself spewing nonsense. You make the claim, you back it up or shut up. You claimed: You are being called on it and have little if anything to support your claim. Back it up or shut up.

Ahhhh, the weak excuse called the "Al Gore Ploy". roflmao More unsubstantiated claim and a lame dodge.

A comment born of pure, unadulterated ignorance and pure, unadulterated distortion of the evidence. Big deal. We can get crap like this off the tv the CEOs of BP, Exxon, etc.

Where's you proof Anna. You have none. You have the nonsense of models, based on fraudulent and selectively chosen data. The conclusion preceded the analysis, it's all in support of a socio political agenda, aimed at enriching a few.

And as i've said before the money to be made from cornering and sequestering the world's carbon market is a 1000 fold that of what can be made from protecting the oil company's market franchise.

It is no accident that carbon was chosen as the villain here. It is the primary and irreplacable energy producing element of our civilization. It is a necessary bi-product of food production. Without carbon we cannot sustain our current level of population, much less provide for more. No expensive and completely inefficient and inadequate 'clean energy' alternatives can replace it.

This all smacks of genocide.. for profit. That is who you are in bed with Anna.

 

[AnnaG]

Where's you proof Anna. You have none. You have the nonsense of models, based on fraudulant and selectively chosen data. The conclusion preceded the analysis, it's all in support of a socio political agenda, aimed at enriching a few. And as i've said before the money to be made from cornering the world's carbon market is a 1000 fold that of what can be made from protecting their product franchise.

Where's your proof?
I posted some proof above.
Your turn.

It is no accident that carbon was chosen as the villain here. It is the primary and irreplacable energy producing element of our civilization. It is a necessary bi-product of food production. Without carbon we cannot sustain our current level of population, much less provide for more. No expensive and completely inefficient and inadequate 'clean energy' alternatives can replace it.

More unsubstantiated opinion. *shrugs* It's all you have.

This all smacks of genocide. That is who you are in bed with Anna.

More opinion?
And my opinion is that you have invested in polluting activites in order to pad your wallet and cannot handle thinking that something may change your status quo. So?

 

[mentalfloss]

If you're going to dismantle the industrial world, reduce billions to poverty by restricting production of food and commodities, and at the same time make trillions for a small group of traders and speculators in carbon credits by imposing tyranny and cruelty on others.. the burden of proof is on the AGW side.

And it has been shown time and time again they have no proof.. they have innuendo, credulity that has never been able to pan out into ONE reliable prediction. Their front men, like Al Gore, are nitwits but there is an evil genius behind all this.. one of utter malevolence and greed.

The Psuedo Scientific Cult of Global Warming, is a social and political phenomenon, not a scientific one. There is absolutely nothing to it. The only real thing we have to fear.. is fear itself.. and those who would use it for their own profit.

Oooh, can I fill out your bull**** form too?
--

If you're going to dismantle the AGW world, reduce billions to poverty by increasing inflation, and at the same time make trillions for a small group of traders and speculators in the oil industry by imposing tyranny and misinformation on others.. the burden of proof is on the denier's side.

And it has been shown time and time again they have no proof.. they have innuendo, credulity that has never been able to pan out into ONE reliable prediction. Their front men, like George W. Bush, are nitwits but there is an evil genius behind all this.. one of utter malevolence and greed.

The Psuedo Scientific Cult of Global Warming Denial, is a social and political phenomenon, not a scientific one. There is absolutely nothing to it. The only real thing we have to fear.. is fear itself.. and those who would use it for their own profit.
--

Here let's try it with something more familiar to you:
--
If you're going to dismantle Sauron, reduce billions to poverty through mass slavery, and at the same time make trillions for a small group of Nazgul in Mordor by imposing tyranny and cruelty on others.. the burden of proof is on evil's side.

And it has been shown time and time again they have no proof.. they have innuendo, credulity that has never been able to pan out into ONE reliable prediction. Their front men, like Saruman, are nitwits but there is an evil genius behind all this.. one of utter malevolence and greed.

The Psuedo Scientific Cult of unparalleled evil, is a social and political phenomenon, not a scientific one. There is absolutely nothing to it. The only real thing we have to fear.. is fear itself.. and those who would use it for their own profit.
--

Here's the part where you throw the red herring.

Also, lol @ morgan's amnesia kicking in again.

 

[AnnaG]

The only real thing we have to fear.. is fear itself.. and those who would use it for their own profit.

Actually realists have to fear the status quo (profit over people and planet). The deniers fear changing for the better.

 

[petros]

There is only ONE way out of environmental decay....

 

[Tonington]

... But not conclusive.

It seems convincing to me. What would you say about those results then? Here's your chance. It's definitely empirical, so how would you explain all of those findings differently?

"Apparent" and "associated" are not indicative of confirmation/conclusive that anthropogenic sources of CO2 are causing any significant warming effect.

There is always the possibility that the measurements were wrong. Scientific findings are never absolute, hence the careful use of words. But apparent means obvious...there is an obvious enhanced greenhouse effect.

Those results don't make sense in any other fashion than an enhanced greenhouse effect. Some results could refute them in the future, but to date, nope. It's the comprehensiveness that makes refuting the larger picture unlikely. There would not be such widespread and robust confirmation of results if these findings were due to chance.

The point being made about the green tech is that it cannot justify it's own operations without the input of massive amounts of public money.

Nonsense. Subsidies aren't just cash inputs, they're also tax credits. And the amount is smaller than is given to traditional sources of fuel.

A graphic I posted in Extras "What to do" thread:

And a new report this week:

"Governments last year gave $43 billion to $46 billion of support to renewable energy through tax credits, guaranteed electricity prices known as feed-in tariffs and alternative energy credits, the London-based research group said today in a statement. That compares with the $557 billion that the International Energy Agency last month said was spent to subsidize fossil fuels in 2008."
Fossil Fuel Subsidies Are 12 Times Support for Renewables, Study Shows - Bloomberg

.. As for the sources rolling out faster, China alone has 400 to 500 new coal-fired plants slated for construction in the near future.

And they're rolling out green infrastructure at the same time. The volume is so large, that in the future the clean energy tech is going to likely be coming from Asia, along with everything else manufactured. They are eating our lunch.

Great. I see a very simple solution to this. Rather than assessing a generalized carbon tax or "price" levied at the manufacturer's end, why not charge it directly tp the consumer.

One way or another, the price of the pollution is captured by the transaction. That's the main point.

I prefer having the manufacturer pay for it and past the cost on through COGS because the impetus to find solutions when the price you pay (as a manufacturer) is a fixed cost is more up front than lowered sales.

And this is the kind of discussion that conservatives should be involved in, rather than denial of scientific observations.

 

[Tonington]

That's what you get for showing humility Anna. Those internet crusaders are ruthless!

I personally think admitting that you are ignorant of many things is a sign of wisdom, so let them chew on their Dunning-Kruger self-satisfaction.

 

[Tonington]

Rational is good judgment, which is to be wise

 

[Tonington]

Should have known that would be a waste of time. You'll never even attempt to read a scientific paper, much less understand a whole string of them which put a coherent narrative together.

 

[AnnaG]

Should have known that would be a waste of time. You'll never even attempt to read a scientific paper, much less understand a whole string of them which put a coherent narrative together.

.... or even the news articles in the blog Walter supplied a link to.

 

[captain morgan]

"Should have known that would be a waste of time. You'll never even attempt to read a scientific paper, much less understand a whole string of them which put a coherent narrative together."


What a compelling argument.

Tell ya what. Point me in the direction that provides the conclusive research that explains the past events.. I can only imagine that this I would be the natural starting point for any understanding and therefore is absolutely critical in our current degree of understanding.

So, whaddya say? I'd imagine that you have reams of references that are universally accepted as fact regarding the above.



...... Can't do it can ya. You know, provide info that doesn't exist.

 

[shadowshiv]

Everybody needs to knock off the constant bickering and making personal attacks towards each other. This is ridiculous. Start acting like grownups!

Also, quotes of other people are not to be edited to make that poster "say" something other than what they originally posted.