Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History’
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
- Status
Try not to be so obtuse. My initial point was that they are a lot more expert on climate than journalists.
Last edited by a moderator:
More expert is vastly different from being expert... A family doctor may be more expert that the average person on the street, but that does not qualify that person as a neuro surgeon.
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=8pjd9xpp&pf=YES December 2009
Science, Politics and Global Warming
“In the end, science offers us the only way out of politics. And if we allow science to become politicized, then we are lost. We will enter the Internet version of the dark ages, an era of shifting fears and wild prejudices, transmitted to people who don't know any better. That's not a good future for the human race. That's our past.”
—Michael Crichton, “Environmentalism as Religion,” (A lecture at the Commonwealth Club, San Francisco, CA, September 15, 2003).
The Global Warming circus in Copenhagen was politics driven by a consensus that, by definition, has nothing to do with science. The apocalyptic nonsense that opened the meeting highlighted that fact. How many who attended or demonstrated at the meeting actually understand the (disputed) scientific grounds for the hysteria? Meanwhile, leading science journals allow skeptics of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) to be labelled “deniers” and refuse them the right of reply. It is doctrinaire denouncement, not science. It is the journal editors who are denying the scientific method by censoring debate. It is they who are peddling ideology.
Science, Politics and Global Warming
“In the end, science offers us the only way out of politics. And if we allow science to become politicized, then we are lost. We will enter the Internet version of the dark ages, an era of shifting fears and wild prejudices, transmitted to people who don't know any better. That's not a good future for the human race. That's our past.”
—Michael Crichton, “Environmentalism as Religion,” (A lecture at the Commonwealth Club, San Francisco, CA, September 15, 2003).
The Global Warming circus in Copenhagen was politics driven by a consensus that, by definition, has nothing to do with science. The apocalyptic nonsense that opened the meeting highlighted that fact. How many who attended or demonstrated at the meeting actually understand the (disputed) scientific grounds for the hysteria? Meanwhile, leading science journals allow skeptics of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) to be labelled “deniers” and refuse them the right of reply. It is doctrinaire denouncement, not science. It is the journal editors who are denying the scientific method by censoring debate. It is they who are peddling ideology.
So? Avro posted a debate between a journalist denier and Monbiat and you implied Monbiat is no more qualified than the journalist at climate matters. I simply pointed out that your implication is wrong and you just agreed with me. Thank you.
And that just shows you are closed to evidence and relying upon whatever you think supports your opinion.
Yeah that sure proves glbal warming is a scam alright. :roll:http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=8pjd9xpp&pf=YES December 2009
Science, Politics and Global Warming
“In the end, science offers us the only way out of politics. And if we allow science to become politicized, then we are lost. We will enter the Internet version of the dark ages, an era of shifting fears and wild prejudices, transmitted to people who don't know any better. That's not a good future for the human race. That's our past.”
—Michael Crichton, “Environmentalism as Religion,” (A lecture at the Commonwealth Club, San Francisco, CA, September 15, 2003).
The Global Warming circus in Copenhagen was politics driven by a consensus that, by definition, has nothing to do with science. The apocalyptic nonsense that opened the meeting highlighted that fact. How many who attended or demonstrated at the meeting actually understand the (disputed) scientific grounds for the hysteria? Meanwhile, leading science journals allow skeptics of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) to be labelled “deniers” and refuse them the right of reply. It is doctrinaire denouncement, not science. It is the journal editors who are denying the scientific method by censoring debate. It is they who are peddling ideology.
Wrong.
I stated that Monbiat is a zoologist and NOT a climate expert. That's it...You assumed the rest.
... What's that you were saying about being closed to evidence?
Last edited by a moderator:
The one good thing is that there is deep water offshore, so a tidal wave would not be able to build up to high, but high enough to wash the floors.
The implication was evident. I'm not wrong.
The globe is warming and it isn't a scam.
Last edited by a moderator:
lol You are 8' above sea level? Miami's airport is 11' above sea level. Isn't the Gulf of Mexico deep? Lookit this:The one good thing is that there is deep water offshore, so a tidal wave would not be able to build up to high, but high enough to wash the floors.
Hurricane's Waves Soared to Nearly 100 Feet | LiveScience
And that's not tidal waves.
Last edited:
A little information on the effects of higher concentrations of substances in the oceans (including CO2): The carbon cycle before humans: New studies provide clearer picture of how carbon cycle was dramatically affected long ago
I do think this is a precursor to another ice age (normal Earth life cycle).
Why is it that the El Nino effect has been so powerful lately? Is it something new, or has it always been with us. When we have la Nina the nutrients get a better mix in our oceans (sea life flourishes), that has not happened in about 5 years, or by Florida time hurricane Andrew..
http://www.elnino.noaa.gov/lanina_new_faq.html
Why is it that the El Nino effect has been so powerful lately? Is it something new, or has it always been with us. When we have la Nina the nutrients get a better mix in our oceans (sea life flourishes), that has not happened in about 5 years, or by Florida time hurricane Andrew..
http://www.elnino.noaa.gov/lanina_new_faq.html
Just went down to the beach,funny even after all this rain it is still there.
Pretty much in the same place it has always been.
Hey Les how is your diesal tractor running?
Doing your part to reduce green house gasses?
Pretty much in the same place it has always been.
Hey Les how is your diesal tractor running?
Doing your part to reduce green house gasses?
Last edited by a moderator:
lol You are 8' above sea level? Miami's airport is 11' above sea level. Isn't the Gulf of Mexico deep? Lookit this:
Hurricane's Waves Soared to Nearly 100 Feet | LiveScience
And that's not tidal waves.
I am on the east coast, just north of Pompano Beach, inland about 1 mile.
That implication is entirely your assumption. Sorry, but you are 100% wrong.
As far as the globe warming is concerned, the issue here relates to whether it is humanity that is the major cause or a part of a natural cycle. I thought that this was evident.
There are lots of possibilities. Here's one:
- Antarctic ice shelf collapse possibly triggered by ocean waves
That's only your opinion, not fact; especially after you've agreed with me that the zoologist is more versed in climate than your journalist. But whatever your implication was is irrelevant anyway.
Wrong again. I think you like the habit of being wrong.
The issue is
right from the topic title. The anthropogenic causes of global warming thread is not this one. http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warmin...html#Is_global_warming_connected_to_the_hole_
Last edited:
- Status