Polar Vortex brings near record cold temps this winter

[mentalfloss]

I think the Cons are (quite rightly) identifying that they need to step up their environmental position to grab some votes for the next election.

This is the second compliment I've given to the right today.

Damn I feel dirty.

 

[EagleSmack]

Without evidence? I can't help that myself and Tonington--two scientists--post scientific rebuttals all the time on this site.

And neither can stand up to Petros and others that see this movement as it is.

Usually the reply is something about wealth distribution or Al Gore or some incoherent rambling about how physics has it all wrong.

Which is what the Climate Change Movement is all about... wealth distribution and taking other peoples money. That is what drives and sustains this movement... the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. The possibility of raiding developed nations (except China and India, etc) coffers.

Buy your carbon credits this year?

It's not the AGW proponents that are lacking in evidence.

Faked evidence, false models, grants at risk, fraud and disinformation.

"I've just completed Mike's Nature [the science journal] trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie, from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."

"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!"

 

[taxslave]

Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes!

Conservative MP Peter Braid Says Extreme Weather And Climate Change Linked

In what is being considered a first by a member of the federal Conservatives, Kitchener-Waterloo MP Peter Braid stated publicly on CBC News Network’s Power and Politics that recent extreme weather and climate change are connected.

“We are seeing the effects, the impacts of climate change,” Braid told host Evan Solomon on Monday. “With climate change comes extreme weather events. We saw that through the floods in southern Alberta, we’re now seeing that with the ice storms in Kitchener-Waterloo and Toronto, with the extreme cold across the country.”

Solomon later asked Braid to confirm he was saying that extreme weather and climate change are related, to which Braid replied, “Absolutely, I’m confirming I said that.”

The statement comes on the same day that two people were arrested in Vancouver after they came within centimetres of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and displayed signs protesting the government’s policies on climate change.

Conservative MP Peter Braid Says Extreme Weather And Climate Change Linked

Of course they are linked. The ice age is coming way sooner than the deniers think.

 

[Zipperfish]

And neither can stand up to Petros and others that see this movement as it is.

[/QUOTE]

On another thread you posted some numbers--the number of trees that need to be planted to make up the CO2 emissions as a result of that antarctic expedition. I asked you for numbers. You tapped out. And now you are going off about wealth distribution again.

You pretty much demonstarted my case perfectly, thanks.

 

[EagleSmack]

Zip: On another thread you posted some numbers--the number of trees that need to be planted to make up the CO2 emissions as a result of that antarctic expedition. I asked you for numbers. You tapped out. And now you are going off about wealth distribution again.

You pretty much demonstarted my case perfectly, thanks.

Oh yes... I said I don't run errands for zealots in the other thread and I'll repeat them here...

I don't run errands for zealots.

I did my research... do yours.

And I don't see how you figure I am not supposed to point out that the failed Climate Scientist Antarctic Expedition is now on the hook for planting 450,000 trees to offset the carbon emissions used and wealth distribution in different threads and posts.

Sorry you can't follow along.

 

[taxslave]

Oh yes... I said I don't run errands for zealots in the other thread and I'll repeat them here...

I don't run errands for zealots.

I did my research... do yours.

And I don't see how you figure I am not supposed to point out that the failed Climate Scientist Antarctic Expedition is now on the hook for planting 450,000 trees to offset the carbon emissions used and wealth distribution in different threads and posts.

Sorry you can't follow along.

I actually wouldn't mind seeing the figures either since I am curious as to how much fossil fuel was wasted saving idiots from their self inflicted grief. How much fossil fuel was wasted getting these protesters into this predicament in the first place. And who paid.
Also how they calculate the amount of carbon absorbed by a tree at various times in the growth cycle, What happens to that carbon when the tree dies and how they came up with those numbers.

 

[captain morgan]

Without evidence? I can't help that myself and Tonington--two scientists--post scientific rebuttals all the time on this site. We post verifiable evidence of our viewpoints.

Those rebuttals presume that contemporary science has a functional understanding of the Earth's climate systems and ALL the variables that have an impact.

Clearly, we don't have that depth of knowledge, so cheery-picking a few laws of physics and extrapolating that towards a cause/effect relationship is without merit

Usually the reply is something about wealth distribution or Al Gore or some incoherent rambling about how physics has it all wrong.

Tell me how this isn't about wealth distribution... Fact is, Gore, Suzuki, IPCC, et al continually focus on anthro emissions and never, not once, have recognized that the only solution to mitigating their perceived threat is to reduce the actual number of emitters.

Politically undesirable to recommend a mass cull. So, apparently the next best thing is to demand a global tax in order to help developing nations become more efficient and self-sustainable thereby having an affect of allowing those communities to support more people.

.... I am amazed that you can't see the glaring hypocrisy and dichotomy between their 'claims' and actual proposed solutions

It's not the AGW proponents that are lacking in evidence.

Spare me... AGW has fallen flat on it's face over the last 10 years highlighted with a research expedition to the Antarctic to confirm AGW, and here they are, stuck in a massive amount of (increasing) volume of sea ice.

 

[EagleSmack]

I only regret that I can only give Capt. M one thumbs up.

Tell me how this isn't about wealth distribution... Fact is, Gore, Suzuki, IPCC, et al continually focus on anthro emissions and never, not once, have recognized that the only solution to mitigating their perceived threat is to reduce the actual number of emitters.
.

Not only that... nations with booming and advanced economies have been given developing nation status.

And the nations that haven't been given that status are free to "emit" providing they pay a carbon tax and the wealth is distributed.

One of the major points of these Global Warming conferences is the bickering between so called developing nations on how they are going to divide up the seized wealth.

 

[Walter]

The title of this thread needs to remove the word near.

 

[mentalfloss]

Oh c'mon Eagle.

You guys always shift the focus to some drastic policy change and Suzuki/Gore.

The science on the anthropogenic causal connection is pretty firm. Where the argument really comes into play is scope.


Is it going to be 10 years, 50 years, 100 years?

Will there be one catastrophic global event or wil there smaller scale scenarios like this unusual blast from the north or the unusual flooding we got last year?

It's a question about scope now.

 

[captain morgan]

Oh c'mon Eagle.

You guys always shift the focus to some drastic policy change and Suzuki/Gore.

The science on the anthropogenic causal connection is pretty firm. Where the argument really comes into play is scope.


Is it going to be 10 years, 50 years, 100 years?

Will there be one catastrophic global event or wil there smaller scale scenarios like this unusual blast from the north or the unusual flooding we got last year?

It's a question about scope now.

There are a large number of 'developing' nations that are pissing and moaning about getting money for 'climate reparations ' . Nice, eh? They even invented a brand new term to articulate their pissy little greed.

These are the same nations that have been relying on the West for food, development money, armed forces to come in and clean up their dirty little genocides and civil wars in addition to outright capital injections.

Never interested in growing up, it's always easier to beg for more crumbs off the table (that go directly into the pockets of the 'democratically elected' dictators.

 

[EagleSmack]

Oh c'mon Eagle.

You guys always shift the focus to some drastic policy change and Suzuki/Gore.

The science on the anthropogenic causal connection is pretty firm. Where the argument really comes into play is scope.


Is it going to be 10 years, 50 years, 100 years?

Will there be one catastrophic global event or wil there smaller scale scenarios like this unusual blast from the north or the unusual flooding we got last year?

It's a question about scope now.

You know... when I posted this you came to mind. If I recollect you were in agreement saying western nations should pay more and nations like China shouldn't because western nations have been successful for a lot longer and nations like China should be able to enjoy a booming economy unabated.

Am I correct? it was awhile ago.

And I don't shift anything... that is what this is all about... wealth distribution.

The Climate has and will always change. We cannot stop it anymore than prehistoric man could.

 

[pgs]

There are a large number of 'developing' nations that are pissing and moaning about getting money for 'climate reparations ' . Nice, eh? They even invented a brand new term to articulate their pissy little greed.

These are the same nations that have been relying on the West for food, development money, armed forces to come in and clean up their dirty little genocides and civil wars in addition to outright capital injections.

Never interested in growing up, it's always easier to beg for more crumbs off the table (that go directly into the pockets of the 'democratically elected' dictators.

Well we here in beautiful British Columbia are paying carbon taxes. Funny how it goes into general revenue and is just a line item on the budget .

 

[EagleSmack]

There are a large number of 'developing' nations that are pissing and moaning about getting money for 'climate reparations ' . Nice, eh? They even invented a brand new term to articulate their pissy little greed.

These are the same nations that have been relying on the West for food, development money, armed forces to come in and clean up their dirty little genocides and civil wars in addition to outright capital injections.

Never interested in growing up, it's always easier to beg for more crumbs off the table (that go directly into the pockets of the 'democratically elected' dictators.

Oh on NPR there was a segment on a consortium of Caribbean nations and their demand for long term reparations in the tune of BILLIONS!

Well we here in beautiful British Columbia are paying carbon taxes. Funny how it goes into general revenue and is just a line item on the budget .

Great example.

 

[captain morgan]

Oh on NPR there was a segment on a consortium of Caribbean nations and their demand for long term reparations in the tune of BILLIONS!

A number of African nations are thumping their chests on this as well.

Recently, we observed the world's first 'climate change refugee' who applied to get out of whatever hell-hole they were in and were claiming admittance based on the West's consumption having a direct (and the sole affect apparently) on rising waters on his tiny little island.

 

[EagleSmack]

Yeah the oceans seem to be rising higher on the coasts of developing nations. Around here... not so much.

A few years ago someone in here posted a picture of high tide as proof of rising sea levels.

 

[Zipperfish]

Oh yes... I said I don't run errands for zealots in the other thread and I'll repeat them here...

I don't run errands for zealots.

I did my research... do yours.

And I don't see how you figure I am not supposed to point out that the failed Climate Scientist Antarctic Expedition is now on the hook for planting 450,000 trees to offset the carbon emissions used and wealth distribution in different threads and posts.

Sorry you can't follow along.

You made a claim and can't verify it. Like the vast majority of other skeptics on this site.

 

[mentalfloss]

You made a claim and can't verify it. Like the vast majority of other skeptics on this site.

Skeptic?

He's not a skeptic.

Skeptics are AGW proponents now.

 

[Kreskin]

This event was caused by Rob Ford inhaling. It's a TO Fordtex.

 

[EagleSmack]

You made a claim and can't verify it. Like the vast majority of other skeptics on this site.

Did you research it?

Again... I do not run errands for zealots.

Prof. Turney's life has a new purpose. He will need to now plant forests to offset his failed Climate Change Expedition and rescue and the rescue of another ship that was trapped in the ice trying to rescue him. And the number of trees he will have to plant is growing.

Skeptic?

He's not a skeptic.

Skeptics are AGW proponents now.