A sophisticated hoax in Copenhagen

[gsvol]

seeks to embarrass the Canadian delegation.

 

[volfanjustin]

Obama landed there in a full blizzard and the temp is 20 degrees below normal, and all these morons are there trying to argue that global warming is real. God does have a sense of humor.

 

[RockyTopVol]

Obama landed there in a full blizzard and the temp is 20 degrees below normal, and all these morons are there trying to argue that global warming is real. God does have a sense of humor.

20 degrees below normal? They'll start crying Global Cooling.

 

[IPorange]

These sort of posts only prove some individuals have no idea what they are talking about in regards to climate change.

 

[volfanjustin]

20 degrees below normal? They'll start crying Global Cooling.

Whatever fits their arguement to collapse our economy and spread the wealth around the globe.

 

[volfanjustin]

These sort of posts only prove some individuals have no idea what they are talking about in regards to climate change.

Oh yea that's right, now it's climate change, sorry I forgot.

 

[IPorange]

Oh yea that's right, now it's climate change, sorry I forgot.

It's been that for over 10 years... And it was only changed because people like you that would shout every winter about how cold it was.

 

[volfanjustin]

It's been that for over 10 years... And it was only changed because people like you that would shout every winter about how cold it was.

I know, leading up to 1998 we were warming so it was global warming, now we are cooling so you all change the phrase to climate change. You all just re word it to fit your absurd arguement. Climate change may or may not be real, but it's not man made.

 

[gsvol]

These sort of posts only prove some individuals have no idea what they are talking about in regards to climate change.

Who needs the truth when you can tell a whopper???

Why don't you explain climate change to us then??

"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill ... All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself."

From 'The First Global Revolution,' pp.104-105 by Alexander King, founder of the Club of Rome and Bertrand Schneider, secretary of the Club of Rome.

 

[IPorange]

I know, leading up to 1998 we were warming so it was global warming, now we are cooling so you all change the phrase to climate change. You all just re word it to fit your absurd arguement. Climate change may or may not be real, but it's not man made.

"You all?" I think you overestimate my authority. We are cooling relative to the very hot years of the late 90's and early 2000's, but we're still warmer than most of the last century. Kind of like if Kobe Bryant scores fifty points in a game, and then only scores forty for a few games, he is "scoring less," even though he is still scoring a ton of points.

It's interesting that you say climate change "may or may not be real," but then constantly argue that it isn't. Which is it? It's dishonest to argue it isn't real, but then hide behind "well if it is, it isn't man-made." That's having your cake and eating it too.

At the very least, there appears to be enough question in your mind given the above, that the argument that there may be human-driven causes to any warming, or at least the potential for humans to affect the climate, isn't "absurd." At one point, many people thought the idea that people could wipe a species out and into extinction was not only absurd but an insult against God. Now that idea is almost unanimously regarded as absurd.


gs, there are threads on this board already where TennTradition and to a lesser extent I have roundly discussed global climate change. You could also google it. The internet has more than just quacky right-wing sites on it, you know. It has the whole rainbow of quacky sites on any subject.

 

[BeecherVol]

And Al Gore is not making any money off of this either.

 

[volfanjustin]

"You all?" I think you overestimate my authority. We are cooling relative to the very hot years of the late 90's and early 2000's, but we're still warmer than most of the last century. Kind of like if Kobe Bryant scores fifty points in a game, and then only scores forty for a few games, he is "scoring less," even though he is still scoring a ton of points.

It's interesting that you say climate change "may or may not be real," but then constantly argue that it isn't. Which is it? It's dishonest to argue it isn't real, but then hide behind "well if it is, it isn't man-made." That's having your cake and eating it too.

At the very least, there appears to be enough question in your mind given the above, that the argument that there may be human-driven causes to any warming, or at least the potential for humans to affect the climate, isn't "absurd." At one point, many people thought the idea that people could wipe a species out and into extinction was not only absurd but an insult against God. Now that idea is almost unanimously regarded as absurd.


gs, there are threads on this board already where TennTradition and to a lesser extent I have roundly discussed global climate change. You could also google it. The internet has more than just quacky right-wing sites on it, you know. It has the whole rainbow of quacky sites on any subject.

I say it may or may not because for every bit of science out there that says it is happening, there is science that says that it is not happening. But I am 99.9% sure its not man made. I don't believe that we have the capability to have an effect on the earth's temp. I think people think we are all more powerful than we are.

 

[KB5252]

I won't say whether there is or is not man made climate change, or more specifically that the earth's temp is rising because of mans actions. There are way too many questions raised against both arguments for anyone to say proof positive we are warming due to man's actions or that we aren't.

What I have a problem with is the tremendous push some are making to thwart a problem attributed to man, especially given the current events and questions raised about the motives of some at the forefront of this organized push. There are many questions and there are many agendas. I am all for making this world a better, cleaner place in which to live, I don't think doing that at the expense of taxpayers, especially given the current economic climate and questions about some of the data used for modeling purposes and so on is a very good idea.

I simply do not trust those who are pushing for cap and trade, there are way too many very powerful people who stand to make billions of the industry of cap and trade, ironically they are also those at the forefront pushing the agenda.

Is this not a reasonable stance on the issue?

 

[volfanjustin]

I won't say whether there is or is not man made climate change, or more specifically that the earth's temp is rising because of mans actions. There are way too many questions raised against both arguments for anyone to say proof positive we are warming due to man's actions or that we aren't.

What I have a problem with is the tremendous push some are making to thwart a problem attributed to man, especially given the current events and questions raised about the motives of some at the forefront of this organized push. There are many questions and there are many agendas. I am all for making this world a better, cleaner place in which to live, I don't think doing that at the expense of taxpayers, especially given the current economic climate and questions about some of the data used for modeling purposes and so on is a very good idea.

I simply do not trust those who are pushing for cap and trade, there are way too many very powerful people who stand to make billions of the industry of cap and trade, ironically they are also those at the forefront pushing the agenda.

Is this not a reasonable stance on the issue?

Well said. :good!:

 

[IPorange]

I won't say whether there is or is not man made climate change, or more specifically that the earth's temp is rising because of mans actions. There are way too many questions raised against both arguments for anyone to say proof positive we are warming due to man's actions or that we aren't.

What I have a problem with is the tremendous push some are making to thwart a problem attributed to man, especially given the current events and questions raised about the motives of some at the forefront of this organized push. There are many questions and there are many agendas. I am all for making this world a better, cleaner place in which to live, I don't think doing that at the expense of taxpayers, especially given the current economic climate and questions about some of the data used for modeling purposes and so on is a very good idea.

I simply do not trust those who are pushing for cap and trade, there are way too many very powerful people who stand to make billions of the industry of cap and trade, ironically they are also those at the forefront pushing the agenda.

Is this not a reasonable stance on the issue?

I find this reasonable. There are some vultures who are too well positioned to make any action fair at this point.

 

[SWIL]

"You all?" I think you overestimate my authority. We are cooling relative to the very hot years of the late 90's and early 2000's, but we're still warmer than most of the last century. Kind of like if Kobe Bryant scores fifty points in a game, and then only scores forty for a few games, he is "scoring less," even though he is still scoring a ton of points.

It's interesting that you say climate change "may or may not be real," but then constantly argue that it isn't. Which is it? It's dishonest to argue it isn't real, but then hide behind "well if it is, it isn't man-made." That's having your cake and eating it too.

At the very least, there appears to be enough question in your mind given the above, that the argument that there may be human-driven causes to any warming, or at least the potential for humans to affect the climate, isn't "absurd." At one point, many people thought the idea that people could wipe a species out and into extinction was not only absurd but an insult against God. Now that idea is almost unanimously regarded as absurd.


gs, there are threads on this board already where TennTradition and to a lesser extent I have roundly discussed global climate change. You could also google it. The internet has more than just quacky right-wing sites on it, you know. It has the whole rainbow of quacky sites on any subject.

It seems fashionable to oppose this issue/idea simply because a liberal like Al Gore is the poster boy for the movement.

 

[KB5252]

It seems fashionable to oppose this issue/idea simply because a liberal like Al Gore is the poster boy for the movement.

For some I'm sure this is correct. For others though I think the fact that he has set himself up to rake in money over fist has them somewhat skeptical of this particular pet project. Remember if cap and trade falls through he will have lost millions, many see him as promoting and lobbying for his investment. The fact that many see him as the poster boy for the movement and the distrust they feel for him on this issue is his own doing IMO.

 

[gsvol]

Whatever fits their arguement to collapse our economy and spread misery around the globe.

FYP


"We know only a single science, the science of history. One can look at history from two sides and divide it into the history of nature and the history of men. The two sides are, however, inseparable; the history of nature and the history of men are dependent on each other so long as men exist. The history of nature, called natural science, does not concern us here; but we will have to examine the history of men, since almost the whole ideology amounts either to a distorted conception of this history or to a complete abstraction from it."

Karl Marx 1845

Hugo Chavez is big on saving the planet, also big on silencing any opposition by whatever means is necessary which pretty much why we don't need such tyrants trying to rule America.

gs, there are threads on this board already where TennTradition and to a lesser extent I have roundly discussed global climate change. It has the whole rainbow of quacky sites on any subject.

You speak of the rainbow coalition??

Funny, I havn't seen you weigh in since climategate revealed the IPCC hoax.

Here is a thread on climategate.

Post #36 on the same topic.

On climate change theology. (ie the skreed of the CO2mmunists)

Everything you ever wanted to know about CO2 but were afraid to ask.

You asked a smart assed question in this thread but evidently didn't stick around long enough to read the answer.

Borrom line is you tend to be sort of a drive by artist, right??

 

[gsvol]

It seems fashionable to oppose this issue/idea simply because a liberal like Al Gore is the poster boy for the movement.

No, opposition is because it is a fraud and a hoax no matter who promotes it.

COP15 has colapsed BTW, Obama might as well have saved the wear and tear on Air Force One.

At least he is out of Waslhington for a few days, that can't be all bad.

 

[SWIL]

No, opposition is because it is a fraud and a hoax no matter who promotes it.

COP15 has colapsed BTW, Obama might as well have saved the wear and tear on Air Force One.

At least he is out of Waslhington for a few days, that can't be all bad.

Foxnews link..... *cringes*

The scope of this issue is far too large for this to be a 100% hoax.

It's obvious nothing is going to happen in Copenhagen. China is growing exponentially and could care less about the enviornment and we can't afford to fall behind them economically; even though that's inevitable.

 

[BeecherVol]

When those involved stand to gain from the issue, it throws up a red flag. Then with datagate, and the cover up of the original figures gathered, that throws up yet, another red flag. You would think, that if they knew how they come up with the adjusted figures, they could reverse the math, and get the original information back. Kinda makes you wonder why this has not, and will not be done.

 

[gsvol]

The scope of this issue is far too large for this to be a 100% hoax.

Well it is a 100% hoax!!!

"The great mass of people will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one."
Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, vol. 1, ch. 10 (1925)

"Through clever and constant application of propaganda people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way around, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise."

--Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

Mein Kampf was and still a favorite text among islamists.

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie.

It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."

-- Joseph Goebbels, German Minister of Propaganda, 1933-1945

 

[IPorange]

You speak of the rainbow coalition??

Funny, I havn't seen you weigh in since climategate revealed the IPCC hoax.

Here is a thread on climategate.

Post #36 on the same topic.

On climate change theology. (ie the skreed of the CO2mmunists)

Everything you ever wanted to know about CO2 but were afraid to ask.

You asked a smart assed question in this thread but evidently didn't stick around long enough to read the answer.

Borrom line is you tend to be sort of a drive by artist, right??

In response to your request (prodded by pm) for a weigh-in, just because I think you're a good guy at heart:

My position post-"climate gate" is not fully formed. I can see how it would be easy to those firmly entrenched in the "there is no global warming" crowd (although hypocritical and illogical for those in the "there's warming but it isn't driven by Man" crowd) to see this as vindication, and proof-positive of an elaborate hoax by an Illuminati-like coalition of Marxists and other nefarious groups put upon the world.

I just don't believe in conspiracies, so I am not one to buy into the idea of there being a wide scale organized effort to misinform. Some of the responses to the hacked and stolen emails I have heard sound fairly plausible. I won't say I am sold on them, but they are worth hearing at least:


Michael Mann response to Climategate - ScienceInsider

This a link to the infamous Michael Mann's response, lead guy on the Hockey Stick fiasco. I know this doesn't exactly make the explanations credible on that fact alone to you, but it is still worth a look.


I guess the bottom line for me is that the chief arguments against climate change are scientifically flawed from an Earth-system and physics perspective-- not usually from a data perspective. And the data arguments I have heard are somewhat trivial, aside from the complaints about Mann's hocky stick, which is clearly overly exaggerated in presentation for effect.

This topic is often debated in a black-or-white manner, when it really isn't one. I have never agreed with Al Gore's claims of apocalyptic effects, or some of the more fantastic time tables for development. I have never agreed with or advocated Cap and Trade. I do think the atmosphere's composition has been affected by the wide scale combustion of fossil fuels, and I think that has changed some of the feedback mechanisms in global climate. If these fellows in question were making up and/or cooking data, that really has no direct impact on my positions on the matter. GCC theory is not based on just these handful of scientists, and it isn't wrong just because various Leftists have or are using it as a vehicle for some of their goals.

As far as your "borrom line," I don't spend too much time on this political forum because there really isn't a whole lot of positively stimulating conversation and debate here. I actually frequent a political forum on another site that is more evenly divided on issues and thus isn't quite the same amount of dog pilings in threads and are more... well... jovial. It is true that sometimes I don't check back on the things I have commented on here.

You, like most here, have already firmly entrenched yourself on every position, and then find more facts only to support it. There really isn't much point in getting into long discussions on things with people like that. I can read what you and others say (I am probably one of the few that actually is sure to read through all your threads and pastings) and mull it over, without wasting my and your time by inputting things you will dismiss anyway. It's only when I feel absolutely compelled to chime in that I do so, like when I feel like clearly there is more or something else to consider. If that comes across as drive-by, well... It's a (mostly) free country.

 

[gsvol]

In response to your request (prodded by pm) for a weigh-in, just because I think you're a good guy at heart:

My position post-"climate gate" is not fully formed. I can see how it would be easy to those firmly entrenched in the "there is no global warming" crowd (although hypocritical and illogical for those in the "there's warming but it isn't driven by Man" crowd) to see this as vindication, and proof-positive of an elaborate hoax by an Illuminati-like coalition of Marxists and other nefarious groups put upon the world.

I just don't believe in conspiracies, so I am not one to buy into the idea of there being a wide scale organized effort to misinform. Some of the responses to the hacked and stolen emails I have heard sound fairly plausible. I won't say I am sold on them, but they are worth hearing at least:


Michael Mann response to Climategate - ScienceInsider

This a link to the infamous Michael Mann's response, lead guy on the Hockey Stick fiasco. I know this doesn't exactly make the explanations credible on that fact alone to you, but it is still worth a look.


I guess the bottom line for me is that the chief arguments against climate change are scientifically flawed from an Earth-system and physics perspective-- not usually from a data perspective. And the data arguments I have heard are somewhat trivial, aside from the complaints about Mann's hocky stick, which is clearly overly exaggerated in presentation for effect.

This topic is often debated in a black-or-white manner, when it really isn't one. I have never agreed with Al Gore's claims of apocalyptic effects, or some of the more fantastic time tables for development. I have never agreed with or advocated Cap and Trade. I do think the atmosphere's composition has been affected by the wide scale combustion of fossil fuels, and I think that has changed some of the feedback mechanisms in global climate. If these fellows in question were making up and/or cooking data, that really has no direct impact on my positions on the matter. GCC theory is not based on just these handful of scientists, and it isn't wrong just because various Leftists have or are using it as a vehicle for some of their goals.

As far as your "borrom line," I don't spend too much time on this political forum because there really isn't a whole lot of positively stimulating conversation and debate here. I actually frequent a political forum on another site that is more evenly divided on issues and thus isn't quite the same amount of dog pilings in threads and are more... well... jovial. It is true that sometimes I don't check back on the things I have commented on here.

You, like most here, have already firmly entrenched yourself on every position, and then find more facts only to support it. There really isn't much point in getting into long discussions on things with people like that. I can read what you and others say (I am probably one of the few that actually is sure to read through all your threads and pastings) and mull it over, without wasting my and your time by inputting things you will dismiss anyway. It's only when I feel absolutely compelled to chime in that I do so, like when I feel like clearly there is more or something else to consider. If that comes across as drive-by, well... It's a (mostly) free country.

IP, those firmly entrenched in the "there is no global warming" crowd (although hypocritical and illogical for those in the "there's warming but it isn't driven by Man" crowd)

What is either hypocritical or illogical??

AGW is 99% ideology and 1% science.

Have you read "Tragedy and Hope by Carrol Quigley, if not you should.

"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists."
J. Edgar Hoover former Director FBI

IP, This a link to the infamous Michael Mann's response,

Mann manipulated historical natural science on purpose.

THERE IS NO DENYING THAT FACTOID.

If one acepts marxist theory that the industrial revolution is/was a bad thing then the hockey stick is very acceptable.

The truth of the matter is that the age old curse of man taking advantage of other men did happen during the industrial revolution, however on the whole the industrial revolution has been a great thing.

You should hear the life story one of my grand mothers who lived from the 1890s til the 1990s, her bottom line was the she would never want to go back, the industrial revolution lessoned the workload on every man woman and child in the world for the most part.

IP, the chief arguments against climate change are scientifically flawed from an Earth-system and physics perspective--

How so????? That was the chief argument, not politics and/or economy. Where is the flaw???

IP, And the data arguments I have heard are somewhat trivial, aside from the complaints about Mann's hocky stick, which is clearly overly exaggerated in presentation for effect.

You must not be paying attention to the facts at all.

IP, I have never agreed with Al Gore's claims of apocalyptic effects

Interesting tidbit, Maurice Strong one of the most hysterical of climate apocalypse and business associate of Gore in the carbon offset market is a founding member of NAMBLA.

IP, I do think the atmosphere's composition has been affected by the wide scale combustion of fossil fuels, and I think that has changed some of the feedback mechanisms in global climate.

Only to a very slight degree and those factors can never ever overcome the more important factors.

It's a (mostly) free country.

I brought it to your attention because had expressed interest, you accuse me several times of not being open minded but then on the other hand you don't try to refute the actual facts I present, only the conslusions.

 

[SWIL]

The scope of this issue is far too large for this to be a 100% hoax.

Well it is a 100% hoax!!!

"The great mass of people will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one."
Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, vol. 1, ch. 10 (1925)

"Through clever and constant application of propaganda people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way around, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise."

--Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

Mein Kampf was and still a favorite text among islamists.

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie.

It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."

-- Joseph Goebbels, German Minister of Propaganda, 1933-1945

dude- throwing out Cold War/Nazi quotes and chain mail pictures doesn't really prove anything.