Global Warming Skeptics

This late in the climate scaremongering game,the best they can come up with these days are these examples of stupid AGW baloney by attacking skeptics with their patented fact less rants.

Non climatologist and professional nutball Prime Minister Kevin Rudd,thinks we skeptics are.... he he,dangerous.

Quote:"As we approach Copenhagen, these three groups of climate sceptics are quite literally holding the world to ransom," he told policy think-tank the Lowy Institute in Sydney. ;-) In fact, climate change skeptics are "reckless gamblers".

http://motls.blogspot.com/2009/11/kevin-...erous.html

Really this from the same dufus who pushed this and is failing big time:

Quote:DESPITE repeatedly brandishing its green credentials, the Rudd Government has reneged on its election promise to run Parliament House and MPs’ electoral offices on clean energy.

It has also failed to deliver on a promise to upgrade all government office buildings to minimum five-star greenhouse ratings.

The promise to use renewable energy was made in a speech by Kevin Rudd in the lead-up to the 2007 election, but so far little or no progress has been made.

http://www.australianclimatemadness.com/?p=1183

He can't do his own freaking office buildings!

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!


Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the IPCC and a famous non climatologist,states what he thinks of a government report in his own words:

Quote:Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of the IPCC, told the Guardian: "We have a very clear idea of what is happening. I don't know why the minister is supporting this unsubstantiated research. It is an extremely arrogant statement."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/20...e-glaciers

Further reading in the link fails to find any highly trained comments from the overblown railway engineer,to counter the government report claims.It is all wind and piss and I think he knows it.


Margot O’Neill blowhard blogger thinks we skeptics are insane or worse! A quick skim of her Lateline blog should cure you of any thoughts that she is a rational being.Here is a quote from her own feathered pen:

Quote:So is the IPCC really that kooky? Have thousands of participating scientists from around the world who've contributed to four IPCC reports since 1990 duped the world with hidden agendas and manipulated science? Have they all got it wrong?

I should point out that the IPCC's conclusions are supported in most countries by most major scientific bodies. In Australia that includes the CSIRO, the Australian Academy of Science, and the Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies, to name a few.

The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) and the UN Environment Program (UNEP). It has issued four reports (1990, 1995, 2001 and 2007) each asserting with increasing certainty that the globe is warming (now 100 per cent certain) and that human driven greenhouse gas emissions are largely to blame (now 90 per cent certain). The next report is due 2014.

While it is called a 'panel,' the IPCC is actually one of the most ambitious scientific undertakings in history bringing together hundreds of scientists and other experts who are generally nominated by their governments or by non-government organisations (such as the Australian Academy of Science or the CSIRO). But the IPCC is also policy-neutral. Its job is to present the best science. There is not a single policy recommendation in its reports.

http://blogs.abc.net.au/events/copenhagen/

I should vomit.


Jeff Schweitzer who actually has some science background (but unfortunately for his 19 fans,no climatology degree),tried hard to cover up that truth with his article,calling us skeptics evil and stupid too:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-schwe...47202.html

His sizzling crap,

Quote:When these tragic events unfold, an apology from the faithful will be inadequate.  Sorry does not suffice in the face of millions of unnecessary deaths and the preventable disruption of hundreds of millions of lives.

Sorry to say for a guy who is a marine biologist,he left out actual science facts in the article.


Another non climatologist and famous blowhard politician John Kerry tries hard to spew out inane comments,such as this stupidity:

Quote:Kerry: You realize that there are something like two or three thousand studies all of which concur which have been peer reviewed, and not one of the studies dissenting has been peer reviewed?

Green: That’s not correct, Senator.

Kerry: Show me a peer reviewed study.

Green: I’ll send you a list.

Kerry: Please, because nobody else has.

http://www.climatechangefraud.com/politi...-to-a-hoax

He was told about this link:

http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10...rting.html


David Suzuki the eco-propagandist sadist and non climatologist,who wanted to jail people for the terrible crime of being skeptics:

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=290513


Then we have this howler from a blog posted by Craig A. James:

A Devil's Pact to Deny Global Warming: Creationist and Business

A man who still fails to understand that his post is really dumb,by reading through the comments in the link.They tear him apart and his replies are shallow and stupid.

Quote:…one thing is clear: Most global-warming deniers are also conservative religious fundamentalists who believe in creationism. These are the people who ignore expertise of virtually every scientist on Earth about evolution, and they apparently have no trouble extending their ignorance to the environmental sciences.

http://religionvirus.blogspot.com/2009/0...rming.html

That was the best he could come up with?

Ad Homonyms

No hard hitting attack on the alleged errors on what "deniers" writes in their papers?

What you read here was just a sampling of the shallow thinking,they run on.They think they are the planetary saviors and gosh if we peons do not listen to them we are doomed,DOOMED! The alarmist bullshit and the insane attacks on climate researchers they seriously write about in all contrary to reality and reason,is why they are losing the argument.The average people who have had to read the cacophony of doomsday messages for YEARS from the media and from the loudmouth hysterics of the Al Gore camp,have finally realized they are being given the alarmist environmentalist propaganda.

This late in the game,why would people continue to allow themselves to be lied to,and still be considered dumb enough to follow their unsupported environmentalist propaganda anymore?

For the next 20 days I expect to see people acting like a "Chicken with its head cut off" or "a fish out of water". Of course John Kerry has been acting like that for a while right along with Brother Al. It would be nice if Copenhagen ended this charade but it will go on and on blindly.

The charade may go on,but the voters will remember it more than usual when they go to the voting booth.

[quote author=Mike Davis link=topic=300.msg2185#msg2185 date=1258161656]
For the next 20 days I expect to see people acting like a "Chicken with its head cut off" or "a fish out of water". Of course John Kerry has been acting like that for a while right along with Brother Al. It would be nice if Copenhagen ended this charade but it will go on and on blindly.
[/quote]

copenhagen will be a greenie weenie's wet dream.  You can bet throughout the whole farce of a conference the media will be going nuts with it.  Not sure what it is like in other countries, but here the hippies are out in full force protesting about lack of gov't policy towards climate change and building up towards copenhagen.

It is beginning to look like Copenhagen is indeed a wet dream,they have postponed their eco-phantasm party to a later date.



A group of Nutball AGW believers have a hard time getting anything going at this city.

:laugh:

I would think the wet dream would be thinking of Bo Derek and realizing you are seeing Moms Mabley! :laugh:

Hey!  I liked Moms Mabley!

Well, not in a "wet dream" way, but still...

;D

I liked her too but as compared to Bo in her swimsuit!

Moms

LOL,

ok you guys we are straying far from the blog lite entry.

saw the latest 'copenhagen' commercial on TV.

It starts out with some power plant emitting co2 into the atmosphere, then the word Cope flashes on the screen, then Hope, then at the end it says 'Hopenhagen'. Made me gag in disgust.

The absurd infatuation over a trace molecule continues,but really I think it is all about control over people is what they are really aiming for.

The UK Govt, care of the Act on CO2 website is now running a series of tv ads (well the same one repeated frequently)
with the aim of getting people to help climate change by, wait for this,
driving five miles a week less to work.........

So, 1 day a week I park up two and a half miles from work. Get on a bus and arrive late at work.
How will that help. ?
You watch, next month it'll be ten miles, then 20, and then, and then...

Way before that the country will have ground to a halt, and gone bust.
Yet climate change will have continued abbated, in whatever direction it is going to (perfectly naturally) change next.
I and most of the rest of the country will be unemployed, and the Govt will be even more out of pocket as we will not be paying income taxes
(no job - because I can not get to [even if I still own a car] work....)
AND, the Govt will be paying me unemployment benefit.

I do not think they have thought this through properly,
or am I the mad one. ?

Derek:
Park one half mile from work each day. Better yet drive backwards and have negative effect because you would be driving negative miles each week. Your other option is to say that I am your offset as I do not drive to work.

(11-24-2009 10:53 PM)Mike Davis Wrote: [ -> ]Derek:
Park one half mile from work each day. Better yet drive backwards and have negative effect because you would be driving negative miles each week. Your other option is to say that I am your offset as I do not drive to work.

But that means he will have to pay you.

I could always use a little extra spending money!

(11-25-2009 08:14 AM)Mike Davis Wrote: [ -> ]I could always use a little extra spending money!

It would be better if those Nutball AGW believers send you some money instead.

gov'ts can get away with ludicrous schemes like that due to public policy and the fact that it 'shows' that the gov't is being green. So in a politicians point of view, it makes them look good (regardless of how silly it is). We all know that politicians are only behaving green to ensure job security for themselves (in other words, garnering votes). They could care less if their green scheme results in negative consequences.

One example is recycling. Our city rolled out those stupid blue bins not too long ago. So what happened ? People are throwing out all sorts of stuff into those blue bins, like empty pop bottles (which can be turned in for money, consumers just pay a deposit when they buy a bottle of pop for example, so when they turn that empty bottle in they get their money back). Bums are now trolling back alleys looking into these blue bins scavenging for any goodies, and there has been an increase in break and enterings due to the blue bins. Will the city admit that recycling has caused an undesirable effect ? Nope. But it looks good for the city politicians as it makes them appear 'green'.

I really am dreading december, why do the greenies always have to wreck something good by doing something stupid ? You know what I'm referring to, Copenhagen during the christmas month. It is supposed to be a joyous occasion, but the stupid greenies are trying to get people down by spouting off doomsday claims.

I couldn't agree more mcclane.

Mike did you fiddle while Rome burned,
or were you too busy paraphasing someone's point as your own.

I was fiddling!