Exposed: Climate Fear Promoters Greatest Fear

Discussion in 'Politics' started by poncho, Aug 26, 2009.

  1. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    A Public Trial of the 'Evidence' of Global Warming Fears!


    'Series of inconvenient developments for promoters of man-made global warming fears continue unabated'

    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has shocked the global warming debate by its formal call to hold a public global warming trial to decide on the “evidence” that mankind is driving a climate catastrophe. The Chamber seeks to have a complete trial “complete with witnesses, cross-examinations and a judge who would rule, essentially, on whether humans are warming the planet to dangerous effect.” Some are referring to the potential for a global warming trial as the “U.S. Chamber of Commerce wanting to put AGW (anthropogenic global warming) creationism on trial.”

    Brenda Ekwurzel of the environmental group Union of Concerned Scientists, is discouraging the idea of a trial. This is the same Ekwurzel who claimed global warming made it “less cool” this summer. See: Climate Fear Promoters Try to Spin Record Cold and Snow: 'Global warming made it less cool' – July 27, 2009

    More significantly, it is the same Ekwurzel who badly lost a public debate over man-made climate fears in 2007. See: Scientific Smackdown: Skeptics Voted The Clear Winners Against Global Warming Believers in Heated NYC Debate – March 16, 2007 & see: Climate Fear Promoters Avoid Debates and Lose When They Engage in Them)

    No wonder the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has called for a full trial on global warming claims. Desperation time has arrived for the promoters of man-made global warming fears, as the science of man-made climate fears continues to collapse. [Update: U.S. Govt Scientist: If climate 'trial' occurred 'only those with religious convictions of warming claims would continue to hold any support for man-made global warming': 'Falsehood cannot be sustained indefinitely' - August 26, 2009]
    In 2009, a series of inconvenient developments for the promoters of man-made global warming fears continue unabated.

    A small sampling of developments include: new peer-reviewed studies,real world data, a growing chorus of scientists dissenting (including more UN IPCC scientists), open revolts in scientific societies, more evidence that rising CO2 is a boon for the atmosphere, and the Earth's failure to warm.
    In addition, publicopinion continues to turn against climate fear promotion and even activists at green festivals are now expressing doubts over man-made climate fears and a Nobel Prize-winning economist is wishing for 'tornadoes' and 'a lot of horrid things' to convince Americans of a climate threat.

    There has been no significant global warming since 1995, no warming since 1998 and global cooling for the past few years. Lack of warming for past decade and recent global cooling, follow a peer-reviewed analysis showing the 20th century was not unusuallywarm. In addition, a global temperature analysis on April 24, 2009 found "No continents have set a record high temperature since 1974."


    Full Article
     
  2. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,378
    Likes Received:
    790
    So with all these scientists who once followed the global warming myth now abandoning the "science" that lead to that fallacy how are the remaining remnant going to hold on?
     
  3. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,505
    Likes Received:
    40

    Facts never mattered to the lemmings - no reason to think this "change" will have any impact.
     
  4. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    The problem has never been the science, or the evidence. The problem has been that people have been making long term predictions based on insufficient evidence, without benefit of further study. As further study is done, it shows that many arly assumptions and presumptions concerning climate change is wrong. Climate change is something that takes decades to study, not years, before one can start making long-term hypotheses. This is a normal part of the scientific method.

    Early backers of global warming got on the band wagon before long term review of the evidence was possible. And it's turning out that they were wrong. This is common when science is politicized. The attitude of "we need an answer now" trumps the scientific method, and leads to incorrect conclusions.
     
    #4 Johnv, Aug 27, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 27, 2009
  5. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    They still got the mainstream media with it's endless global warming propaganda messages. The "big lie" will most likely continue as if nothing has changed, until the one worlders find a new threat to convince us of the need of global taxation.

    Here's another report that debunks "global warming".

    UN exaggerated warming 6-fold: the scare is over

    SPPI’s authoritative Monthly CO2 Report for July 2009 announces the publication of a major paper by Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT, demonstrating by direct measurement that outgoing long-wave radiation is escaping to space far faster than the UN predicts, showing that the UN has exaggerated global warming 6-fold.Report, page 3.

    Lindzen’s paper on outgoing long-wave radiation shows the “global warming” scare is over. Thanks to recent peer reviewed papers that have not been mentioned in the mainstream news media, we now know that the effect of CO2 on temperature is small, we know why it is small, and we know that it is having very little effect on the climate. Page 3.

    The IPCC assumes CO2 concentration will reach 836 ppmv by 2100, but, for almost eight years, CO2 concentration has headed straight for only 570 ppmv by 2100. This alone halves all of the IPCC’s temperature projections. Pages 5-6.

    Since 1980 temperature has risen at only 2.5 °F (1.5 °C)/century, not the 7 F° (3.9 C°) the IPCC imagines. Pages 7-9.

    Sea level rose just 8 inches in the 20th century and has been rising at just 1 ft/century since 1993. Sea level has scarcely risen since 2006. Also, Pacific atolls are not being drowned by the sea, as some have suggested. Pages 10-12.

    Arctic sea-ice extent is about the same as it has been at this time of year in the past decade. In the Antarctic, sea ice extent – on a 30-year rising trend – reached a record high in 2007. Global sea ice extent shows little trend for 30 years. Pages 13-15.

    Hurricane and tropical-cyclone activity is at its lowest since satellite measurement began. Page 16.

    Solar activity has declined again, after a large sunspot earlier in the month. The Sun is still very quiet. Pages 17-18.

    The (very few) benefits and the (very large) costs of the Waxman/Markey Bill are illustrated at Pages 19-21.

    Science Focus this month studies the effect of the Sun on the formation of clouds. IT’S THE SUN, STUPID! Pages 22-23.

    As always, there’s our “global warming” ready reckoner, and our monthly selection of scientific papers. Pages 24-27.


    And finally, a Technical Note explains how we compile our state-of-the-art CO2 and temperature graphs. Page 28.


    SOURCE
     
    #5 poncho, Aug 29, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 29, 2009
  6. alatide

    alatide
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    974
    Likes Received:
    0


    I don't agree with the idea of a trial. A trial is not the way to investigate scientific theories at least in the 21st century. Neither is a vote. Scientific theories are introduced by scientists and either upheld or not through scientific evidence. We're not talking about religion here. We're talking about science.

    The right wing Christian response to this theory is reminiscent of the Inquisition which brought scientists before them to charge them with heresy for holding to a scientific theory. This happened to that radical Galileo for supporting Copernicus' theory that the earth revolved around the sun rather than the other way around.

    Galileo's championing of Copernicanism was controversial within his lifetime, when a large majority of philosophers and astronomers still subscribed (at least outwardly) to the geocentric view that the Earth is at the centre of the universe. After 1610, when he began supporting heliocentrism publicly, he met with bitter opposition from some philosophers and clerics, and two of the latter eventually denounced him to the Roman Inquisition early in 1615.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

    Although he was cleared of any offence at that time, the Catholic Church nevertheless condemned heliocentrism as "false and contrary to Scripture" in February 1616,[8] and Galileo was warned to abandon his support for it—which he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, published in 1632, he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy," forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    Have we now dropped back 500 years in our treatment of scientific theories to the level of an Inquisition dictating what is "acceptable" science rather than the scientific method?
     
  7. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Apparently the champions of man made global warming didn't have a theory based on reliable scientific facts to begin with. They did have an agenda though, global taxation and control. In other words, Al Gore and his UN buddies used bogus "intell" in order to sell us a "global war on carbon emissions" in much the same way as Bush and his globalist buddies used bogus "intell" to sell us a "global war on terror".

    Same ole globalist tactics. Using contrived threats and fearmongering to grab up more money, power and control. Has nothing to do right vs left. This is about lies vs truth or facts vs farse.
     
    #7 poncho, Aug 29, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 29, 2009

Share This Page

Loading...