Comments on: Exile for non-believers

By: ------ THE SKY IS FALLING ------ - Page 934 - The Environment Site Forums

------ THE SKY IS FALLING ------ - Page 934 - The Environment Site Forums — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 22:52:09 +0000

[...] Taylor thinks that it is due to too many bears competing for food rather than Arctic warming. Exile for non-believers [...]

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Isbjørnforsker utestengt – støtter ikke “konsensus” — synop.no

Sat, 16 Jan 2010 12:58:31 +0000

[...] joannenova.co.au Les mer om Taylors syn [...]

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: John Nicklin

John Nicklin — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 18:39:03 +0000

NeroFiddles:

… Mysteriously, the one publicity-hound cum scientist who agrees with them happens to put bread on his table by working for an Innuit government which wants to be able to keep hunting polar bears.

Dr. Taylor doesn’t work for the government, he retired. If you want to do the “follow the money” trail, then you must also draw conclusions about the veracity of others like Gore. But then its only the skeptics that draw such accusations. You would be further ahead if you could show why Dr. Taylor’s findings are wrong. What research can you quote to refute his views on the health of Polar Bear populations in his studies?

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Mike M

Mike M — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 05:36:06 +0000

NeroFiddles- There really should be no need for any of us to prove anything. It is UN and the warming alarmists who have yet to satisfy the inconvenient requirement of proving their theory, (and hanging some real numbers on it as well), to establish it as a fact worthy of anyone’s concern let alone shackling my children’s future to a bleak economy running on less energy. (Don’t bore me with windmills and solar cells either.) CO2 going up or down, temperature going up or down, correlations, consensus – all meaningless things that do nothing at all to prove that ‘X’ more CO2 CAUSES measurable global warming.

Don’t look now but Lindzen and Choi just shot down a MAJOR radiative assumption made in IPCC and NASA climate models that a warmer ocean in the tropics acts to reduce radiative cooling – the so called ‘positive feedback’ that Gore refers to that will reach a runaway ‘tipping point’, (and then the earth melts!). Well, it ain’t so, the feedback remains NEGATIVE so the warmer it gets even MORE heat is radiated back out to space.

By the way, nobody disagrees that smog is bad, (and thanks to CAPITALISM to pay for it in a free society, smog has been greatly mitigated by technology over the last 20 years), but more CO2 would actually be GOOD – ask a plant, (you know, those ‘green’ things lurking outside of your house). What is good for them HAS TO BE good for us because without them we’d be dead.

Like or Dislike: 1 0

By: NeroFiddles

NeroFiddles — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:12:40 +0000

In the comments above, amateur scientists stumble over various bits of data, sometimes looking at wrong tables or mis-typing things or using last year’s data to refute a 200 year trend, but always earnestly “proving” something-or-other that pleases them. Lots of CO2 and smog is actually good for us (suck it up, folks). Mysteriously, the one publicity-hound cum scientist who agrees with them happens to put bread on his table by working for an Innuit government which wants to be able to keep hunting polar bears.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: John Nicklin

John Nicklin — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:20:13 +0000

Gore’s old proffessor, Dr. Revelle co-authored a paper with Fred Singer just before he (Revelle) died. The conclusion of the paper was that it was too early to say whether CO2 had any influence on the climate and called for more research. When confronted with this during his run for office, Gore had his aids try to have the paper removed from publication and/or to have Revelle’s name removed from the paper. Both attempts were denied by the publisher. Like many people, Gore heard what he wanted to hear, not what was actually said.

As for Dr. Taylor, I’m sure that if he shared the PBSG’s views on global warming, he would have been invited to attend even if he was not appointed by the government.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Henry chance

Henry chance — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:24:30 +0000

Speaking of Gore, back in the Spring of 2007, Senator Jim Inhofe challenged Gore to take a pledge to reduce his energy use. Because Gore insists that global warming is the result of human energy use and the current means of producing that energy is by far the major source of human CO2, Gore should lead by example by pledging to use no more energy than the average US citizen.

Two years later Gore still refuses to make this pledge thus underscoring his elitist hypocrisy. Reportedly, Gore uses more electricity in one week than the entire country of 20 million Ugandans use in a whole year. Gore’s refusal is just further proof that he is a fraudulent scam artist, (and always was IMO).

Mike M:
September 30th, 2009 at 2:54 am

Ok Mike. If Algore isn’t human, his combustion and consumption transcends environmental impact. He just GLOs and radiates brilliance to the planet.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Kendra

Kendra — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 00:23:19 +0000

Joanne, the 74% with cherry and chili is very good! I’m still a bit old fashioned, I’ll take a selection of truffles: champagne, cognac, baileys, tiramisu, latte machiato – in addition to the old standbyes! 90 gets abit to much like eating something different.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Mike M

Mike M — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:54:54 +0000

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Don G

Don G — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:18:35 +0000

I had no idea the word “shucks” was even used outside our small, colloquial corner of Midwest USA. Now I’m beginning to wonder about the possibility of AGW being real—down under, of course—:o)

Like or Dislike: 0 0