Thirty years of propaganda has only reached a quarter of the population.
When asked “Is the scientific debate about global warming over?” 75% of US voters will not get their IPCC badge:
… 61 percent said the debate is not over. — Washington Times.
Most people don’t believe, despite all the 97% consensus surveys, all the two week junkets, billlions in government funding, and speeches by Leonardo Di Caprio. What tactic is left? Double the bullying and namecalling?
These are pretty dreadful numbers for the Global Worriers.
And look at the breakdown by political party:
Just 26 percent of Republicans and 28 percent of Democrats agree that the debate about global warming is “over,” as opposed to 19 percent of unaffiliated voters.
There are almost as many obedient, trusting Republicans as there are obedient, trusting Democrats. At least on this question, there is not the usual polarization along political lines. We can see why polls paid for by Climate Worriers rarely ask this question about the debate.
“Do you believe in climate change” is a better thing to ask if you want a “certain kind of result”.
Skeptics are winning.
A climate debate could begin,
When those who oppose are let in,
To argue their case,
Which the warmists can’t face,
As they know that the skeptics would win.
— Ruairi
Nearly 7 out of 10 US voters don’t want skeptics prosecuted
Rassmussen: Most Still Oppose Government Prosecution of Global Warming Critics
When asked, “Should the government investigate and prosecute scientists and others including major corporations who question global warming?” 69% opposed it.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 69% of Likely U.S. Voters oppose the government investigating and prosecuting scientists and others including major corporations who question global warming. Just 15% favor such investigations…
This is not a big issue even for Democrat voters:
Even so, only 21 percent of Democratic voters said in the survey they favor the government investigating and prosecuting climate-change skeptics.
h/t Climate Depot
The idea of investigating and prosecuting skeptics is so beyond the pale, the fact that 31% don’t oppose it is a sign of strange times indeed.
510
This reminds me of the Rasputin Poll where 97% of people agreed the idea of Climate Change ™ was hard to kill……
182
My thoughts exactly.
31% want us prosecuted for our ‘incorect’ opinions. Chilling.
291
Damn! Of all the words to misspell!
200
Not strange times Dan, but desperate measures for the Warmists. I don’t really trust polls that much anymore.
101
There is an old saying”Never conduct a poll,unless you know what the results will be”
20
Even the act of including a question in the Rasmussen poll, is another step towards legitimising the persecution of people for their thoughts.
Think on it.
171
Remember that this is a response to a poll. How many of those responders had thought about this prior to the question being asked and how many actually cared about the answer they gave. how many even understood what they were being asked? Getting upset about poll responses is quixotic.
35
The master of rationalization speaks.
60
I’ll take that as a compliment. Seriously though, you have to question poll results and their interpretation. I actually don’t believe that 30% of people think that an opinion or a belief is worthy of a custodial sentence. Assuming that the question and result are accurately described then something else is going on – a misunderstanding of the question maybe? Was there a preamble that we have not heard about? In what order were questions asked?
53
Sounding very skeptical Gee! Hanging around here is good for you.
40
Oddly, when the poll confirms some tenet of the warmunist manifesto, it’s presented as irrefutable by Alhore and his henchmen. When seen as detrimental to the cause, …..well, those polls aren’t very scientific….
21
An example?
22
Political Debate my be over but science debate is never over.
40
Yesterday evening I was at a dinner, where the guest speaker was someone from the UK’s Met Office. Once he moved away from the subject of weather onto that of supposed climate change I could not resist the urge to tear him a new one.
At the end, he was reduced to pleading/burbling the models were “very accurate, as everyone agreed they were” and “climate scientists could be trusted not to manipulate the data”. He was incredibly unconvincing, however my point is I was amazed by the number of people, attending the dinner meeting, who came up to me afterwards to say they agreed with me.
Sadly, for those of the alarmist persuasion, there wasn’t a swivel-eyed troll amongst them.
723
“Climate Scientists could be trusted NOT to manipulate the data” Now why would he feel it necessary to say that?
533
Peter,
If you want to check how the BoM’s homogenisation of temp is ‘corrupting’ the data, have a look at South Australia’s mean max temp for July this year.
Of the +70 sites, 49 were below average, 18 above and 5 average. When you average all the sites, the state’s mean anomaly is -0.15C. If you only average the 13 ACORN sites, it comes to -0.1C.
Yet the state’s average max mean is given as +0.2C. Only two districts out of 16 or so show an above average anomaly (around the SE and Adelaide) yet if you look at the BoM’s shading map, it shows more than half of the state above average.
This is not the first time I have noticed this. It seems the method the BoM uses to homogenise temps across large areas obviously bears no resemblance to the actual site temps.
This shows the data for each w/station and the anomaly ‘shaded’ map.
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/month/sa/summary.shtml
There is no mention of the +0.2C on the SA summary but can found at the Aust summary for July here.
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/month/aus/summary.shtml
333
Abysmal behaviour from BoM but unfortunately the story continues.One can hope that elements of the senate can somehow leverage an INDEPENDENT audit of the organisation.
133
Researchers in other fields have offered their services to conduct an audit, on the basis that their conclusions would be demonstrably independent as far as the general public were concerned.
I understand that these offers have all been declined, on the basis that climate is much too complicated for a mere physicist to comprehend. Perhaps they are worried that a physicist would have trouble in understanding the math? Hmm, yes, that is probably the answer.
170
And god forbid that geologists would even presume to understand anything about climate interactions
60
In the new science, if the data disagrees with the model, the data is faulty and must be corrected or homogenized. There are simply not enough measuring stations so any given station is wrong and as the model demonstrates there are plenty of places with no thermometers where the agreement is exact.
202
Ian,
Asked the BOM why this is so???
Geoff
60
Geoff
Just did so. Will let you know the answer?
40
I’ll guess
“No answer was the stern reply”
51
It would have been interesting to ask him why the Met Office media statement on global warming having “stalled” during 1998 was issued just before Christmas Eve 2012.
Surely not to avoid that news spreading too far?
It was also interesting that predictably the Met Office also pointed out that when the next cold period passed the warming would continue.
Who would have thought that.
132
I salute your courage!
91
I have seen that so many times. The person starts off like a peacock in full bloom and ends up like a henpecked rooster with a fox behind it.
They are all front and as soon as they meet some resistance in the form of cold facts and logic they have nothing.
110
Democracy relies on the collective wisdom of the masses to make decisions about leaders and laws that promote the bests interest of all and to hold accountable all who fail to deliver. Free markets rely on the collective wisdom of purchasers to make the most of their own personal resources to better their own lives.
Polls such as this only reinforce why these most powerful systems of governance and trade need to be preserved in their purest form at all costs so that society can continue to prosper and progress. People acting for their own best interests are much smarter and more honest than politicians, public servants and media hacks who’ve sold their souls to special interests.
280
It’s the silent majority that can make a difference, unfortunately the silent part is their Athenians heel so to speak.
101
“Athenians heel…”? While he was Greek, I’m not sure Achilles was from Athens, or that his weakness was a common condition, there.
20
Because those “politicians, public servants and media hacks”, are acting in their own best interests as they see it.
There is a hierarchy of power with everybody at each level acting in their own best interests, to the detrement of the levels below them. As George Carlin said, “It is a big club! And you ain’t in it!”
60
Asking a loaded question such as “Do you believe in climate change?” gives nothing about an inferred vector in both magnitude and direction, which is why the more ambiguous the question the more easily it can be misconstrued or manipulated to mean whatever a person wants.
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs supersedes mindless hand-wringing over an ephemeral—and incorrect—concept like CAGW.
111
When I am asked that question, “Do you believe in climate change?”, I always answer “Yes”.
I mean, it would be stupid of me to observe the climate changing day by day, week by week, season by season, and somehow convince myself that it wasn’t happening, wouldn’t it?
When I am asked, “Do you think that mankind is changing the climate?”, I always answer “No”, because it would be arrogant for me to assume that mankind is more powerful than nature, and besides, nature is self correcting.
120
“What tactic is left? Double the bullying and namecalling?”
No Joanne.
Like Syme, a developer of Newspeak, and Winton after him, you will find out that Thinkpol has a procedure for all who disturb the peaceful life of the proles.
Your invitation for a ‘talk’ at the Ministry of Love is scheduled. Please attend.
130
Aauuuggg!
not
“…and Winton after him…”
but
…and Winston after him…
30
There is a town called Winton, in New Zealand. There is also a politician with the christian name of Winston. I was somewhat confused there, for a minute.
30
I have read more info on climate change then I care to remember. After awhile you realize it is all BS. We as a human race were supposedly doomed in the 1960’s. That became the 1970′, which in turn became the 1980’s. For sure we were going to run out of oil in the 1990’s and perish.
Then along came the year 2000, WE WERE GOING TO DIE!!!! Well 50 plus years later we are still here,I gave up years ago listening to this garbage. What astounds me is that there is anyone that does believe it.
But some people live in terminal fear of someone doing something that they don’t like. I just wish I could yabber the BS that the greenies do. God I would be rich!!!
293
If marketing hyperbole and puffery did not work there would be no sales and marketing people.
50
People have such frightfully short memories. I believe most of it’s based on fashion trends, such that whatever was trendy 20 years ago always returns.
We’re now dealing with Millennials – the worst kind.
92
Don’t heap too much on the millenials. They are are a product of a weak education …
171
They are a product of a weeks’ education. The rest of their attendance is spent in absorbing the propaganda.
191
A climate debate could begin,
When those who oppose are let in,
To argue their case,
Which the warmists can’t face,
As they know that the skeptics would win.
450
Added to the post thanks Ruairi. :- )
102
Another winner! 🙂
20
Pew reckons the only people taking climate change seriously are the Latin Americans, Africans and Europeans, a mixture of enlightened self interest and guilt.
Before the election SBS did a snapshot of Chinese immigrants in Australia and discovered that they regarded climate change as a low priority, along the lines of same sex marriage.
Back in the Middle Kingdom its the same story, the masses are pretty much indifferent to the arguments of the European pseudo Marxists on the end of the world as we know it.
90
Taking this a little further, Beijing doesn’t believe political reform or foreign policy should be influenced by popular will, so we don’t see many homegrown polls coming out of China, but this caught my eye. Eating dog has unsavory connotations.
‘The poll also found that 62 percent of the respondents thought Yulin damages China’s reputation and 69.5 percent added that they have never eaten dog meat, discrediting previous claim that Yulin festival is part of Chinese culture.
“It is embarrassing to us that the world wrongly believes that the brutally cruel Yulin festival is part of Chinese culture. It isn’t and as we see in this poll, most people here don’t eat dogs and believe that the festival damages China’s global reputation,” said Qin.
China Daily
30
Subject: Fw: Do you know this man?
[snip]
He is Edward“Ed” Mezvinsky, born January 17, 1937. Then you’ll probably say, “Who is Ed Mezvinsky?”
Well,he is a former Democrat congressman who represented Iowa’s 1st congressional district in the United States House of Representatives for two terms, from 1973 to 1977. He sat on the House Judiciary Committee that decided the fate of Richard Nixon.
He was outspoken saying that Nixon was a crook and a disgrace to politics and the nation and should be impeached. He and the Clintons were friends and very politically intertwined for many years.
Ed Mezvinsky had an affair with NBC News reporter Marjorie Sue Margolies and later married her after his wife divorced him.
In 1993, Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky, then a freshman Democrat in Congress, cast the deciding vote that got President Bill Clinton’s controversial tax package through the House of Representatives.
In March 2001, Mezvinsky was indicted and later pleaded guilty to 31 of 69counts of bank fraud, mail fraud, and wire fraud. Ed Mezvinsky embezzled more than $10 million dollars from people via both a Ponzi scheme and the notorious Nigerian e-mail scams.
He was found guilty and sentenced to 80 months in federal prison. After serving less than five years in federal prison, he was released
in April 2008 and remains on federal probation. To this day, he still owes $9.4 million in restitution to his victims.
About now you are saying, “So what!”
Well, this is Marc and Chelsea Mezvinsky.
That’s right; Ed Mezvinsky is Chelsea Clinton’s father-in-law.
Now Marc and Chelsea are in their early thirties and purchased a $10.5 million dollar NYC apartment.
Has anyone heard mention of any of this in any of the media? If this guy was Jenna or Barbara Bush’s, or better yet, Sarah Palin’s daughter’s father-in- law, or better still Donald Trump’s daughters father-in-law, the news would be an everyday headline and every detail would be reported over and over.
And yet they say there are no double standards in political reporting. And people are already talking about Hilarious as the next President! And then there is possibly Chelsea for president in future!
Chelsea Clinton earned $600,000 a year when working forNBC and now works for the Clinton Foundation and sits on many boards.
The cycle never ends! Lying and corruption seem to make some candidates more popular.
“ America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.” Abraham Lincoln.
Wake up People!
[Ok had some time and part is apparently correct according to SNOPES http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/mezvinsky.asp The part about Soros is apparently not correct [SNIPPED] but may need more investigation. From Snopes: “Some versions of this item claim that Chelsea Clinton and Marc Mezvinsky’s wedding was hosted at “George Soros’ mansion.” This is false: the couple was married at the Astor Courts in Rhinebeck, New York, an historic property owned by Kathleen Hammer and Arthur Seelbinder.”]ED
[Apparently most of the rest is true. The Chelsea job for $600k checks out, more here. And indeed Chelsea’s in laws were both politicians, and her father in law was jailed for fraud. –Jo
20
Like many, I’ve been taking more interest than usual in the US elections. On the subject of polls I came across this piece yesterday and I’m not sure if I should take it seriously or not BUT an important point in it, is Rasmussen polls are considered to be serious even by the “game players”( scroll down to the interview at the bottom)
http://freedomoutpost.com/dnc-insider-clinton-being-pounded-in-polls-dont-believe-mainstream-media/
40
Good story about hillary clinton today……..
Hillary Clinton Received Secret Memo Stating Obama Admin Support for ISIS:-
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/08/11/flashback-obama-admin-supported-group-became-isis/
60
As someone who lives here and sees what’s going on day by day, I can only say one thing — the poll that matters will happen on November 8. Until then I don’t take even Rasmussen polls too seriously. Now if there was a big lead on either side and it was sustained, it’s another matter.
I keep remembering the Harry Truman/Thomas Dewey election where it seemed so certain that Dewey would win that a major newspaper printed the following morning’s edition with a front page headline that read,
in advance of knowing any real election results and they put that out on the street only to find out that Truman had been reelected. So there are polls and there are polls.
Was that bias or just foolish desire to be first on the street with the news? I can’t answer but it was a Chicago paper. It points out that the result isn’t in until the winner crosses the finish line — horse racing, track and field or politics, it’s all the same.
20
In 1948 I wasn’t following politics so this is a historical event for me that I learned about later. But ever since finding out about it I’ve been very careful what I believe and what I don’t.
10
Roy
I agree the November poll is the only one that counts and I think there will be some very surprised MSM journalists and pollsters in the days following –no matter who wins. It will be a lot closer than they think.
Another interesting piece on how polls are not to be believed. Basically you have to read the fine print on the methodology of how the polls are conducted.
http://averybgoodman.com/myblog/2016/08/10/how-and-why-american-pollsters-are-falsifying-election-polls/
10
This is a bit off topic, but I thought it was interesting.
With the QLD drought breaking, it’s time to expand operations again.
Step one was a meeting with the bank to assess our borrowing capacity.
First question (with a frown)”Do you have any cabon contracts in place?”
A negative answer was met with a big smile, and “Oh good”
290
ROFL.. [thud]
50
Binny
We had a look at that. The Peter Beattie sacred weeds didn’t qualify – only our best cleared country so no way.
Helps if you’ve had some cattle survive though.
Hang in.
10
How to get a skeptic to believe in (Doomsday Global Warming]? Scientists are studying that
“Their attempts are well-timed and perhaps even working, as beliefs seem to be shifting.
Most Americans now think man-made [Doomsday Global Warming] is happening, polls show.
And in the past two years, the number of Republicans who believe in [Doomsday Global Warming] has jumped to 47 percent, up from 28 percent in 2014.”
. . .
Unfortunately, no link to the successful ‘shifting of beliefs’ polls was provided.
71
The Leftard manual on life. “I say it so it’s true. Now TOE THE LINE!”.
Human nature dictates we don’t like to be left out. These polls and reports on consensus play on that. Consensus isn’t science. Neither is “wisdom of the crowd”.
81
To dear Sillyfilly, Frank, Craig Thomas and all the other warmist trolls who infest any skeptic site.
.
Could you please describe clearly and precisely in your own way and backed with some unambiguous and verified real facts and data as to just what your Climate Change is and how it is different to the “natural climate change” this planet has been constantly going through for the 4.5 billions of years of its existence?
Could you please in your own way carefully describe how your Climate Change that you apparently so fervently believe in can be very clearly identified from the “natural climate change” mankind has seen and experienced and lived through and adapted to for the hundreds of thousands of years of his existence?
.
Implicit in these questions of course is the fact that if you cannot clearly and accurately define in your own words and provide unambiguous examples of your version of your Climate Change that can be shown to be very distinct from “natural climate change” then you really don’t know what you believe in and are posting about and talking about.
Your apparent fervent belief in your Climate Change is then just like those great masses of foam often seen floating on the ocean’s waters.
Those masses of foam look impressive and have a great visual impact but touch that great mass of the ocean foam or your Climate Change belief with just a tiny twig of reality and it, like those masses of ocean foam, just pops into nothingness leaving nothing behind except a thin film of scum upon the deep waters of reality.
And do note that I have called it “your” Climate Change
Its not “our” Climate Change!
We, the skeptics only have “natural climate change”, the same “natural climate change” that has been ongoing on this planet since time began.
242
But ROM,
Those people you refer to, and many like-minded others, believe that humans (alone) can destructively change the planet’s environment.
This is the guilt side of their hubristic beliefs. Mighty man is destroying the planet is their mantra — their dismal, antiscience, illogical, nonsense chant. They do not see any good in the industrial progress we have maintained and how this has improved our world.
Nature does not require humans, without nature, and its numerous strange variabilities, humans are nothing. This they fail to understand, nature can and will survive us; nature marches by the almost regular rhythms of its own drum.
Thus natural climate variability is beyond them, as they have no appreciation of the past, of the real extreme climate changes that have already happened, and, in all probability, will continue to happen.
Meanwhile as our climate naturally changes they will seek over-simplistic human caused effects to try and explain the unexplainable. And it is unexplainable at this time as scientists knows so little about how climate actually works.
82
Still waitin’ fer feedback on feedback.And that doesn’t mean model hindcastin’ or modellin’-
forcastin’ or extrapolat’n or add-justin’.
41
Here you go, Craig.
https://climateaudit.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/figure-1-4-models-vs-observations-annotated.png
Fig 1.4 IPCC 2nd Order Draft showing post AR4 discrepancy btw model projections and observations. Didn’t last long, too damning, replaced by amended spaghetti graph version. Tricky IPCC.
41
All this information has been collated by the IPCC and is readily available.
421
But Craig Thomas as you have this information at your fingertips why don’t you just tell us in your own words just what it is about your Climate Change that you so fervently believe in that is so different to “natural climate change”.
Just saying the IPCC has all this information is really dodging the issue and makes it appear you really are quite ignorant even about the contents of the IPCC’ s reports which you just sort of point to as some sort of back up for your beliefs.
Do you really know anything at all as to what is in the IPCC’s AR5 technical reports ?
Do you know that the Charter of the IPCC says very specifically that the IPCC is to find and research humanity’s effects on the Climate.
Its Charter does not say at any point that the IPCC is to just research the planet’s climate as a whole but quite specifically is to find and examine the human effects on the climate.
So the IPCC researchers and its operatives will find such human induced effects on the climate even if it has to invent them or exaggerate them so as to maintain its funding and its role and the role of its executives as another UN department.
Thats just human nature at work!
Surely anybody who claims as you appear to do, that they believe so fervently in “Climate change” should be able to describe in their own words what exactly it is that is so different in their Climate change” compared to “natural climate change” .
If you want to convince others then you really should have all that information at your finger tips ready to convince the doubters otherwise you merely come across as a cultist level believer who believes because he or she is not mentally perceptive and equipped and motivated enough to seek out and examine the information and data to ascertain for themselves the real truth.
Climate change dogmatism alone which you are preaching without any hard evidence and a thorough knowledge of the subject to back your claims and dogmatism will destroy you as it is now steadily destroying the whole Climate Change belief and ideology as Jo has headlined for this posting.
So Craig Thomas why not answer in your own words my questions to you and other warmist trolls in post #12 ?
202
ROM:
Craig Thomas has been told that the information is in the IPCC reports. What makes you think he has read them? What makes you think he could understand them if he could read them?
He may have read a newspaper or Warmist site summary of the Summary, which is written by AGW believers – some of whom have a little scientific training – but the Scientific parts of the whole report? No way.
92
Graeme is right. Craig Thomas has all the attributes of an eco-grunt foot soldier. As does Silly Filly. Both of them appear to be following orders, and reading off a script.
Frank, I put in a different category – he just seems to be angry that this site exists, and that it is well patronised by people who mostly have respect for our host, and for each other.
40
Also note, that as soon as he is cornered into having to produce something, ANYTHING of his own thinking or understanding …..
…. he disappears.
30
IPCC Official: “Climate Policy Is Redistributing The World’s Wealth”……
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/11/18/ipcc-official-%E2%80%9Cclimate-policy-is-redistributing-the-worlds-wealth%E2%80%9D/
The ipcc admits the real reason behind the global warming SCAM!
72
That’s the problem.
72
How many feet can you fit in your mouth at once, Craig ???
63
The IPCC is a political organization not a science one. It’s in the name. It is run by militant Marxists who admire the Chinese government and want to
rework the world’s economic system and political opportunists from Costa Rica like the Figueres family.
Much of what they publish is rubbish or a potporri of rubbish.
Remember when they announced 400Million Indians were going to die of thirst by 2035. No evidence whatsoever! Not the slightest. Then it was declared a typo?
Then the half life of CO2 in the air, 80 years, even thousands of years. Ignorant opportunists. These are your reference?
Perhaps read “The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Expert”
but I guess you don’t read much.
72
available on Kindle from Amazon
“…shines a hard light on the rotten heart of the IPCC”
Richard Tol, Professor of the Economics of Climate Change and convening lead author of the IPCC
52
TdeF said, re Craig Thomas :
Of course he doesn’t read. I’m beginning to conclude, from his perpetual and continued resistance to reading, that he can’t.
If he could read and had read, then he would have seen just how the IPCC Working Grouo 1 (the science-based) IPCC publications are so roundly and soundly contradicted by the Summary For Policy Makers.
The Summary is to Working Group 1 as Lewis Carroll’s “Through the Looking Glass” is to Einstein’s paper on “The Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies.”* . But then, if he had actually read them, he would have known that.
The same applies to Silly Filly F et al.
Both “The Summary for Policy Makers” and “Through the Looking Glass” are arrant nonsense. “Through the Looking Glass,” though, is delightfully funny.
An obvious conclusion is that these trolls are wilfully uninformed and remain deliberately ignorant. While that remains the case, they deserve to be ignored.
* also known as “The Theory of Special Relativity.”
41
… maybe Craig needs to be introduced to the Red Queen … 🙂
10
Craigthomas,
It seems that you might not have read Donna LaFramboise’s expose of the way that the IPCC works.
https://www.amazon.com.au/Delinquent-Teenager-Mistaken-Worlds-Climate-ebook/dp/B005UEVB8Q
It is available as an eBook for $US8.34
If you do read it you might understand why readers here take you comment with less than the expected reverence.
41
do not exaggerate, it’s only 4.3 billion years!!!!
40
Your adorable. Listen to your fury.
Not long ago at all, all the sceptics told us: ‘Your all wrong. The worlds Climate is not warming!’
Now you seem to have evolved to ” yes it’s warming, but..but..”
Maybe it’s Force X? (Stifles laughter)
I guess the times, like the worlds climate, are a changing.
But relax, We don’t want you skeptiks locked up. Well…Not in a jail, anyway. (Hee hee)
Place Red thumbs here, please.
26
The climate changes – and has done so ever since the first gas molecule started floating above the surface of the planet. It only appears to be semi-literate, anti-scientific slack-jawed drones like you who seem to think that the climate can only be, and has only been changed by humans.
So…what’s your point exactly…? Are you capable of constructing a cogent argument, or do the big words and numbers above 10 just get a little bit too much for you?
40
” yes it’s warming, but..but..””
There was an El Nino spike.
Nearly back to the zero trend in only a few months.
Then a gradual cooling trend, which will leave all you AGW monkeys looking like chumps. 🙂
31
“Place Red thumbs here, please.”
Your post is too much of a baseless child’s rant to be worth a red thumb.
31
Andy
One of the NFID* thumbers out in the open?
“Starts with “no” and ends with “idea”
10
I see that Ross has been assigned to the job of acting as Craig’s minder. This is not the first time that the trolls have worked as a tag team. Which of course implies that somebody somewhere is tactically organising, ‘the engagement’
30
“Craig’s minder”
But which is the child ?????
21
“somebody somewhere is tactically organising,”
And being a far-left drone…
is TOTALLY INEPT !!!
20
*You’re
10
If I consider what Thomas Kuhn had to say about the existence of an AGW consensus, I must concede that among climatologists there exists a consensus in favour of AGW.
But that does not bother me at all. When I did my first master’s (in geography) the head of department downgraded a paper of mine, saying that I was too skeptical about received wisdom. For me that was a high compliment, a bigger reward than getting a B grade instead of an A grade.
I have lived through the tail end of eugenics, the Piltdown Man, fixed continents and the geosyncline theory of mountain-building, the miscounting of 48 chromosomes in man, stress as the cause of duodenal ulcer, culture-induced schizophrenia, and several other science fantasies.
A formal course in the history of science exposed me to an extensive list of other errors, including Kelvin’s estimate of the age of the Earth as 100 million years, later reduced to 20 million years.
Consensus is not worth much. Applied to climate science, one only has to read the IPCC’s Summary for Policymakers and check back through the science volume to see what supports the consensus, a lot of guesswork.
Ultimately, the real world might turn out to fit the theory of AGW. But so far the evidence does not stand up to critical scrutiny.
Moreover, the adverse economic consequences of intervention appear to be greater than the value of losses that can be reasonably expected if the AGW theory turns out to be correct in its dire predictions.
I have even less confidence in economists such as Nicholas Stern than I had in James Hansen and Phil Jones.
By 2050 we will know whether the AGW climatologists are correct or not. But even if they are correct, adaptation would most probably be cheaper than mitigation.
As Hubert Lamb advised, watchful waiting with minimal intervention is the optimal policy.
323
a skeptic is a wise man, only a fool has all the answers
130
And before that there was the Phlogiston theory which required a belief in negative weight until Lavoisier proved that not only was Phlogiston colourless, odourless, but would have to have negative volume and a negative weight the exact opposite of the weight of air consumed in combustion, rusting etc. The whole theory died of ridicule.
Then there was the N-rays case where mysterious rays were ‘refracted’ by an aluminium prism in the reverse direction taken by light rays in glass. That was partially discredited by an American physicist (and amateur magician) secretly removing the prism at times while believers could still observe the effect. Apparently a few continued to believe in those N-rays but kept silence in public. I foresee Craig’s future.
40
Graeme
https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~ken/Langmuir/langmuir.htm
10
Thank you, very interesting.
10
He can continue to keep company with Tim Lambert
10
Hottest Year Evah! UPDATE:
Rain brings farmers relief in northern NSW where recent deluge delivers greenery
“Two years ago, when the The Daily Telegraph visited the property, it was at the epicentre of the state’s devastating drought.
Yesterday, Mr Evans showed us around his farm, revitalised by recent rain that has dumped 177mm since June — equivalent to the entire rainfall for 2014.
Farmer Mark Evans is about to harvest for the first time since 2012.”
~ ~ ~
Australian Pulse Crop Outlook for 2016 Winter Season
“In 2016, the ‘International Year of Pulses’, the Australian pulse crop area could reach record levels.
(BOM) predictions are still for above average autumn rainfall and temperatures, which should encourage a full cropping program for the region.”
101
A year of abundance coupled with good prices and Warwick Hughes thinks we should buy back Port Darwin.
50
Sometimes the mind just wanders along turning over the odd bits of mental bark and even the odd warmist coprolite to see what if anything is hiding underneath.
Quite remarkably in this age of what is supposed to be an age of scientific enlightenment, the great western belief system of the end of the 20th century, the Climate Change/ catastrophic Global Warming ideology is very similar in its claims to the pre Copernian geocentric belief that the earth and most importantly, Mankind, then regarded as god’s greatest creation, was the centre of the Universe around which everything revolved and evolved.
Today the whole of the Climate Change / Global Warming ideology and its belief system revolves completely around the belief in the all powerful Mankind’s supposed ability to drastically change the climate of the entire planet in only a tiny infinitesimal fraction of time and for the worse at that .
What is it about humanity’s mentality today that even after half a thousand years of unparalleled scientific and education advancement from the pre Copernian 15th century to the very late 20th century, we as a race and species cannot let go of the mentality that everything in this Universe revolves solely and completely around our species and race?
123
ROM,
IMO it is a symptom of the religion of Scientism.
Scientism offers the vain (and insane) belief that humans can ultimately understand the totality of nature. Scientism offers a pristine, artificially ordered world. A computerized virtual reality world and everything bad that happens there is somehow linked to a human cause. These true believers fail to notice that humans are part of the natural order, part of this global environment.
That coupled to the explosion in mass communication in the last few years has ensured this nonsense is widely perpetuated.
80
CNN reports that 200 million people died last year in the US from surgery complications — not a good track record!
25
Interesting number may have CNN put out. Or is it just an innumerate twitter scaremonger…
Here’s a different view about the 2014 figures–
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-many-die-from-medical-mistakes-in-us-hospitals/
60
Oops it posted before I wanted it to…
Interesting number that CNN may have put out. Or is it just an innumerate twitter scaremonger…
Here’s a different view about the 2014 figures–
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-many-die-from-medical-mistakes-in-us-hospitals/
40
A lesson in Maths 101 – or its lack of here in comments re this report
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2016/08/your-moral-and-373.html
and comments – like
“65 mn botched operations kill 200 mn people? That’s roughly 3 deaths per surgical procedure. What are they doing? Attempted 3-way head transplants or something? On the other hand, given this idiot’s lack of math skills, maybe he needs a head transplant!”
Mass surgical in action?
90
How does that number expressed as a percentage on a per capita basis compare with other developed nations?
20
“How does that number expressed as a percentage on a per capita basis compare with other developed nations?”
Who cares. CNN (Clinton News Network) not being good at math, seems to think 200M deaths a year is “sustainable”.
40
200M US deaths/year. Think about it
31
The whole population of the country would be dead in a matter of a few years. Nice one CNN.
21
Does wonders for the unemployment rate!
10
But not for long.
10
Population of the USA is around 319 millions.
With 200 million dead last year from surgery complications, there must be a hell of a lot of vacant buildings, hospital beds, job vacancies , empty towns and cities and of course a very severe, critical in fact shortage of coffins, coffin makers, undertakers, morticians, death certificates, grave diggers, hearses and etc.
After you take the numbers of surgeons into account, the nursing staff, the coroners, the legal eagles although a lot of those might have got the surgeons chop to eliminate an further legal troubles, and etc, I doubt you could find enough ordinary Americans left to even have enough for decent Presidential election.
So where the hell did the Twitterati ever learn their counting abilities?
It certainly wasn’t enough to even educate their thumbs!
Their thumbs must be the only reservoir of their education as there ain’t nothing of substance between the ears if they Twitter this sort of stuff.
But I guess that fact is well known to the non Twitterati which is why they are still non Twitterati.
70
Current US Population is “324,379,183” acording to
http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/us-population/
Therefore “clipe” what you are trying to tell us all is that OVER 61% of the entire US population died last year.
I DON’T THINK SO!@
40
Iatrogenic harm is the third most prevalent cause of fatal disease in the US.
http://www.yourmedicaldetective.com/public/335.cfm
It has always been a major problem throughout the history of medicine. And the major root causes now are the same now as they always have been. Greed and ignorance.
Primum non nocere
That ancient concept should be the guidance for all care givers and it were and applied to other fields such as government and science we would all be a whole lot better off.
10
There is nothing to argue and there never was…..CAGW = BS…. case closed…give back our trillions and prosecute the Climate Marxists and ‘Renewable’ Racketeers!
Now that would be justice.
72
Never in the history of mankind how so much wealth been stolen from citizens by international politicians and their fellow travellers.
91
Beware official statistics
”
Speaking in Sudbury, Ont., Bill Morneau made his first public comments since Statistics Canada released grim numbers last Friday about the country’s labour force and its international trade performance.
The federal agency said Canada lost 31,200 jobs in July, while its trade deficit with the world swelled to a record level of $3.6 billion in June.
The Canadian economy also contracted 0.6 per cent in May — the country’s worst one-month performance since the darkest days of the Great Recession seven years ago.
Morneau did not mention any of these figures to his small audience of business people in Sudbury…”
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2016/08/sunny-days-my-f.html#comments
60
Honest Poll
Do you believe humans have caused global warming?
Should government prosecute those who have alarmed the electorate on the issue of global warming?
40
Poll: “Should government prosecute those who have alarmed the electorate on the issue of global warming?”
YES!!!
20
The Nuremberg Defence front and centre for all those useless desalination plants, ultimately only ridicule will be heaped on the high flyers like Flannery.
40
THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED, ONLY THE DATA IS UNCERTAIN.
EUGENE WR GALLUN
121
Clexit in DC!
11 Aug: Washington Times: Moving closer to ‘Clexit’
Climate change is seen by growing numbers as a magnificent hoax
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
First there was Brexit, when Great Britain shook up the global establishment by following through on a dare to exit the European Union. Now a movement is building that would further stun the supranationalists: an exit from the United Nations climate change protocol, dubbed “Clexit.” (Not very imaginative, but sloganeers are rarely original.) Men of good will don’t tear up agreements unless there’s ample reason, but international pacts with intangible benefits are never worth the paper they’re printed on. Brexit happened, and Clexit could be next.
Donald Trump, whose name strikes fear in the hearts of establishmentarians of both parties, has said if elected he would renegotiate or cancel U.S. participation in the accord signed by nearly 200 nations in Paris last December. He says the pact, meant to reduce greenhouse gases that the greenies say cause global warming, is particularly harsh toward U.S. industry, and his rallying cry is “America first.”
Clexit-like language has prompted squeaks of dismay from adherents of green orthodoxy in Washington. Two former directors of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, William Ruckelshaus and William Reilly, issued a statement this week claiming the Donald would undermine the environmental legacy of Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon and George H.W. Bush. “Donald Trump has shown a profound ignorance of science and of the public health issues embodied in our environmental laws,” they say. “To back away now, as Trump wants to do, would set the world back decades — years we could never recover.” Lest they lose their place in the capital establishment, both endorsed Hillary Clinton. Once a bureaucrat, always a bureaucrat…READ ON
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/11/climate-change-seen-as-hoax-by-growing-numbers/
50
Pat
I find it interesting that Climate Change is not mentioned much in the POTUS campaign. Except for Trump clearly stating his position ( including putting as a major part of his economic statement) and Clinton saying she will close down the coal industry it hasn’t really been in the headlines.
51
Its the elephant in the room, same as in the Australian election. There is nothing we can do to encourage politicians to talk about the most important issue of our time.
20
12 Aug: Bloomberg: Eric Roston: Climate Change May Be Doubted by Some, But Now It’s the Law
A federal court allows the Obama administration to incorporate the price of global destruction.
A federal appeals court in Chicago gave a thumbs-up this week to an obscure regulatory practice that helps the U.S. government account for projected costs of climate change. The decision comes less than a week after the White House issued guidance to all federal agencies about how they can build carbon accounting into their decision-making.
Although not as splashy as the economywide “cap” on climate pollution President Obama proposed in his first term, the intensely wonky “social cost of carbon” is gradually making its mark.
***The seismic effect of bureaucrats at every level of government adding a new line to their balance sheets cannot be overstated…READ FOR DETAILS
VIDEO: Watch Next: Blocking Out the Sun to Fight Climate Change
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-11/climate-change-may-be-doubted-by-some-but-now-it-s-the-law
30
name-changing:
12 Aug: Eos (American Geophysical Union): Climate Scientists’ New Hurdle: Overcoming Climate Change Apathy
by JoAnna Wendel
It’s not just about deniers anymore. Scientists now have to convince a new group: those who believe humans have altered the climate but don’t think anything can or should change
In a new policy forum paper (LINK) published today in Science, Paul Stern of the National Research Council and colleagues call this “neoskepticism.”
Neoskeptics aren’t just random venting bloggers; policy makers and even respected scientists are joining in. They may argue that climate scientists “overblow” the risks or insist that because scientists are still hammering out the details on climate change’s effects on the globe, immediate mitigation is too costly…
Unfortunately, in climate science, “there’s been a long history that says that scientific uncertainty is a reason for not taking action,” Stern said. Such delay of action feeds back to fuel neoskepticism…
“The basic error these ‘lukewarmers’ make is in always taking as gospel the lowest estimate of a plausible range. They are simply allowing their biases to eliminate real uncertainty—and this is merely confirmation bias, not ‘rational optimism,’” said Gavin Schmidt, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies…ETC
https://eos.org/articles/climate-scientists-new-hurdle-overcoming-climate-change-apathy
12 Aug: Science Mag: The challenge of climate-change neoskepticism
Paul C. Stern, John H. Perkins, Richard E. Sparks, Robert A. Knox
Summary.
Typically, defenders of business as usual first question the scientific evidence that risks exist; then, they question the magnitude of the risks and assert that reducing them has more costs than benefits. A parallel rhetorical shift away from outright skepticism led us to identify “neoskepticism” as a new incarnation of opposition to major efforts to limit ACC. This shift heightens the need for science to inform decision making under uncertainty and to improve communication and education…
View Full Text: This article is available to AAAS members…
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6300/653
30
10 Aug: Nature: Biodiversity: The ravages of guns, nets and bulldozers
Authors: Sean L. Maxwell, Richard A. Fuller, Thomas M. Brooks & James E. M. Watson
There is a growing tendency for media reports about threats to biodiversity to focus on climate change.
Here we report an analysis of threat information gathered for more than 8,000 species. These data revealed a contrasting picture. We found that by far the biggest drivers of biodiversity decline are overexploitation (the harvesting of species from the wild at rates that cannot be compensated for by reproduction or regrowth) and agriculture (the production of food, fodder, fibre and fuel crops; livestock farming; aquaculture; and the cultivation of trees)…
Early next month, representatives from government, industry and non-governmental organizations will define future directions for conservation at the World Conservation Congress of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)…It is also crucial that the World Conservation Congress delegates — and society in general — ensure that efforts to address climate change do not overshadow more immediate priorities for the survival of the world’s flora and fauna…
Of the species listed as threatened or near-threatened, 72% (6,241) are being overexploited for commerce, recreation or subsistence…
The expansion and intensification of agricultural activity is imperilling 5,407 species — 62% of those listed as threatened or near-threatened…
Meanwhile, anthropogenic climate change — including increases in storms, flooding, extreme temperatures or drought that exceed background variability, as well as sea-level rise — is currently affecting 19% of species listed as threatened or near-threatened…
http://www.nature.com/news/biodiversity-the-ravages-of-guns-nets-and-bulldozers-1.20381
10 Aug: New Yorker: Are Conservationists Worrying Too Much About Climate Change?
By Michelle Nijhuis
http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/are-conservationists-worrying-too-much-about-climate-change
20
The Poll that really matters in the US of A is the one that is coming up in November. The Presidential election. Then we will find out what the majority of US citizens really think. And they have a clear choice of opposites on important issues, especially what should be done about Climate Change. Trump says he will tear up the Paris agreement and Clinton says she will increase the measures reduce CO2 emmissions.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/10/a-new-great-silent-majority-may-yield-election-day/
50
Go Trump!!!!
50
Angry: where?
10
TRUMP FOR POTUS!!!!
HILLARY TO JAIL!
00
Trump is surrounded by people who have worked/are working for the Russians.
As bad as Hilary is, on the national security front, Trump is infinitely worse.
http://observer.com/2016/08/yes-american-spies-really-think-trump-is-putins-guy/
11
And, Mister Craig, some think he’s trying to save the USofA from another cold war
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/07/30/russia_expert_stephen_cohen_trump_wants_to_stop_the_new_cold_war_but_the_america_media_just_doesnt_understand.html
10
“Trump is surrounded by people who have worked”
Yes.. Hillary should try something similar.
10
Hinkley Point meltdown, French Socialists want to pull the plug and …
‘The Chinese ambassador in London wrote this week that “China-UK relations are at critical historical juncture” and that Downing Street should clear the project “as soon as possible”.
‘In a thinly-veiled warning, he wrote that China has invested more money in Britain than in Germany, France, and Italy combined over the last five years precisely because the UK was deemed a trustworthy country and was open for business. “It has not been easy for China and the UK to have come this far,” he said. Up to £100bn of future investments could be affected.’
Ambrose Evans-Protchard
40
The heaviest snow in two decades blanketed Lesotho in late July 2016. The storm prompted the airlifts of at least eight tourists, and caused the deaths of several shepherds in the Joe Gqabi District Municipality, according to news reports.
It was the heaviest snow since 1996, said Stefan Grab, a professor at the University of the Witwatersrand (South Africa). Twenty years ago, the snow would have lasted as long as a week in places. This year, he said, snow at altitudes at or below 1800 meters (roughly 5,900 feet) melted within a day or two.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=88509
20
It was just a cold air outbreak.
40
11 Aug: Breitbart: Nanny McBollocks: Emma Thompson Caught Spouting Climate Tosh on The BBC
by James Delingpole
But the idea – which the report entertains – that this can simply be solved by the BBC’s staffers being more mindful of statistical accuracy in the future is clearly a nonsense.
The rot is much deeper than that. As I’ve reported before here the ***BBC’s bias on environmental issues is entrenched, institutional and undoubtedly in breach of its charter…
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/08/11/nanny-mcbollocks-emma-thompson-caught-spouting-climate-tosh-on-the-bbc/
***ABC’s bias, ditto.
50
read for more of the names:
11 Aug: Politico: Andrew Restuccia: Hillary Clinton’s climate army
Her swarm of formal and informal energy and environmental advisers dwarfs Donald Trump’s handful of outside experts
(Darius Dixon and Elana Schor contributed to this story, which originally appeared on POLITICO Pro on July 28)
The team of nearly 100 informal advisers, who have spent the past year compiling recommendations on everything from chemical safety and Everglades restoration to nuclear power and climate finance, includes holdovers from the Obama administration such as former White House advisers Carol Browner and Heather Zichal..
Like Obama, Clinton is prepared to rely on her executive powers to make progress on climate change, rather than waiting on Congress to send her legislation. She also intends to make climate change a bigger focus in the general election…to draw a contrast with Trump, who has scoffed that climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese…
“I think the choice is pretty clear this year for voters on this issue more than on any other issue,” Clinton energy adviser Trevor Houser said during a POLITICO policy discussion in Philadelphia last month…
Their goal is to counter Trump’s bombastic rhetoric with detailed policy proposals that build on Obama’s record of using the executive branch’s authority to slash pollution and encourage a shift to renewable energy sources…
Along with climate change, the campaign is also expected to make a major general election theme out of environmental justice…
The Clinton campaign’s policy bench starts at the very top with Chairman John Podesta, who was a leading architect of Obama’s second-term climate strategy and remains involved in developing the campaign’s climate and energy agenda…
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/hillary-clinton-climate-team-226930
Oct 2015: Yahoo: Michael Isikoff: Hillary moneyman highlights new Saudi connection
The Saudi contract with the Podesta Group, owned by veteran Washington lobbyist and Clinton campaign bundler Tony Podesta, calls for the firm to provide “public relations” and other services on behalf of the royal court of King Salman…
“They are very nervous about an American policy change, and so they are betting on the horse they think will win — Hillary Clinton,” said Ali Al-Ahmad, a Saudi analyst with the Institute for Gulf Affairs, and a frequent critic of the regime, about the hiring of the Podesta Group…
Tony Podesta is the brother and former business partner of Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta. He is also a prolific Democratic Party fundraiser who is among 43 Washington lobbyists (many of whom also represent foreign governments) listed as Clinton campaign bundlers in reports filed by the campaign with the Federal Election Commission…
The Saudis have longstanding ties to the Clintons: The kingdom of Saudi Arabia is among the largest donors to the Clinton Foundation, contributing between $10 million and $25 million, according to the foundation’s website (which discloses figures only in broad categories, not precise sums). Bill Clinton has also received hefty fees for speeches in Saudi Arabia, including $600,000 for two talks while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. Last Sept. 4, Bill Clinton met with King Salman for what was described by one source as a “brief courtesy visit” at the Four Seasons Hotel. Two weeks later, on Sept. 18, the Podesta Group filed papers with the Justice Department reporting that it had been retained by an entity called “the Center for Studies and Media Affairs at the Saudi Royal Court.”…
A review of the Clinton campaign’s bundler list by Yahoo News found lobbyists representing the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, South Korea, Morocco, Japan and Hong Kong…
In her campaign, Hillary Clinton has pledged to push for sweeping campaign-finance reform that will “end the stranglehold that wealthy interests have over our political system” and “curb the outsized influence of big money in American politics.”…
https://www.yahoo.com/news/hillary-moneyman-highlights-new-saudi-connection-194828485.html
20
Pat
Try
“Chris c | August 12, 2016 12:24 AM | Reply
Hillary’s medical records leaked. From Zero Hedge poster: postafoa02 Aug 11, 2016 5:47 PM
http://halturnershow.com/index.php/news/world-news/198-hillary-clinton-medical-records-leaked-dementia-seizures-black-outs”
Comment at
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2016/08/reader-tips-3574.html#comments
20
O/T for Tony Oz
Fiddling with power in Alberta
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2016/08/the-brains-behi.html
and link
20
Never fear..a vaccine is here to save us (our cows) from too making much methane..the comedy continues…
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-10/mitigating-methane-emissions-from-cattle-via-vaccine/6925676
20
Looking back …
Looking back at an article written in the Guardian about how concerned the CAGWers were about us skeptics.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/cif-green/2010/feb/15/climate-science-ipcc-sceptics
I was not surprised by how much the author had misunderstood the reasons for the success of the skeptics movement.
It all boils down to trust, and the hard work of Blogs like this one in highlighting just how wrong the climate Scientists have proven to be.
The level of dellusion of those promoting the CAGW case, is and remains astonishing.
The result of the American elections may undo much of this hard work, and with Clinton winning ( nothing seems to stick to that opportunist ) in November we may see the EPA reach new hights of absurdity.
luckily in the U.S. the goverment has checks and balances, but the country will need them. 😮
40
Were that it were true.
Certainly, on paper, there are checks and balances.
But when the entire system is totally corrupt, then those checks and balances are not enacted.
Recall the recent debacle in which the FBI chose not to recommend charges against the nototiously corrupt Hillary.
We can all remember recent similar instances of institutional corruption.
In other words we, as a society of law and ethics,are already well down the flusher.
50
This is the bit that they do not understand:
The IPCC has not done GOLD STANDARD scientific reporting and the value of scientific enquiry has been undermined be these very same supporters. The motely assortment of cranks and ideologues are not a disciplined and well funded organisation. The motley assortment is driven by one thing only. A search for the truth and wanting to see it brought to the public attention.
30
That was reassuring to read, but then I remembered: 70% of the country was opposed to ObamaCare, too.
We are no longer a self-governing nation. Today we have a Ruling Class that 1) holds itself above all laws, and 2) does whatever it pleases. Frankly, it’s got me thinking about immigrating to Australia.
60
Don’t go to that bother … not different.
50
Drapetomania @ #31
Are you implying that all of us Old Farts are going to have to line up with the cows for feed instead of getting a decent feed of home cooked beans and pulses ?
The Kiwis are a long way behind the Aussies as they were doing a whole lot of research a decade or more ago to try and stop sheep and cattle and kangaroos from farting so as to reduce methane excursions and therefore to reduce Global Warming ;
.
[ Holds head in hands and shakes in terror, sweats profusely in fear at the very idea of the catastrophe of “Global Warming”
Then gets angry at the sheer utterly blatant arrogant, ignorant, condescending stupidity of it all.]
So whats news! Animals and creatures of every conceivable type and some not conceivable at all to the human intellect have farted and methaned their way around the planet since the first multicelled creatures began to populate the Earth some 850 million years ago.]
One day perhaps in not so many years to come as the whole Climate Change catastrophe meme begins to collapse in its totality, somebody somewhere will spend a good part of their lifetime drawing together the estimated costs, the economic, financial, developmental and most importantly of all the immense and so unnecessary and completely avoidable human costs and the incalculable destruction of hundreds of thousands or millions of lives and hopes and dreams destroyed by the green leftard fanatics and running dog scientists of the global warming /climate change global society destroying debacle.
And some like the ninety plus year old guards of the concentration camps of WW2 will still be around to be held fully accountable for the immense social, personal and economic cost they inflicted on a trusting populace and a trusting nation without ever even attempting to leaven their claims with any attempts at honesty and truth and ultimately all for no visible, viable or scientifically proven and valid reason of any sort at any level.
50
Indeed ROM,
Apparently the atmosphere as we know it today is the result of respiration by photosynthetic marine and land plants before and during the carboniferous period. 20% O2 from nothing but CO2 and probably a lot more CO2 which became limestone.
30
It would be interesting to find a paper that shows how the total atmospheric chemistry has changed over the last 1,000 years, or even 10,000 years (or more).
I suspect it may indicate how some effects of natural climate change has progressed, and could gives us an insight to real climate trends.
20
Not to worry about stupid polls , the new LIA is returning as we expect, which will freeze their asses off.
https://iceagenow.info/scientist-predicts-little-ice-age-icy-reception-colleagues/
“Whatever we do to the planet, if everything is done only by the sun, then the temperature should drop similar like it was in the Maunder Minimum,” she said.
Although Landscheidt has already shown the model earlier but in a different way.
30
Hey Jo
How is your hero Trump traveling?
Oh hell! THAT bad??
And against Clinton, no less. Hell, I don’t even like her that much!
I see the Trumpets have started blaming the media for the seriously bad polling.
In politics, this means your preparing the ground for a bad loss.
Oh well. I’ll miss the laughter.
12
I do like ‘Trump Pence’ as a bumper sticker.
Sounds a bit like ‘Tuppence’. As in: ‘Not worth a…’
Oh, come on! (Snicker)
12
Read #29.1?
40
That link is really interesting Ian.
PS. Looks like I’ll have to get another “site, sign on name” with this interloper moving in.( is it school holidays over there ?)
11
This is an appeal to Troll Central
When you draw up the roster from your Troll panel for Jo’s site could you please ensure you roster Trolls of some quality for duty here.
We hand out thumbs here, both red and green, for the quality of the contributing comment.
The current one you have sent over here is of such poor Troll quality that “its” not worth and barely rates even a red thumb or two from practically all of Jo’s denizens.
In fact this one is of even worse quality than Sillyfilly and that is really saying something about the quality of the Trolls you are currently sending our way.
51
Visible waves in the stratosphere in the south.
http://exp-studies.tor.ec.gc.ca/ozone/images/graphs/gl_dev/current.gif
30
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/hgt.aao.cdas.gif
20
Unfortunately the small percentage who do think it’s over have all the clout when it comes to policy. Hence we have California thinking it can singlehandedly save the world from the horrible excesses of using energy from any source but what they approve of in Sacramento.
The bull lives in the capitol building in Sacramento and is still raging like the Statehouse was a china shop. There’s no end in sight.
It’s entirely possible that a large number of the others, (100 – 61)% have moved to California because they feel much more welcome here than anywhere else except DC. 😉 Or is it :-(?
It’s an interesting problem because since I moved here in 1969 I have watched the incoming power lines, which are largely overhead, have their conductor size increased to about double what they were and new power lines constructed as the area that was once all chaparal around me has been built up. We are an energy hungry nation and more and more appliances are now important to daily life, appliances that almost all now need standby power as well as what they use when actually turned on. If we fail to keep up with the demand the house of cards will blow away so quickly they won’t know what happened to it until it’s too late.
If only those responsible for the bad policy making would suffer I wouldn’t care. But we all suffer equally when the lights will not turn on, the phones won’t work and, god forbid, the Internet goes down.
20
Unfortunately a very agressive militant 25%. If the other 75% were as half as agressive and militant the world would be a much more lovely planet
00