Top scientist resigns from post - admits Global Warming is a scam

a reply to: BlackboxInquiry

Well ya when you make a joke and from the point of ignorance it is funny, but not true.

Plenty of people have said why it is happening and published it for anyone to see.
So not really "Just trust us".

Was funny though, will give him that.

originally posted by: berheal
I got tired of reading beyond page four, so I'm going to jump in here and then move on. It seems to me that most people are missing the point entirely, one scientist says manmade gw, another says gw is not manmade and the whole world argues.

how about: virtually all scientists who work on the problem professionally and almost all others say that there is significant manmade global warming, and a tiny number say no.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: flice
I still don't understand why there is still debate wether its warming or not........

Part of my issue with deniers is that they started by denying that any change was happening..

They screamed, lied and argued with science until it was too obvious to deny and the melting glaciers were just too real and visual to continue to lie about.

THEN and only THEN did they change to...Ummm..OK...Climate change IS happening BUT it's not manmade!

And if it's not manmade, then what is the specific physical mechanism, and how does the man-made change in greenhouse parameters not have an effect?

There is no consistent scientific answer there either. Generally no answer other than 'I dunno' or then starting to insult humans for being 'arrogant' for trying to find out.

Denialists BS about 'cycles' and 'the Sun' without any serious experimental evidence and theory.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Dr X
OK, Lets see what some real scientists have to say on this, Not some conservative funded (read bought out by the oil industry) rag like the Daily Telegraph:

NASA:
Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities.

climate.nasa.gov..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> climate.nasa.gov...

Let me know when their predictions are accurate.

A climatologist is like a weatherman on a different time scale. A weatherman might not be spot on as far as rain or if it is going to be 77 degrees or 79 degrees...but they are right about trends and statistical certainties in their predictions.

You guys take issue when they don't make precise predictions...and then claim that winter or summer is not going to happen because that weatherman was off on yesterdays forecast.

That analogy is not so far from the actual scientific reality.

Why is summer warmer than winter?

Because in summer, on average, more electromagnetic radiation reaches the surface in summer than in winter.

Why is global warming from increased greenhouse emissions happening?

Because the upper atmosphere is shining more in infrared, and on average more electromagnetic radiation reaches the surface now than before.

That is not a hypothesis, it is an experimentally confirmed fact.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: BlackboxInquiry

Well ya when you make a joke and from the point of ignorance it is funny, but not true.

Plenty of people have said why it is happening and published it for anyone to see.
So not really "Just trust us".

Was funny though, will give him that.

True or not true...the fact remains that people still refuse to call it what it is. Simply: pollution.

We do need to fix it, and it'll clear up a lot of things...but I'm *not* falling for the carbon credits bullcrap...those who brought up the scare tagline for pollution, are the very same people who are in, or will be directly *selling* carbon credits.

Carbon credits won't make the pollution any cleaner, and no Gov't agency has ever been proven to make things more efficient, streamlined, well-functioning, or even able stay in a budget.

The costs of this program done out of pure greed and accepted under pure ignorance, only make those peddling the scare tagline rich and pass the costs of it directly onto the consumer.

Incentives should be given, not punishments...incentives would fix the problem many times faster, for less expense and would create jobs at the same time, not costing people them.

Personally, I think people need to step back, and really listen, look and think about what's presented and follow the money. It's sad to watch so many blindly trust those who have time and time again, proven themselves to be *anything* but trustworthy.....

The number 1 polluter is China, and the United States doesn't control them (look at the currency manipulation for a small example)...so if that's the case, why would the United States be footing the majority of the bill?

originally posted by: BlackboxInquiry.

Carbon credits won't make the pollution any cleaner, and no Gov't agency has ever been proven to make things more efficient, streamlined, well-functioning, or even able stay in a budget.

Carbon Credits are a compromise and thus faulted...Just like Obamacare..better than the nothing that the Right Wing wants, but faulted all the same.

When Company A produces a product they have expenses x,y and z...(Labor, Materials, Energy etc.)

What polluters do is take one of those expenses and not pay it so that they can benefit from the extra-profit.

Who pays that expense? Citizens...through increased medical bills, asthma meds, cancer treatments et al. Plus via taxes that pay for environmental clean-up. Now that expense has accrued interest and snowballed to the general living environment.

I am a free-market capitalist...and the fact that polluters are cheating to make money and off-setting the production costs to all of us is pure corruption of the capitalistic equation.

Return the cost of the polluting to those responsible...assign an accurate cost...and then let the free market sort it out. The companies will have to invest in research into cleaner tech or adapt or charge people the accurate cost (environmental impact included) and see if their product still sells.

But right now...the oil refinery or the car manufacturer doesn't have to pay the cost of little Joe citizens asthma treatments etc. Nor are they chipping in when some small island gets swamped out of existence. etc.

Assign accurate expenses to those reaping the profits.

Right now it is cheaper for them to finance denial campaigns and buy politicians than it is to pay the actual expenses associated with their product.

Anybody see the news about Volkswagen? Gotta love it...they rigged the CPU's in their cars to show emissions tests that their cars were not polluting...cuz it was cheaper than actually making a car that met emission's tests.

a reply to: BlackboxInquiry

We do need to fix it, and it'll clear up a lot of things...but I'm *not* falling for the carbon credits bullcrap...those who brought up the scare tagline for pollution, are the very same people who are in, or will be directly *selling* carbon credits.

Cool, so since some one came up with a bad idea we should just ignore it all together?
Makes sense.

The number 1 polluter is China, and the United States doesn't control them (look at the currency manipulation for a small example)...so if that's the case, why would the United States be footing the majority of the bill?

You are right we can't do anything about China but we are trying .
In the mean time we should set the example.

Proves all the more the world is in a total failure and mess after 9/11 and the 2008 stock market crash and lie about everything.

They have to have their money and power is all it is about.It also has become far more divisive since Obama has taken office with any subject.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: BlackboxInquiry

We do need to fix it, and it'll clear up a lot of things...but I'm *not* falling for the carbon credits bullcrap...those who brought up the scare tagline for pollution, are the very same people who are in, or will be directly *selling* carbon credits.

Cool, so since some one came up with a bad idea we should just ignore it all together?
Makes sense.

The number 1 polluter is China, and the United States doesn't control them (look at the currency manipulation for a small example)...so if that's the case, why would the United States be footing the majority of the bill?

You are right we can't do anything about China but we are trying .
In the mean time we should set the example.

Pollution? Of course not, I"m saying we need to find solutions and offer *incentives* not punishments as I was saying...carbon credits, and the term global warming - all scaremongering and scare tag-lining a simple term: pollution.

I have never said ignore the pollution or to not clean it up - I am however, advocating a return to sanity...clean up the pollution and whatever the term the political idiots want to be used, would be solved, better, more quickly and for cheaper..adding jobs and reducing costs..not vice versa.

I agree with the clean up, the terms and the scare mongering and those trying to profit off people emotions and scaring them - that's the bull!@# part I wholeheartedly disagree with....

Setting an example, would also have some sort of willingness for others to follow, otherwise, just like the currency manipulation by China...they've got us all over a barrel.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: BlackboxInquiry.

Carbon credits won't make the pollution any cleaner, and no Gov't agency has ever been proven to make things more efficient, streamlined, well-functioning, or even able stay in a budget.

Carbon Credits are a compromise and thus faulted...Just like Obamacare..better than the nothing that the Right Wing wants, but faulted all the same.

When Company A produces a product they have expenses x,y and z...(Labor, Materials, Energy etc.)

What polluters do is take one of those expenses and not pay it so that they can benefit from the extra-profit.

Who pays that expense? Citizens...through increased medical bills, asthma meds, cancer treatments et al. Plus via taxes that pay for environmental clean-up. Now that expense has accrued interest and snowballed to the general living environment.

I am a free-market capitalist...and the fact that polluters are cheating to make money and off-setting the production costs to all of us is pure corruption of the capitalistic equation.

Return the cost of the polluting to those responsible...assign an accurate cost...and then let the free market sort it out. The companies will have to invest in research into cleaner tech or adapt or charge people the accurate cost (environmental impact included) and see if their product still sells.

But right now...the oil refinery or the car manufacturer doesn't have to pay the cost of little Joe citizens asthma treatments etc. Nor are they chipping in when some small island gets swamped out of existence. etc.

Assign accurate expenses to those reaping the profits.

Right now it is cheaper for them to finance denial campaigns and buy politicians than it is to pay the actual expenses associated with their product.

Anybody see the news about Volkswagen? Gotta love it...they rigged the CPU's in their cars to show emissions tests that their cars were not polluting...cuz it was cheaper than actually making a car that met emission's tests.

I still stand by using incentives, not punishments...let them chase the carrot, not run from the broom.

Why should we have to pay for it either way? I'd rather give tax incentives, or the like to companies who *meet or exceed* guidelines...catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

This way it would get the same goal done, less expensively, more quickly and would add jobs...not push costs onto the consumer and cause more job loss than what is currently being experienced. Real jobs, full time jobs...not some burger flipper that sticks the person who has a degree on a treadmill for mediocrity and Gov't reliance just to live....

Can you find a post I've ever made where I said man doesn't contribute to warming? It sounds like your usual dense self.

You've never done well in this debate and now is no exception. I've posted dozens of peer reviewed papers, you have posted ZERO. You admitted in another thread you get your info from the tv show cosmos...

a reply to: jrod

Some scientists are driven by egotistical fervor for their ideas. Mann is one of them. He recently had to retract papers for using data that contradicted actual measurements. He used proxy data that disagreed with actual measurements to come to the conclusion the Gulf Stream was slowing. It was discussed here.

a reply to: Indigo5

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

With anything you have to understand the "why?" The why is simple if you look into Technocracy. It's going to boil down to another arm of the Corporate Socialist agenda where the government and their team of "experts" get to tell the peons - "we know better than you."

a reply to: raymundoko

But you are aware that the Gulf Stream has in fact dramatically slowed??

Gulf Stream is slowing down faster than ever, scientists say
www.independent.co.uk...

originally posted by: Titen-Sxull
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I always love the hair-brained accusation that scientists are raking in big bucks "supporting" climate change when they could all quit their jobs and retire on the money a company like Exxon could pay for them to cover-up climate change. Every time some scientist comes out claiming its a hoax I have to wonder what kind of money the energy companies shelled out to them, I guarantee its way higher than what a scientist actually makes.

It's like someone saying, "all those scientists who say smoking is bad for you are just working together with doctors to diagnose you with problems you don't have to make MONEY!" when the real money for scientists with no ethics was to work for the tobacco industry creating propaganda disguised as science.

It really baffles me the opposition to the obvious, that seven billion humans creating mass pollution on a grand scale is bad for the planet and we should find a way to pollute less. Oh the conspiracy! How dare we want to treat the Earth with more respect! What a total scam Climate Science is, with their constant profit from grant money that gets spent on new research.

It baffles you that a system can be corrupt from a dedicated core on how to conduct studies and how to find and use evidence ???

And find amazement that SCIENCE can be a cog in a wheel of deception that is as strong as all the religions that preceded it ??

Because WHY ?? Your computer works ???

My DISMAY, is that things are so dam easy to cover up, and likely NEITHER SIDE, as USUAL, has much truth in it.

Keep telling us of our Lords and Saviors if we would JUST BUY INTO THE SYSTEM THEY HAVE, indoctrinated scientists!!

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Gothmog

Who are they then? No one denies it is a natural thing to warm up, just not at the rate we are.

The rate we are warming is faster than ever before ??

What in the world leads you to this conclusion, and why believe all the hype and just solidly trust that most of these conclusions are correct.

I sense incredible coverups in all of this, and of course since you or I do not see it then the scientists would right ???

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: darkbake
No doubt. The anti intellectual movement in the US is concerning.
It really makes me wonder if there truly an agenda to keep the general public ignorant and in the dark about vital issues.

For the first time on ATS , I would have spit my coffee all over the screen, had I been drinking any.

The war on intellectuals has been WON, long ago, your concensus is proof of it, the schooling destroys your critical thinking, and replaces it with chants that someone is on your side.

Take a look around, and wake up from the dream state, painful I guess, but very nice.

WOW, I bet you even think that this that you support is mostly untouched by this Anti-Intellectual movement.

That's the paper that was retracted :-) Mann co authored it with Rahmstorf.

Sorry you didn't get the memo.

Source

Several recent studies have generated a great deal of publicity for their claims that the warming climate is slowing the pace of the Gulf Stream. They say that the Gulf Stream is decreasing in strength as a result of rising sea levels along the East Coast. However, none of the studies includes any direct measurements of the current over an extended period to prove their point.

The ADCP measures currents at very high accuracy, and so through the repeat measurements we take year after year, we have a very powerful tool by which to monitor the strength of the current,” said Rossby. “There are variations of the current over time that are natural — and yes, we need to understand these better — but we find absolutely no evidence that the Gulf Stream is slowing down.”.

They used proxy data and intentionally left off data with actual measurements. Some uneducated chumps fell for it...Mann is a fraud.

a reply to: Indigo5

originally posted by: Indigo5


There is not doubt that climate change is happening now...Anything that denies that requires heavy amounts of flat earth logic.

Sure, it's always happening.

a reply to: raymundoko
Yes, you have been critical of AGW over and over again on these threads. I am replying via cell so providing links is tough.

Way to resort to ridicule and write me off as too dense to figure this stuff out instead of actually addressing the issue.

Since I am bored and apparently not as dense as you would want the readers of this board to believe, here is an old thread where you were trying to suggest AGW is not significant:
www.abovetopsecret.com...