Trump Picks Climate Change Dissenter to Lead EPA

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: JinMI

Ha, I don't think its that complicated. Either you want people to be tortured and murdered, deported and the earth to be raped--- or none of that.

They say the devil is the father of lies-- and the right wing so love their fake news and the lies they try to use to drown out the truth.

Others have empathy, compassion, and are ready to take responsibility for the environment and the damage we cause. People who are ready to pursue green sustainable energy.

I think we're in a kind of biblical-style spiritual battle. A battle between love, compassion, responsibility, and togetherness.... vs hate, agression, denial, and division.

Good vs evil. And I think the good may need to accept that no amount of reason or truth can pursuade evil.

Your black and white view of the world is dangerous.

a reply to: BubbaJoe

You may have to elaborate. I'm a little thick skulled and didn't catch the meaning of your post.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: BubbaJoe

You may have to elaborate. I'm a little thick skulled and didn't catch the meaning of your post.

You really should quote my posts, as of this time at night can not keep them all straight. I think that Donald Trump is an ass, many of his supporters are alt-right, I understand why he was elected by a bunch of pissed off people, I understand all of that. His cabinet picks are fortifying the swamp, may the orange messiah be impeached because of conflict of interest, which he claims cannot be, since he is POTUS, dictator much there Donald.

I am serious, this guy and his transition team is a joke. There was not this much BS in 2008 with Obama transitioning into office, and I know a lot of you were not happy about that.

originally posted by: Tempter

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: JinMI

Ha, I don't think its that complicated. Either you want people to be tortured and murdered, deported and the earth to be raped--- or none of that.

They say the devil is the father of lies-- and the right wing so love their fake news and the lies they try to use to drown out the truth.

Others have empathy, compassion, and are ready to take responsibility for the environment and the damage we cause. People who are ready to pursue green sustainable energy.

I think we're in a kind of biblical-style spiritual battle. A battle between love, compassion, responsibility, and togetherness.... vs hate, agression, denial, and division.

Good vs evil. And I think the good may need to accept that no amount of reason or truth can pursuade evil.

Your black and white view of the world is dangerous.

One might say the devil was not evil, he just had a difference of opinion. All stories of good and evil can be given the political theater treatment. So of course this one can too. I don't necessarily even believe in good and evil... but having said that...

We are living the political theater version of good and evil.

Mankind's unwillingness to accept responsibility... the importance of money over people and even over the earth itself. The darkness in hearts that cheer for torture, deportation, cheering for the suffering of people. Mocking those who would show compassion for people and the earth.

You could call it ignorance, but the cheering for torture, murder, deportation, the callousness toward all of it, the coldness and anger, the racism, the xenophobia, the flippant attitude toward the environment, and the president-elect being a known Fraud, and white supremacists celebrating his win... gives it that evil edge.

Yep its the United States going through a spiritual battle of good vs evil.

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

originally posted by: Tempter

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: JinMI

Ha, I don't think its that complicated. Either you want people to be tortured and murdered, deported and the earth to be raped--- or none of that.

They say the devil is the father of lies-- and the right wing so love their fake news and the lies they try to use to drown out the truth.

Others have empathy, compassion, and are ready to take responsibility for the environment and the damage we cause. People who are ready to pursue green sustainable energy.

I think we're in a kind of biblical-style spiritual battle. A battle between love, compassion, responsibility, and togetherness.... vs hate, agression, denial, and division.

Good vs evil. And I think the good may need to accept that no amount of reason or truth can pursuade evil.

Your black and white view of the world is dangerous.

One might say the devil was not evil, he just had a difference of opinion. All stories of good and evil can be given the political theater treatment. So of course this one can too. I don't necessarily even believe in good and evil... but having said that...

We are living the political theater version of good and evil.

Mankind's unwillingness to accept responsibility... the importance of money over people and even over the earth itself. The darkness in hearts that cheer for torture, deportation, cheering for the suffering of people. Mocking those who would show compassion for people and the earth.

You could call it ignorance, but the cheering for torture, murder, deportation, the callousness toward all of it, the coldness and anger, the racism, the xenophobia, the flippant attitude toward the environment, and the president-elect being a known Fraud, and white supremacists celebrating his win... gives it that evil edge.

Yep its the United States going through a spiritual battle of good vs evil.

All those things you said, you try and make it seem like all people exhibit some or all of those traits. Not true.

When you lump everyone in together like that it really diminishes your claim.

And it makes you seem like you hate everything, too.

a reply to: spiritualzombie

HE is a conman, he claimed to be a populist and he is the complete opposite of a populist. He now has three Goldman Sachs bankers heading up key positions, including a major role regulating monetary policy. LAst we all checked, Goldman Sachs is not a populist institution, it is an elite financial institution that bilked the people, the share holders, the government and the lower tier employees some 8 years back. That is hardly the choice of a populist or a man of the working people. HE picked the most elite of the elite to grease the machine for the banker class and make it easier for them to over leverage, charge consumers more and put America over the abyss again.

I would say such a departure from the president he claimed he was gonna be earns him the right to be called a con man. Or we can discuss the wall he is backing down on, or the fact that they are gonna Repeal and Replace Medicare and slash social security when plenty of seniors would not of voted for a man who they knew was gonna slash their fixed income. Liar, Conman, Villain seems to be faith rhetorical ton for such a man.

a reply to: Tempter

Not all Nazi's were bad guys. But they all supported Hitler. I have family and friends who voted Trump. And the devil swayed 30% of the angels right? Not that I believe in that story, but if I did I would think not all those angels were evil-- they were just wrong.

In a battle of good vs evil, some people make the wrong choice and end up siding with evil. It's pretty sad actually-- especially when you know they're not bad people... but their minds can become pretty twisted into a false reality once evil has swayed them.

a reply to: superbanjo

Absolutely a conman. No doubt about it. I'll never respect him and I sincerely hope there is a silent plan right now in the upper levels of government to take him down. He is not a friend to this country, its people, nor the world. He's a piece of sh#t that was easy to spot-- and I'm so disappointed in how many people actually voted for him. And the fact that they aren't concerned about what he's doing now-- none of it feels right.

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: superbanjo

He's a piece of sh#t that was easy to spot-- and I'm so disappointed in how many people actually voted for him.

Had Hillary not cheated Sanders out of the nomination, Trump might not be president, today. Had she not sold her office to the highest foreign bidders because of sheer greed, Trump might not be president, today. Had she not enlisted the aid of two wastes of space, Brazile and Wasserman-Schultz, Trump might not be president, today. Had she not made a deal with Lynch, another corrupt official, and then publicized it, Trump might not be president, today. Had she been honest about her medical condition, Trump might not be president, today.

It was the perfidy and corruption within the DNC that led to a Trump Presidency by allowing Hillary to cheat her way to the nomination. You do realize that in a Hillary Presidency, Bill would be calling the shots, privately, don't you?

a reply to: pteridine

The Hillary critiques while valid are also so overblown. I mean to say anyone no matter how terrible would be better shows a clear lack of judgment and extreme bias against Clinton. Trump's faults and shadiness far out weighed Hillary's --- we saw the email leaks-- all those thousands of leaks and what was there? Such minor stuff. Seriously, a couple debate questions and some efforts by DNC to hurt Sanders. It was actually refreshing to see that nothing worse was revealed.

Meanwhile Trump and the RNC remains sealed shut and shrouded in unknown... all we know is what he says and does, supporting war crimes, murder, torture, mass deportation, Muslim ban or registry, media silence, rejecting intelligence briefings and denying climate change.... not to mention his agreement to payout $25 million for defrauding people.

So the Hillary excuse is really weak. It doesn't add up to the negatives of Trump by any reasonable standard.

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: pteridine

The Hillary critiques while valid are also so overblown. I mean to say anyone no matter how terrible would be better shows a clear lack of judgment and extreme bias against Clinton. Trump's faults and shadiness far out weighed Hillary's --- we saw the email leaks-- all those thousands of leaks and what was there? Such minor stuff. Seriously, a couple debate questions and some efforts by DNC to hurt Sanders. It was actually refreshing to see that nothing worse was revealed.

Meanwhile Trump and the RNC remains sealed shut and shrouded in unknown... all we know is what he says and does, supporting war crimes, murder, torture, mass deportation, Muslim ban or registry, media silence, rejecting intelligence briefings and denying climate change.... not to mention his agreement to payout $25 million for defrauding people.

So the Hillary excuse is really weak. It doesn't add up to the negatives of Trump by any reasonable standard.

You found Hillary cheating her way to the nomination and during debates refreshing? Did you find her corruption inspiring, too? Ol' Hillary's private server was hacked by at least five security services and she was having her Filipino housekeeper print and fax top secret materials. She showed an abysmal lack of judgement and proved she was not Presidential material. She lied to Congress. She sold influence as Sec State. The Clinton's even corrupted Loretta Lynch into dropping the investigation for continued employment as AG. Here is a little reading material for your education, if you dare to educate yourself. www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com...

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
Trump Picks Scott Pruitt, Climate Change Dissenter, to Lead E.P.A.
www.nytimes.com...

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald J. Trump has selected Scott Pruitt, the Oklahoma attorney general and a close ally of the fossil fuel industry, to run the Environmental Protection Agency, signaling Mr. Trump’s determination to dismantle President Obama’s efforts to counter climate change — and much of the E.P.A. itself.

What the F is this?

There's really not much to say about this. Con man, villain, or total dumb#ss.... take your pick. Seems like an unwise move to me.... that is, if your goal for the EPA is Environmental Protection.

Just more of the same from the worst President Elect of all time. Share... discuss... talk about how the New York Times is leftist garbage. Or Climate Science is a Chinese hoax. I haven't yet plunged a coat hanger into my brain, so I still see this for the repugnancy it is. BUT maybe some of the more specially educated and lesser principled individuals can enlighten me to the greatness in this.

For everyone else... We're in a villain's world now. So... Here's more villainy for you. Enjoy.

Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (REVISED)

I believe you mean "Man Made Climate Change Skeptic".

originally posted by: Steak
Great Pick By President Trump.

Yep, another great pick by President Trump. He is really setting the country up to completely stomp on the years of liberal abuse and propaganda that has destroyed so many Western countries.

originally posted by: projectvxn

You only believe that because of politics.

No, I know that because it is what the evidence actually says. From 1998-2016 CO2 levels increased by 39ppm. If it was true that CO2 is the cause of the warming, and if an increase of CO2 of 72 ppm increased temperatures by ~0.8 from 1898-1998. (Like the AGW camp claim that CO2 was the cause of this warming) Then an increase in CO2 levels of 39ppm should increase temperatures by ~0.4 decgrees. Yet what we see from 1998-2016 is an increase of ~0.1 degrees. Which could be explained by the changes occurring on the sun. Even though the overall activity on the sun has been diminishing, the visible light from the Sun had increased in 2007 more than in 2004 radiating more heat to Earth's Troposphere than in 2004.

Declining solar activity linked to recent warming

The Sun may have caused as much warming as carbon dioxide over three years.

Quirin Schiermeier

An analysis of satellite data challenges the intuitive idea that decreasing solar activity cools Earth, and vice versa. In fact, solar forcing of Earth's surface climate seems to work the opposite way around — at least during the current Sun cycle.

Joanna Haigh, an atmospheric physicist at Imperial College London, and her colleagues analysed daily measurements of the spectral composition of sunlight made between 2004 and 2007 by NASA's Solar Radiation and Climate Experiment (SORCE) satellite. They found that the amount of visible light reaching Earth increased as the Sun's activity declined — warming the Earth's surface. Their unexpected findings are published today in Nature1.

The study period covers the declining phase of the current solar cycle. Solar activity, which in the current cycle peaked around 2001, reached a pronounced minimum in late 2009 during which no sunspots were observed for an unusually long period.

Sunspots, dark areas of reduced surface temperature on the Sun caused by intense magnetic activity, are the best-known visible manifestation of the 11-year solar cycle. They have been regularly observed and recorded since the dawn of modern astronomy in the seventeenth century. But measurements of the wavelengths of solar radiation have until now been scant.
Radiation leak

Haigh's team compared SORCE's solar spectrum data with wavelengths predicted by a standard empirical model based mainly on sunspot numbers and area, and noticed unexpected differences. The amount of ultraviolet radiation in the spectrum was four to six times smaller than that predicted by the empirical model, but an increase in radiation in the visible wavelength, which warms the Earth's surface, compensated for the decrease.

Contrary to expectations, the net amount of solar energy reaching Earth's troposphere — the lowest part of the atmosphere — seems to have been larger in 2007 than in 2004, despite the decline in solar activity over that period.


The spectral changes seem to have altered the distribution of ozone molecules above the troposphere. In a model simulation, ozone abundance declined below an altitude of 45 kilometres altitude in the period 2004–07, and increased further up in the atmosphere.

The modelled changes are consistent with space-based measurements of ozone during the same period.

"We're seeing — albeit limited to a very short period — a very interesting change in solar irradiation with remarkably similar changes in ozone," says Haigh. "It might be a coincidence, and it does require verification, but our findings could be too important to not publish them now."
Sun surprise

The full implications of the discovery are unclear. Haigh says that the current solar cycle could be different from previous cycles, for unknown reasons. But it is also possible that the effects of solar variability on atmospheric temperatures and ozone are substantially different from what has previously been assumed.
...

www.nature.com...

Let's recap the important part again...

...
Contrary to expectations, the net amount of solar energy reaching Earth's troposphere — the lowest part of the atmosphere — seems to have been larger in 2007 than in 2004, despite the decline in solar activity over that period.
...

www.nature.com...

An influence of solar spectral variations on radiative forcing of climate

GCMs have been wrong time and again because the radiative forcing of CO2 has been extremely overestimated. More so when we are seeing other planets and moons in the solar system warming, and we are also seeing the Sun changing, and reacting strangely.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

You cherry picked that data as has been shown to you several times.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

You cherry picked that data as has been shown to you several times.

I did not cherry pick that data... You do seem to want to ignore changes occurring in the entire solar system which have been linked to changes in climate, and to geological changes. Earth's magnetic field weakening, the increase in visible light from the sun when it's overall activity had been diminishing. We are seeing planets and moons with an atmosphere warming. Even Pluto and Charon, which began warming since at least 1988, are to this day warming, and Pluto seems to be radiating x-rays when we know it is too small to be able to radiate this energy internally. Yet i am the one cherry picking? How so?

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I'm on 3 other denialist threads across multiple scientific disciplines.

I simply don't have the time for this.

I watched you cherry pick data on anthropogenic climate change for quite some time. I've watched you misrepresent data over and over again. Even to the point of denying CO2 opacity to IR radiation. I don't know why you feel the need to do this.

But I'm not going to waste my time arguing with you about it.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

You cherry picked that data as has been shown to you several times.

I did not cherry pick that data... You do seem to want to ignore changes occurring in the entire solar system which have been linked to changes in climate, and to geological changes. Earth's magnetic field weakening, the increase in visible light from the sun when it's overall activity had been diminishing. We are seeing planets and moons with an atmosphere warming. Even Pluto and Charon, which began warming since at least 1988, are to this day warming, and Pluto seems to be radiating x-rays when we know it is too small to be able to radiate this energy internally. Yet i am the one cherry picking? How so?

What has this got to do with man made climate change? We do seem to be going through a period of warming, but the whole climate change debate is about people and our effects on the equation (which I suspect is next to zero).

a reply to: projectvxn

I feel the need for truth because the false claim that mankind is the cause for climate change is being used to impose draconian laws which are meant to convert western countries into third world countries. Trump picking this man to head the EPA (i would rather he would have picked someone like Dr. Roy Spencer) would mean having someone who does not want to impose these "regulations" based on a lie.



You know of other countries which have imposed similar draconian laws to "combat climate change"? Just look at Venezuela.

a reply to: projectvxn

I've learned to listen to you when it comes to science.

I do pay attention