World needs ‘brain washing’ on climate change, Jerry Brown says at Vatican

a reply to: Justoneman

There's two parts to this discussion. One is the facts around global warming. Second is a policy response to the facts. The problem is in order to avoid any discussion around having a policy response to the facts the facts and scientists are attack. This is insanity. If the Big Oil government will not allow a policy response to the facts that is a different issue.

Corporations ARE the government.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Justoneman

Science is are very best tool for separating what is reasonable from superstition. Without science all we have is superstitious politicians controlling their money interests.

Oh you are right. I am saying the IPP and the UN are caught lying and have fudged the facts you think are true. Data has been shown on ATS ad infinitum. I have threads on it. The usual leftist looked very silly trying to argue the flawed logic of the IPP, UN and Al Gores movie verses the real facts.

a reply to: Justoneman

Some interesting facts to ponder in this Documentary made with Al Gores data in mind and confronting the "science" with the climate experts who have data to prove the IPP lied. Not your backyard alchemists quoted or interviewed.

www.youtube.com...[editby


ETA

NASA claims the oceans are falling now.

www.zerohedge.com...

I am declaring the case closed on the IPP models.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Justoneman

There's two parts to this discussion. One is the facts around global warming. Second is a policy response to the facts. The problem is in order to avoid any discussion around having a policy response to the facts the facts and scientists are attack. This is insanity. If the Big Oil government will not allow a policy response to the facts that is a different issue.

Corporations ARE the government.

The real story is the other planets are experiencing huge changes. Ask yourself what that means to Earth changes and you will have to conclude it is a solar system event and not AGW.

The magma responds to the magnetic field and other energy emitted by Sol. It is physics. We have not mastered controlling the Solar System, to my knowledge (channeling Michiu Kaku here). The sun is affecting the inner mechanism of every planet and something big is happening during our lifetime.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: dfnj2015
The science is not perfect. But every year the science gets better and better:

The 97% consensus on global warming

If even ONE of the models worked, as I do know about the models, I would buy into it. As a Environmental Scientist Iknow 100% at this point that they are hijacking the truth and are hurting the credibility of ALL of science in so doing!

If you believe a lie by someone and his buddies, the find out later it was a lie, you WILL despise all of them and anybody who might be the least bit like them. Scientist do not used failed theories and get away with it from the rest of science. That is why we are speaking out against AGW.

Yea, I work in the academic publishing industry, how much of the peer review on the "science" is not just back patting, or yup this says it's real and it fits my agenda!

Today we have people going around creating circles of peer review where if you scratch my back I'll scratch yours... that's science somehow? Like and scientific method, if you don't follow it closely and repeat it and get the same results, it is not fact and not necessarily true even if you get the same results... but if I tell a lie, tell my buddies, hey say this is true I can push it through and get it published in a "respectable" journal.. it's exactly the same thing that happened when the pair of academics published a paper on males metaphorical penises are a reason for climate change... they showed how ridiculous the peer review process is, but also in this instance of people back patting climate change.

So, this unfortunately makes it hard for me to see someone say science blah blah blah... it's like saying I read it on the internet so it must be true. That's how it's becoming.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse
pollution/environmental issues:

I think there would be a lot less of these probs if businesses worked together instead of against eachother; think how much resource could be saved if this was the case. Factories could be used for storing the same materials: i.e plastics! Could use and re-use the same cups, pots, plates etc for different businesses. The challenge would still be there, there just wouldn't be all these different people trying to make a dollar/pound more than the next business. In fact cashflow could be shared. As for plastics... we've all seen the amount of different detergents and deodorants when basically they all do the same thing, it's just some people want the dollar/pound more than the next person but if people worked together, there would be a lot less of these products which would equal a lot less plastic. Do we really need all these different deodorants/perfumes?? Yogurt is another one, so many different companies making yogurt but at the end of the day, they all taste the same. What about bread? That's packaged aswell from different sources but also white bread is white bread and brown bread is brown(Granted some of the brown bread doesn't taste quite as good as the next loaf) but could still save on packaging.

Tinned foods! keyboards! Computers!

The list is endless.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Justoneman

Science is are very best tool for separating what is reasonable from superstition. Without science all we have is superstitious politicians controlling their money interests.

Oh you are right. I am saying the IPP and the UN are caught lying and have fudged the facts you think are true. Data has been shown on ATS ad infinitum. I have threads on it. The usual leftist looked very silly trying to argue the flawed logic of the IPP, UN and Al Gores movie verses the real facts.

"lying" and "fudge" is part of the scientific process. Good science is not perfect the first few iterations. Good science is independently verified to eliminated errors. I have heard endless mantras from scientists who say let the data speak for itself. This is not about fooling people into funding scientific research. That is a red herring to prevent any public policy addressing the facts. Science and scientists follow the process precisely to eliminate the superstitious nonsense and bias.

That's what these liberals don't understand. We already have the environmental protection's. We take care of our own environment we don't need the oversight of some government world organization some universal church Leader, or any one besides our own elected political officials. a reply to: Justoneman

a reply to: ManFromEurope

It would change the world climate for the better by getting rid of the real problem of the global elites. We could take back the vast stores of knowledge socked away in the Vatican and curb their power. It would dismantle the economic hub of the City of London and stop the upcoming financial crisis from being in their full control. The arm of war would be omitted from what we have believed is the U.S. and prevent countless scores of deaths.

Sorry, I'm on the boat that the global warming crisis is a full on agenda. If anything, we need to be more concerned about the coming grand solar minimum and maybe even a mini ice-age. I've learned a great deal in the past few years about the agendas of the "scientists" we put our faith into and it's as bad as religion. And I hate religion.

a reply to: GraffikPleasure

So if not science then what? Because without science all we have superstitious nonsense. Which for people who don't want to change the status quo it is a very good tactic to attack scientists and scientific results.

Corporations ARE the government.

And Big Oil doesn't want any public policies to hurt fossil fuel sales. Money talks, almost everything on this thread criticizing climate change scientists and studies is BS.

And....cognitive dissidences says, but, but, but, Al Gore, CO2, fossil fuel's, your all A bunch of uneducated fools the science is settled OK.

Cognitive dissidence is what happens to children when they're molested by a parent where their total source of security is also the source that betrays them.

www.urbandictionary.com...
a reply to: Justoneman

a reply to: RogueWaterC1

The only cognitive dissidence we have is people accepting the idea that really smart people might actually have something valuable to say.

originally posted by: Justoneman
The real story is the other planets are experiencing huge changes. Ask yourself what that means to Earth changes and you will have to conclude it is a solar system event and not AGW.

Careful what you say. This can be taken out of context by the globalists who will blame me and my SUV for causing inter-planetary changes!

originally posted by: RogueWaterC1
And....cognitive dissidences says, but, but, but, Al Gore, CO2, fossil fuel's, your all A bunch of uneducated fools the science is settled OK.

Cognitive dissidence is what happens to children when they're molested by a parent where their total source of security is also the source that betrays them.

www.urbandictionary.com...
a reply to: Justoneman

Oh the House of Al Gore follower speaks. Don't be throwing rocks at real science and call them fools. The facts are not in your favor. How about NASA backtracking does that count for you who would imply idiots challenge a theory that is failed time and again? Did you watch the documentary with the Scientist speaking to Congress and Al Gore caught lying or not?


AS Nicholson said "you can't handle the truth", apparently.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: RogueWaterC1

The only cognitive dissidence we have is people accepting the idea that really smart people might actually have something valuable to say.

Right and the failed theory guys have the bully pulpit for some people. I repeat FAILED theory, case closed.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

“At the highest circles, people still don’t get it,” he said. “It’s not just a light rinse” that’s required. “We need a total, I might say ‘brain washing.’

“We need to wash our brains out and see a very different kind of world.”
...

Yes, in the guise of helping control climate we must jump up and wash our awareness of any other influence; like the truth about the real effects of environmental pollution, corporate greed, endless war, endless debt and corruption.

Be complient, earn, consume... They really do live among us.We don't need 'sunglasses' to tell them apart either. Career politicians are one tell, Brown is a career politician.

So a religious fanatic believes in human induced climate change and that invalidates the science that supports it?

What we have here is a failure of logic.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: GraffikPleasure

So if not science then what? Because without science all we have superstitious nonsense. Which for people who don't want to change the status quo it is a very good tactic to attack scientists and scientific results.

Corporations ARE the government.

And Big Oil doesn't want any public policies to hurt fossil fuel sales. Money talks, almost everything on this thread criticizing climate change scientists and studies is BS.

I'm not saying never believe it, but knowing the 2 industries can be manipulated makes me question EVERYTHING like it SHOULD be.

The fake peer review paper I mentioned proves that both institutions/trains of thought are not to be taken 100% true,like a religious cult would. It's on this piece of paper so it must be true...right... All the "experts" agree..right???... Just face it, science is becoming the new religion.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Shouldn't the globalist be concerned with Trump ...oh and Russians .

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Here's a little series of reminders on how fcked we really are.







You're obviously willing to ignore all the data for your sad political drivel. As fcking usual. You don't need a brainwashing, you'd need to have a brain first.