US physics professor: 'Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I

Just a theory but maybe it is possible there IS truth to global warming but it LOOKS like a scam because all these greedy people are trying to find ways to profit off of it so they change things around to promote themselves and in doing so it makes the truth seem like a lie/scam. I have not seen anyone consider that this could be the case?

reply to post by 0ne10


And why am I a denier?

I never said I disagreed that humans have played a role, just how much is my question.

And to say that the carbon tax is not an issue in a climate thread is like taking a shower in a rain coat, because carbon is the debate and the whole idea about the way to reduce the carbon and the only options so far are cap and trade and carbon taxes.

So I may be a denier but that is far more desirable to question than to blindly follow and not be able to see the forrest for the trees.

waits patiently for more wiki qotes to prove how wrong I am again
will it be Mayan prophecy or will this some how lead to the Hopi Indians or am I going to get wiki quotes saying that Al Gore won't make money out of a price on carbon?

Originally posted by munkey66
And why am I a denier?

You tell me... look what you just said;

Originally posted by munkey66
So I may be a denier but that is far more desirable to question than to blindly follow and not be able to see the forrest for the trees.

Who am I blindly following?? Nobody... I have the ability to research, calculate, and conclude all on my own. That is exactly what I did. I don't need other scientists to point out the obvious, I am quite capable of seeing the obvious on my own.

Originally posted by munkey66
I never said I disagreed that humans have played a role, just how much is my question.

Played a role in what exactly?

See, I am not the type that is looking at the temperature data and blaming the changes on humans. I am the type that is looking at the science behind our atmosphere, and how humans are changing the atmosphere every day. Whatever climate change is happening now is irrelevant. It's the climate change that will happen if we don't change our ways. It is obvious that if we keep growing in population, and this increased population uses more vehicles, and energy, all we will see is an increase in CO2. Soon enough, in the future, CO2 will be at insane levels. This is bad, it WILL effect the climate no matter what you say.

Originally posted by munkey66
And to say that the carbon tax is not an issue in a climate thread is like taking a shower in a rain coat, because carbon is the debate and the whole idea about the way to reduce the carbon and the only options so far are cap and trade and carbon taxes.

Wrong... this topic is about the science of climate change. It has nothing to do with the carbon tax. NOTHING. Carbon tax is all political. The only reason you people keep talking about the carbon tax is because your entire weak argument is based around climate change being fake because people want money from the carbon tax. Totally avoiding atmospheric science, and muddying the water with irrelevant political garbage.

Carbon tax is not the only option. We have alternative energy like solar power and electric cars, and it is possible for people to invent alternative energy.... It is possible to capture CO2 and store it, etc. It is possible to stop being so wasteful, make more efficient electronic devices, smarter travel plans, smarter everything... teach people to stop being so wasteful... There are many options, however when deniers keep denying the proven science behind climate change, this prohibits everyones ability to work together and get this started. Instead of just fixing the problem, we got people arguing about it.

Originally posted by munkey66
waits patiently for more wiki qotes to prove how wrong I am again

Oh that is predictable of you.. Attack the sources because that is the only argument you have. Weak, very weak...

When I post something from Wiki it is most likely a generic quote that could be found in 1000's of alternative sources, and I verified the quote myself before posting. Would you like me to find alternative sources for everything I ever quoted from Wiki? Or are you going to sit there and ridicule a source without doing any of your own verification of the information from the source?

I laugh at you for making such a weak comment.

Originally posted by munkey66
will it be Mayan prophecy or will this some how lead to the Hopi Indians or am I going to get wiki quotes saying that Al Gore won't make money out of a price on carbon?

That is by far the most idiotic thing you have said yet...

You have no argument, so now your only option is to try to ridicule me by trying to guess my beliefs... and you fail miserably.

Why don't you go cry about the carbon tax some more.

reply to post by jpm06002


That is EXACTLY what is happening. You are 100% correct.

Climate change is real. There is actually no debate at all about it, it is 100% proven to be true. Humans are increasing CO2 levels, and there is no end in sight. This is going to change our atmosphere.... changing our atmosphere will cause changes in climate. There is no denying it...

However, all the controversy behind the stupid carbon tax is making people think it is all a lie. The are willing to believe climate change, which was an issue raised 100 years ago, was invented just for a carbon tax law. If that were true, we would have been getting carbon taxed 100 years ago!

reply to post by 0ne10


Unfortunately I don't think you see the big picture.

Reguardless of how real AGW is, it is a political topic and not just a scientific one, It wasn't scientists signing the Kyoto protocol, it wasn't scientists working out their plan to tackle the issue in Copenhagen, it was the goverments their?
If this is all science, where were the scientists?
It is goverments that impliments taxes, not science, but you seem to think that these new energy sources are going to save us.

China is still building a new coal fired power plant each week?
Maybe China are climate skeptics, what do you think?

Originally posted by munkey66
reply to post by 0ne10

 

Unfortunately I don't think you see the big picture.

No. It is you that can't see the big picture. You can't disprove climate change by arguing about politics. Plain and simple.

Originally posted by munkey66
Reguardless of how real AGW is, it is a political topic and not just a scientific one, It wasn't scientists signing the Kyoto protocol, it wasn't scientists working out their plan to tackle the issue in Copenhagen, it was the goverments their?

It's because scientists have already concluded that climate change is a real threat, long ago. Now the threat moved to politics because we have to decide, and do something about the threat. Most scientists are not politics so they just give advice to the politics, and government. We have already moved past the science part, it was already proven... now we are on to the decision part and figure out what we do about it. Carbon tax is just an idea.... a bad idea... Let's hear your ideas, see if you can do better.

Originally posted by munkey66
If this is all science, where were the scientists?

After confirming the reality of climate change, they are now figuring out ways to stop it. One of those ways involves working with politics to agree on decisions.

Originally posted by munkey66
It is goverments that impliments taxes, not science, but you seem to think that these new energy sources are going to save us.

The government is US. You, me, our friends and family, and the people are the government. The government is a group who make decisions for the collective, everyone. The people find the problems, and the government decides on ways to solve them.

Example: People are getting killed by drunk drivers. To try solve the problem the government now punishes people who drink and drive.

Do you really not understand how the world works?

The scientists found the problem and they convinced the government to solve the problem.

Don't take this personal, but I have to ask you a question...

How old are you?

Also, yes.... new energy sources are going to solve the problem! Are you going to deny that too??

Originally posted by munkey66
China is still building a new coal fired power plant each week?
Maybe China are climate skeptics, what do you think?

I think you are unaware of technology that captures CO2 from coal plants and puts it back into the ground.

Also, we can't just stop building power plants. That is the main issue. The population is increasing and we need more and more power plants, more and more cars, more food, more travel, more everything... all of it is increasing pollution on Earth, and there is no end in sight.

When does it end? Never, right? The population just keeps growing, and so does the pollution (co2).... THIS IS THE PROBLEM.



We know the role of CO2 in the atmosphere...

We know the population is going to continue to grow...

We know that CO2 output will increase with the population...

We know that in the future we will be producing so much CO2 that our atmosphere will be full of it....

We know that so far, we are doing next to nothing to stop it....

We know this will effect the climate, and all of Earth.....

Do you understand?

The way I see it... this climate change issue is almost like the Gulf oil leak.

We have CO2 leaking into the atmosphere non-stop, and the rate is only increasing with no end in sight. We need to cap the CO2 to prevent the atmosphere from filling up with large amounts of it, or it will do known and unknown damages.

However, unlike the oil leak where people were desperate to do anything to stop the leak, people are actually arguing about stopping the CO2. Some don't even believe CO2 will do any damage. That is like believing the oil wouldn't do any damage if you just let it leak into the Gulf for ever and ever.

Everyone wanted the oil company to be punished for the damages, and pay for it. But, no, nobody wants anyone to pay for CO2 damages...

Originally posted by munkey66
reply to post by 0ne10

 

Unfortunately I don't think you see the big picture.

Reguardless of how real AGW is, it is a political topic and not just a scientific one, It wasn't scientists signing the Kyoto protocol, it wasn't scientists working out their plan to tackle the issue in Copenhagen, it was the goverments their?
If this is all science, where were the scientists?
It is goverments that impliments taxes, not science, but you seem to think that these new energy sources are going to save us.

China is still building a new coal fired power plant each week?
Maybe China are climate skeptics, what do you think?

lolwut?

You just said global warming is real, but -->it doesn't matter

Originally posted by jpm06002
Just a theory but maybe it is possible there IS truth to global warming but it LOOKS like a scam because all these greedy people are trying to find ways to profit off of it so they change things around to promote themselves and in doing so it makes the truth seem like a lie/scam. I have not seen anyone consider that this could be the case?

Oh. My. GOD. Someone on ATS who actually gets it.

If I could give you ATS applause I would hand you ALL of them. You are the first person I have ever seen on here who actually managed to come to this conclusion on their own.

Mind you - pretty much anyone who acknowledges the reality of global warming already feels this way - but none of the deniers on here have EVER bothered noticing this, because they're all too busy telling us how brainwashed we all are for supporting Al Gore and his big Machiavellian scam he invented 100 years before he was born somehow.

0ne10 and mc_squared

I am going to use one of your own analogies
Does that mean if you find a tumor you should just deny the tumor and refuse to seek treatment because Obama's healthcare plan is bullsh**?
to answer that question is of course NO!,
but what is being offered as treatment for that tumor is to remove it and then charge you, you family and your neighbours.

we have goverments who work for us
I'm sorry, you asked my age and you make comments like this
could have sworn that huge corperations had more of a say than the average man, the media has more say than your average man, of course you can vote for the candidates chosen for you, not by you but by others in power.

You are both so busy arguing about climate change, it does not matter if it is raising by man or not, it is changing and we are going to get charged for it, you cant seem to understand that any tax imposed is 1 tax that will not be removed, it will not be your goverment or my goverment handing out the carbon credits but rather a body under the heading of the UN.

lets break it down real easy for you both to understand.
Climate change is caused by man pumping co2 into the atmosphere supposedly
big business will now be taxed for carbon released.
Who pays the costs?
the person who purchases the product absorbs the cost.

now lets look at a few wiki facts shall we from 2007
China produces 22.30% of the worlds emissions
US produces 19.91%
and the next is India with 5.50% and the rest drop off down from there

populations
China 19.5% of the worlds population
India with 17.3%
and the US with 4.52%

from the above figures, can you tell me who has the most to lose if a carbon tax is introduced?
China with 19.5% of the world population only produces 22.30%
India with 17.3% of the world population only produces 5.50%
or the US with a population of 4.52% who produces 19.91% of the emmisions

I am no genius, but it looks like if a carbon tax was introduced, the US citizens would be screwed, India has nothing to lose and China will be subsidized as an emerging economy.

now you will continue to take 1 line at a time and show me how wrong I am,

You asked my age and I have no problem with it, I am 43 years old, now I may be way off the mark, but I am going to say that you are a student still who thankfully still knows it all.

little heads up by the way, the world is not run by students, it is run by old men with old ideas who employ other old men with the same ideas and they do not like to let go of power or control, they are the ones who got us in this climate jam and they will also be the ones who give us the solution, just like the other old men who caused the Global Financial Climate will also give us the solution.

But continue to argue about the minutes % of c02 caused by man, they like you being distracted and nothing would make those in power happier than to have people begging to be enslaved by a carbon tax.

Originally posted by munkey66
I am going to use one of your own analogies
Does that mean if you find a tumor you should just deny the tumor and refuse to seek treatment because Obama's healthcare plan is bullsh**?
to answer that question is of course NO!,
but what is being offered as treatment for that tumor is to remove it and then charge you, you family and your neighbours.

We all contribute to CO2 pollution. We all should pay.

If we all were the cause of the tumor, we all should help pay to remove it.

Originally posted by munkey66
we have goverments who work for us

I'm sorry, you asked my age and you make comments like this

So I guess you are really mentally young since you don't understand how the government works. You are just another anti-government conspiracy fanatic.

YOU are the government. You could become a governor, a congressman.. you can be the President. The government is a group of people who come together to make decisions. That is the reality... Corporations are owned by people too. They are owned by you and me, and other people. You can make your own corporation right now.

Do you not understand these basic truths? Obviously not.

I can't believe you think the government is some big bad monster out to kill you.... typical anti-government conspiracy fanatic.

Originally posted by munkey66
could have sworn that huge corperations had more of a say than the average man, the media has more say than your average man, of course you can vote for the candidates chosen for you, not by you but by others in power.

Those are all run by people too... people like you and me...

Originally posted by munkey66
You are both so busy arguing about climate change, it does not matter if it is raising by man or not, it is changing and we are going to get charged for it, you cant seem to understand that any tax imposed is 1 tax that will not be removed, it will not be your goverment or my goverment handing out the carbon credits but rather a body under the heading of the UN.

We are arguing about climate change because people are claiming it is fake when it is REAL.

I don't want my future great great grandchildren to live in an atmosphere that is 50% + CO2. I would rather pay a tax than watch the destruction of the planet by the hand of man.

You are so selfish. If you don't want to pay a carbon tax, then stop using fossil fuels!

Originally posted by munkey66
lets break it down real easy for you both to understand.
Climate change is caused by man pumping co2 into the atmosphere supposedly
big business will now be taxed for carbon released.
Who pays the costs?
the person who purchases the product absorbs the cost.

Then stop or decrease your usage of the product!

Originally posted by munkey66
now lets look at a few wiki facts shall we from 2007
China produces 22.30% of the worlds emissions
US produces 19.91%
and the next is India with 5.50% and the rest drop off down from there

populations
China 19.5% of the worlds population
India with 17.3%
and the US with 4.52%

from the above figures, can you tell me who has the most to lose if a carbon tax is introduced?
China with 19.5% of the world population only produces 22.30%
India with 17.3% of the world population only produces 5.50%
or the US with a population of 4.52% who produces 19.91% of the emmisions

I am no genius, but it looks like if a carbon tax was introduced, the US citizens would be screwed, India has nothing to lose and China will be subsidized as an emerging economy.

You are right about one thing... you are no genius.

Cry some more about your taxes and precious money while your entire world is being destroyed. Makes a whole lot of sense... What good is money when you don't have a livable Earth?

Originally posted by munkey66
now you will continue to take 1 line at a time and show me how wrong I am,

You asked my age and I have no problem with it, I am 43 years old, now I may be way off the mark, but I am going to say that you are a student still who thankfully still knows it all.

You are just about the age where your mental facilities start to degrade.

Originally posted by munkey66
little heads up by the way, the world is not run by students, it is run by old men with old ideas who employ other old men with the same ideas and they do not like to let go of power or control, they are the ones who got us in this climate jam and they will also be the ones who give us the solution, just like the other old men who caused the Global Financial Climate will also give us the solution.

Loopy logic.

Sorry, it is now 2010... we have new technology, new scientists, new geniuses, new people. Get out of the way, or you will get pushed out of the way!

The children own the world, the adults are just borrowing it.

Originally posted by munkey66
But continue to argue about the minutes % of c02 caused by man, they like you being distracted and nothing would make those in power happier than to have people begging to be enslaved by a carbon tax.

You keep ranting on and on and on about this stupid tax.

You are being distracted by a tax while your world is being destroyed.

Wake up! Money doesn't matter, your home/Earth does!

reply to post by 0ne10

It's because scientists have already concluded that climate change is a real threat, long ago.

Yes, and since then have lied, obfuscated, destroyed, slandered any evidence to the contrary, and anyone presenting that evidence.

Whatever your views on "current earth science", global warming was a scam from the word go. Based on fraudulent "computer generated models" which would produce results from red noise.

Also, they have, and are currently still manipulating temperature records through "corrections" which have in MANY cases shown what was a neutral temperature drift over several decades into a warming trend. These "proofs" have been unlocked despite their illegally refusing to release the cose for the calculation of these corrections.

That's fraud.

You're siding with liars, frauds and self enriching scum, Mr Pachuri being a really sad yet typical example.

Remember the "clobal cooling" fears of the 70's? Not? You should investigate that.

And why are the Bilderbergers talking about global cooling threats?

reply to post by 0ne10


So I was right, you are still a student who knows all.

The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.
Socrates

We all contribute to CO2 pollution. We all should pay.

Water vapor (the oceans, lakes, etc) produces the most CO2, followed by dying vegetation, followed by animals and bacteria, followed by volcanoes, followed by the burning of fossil fuels (less than 1%).
so basically nature itself needs to pay as well then?

So I guess you are really mentally young since you don't understand how the government works. You are just another anti-government conspiracy fanatic.

I know how goverments run in theory, but practical and theory are far from close to the mark when it comes to deals done. its not being a anti goverment conspiracy fanatic, Its called not being stupid and believing that goverments can't be corrupt.
do you trust Irans goverment? North Koreas?

I can't believe you think the government is some big bad monster out to kill you.... typical anti-government conspiracy fanatic.

twice the same insult so I say I hit a nerve

Those are all run by people too... people like you and me...

These big corperations may be run by people like you, not me, I would never poison a water supply in the search of recources.
I would not put peoples lives in danger to save a few dollars, I am nothing like these people, pumping poisons into our children for the sake of making money.

You are so selfish. If you don't want to pay a carbon tax, then stop using fossil fuels!

again a personal insult, you have no idea about what I do to help the enviroment, I may not agree with the whole AGW, but I do try and use as little as I can, I have a 2 year old car with less than 5,000 miles on the clock and ride my bike, I have probably planted more trees than you have had meals.
Or is someone who questions the whole carbon tax deal a planet hater?
good call, discredit with no evidence, I am probably greener than you

Cry some more about your taxes and precious money while your entire world is being destroyed. Makes a whole lot of sense... What good is money when you don't have a livable Earth?

Again an assumption by you, you have no idea again my feelings about money, I chose a profesion in horticulture, hardly a money making venture, I chose a job I loved over the love of money, so once again, you are wrong
so I understand from your stance that you would be happy to see your grandchildren paying their carbon tax like good little slaves, but I forgot, you wont have grandchildren, because after big business is carbon taxed, it won't be enough, so the common man gets taxed, still not enough, you don't want to be selfish now and put another person on the planet?
every person is one more who produces C02.
we must do something to slow the population growth, right?

You are just about the age where your mental facilities start to degrade.

again with the insults
I suppose sir Isaac Newton had no idea around my age or Albert Einstein who came up with general theory of relativity around the age of 40

Loopy logic. Sorry, it is now 2010... we have new technology, new scientists, new geniuses, new people. Get out of the way, or you will get pushed out of the way! The children own the world, the adults are just borrowing it.

new technology yet we are still building coal fired power plants.
new geniuses? compared to who? probably find those so called geniuses are aound my age or older
Who says it is the childrens world? arn't they just living off it like a parasite until they make their own way and then they are pushed aside by the next parasites

You keep ranting on and on and on about this stupid tax. You are being distracted by a tax while your world is being destroyed.

This stupid tax? goverments don't introduce stupid taxes do they?
I thought goverments where fantastic
I think the world is being destroyed by your country, mine hasn't tested nukes, mine isn't using depleted uranium as amunition, mine isn't driving huge cadilacs, mine isn't the second largest producer of emmissions on the planet.
Maybe you should vote for someone who will do it for you, because I hav't seen to much change yet

reply to post by munkey66


Ok, you are going on ignore, you are worthless.

reply to post by harryhaller

Originally posted by harryhaller
Yes, and since then have lied, obfuscated, destroyed, slandered any evidence to the contrary, and anyone presenting that evidence.

Climate change via increase in the greenhouse effect has been proven to be true. Period. There is no evidence to the contrary.

What rouge scientists do has no effect on the truth...

Originally posted by harryhaller
Whatever your views on "current earth science", global warming was a scam from the word go. Based on fraudulent "computer generated models" which would produce results from red noise.

I'm sorry, but climate change was discovered in 1824. It wasn't until after 1930 that anything even close to a computer was invented.

Please, learn about the greenhouse effect. Educate yourself.

Originally posted by harryhaller
Also, they have, and are currently still manipulating temperature records through "corrections" which have in MANY cases shown what was a neutral temperature drift over several decades into a warming trend. These "proofs" have been unlocked despite their illegally refusing to release the cose for the calculation of these corrections.

Temperature data does not prove or disprove climate change. Sorry to break the bad news to you.

Originally posted by harryhaller
That's fraud.

You're siding with liars, frauds and self enriching scum, Mr Pachuri being a really sad yet typical example.

No, I am not siding with anyone except the truth.

Originally posted by harryhaller
Remember the "clobal cooling" fears of the 70's? Not? You should investigate that.

Yes I do... Those fears were caused because of temperature trends. Temperature trends do not prove or disprove man-made climate change and can not effect the science behind the greenhouse effect.

Climate change was not "invented" because of temperature trends. It was discovered when they discovered the greenhouse effect in 1824, when they realized the importance of our atmosphere and how it works.

You should definitely learn about the greenhouse effect and the atmosphere, and how changes in the atmosphere would effect the Earth.

Originally posted by harryhaller
And why are the Bilderbergers talking about global cooling threats?

Maybe because they own the fossil fuel factories and have something to loose if everyone found out that fossil fuel is bad for the world?



Just answer this question, I dare you.

Do you know how the gases on Earth (the atmosphere) keeps Earth warm? If so, describe the process.

Thanks.

A few years ago I watched Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth" and at the time I was sold on the Global Warming by man theory. Now I am not so sure anymore. Do we have a problem with pollution on this planet absolutely, I see the pollution with my own eyes, just look at the smog in LA for one example.
Here is the issue, pollution may not be synonymous with global warming, this might very well be a natural weather cycle, and it is being evilly exploited for money.

We need to cut down on polluting our planet that is for sure, but taxing people on a naturally occurring weather patterns is very evil.

reply to post by Blue_Jay33


Can I ask you some questions?

Do you agree or disagree that our atmosphere keeps Earth warm?

Do you agree or disagree that CO2 levels are rising?

reply to post by Kandinsky

If there's a rational argument for *not* reducing carbon emissions or protecting the environment can somebody post a basic outline?

No one will argue against protecting the environment. We can achieve 100% effect if we eliminate all people.

Ever heard of cost/benefit analysis?

We can pinpoint the costs, but since the "cause" is ephemeral, there is no legitimate "benefit" measure. Until the science is settled (and even Dr. Phil admits it is not), it is unreasonable to impose proposed "remedies" that no one will say address the cause or deliver a measurable return.

Throwing money at a problem is never the solution. Give me proof of "cause" and we can address remedies. Guessing is not good enough.
jw

reply to post by melatonin
WOW! Who would've expected a substantive response, instead of a personal attack?

Bottom line? For "AGW" models: GIGO. you can't pick, choose and modify your "data" and expect anyone to accept your "objective" analysis.

When will the AGW advocates act like REAL scientists and offer reproducible, objectively scrutinized analyses instead of opinions offered as "settled science?"

The AGW fraudsters limp along with less support and more scrutiny. Any wonder that fewer people are willing to suffer the AGW leeches lightly?

jw.

reply to post by ghostsoldier
The core problem with a carbon tax is, "how does this address climate change?"

What about water vapor, sulfur dioxide and methane? These are three major components of the GHG mixture and probably the most problematic. Why focus on CO2?

BECAUSE ... we can tax the producers of CO2 more easily than the others!

When the focus shifts from sources of revenue, rather than most effective solutions, then the AGW/Cap & Trade/Carbon tax arguments fall apart.

Thus far, EVERY carbon trading scheme, including the Kyoto protocol, have been 100% ineffective; and, in some cases, detrimental to CO2 remediation!

Do we want more money going to special interest groups, AGW advocates and NGOs; or, effective solutions? The former do not equate to the latter.

jw

reply to post by melatonin

Jupiter: there is no observed data of warming. It is a prediction based on modelling of the influence of planetary storms.[/quote]

Of course, we all know that "modeling" has nothing to do with the AGW predictions, doomsday scenarios and begging for additional funding.

If personal attacks do not work, resort to challenges to the "science," no? Perhaps we should begin with acceptance that the "science is NOT settled" about AGW?

Man cannot change the climate of the Earth; no one has ever demonstrated that it is possible (except for 'modeling,' which you scoff at). We can affect local environs, for limited times; but are not currently able to effect global change of any kind.

jw