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

reply to post by 0ne10


The facts speak much louder than words.
Truth is a good thing. It has a way of keeping folks honest. Less stress. That's a good thing.

Originally posted by xxshadowfaxx
Bottle Water ---- Less healthy than most tap water, with added chemical harmful to the body, and most of the good minerals taken out.

Electricity ---- We are told we are wasting electricity, as if there wasn't enough. It's impossible to run out of electricity. FACT.

Organic foods ----- Costs twice as much as regularily grown foods. But my question is, when did they stop growing organically? And Why is it cheaper to buy chemically grown foods, you'd think the chemicals would cost more than just plain old organic?

Bottom line..... We must pay for everything we do. From going in the sun, to drinking water, to eating "organic" foods. They even found a way to charge us on the air we breathe. It's pretty genius when you think about it. It's also twisted and evil. But that's the world we live in today.

1. Some people must drink water from PET bottles because tap water is poisonous to intolerable extents.
2. Electricity is not free and yes you can (and probably will) run out of electricity once fossil fuels are gone.
3. Organic foods don't use chemically synthesized inorganic fertilizers, extremely toxic pesticides and many other nice things.

Bottom line, yeah you must pay and the more we breed and more we destroy, more we'll pay - everything has a price, from lavish lifestyle to stupidity which seem to have no bounds. Yes we live in twisted and evil world but we made it so ourselves... not evil reptilian space aliens or Obama as many here believe.

I don't know why I'm even answering this but what the heck.

Reply to post by Perseus Apex

Everything I just said is factual and proven.

Do you need me to show you the facts of electromagnetic radiation's ability to pass through some matter at one wavelength, but not the same matter at another wavelength?

You want me to explain to you how x-rays pass through your skin but not your bones, and how that relates to greenhouse gases and our atmosphere using scientific facts?

You want me to start my truck and prove CO2 is being introduced at high levels by man?

You want me to explain how atmospheres work using facts?

Your link you posted was created because some scientificaly challenged fool doesn't want to be taxed. I don't want to be taxed either but that will not stop mans destruction of the atmosphere. Taxing wont stop it either. Certainly, you are no scientist our you would have understood by now.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

I hate when people try to debate science using politics... This topic is a good example of what I hate.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by SeventhSeal

No, we don't know for sure if we're causing it or not. That's still up for debate, like it or not.

Really, people are really 'debating' whether or not we humans are causing the Sun to burn hotter??

You can't be serious.

reply to post by serbsta

I think those that say global warming is a total hoax really haven't looked at the data.

NO! You're using a straw man argument, logical fallacy.

"Climate Change" opponents are NOT claiming there is not a warming going on. There is warming happening. What we disagree with is that it's human's fault that the Sun is burning hotter.

Which it HAS been doing. If ANY side is failing to 'look at the data', it's the Climate Change parrots who are refusing to look at the data that shows all planets in our solar system heating up in direct proportion to the Earth.

Originally posted by 0ne10
Reply to post by Perseus Apex

 

Everything I just said is factual and proven.

Do you need me to show you the facts of electromagnetic radiation's ability to pass through some matter at one wavelength, but not the same matter at another wavelength?

You want me to explain to you how x-rays pass through your skin but not your bones, and how that relates to greenhouse gases and our atmosphere using scientific facts?

You want me to start my truck and prove CO2 is being introduced at high levels by man?

You want me to explain how atmospheres work using facts?

Your link you posted was created because some scientificaly challenged fool doesn't want to be taxed. I don't want to be taxed either but that will not stop mans destruction of the atmosphere. Taxing wont stop it either. Certainly, you are no scientist our you would have understood by now.

And just how many trillions of dollars in tax revenue will it take to reverse the increase in the temperature of the Sun?

Take your time.

Originally posted by serbsta
Mars is heating up.

Jupiter is heating up

Venus is heating up.

Out solar system is heating up, we are not experiencing warming on a global scale, we are experiencing warming on a solar scale...

I think those that say global warming is a total hoax really haven't looked at the data.

Or maybe they have and understand that these sort of arguments are specious. Not picking on you particularly, as a few are pushing this argument in the thread.

Planetary bodies in the solar system can do one of three things: warm, cool, stay stable. If these planets are varying with no common relationship we would expect to see 33.3% warm, 33.3% cool, 33.3% stay stable. If the sun is the cause, we would expect to see almost all warming with time - although with diminishing returns due to the inverse square law.

Mars: the data is two timepoints. One in 1977 from Viking and other in 1999 from Global Surveyor. Two measurements on two days 20-odd years apart do not a trend make.

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

Venus: never even heard this in the normal meme

The other planets usually associated with the solar system argument are pluto and neptune. They have actually been observed to be brightening. Pluto is again based on only two timepoints. Neptune is coming out of its 'winter'. Interestingly, pluto is estimated to have warmed about 2'C using the datapoints - use the inverse square law to calculate how warm the earth might be if this was due to the sun. If we do actually take the two timepoints for mars and pluto as indicative of warming, along with Neptune, we have 3 planets (taking pluto as it should be). That's 33.3% - no more or less than we'd expect. Indeed, we also have similar evidence that another is cooling (Uranus).

However we don't really have evidence of any planets, apart from our own, showing long-term warming. Moreover, solar activity hit a peak around 1950. It has never reached that peak since, and has been falling for the last 20 years. There are a number of fingerprints that show that solar activity is unlikely to be causing the warming, but that's for another time.

This is an interesting thread, complete with "consensus" science.

Just a few points that have been raised by the AGW establishment:

1. It's getting hotter. We don't know that. Between all the "corrections" made to temperature data, with badly sited stations, incomplete records, and various computer "adjustments" (again because there are a LOT of adjustments) we don't really know what the global temperature is, should be, or doing.
2. Carbon dioxide is bad. Yes carbon tax. May i point out that the logical extension of carbon tax is making you pay to breathe out. You can have as much oxygen as you like, as long as you don't exhale. Do i need to point out how bad this kind of thinking is?
3. "green" products are better. Rubbish. "energy saving" lighbulbs have more heavy metals in them. Did you know that it's advised that should a fluorescent bulb break, you evacuate the room for 15 minutes? They are that dangerous. Ditto for the Prius. As an overblown PR hype, the carbon footprint of a single prius should make any "greenpeace type" blush. Plus, our focus on "green" is emissions ONLY, absolutely NO data is taken into account for manufacture of the vehicle. Now, because of our "green" emmissions policy, auto manufacturers are accepting that the cvar must be replaced every 5 years. New car every 5 years is more "green" than 1 car in 10 years? No, it doesn't add up.
4. The worst is C02. Again, rubbish. If we are to look at the "worst" that mankind is doing, i'm thinking more like the gulf, that red river in austria, and millions of other examples of HIGHLY TOXIC waste entering our biosphere. Please note: all this talk about "green" is detracting from the REAL problems, and criminals, like BP, Shell, many other industrials.
5. Free energy is a pipe dream. Rubbish. It's around, but if they make free energy available, they will lose both their power and money. There are many ways to generate energy, from a rubbish dump even. The only way forward that would be acceptable relies predominantly on preserving the status quo: ie: fossil fuels and wind turbines. (IMHO: fossil fuels are more ecologically friendly than wind turbines, and better in every way.)

Ok, just a few points, but the lie really is big. I'm still astounded how fast this trash spread through our culture, my kids in primary school have all learned about global warming. What they don't learn is how messed up the science behind it is.

Hitler was right, make the lie BIG, and keep repeating it.

reply to post by melatonin


Hmmmm, it appears Polly still wants her cracker.

"The sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures," said Sami Solanki, the director of the renowned Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Gottingen, Germany, who led the research."

Here

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by melatonin

 

Hmmmm, it appears Polly still wants her cracker.

"The sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures," said Sami Solanki, the director of the renowned Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Gottingen, Germany, who led the research."

Here

Sure, I'm sure a pumpkin seed would be healthier for you, though.

And here's Sami from the Max Planck Institute, where Sami Solanki works:

These findings bring the question as to what is the connection between variations in solar activity and the terrestrial climate into the focal point of current research. The influence of the Sun on the Earth is seen increasingly as one cause of the observed global warming since 1900, along with the emission of the greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, from the combustion of coal, gas, and oil. "Just how large this role is, must still be investigated, since, according to our latest knowledge on the variations of the solar magnetic field, the significant increase in the Earth’s temperature since 1980 is indeed to be ascribed to the greenhouse effect caused by carbon dioxide," says Prof. Sami K. Solanki, solar physicist and director at the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research.

Max Planck Institute

His data shows that solar actvity had been high last century, but it hit a peak in the 1950s. You can see the data in his paper with Natalie Krivova here.

ABE: and here's a nice picture for polly (Solanki's data up to 1978, PMOD satellite data through to 2009):

How do the man-made global warming *cough* i mean climate change retards explain the FACT that all the planets in our solar system are heating up all at the same time???

reply to post by harryhaller


You are right in my opinion. MTSU in Murfreesboro, TN built a car that could use water or Hydrogen and no manufacturer picked it up. The design is going on 20 years now. Corporate elite want big oil and apparently someone wants the tax money. I vote HOAX and agree the Sun is doing 99.99999% of the heating. When it cools down, so do we here on Earth unless HAARP type waves can artificially warm the planet. That may be what is happening now, HAARP reportedly heats up the upper atmosphere.

reply to post by bronwyn82


I would have thought the Greatest Fraud of all Time is Religeon, as it's been going now for
thousands of Years, and not showing any signs of slowing down. So that would make this the Second Biggest.

reply to post by bronwyn82


Here is a little about the author of the story...James Delingpole

James Delingpole is a writer, journalist and broadcaster who is right about everything.

OK? So you have a guy who already makes outlandish and untrue claims..."right about everything", impossible.

And keep in mind Hal Lewis: [My Resignation From The American Physical Society] who up and resigned in indignation over the whole "alleged global warming scam" was well over 80 years old.

Also interesting is why didn't he use his given name for this letter. It is not Hal, his name is Harold.
www.physics.ucsb.edu...

Here is another interview with Harold where he admits he has lost or thrown away all his pertinent papers. www.aip.org...
Here is another quote detailing how he got his "Masters"

I actually got my Masters at that time after the first year — in what I recall as a rather bizarre way. I hadn't quite spent enough time to accumulate enough credits for what was then required for a Masters degree. I needed one course, and the rules of the University of California in those days were that you could get credit for courses if you took them by examination. Since I was going into the Navy, I decided it would be nice to have a Masters degree before I left. I took a course, as I recall, in differential geometry, by examination, never having studied the subject, and so I ended up with a Masters degree.

Reading more, you will observe Mr Lewis has a great deal of envy and perhaps resentment he did not become as famous as Oppenheimer.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


Maybe you should read my post again. I said taxing wont help. So the answer is 0.

Also, the Sun is not the only mechanism that can make the Earth warm. Did it ever occur to you that it is possible for our atmosphere to be changing AND the Sun to be getting warmer at the same time?

Probably not...

Are you claiming that our atmosphere can not be changed by man? If you are, let me start my truck and prove you wrong.

reply to post by rusethorcain


Smearing an opponent's character is despicable, and the tactic most favoured by the global warming movement against all who question their "consensus".

Do you have anything of substance to add?

reply to post by 0ne10


Compare your truck to a volcano.

Case closed.

Originally posted by babybunnies

Originally posted by Mak Manto
WOW!

One? ONE PROFESSOR IS SAYING GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE? Good God, ATS! We've got to get ready! A Physics professor is saying that global warming is a fraud!

And to think we listen to the National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science about how global warming can become a future threat!

Yes, this ONE PROFESSOR SURELY IS LEADING A REVOLUTION!

I like your sarcasm, but sometimes, it only takes one.

In the Middle Ages, only ONE man said that the Earth was round, despite EVERY other scientist agreeing it was flat.

Look, if this was a bet, I would place my winnings on the ORGANIZATIONS that state global warming is real. You have one scientist. We have THOUSANDS of scientists who are dead sure global warming is being impacted by humanity, and that if we don't try to slow or stop this, in a few short generations, we're going to be in serious trouble.

Let me say this: There is a consensus by the scientific community global warming is happening, and it's by our hands with the release of greenhouse gasses.

Who you going to believe?

reply to post by SKUNK2


You would have to be a complete retard to not understand that temperature data is not what proves or disproves climate change. The Sun, and the rising temperature on other planets is technically irrelevant.

You can ignore the Sun, you can ignore the rising and falling of temperatures, and you can still arrive to the conclusion that changing our atmosphere will change our climate. Adding CO2 will change our atmosphere, and our atmosphere changes our climate. It's pretty simple logic.