My friend, the ursine set has no greater supporter than I. I love all bears - polar, Kodiakal, brown, black, Chicagoid, pandalic, honey, sun & yet undiscovered in the back stretches of New Guinea, where the wild men still run free.:00hour
Weather Channel Founder Calls Global Warming "Greatest Scam in History"
- Thread starter IntenseOperator
- Start date
My friend, the ursine set has no greater supporter than I. I love all bears - polar, Kodiakal, brown, black, Chicagoid, pandalic, honey, sun & yet undiscovered in the back stretches of New Guinea, where the wild men still run free.:00hour
Correct. Natural variation is seized on by liars to whip up hysteria. Government doesn't solve problems, government creates problems. See Aral Sea. For those who doubt, name one thing the U.S. government does well.
Which brings me to a prediction in 08 and beyond.
With the push for higher costing bio fuels--which also deplete food source and without question increase cost of feeding livestock--ie inflation
My prediction: the very same people pushing the bio fuel/global warming agenda will be the same that will be ranting about inflation and global starvation in the years to come
Yes. It's always the same agenda, in different guises depending on the times and what the pushers think will sell.
Here's an example of state socialism. Missouri passed a law that all gas must be 10% ethanol, as of Jan 1, 2008. Ethanol costs more energy to produce than it gives off. Ethanol is just another socialist scam, a sop to the corn farmers. The rest of us pay higher taxes so farmers and the politicians they lobby can live higher off the hog. Better we should repeal restrictions that prevent oil companies from drilling and building refineries, and also those that prevent new nuclear plants from being built. That will keep costs down and it won't damage wildlife either. If Ethanol, solar panels and windmills could provide enough energy to run our system, they wouldn't have to be subsidized.
Private land ownership is what keeps things nice and clean. The government is a source of bad law and bad advice, more often than not. As an example, back in the thirties, the government told private landowners to shore up river banks by throwing old appliances and cars into the ditches. So today all over the midwest you find this kind of crap in drainage areas. Later the government said, oops, we were wrong about that. It doesn't prevent erosion at all. The government has no incentive to do anything right or under budget. The less government we have, the freer and richer we'll be.
Advised that the troops would burn up due to the intensity of the Sun and it's deadly radiation...
Bush today announced the mission would be a night mission....:mj07:
DTB's post got me thinking... Funny you don't see pics of Antarctica. Just the North Pole.
You know, in the past, I've been cavalier about my flatulence. I'm turning over a new leaf in 2008. To fight Global Warming, my New Year's resolution is direct all farts southward, to redress the polar icecap imbalance. It's not that I care more than other Americans, well...who'm I kidding? I do.
If this immodest measure fails to correct the problem, though I can't see how it would, then I promise to lead a national campaign for Fart-Free Fridays in 2009.
Your takeaway here is that Global Warming is history by Jan 1, 2010, at the latest.
You know, in the past, I've been cavalier about my flatulence. I'm turning over a new leaf in 2008. To fight Global Warming, my New Year's resolution is direct all farts southward, to redress the polar icecap imbalance. It's not that I care more than other Americans, well...who'm I kidding? I do.
If this immodest measure fails to correct the problem, though I can't see how it would, then I promise to lead a national campaign for Fart-Free Fridays in 2009.
Your takeaway here is that Global Warming is history by Jan 1, 2010, at the latest.
I/O don't tell me the lack of sleep and Chi town weather have driven you so insane that you don't believe in Global Warming.
Say it ain't fukcin so!
Say it ain't fukcin so!
I wasn't exactly trying to stand up for his credibility. I was only pointing out that he's known by millions more for his career as a weatherman for decades, than as someone who did well with a web site they started. As Mahoney stated, he is going against the hand that feeds him.
As far as an opinion on his abilities as a weatherman, they are all just entertainers 1st and actual credible forecasters second. My income is directly tied to the weather. I'm well aware of their lack of consistant ability. I guess I don't take my weather forecasters as seriously as you do yours. Don't know if you keep up with the weather in these parts, but so far this winter I don't think they are close to 50/50.
I did find him very entertaining though. Kevin Mathews had a great take on him that was hilarious.
Agent
I'm not very hip...
I am still believing in the unstoppable ice sheet to consume all of North America that was predicting a couples decades back by these same scientist. I'll come around to what they are saying now in another twenty years or so when what I'm positive what they said then isn't true. I'm also wearing shirts with alligators on them.
I guess the wonder full engineers from NASA are full of chit to. And for some one to say there's no info on antarctic. First ozone hole was found in that region 9 YEARS AGO. The ice pack there has shrunk over 7%.
I'm not pretending I keep current on all the global warming etc.
but have heard a bit more of late that the sun has a lot more of an influence on the climate than man does. And that it's been acting very irregular in recent history. When I got time, I'll try to look further into it.
but have heard a bit more of late that the sun has a lot more of an influence on the climate than man does. And that it's been acting very irregular in recent history. When I got time, I'll try to look further into it.
Chicago has the shittiest weather of any place I have lived. You get like 2 good days a year.
No wonder everyone acts like an A-hole.
Mahoney,
I am not really sure what your position on this is, same for DTB and some others. Do you accept that global warming is an undenial reality but that it is NOT man made and is just a natural cycle. Or do you guys deny that it is even happening?
I am not sure what petro based non-sense research has led to believe that the Antarctic ice sheet is not melting. If you would like, I will bury this thread with endless studies and data that establishes beyond any doubt that the Antarctic ice sheet is disappearing.
I am not really sure what your position on this is, same for DTB and some others. Do you accept that global warming is an undenial reality but that it is NOT man made and is just a natural cycle. Or do you guys deny that it is even happening?
I am not sure what petro based non-sense research has led to believe that the Antarctic ice sheet is not melting. If you would like, I will bury this thread with endless studies and data that establishes beyond any doubt that the Antarctic ice sheet is disappearing.
actually the Indiana side of the lake can really turn to crap during the winter
I'm talking "nobody is going anwhere for a few days" crap
It's good to be on this side of the "lake affect" snow
I lived right down on the 'beach' in the Indiana Dunes/Chesterton area for over a year. Hideous weather. Then, lived in the Lincoln Park area with Captain Morgan for a summer while he worked at the Merc, but I was in such a daze I can't remember if we had good weather or not:mj07: I do remember playing Golf at Harborside one day and the wind literally blew me over! Oh the memories of that 15th story 'Penthouse' the Captain was renting for $3500/month:scared
9 foot bong anyone? :jump: :Yep: :dizzy:
Those are mostly bitter "DIE HARD" :mj07: Cub's fans.
Well.........you understand. :142smilie
Mahoney,
I am not really sure what your position on this is, same for DTB and some others. Do you accept that global warming is an undenial reality but that it is NOT man made and is just a natural cycle. Or do you guys deny that it is even happening?
I am not sure what petro based non-sense research has led to believe that the Antarctic ice sheet is not melting. If you would like, I will bury this thread with endless studies and data that establishes beyond any doubt that the Antarctic ice sheet is disappearing.
All I know is winters have been much milder for the past ten years or so.
But also I think you need to track weather data for much longer periods of time to get a read on real changes in climate of a planet that's been around for quite a while.
Two days ago my sidewalk was ice-free. Today my walk and yard are covered with five inches of snow. Do you deny that global icing is a reality? My projections, if I had time to make a graph, would show that by next Tuesday I will be under eight feet of snow and unable to leave the house to buy turdcoil darkbulbs. I demand that your taxes be raised to do something about this immediate and pressing problem, since your refusal to quit taking hot showers is depriving Nature of the heat she needs to keep the outdoors warm.
Ice melts and reforms all the time. Temperatures rise and fall all the time. You have no evidence that human behavior has anything to do with melting/icing. That's the crux of the matter. Until you prove to reasonable, normal people that human behavior causes what are, to any unprejudiced eye, merely Nature going about its business, you'll be seen for what you are: guiltmongering socialists. The only thing the GW pushers have is demands that normal people drastically change their everyday behavior and hand over their wallet to Al Gore and his band of hypocrite-alarmists.
In this story it is revealed that commie-capitalist Gore's main science guy, from NASA, 1) advocates lying; 2) has a financial interest in pushing the Big Lie that is global warming.
15-Year-Old Byrnes Outsmarts NASA?s Global Warming Alarmist James Hansen
By Noel Sheppard | June 7, 2007 - 10:24 ET
On May 18, NewsBusters introduced you to Kristen Byrnes, the fabulous fifteen-year-old from Maine who had torn apart many of the myths purported by the Global Warmingist-in-Chief, soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore, in his schlockumentary ?An Inconvenient Truth.?
Now, the Precocious Ponderer from Portland is taking on the scientist that Gore relied on for much of his misinformation, James Hansen of NASA.
In her recent report entitled ?Houston, We Have a Problem,? Byrnes identified a serious concern with this so-called scientist that many anthropogenic global warming skeptics have been addressing for years (emphasis added throughout):
James Hansen seems to have a busy life for someone from Iowa. But the real question seems to be is whether or not Hansen is too busy to realize what he is actually saying to the pubic.
As Hansen attempts to seduce, exaggerate, and alarm the public, some people (like me) attempt to inform the public of the reality of global warming, its impacts, and now, the truth behind James Hansen.
Next, Byrnes took on the myth Hansen likes to purport that he is politically independent:
Hansen claims that he is an ?independent?, but he seems to be the only person who believes it. Readers may already be aware of this, but if not? James Hansen was granted a quarter of a million dollars from the Heinz Environment Award a.k.a. U. S. Senator and former Presidential Candidate John Kerry?s wife?s foundation. You know the old saying; ?nothing in politics is free.? So my first question is: what did he do to get the quarter of a million dollars? Was it the price for switching his political standing from ?independent? to democratic when he later endorsed John Kerry for President? Was it payment for interpreting his department?s data in a way that would benefit his political friends?
More evidence of his connections to the Democratic Party was his endorsement of Al Gore?s presidential campaign in 2000. James Hansen was also a science advisor to Al Gore?s movie An Inconvenient Truth.
As kids say these days, ?Oh SNAP!?
Marvelously, she was just getting warmed up:
James Hansen is a scientist who admittedly uses scare tactics to convince the public that global warming will be ?potentially disastrous?. Consider this statement from Hansen in his own document called ?Can We Defuse the Global Warming Time Bomb?? [published in the journal Natural Science] in August of 2003.
Emphasis on extreme scenarios may have been appropriate at one time, when the public and decision-makers were relatively unaware of the global warming issue, and energy sources such as "synfuels," shale oil and tar sands were receiving strong consideration. Now, however, the need is for demonstrably objective climate forcing scenarios consistent with what is realistic under current conditions. Scenarios that accurately fit recent and near-future observations have the best chance of bringing all of the important players into the discussion, and they also are what is needed for the purpose of providing policy-makers the most effective and efficient options to stop global warming.
Fascinating, wouldn't you agree? What Hansen wrote in 2003 was that he used to advocate lying to the public and policy makers to get them to act. Yet, we should believe his prognostications now because he?s decided it?s suddenly important to be truthful.
Right.
To demonstrate how Hansen clearly is still operating from his prior modus operandi regarding the need to exaggerate to impact the debate, Byrnes pointed out the following deliciously inconvenient truth:
It is important to understand that global warming has been measured in tenths of degrees, .77 degrees Celsius in the past 100 years. There has been a great deal of controversy about the accuracy of the temperature data, mainly the bias of temperature data due to urban heat island effect. This controversy has lead many to focus on rural temperature stations. Rural stations are intended to represent the cool breezy countryside, small towns, farms, trees and grass.
In recent weeks, researchers have been visiting these temperature stations. What they noticed was that there are serious problems with the quality of these temperature stations. They noticed that many of these temperature stations were located next to concrete buildings, near hot exhausts of air conditioning units, attached to metal towers and poles, surrounded by driveways and above gravel.
How delicious. And, here?s the excruciatingly painful punch line:
The photos of these temperature stations are not just a few of many; they are the first few dozen that have been visited. About 80% of the temperature stations that have been visited and photographed have serious quality problems. This brings up some more questions: How many tenths of a degree will temperatures rise when the thermometer is near the hot exhaust of an AC unit? Or how about when it is located above gravel or near a paved road or driveway? How many tenths of a degree will the temperature rise when the thermometer is above pavement and surrounded by buildings (no wind)? And in one case, as documented by the photograph below, how many tenths of a degree will the temperature rise when the caretaker of the facility burns trash in a metal barrel just 5 feet away from the temperature station?
For those interested, more pictures of these stations can be found here.
http://www.climateaudit.org/
Now, putting this is some perspective, given the position and location of some of these stations, wouldn?t this be a fabulous thing for investigative journalists to be reporting? Can?t you just imagine a segment about this on ?60 Minutes,? ?20/20,? or ?Dateline?? Why do you think that hasn?t happened?
Or, is it the job of fifteen-year-olds to point out that which adults find too inconvenient?
Brava, Kris. Brava!
?Noel Sheppard is an economist, business owner, and Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
http://newsbusters.org/node/13282
15-Year-Old Byrnes Outsmarts NASA?s Global Warming Alarmist James Hansen
By Noel Sheppard | June 7, 2007 - 10:24 ET
On May 18, NewsBusters introduced you to Kristen Byrnes, the fabulous fifteen-year-old from Maine who had torn apart many of the myths purported by the Global Warmingist-in-Chief, soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore, in his schlockumentary ?An Inconvenient Truth.?
Now, the Precocious Ponderer from Portland is taking on the scientist that Gore relied on for much of his misinformation, James Hansen of NASA.
In her recent report entitled ?Houston, We Have a Problem,? Byrnes identified a serious concern with this so-called scientist that many anthropogenic global warming skeptics have been addressing for years (emphasis added throughout):
James Hansen seems to have a busy life for someone from Iowa. But the real question seems to be is whether or not Hansen is too busy to realize what he is actually saying to the pubic.
As Hansen attempts to seduce, exaggerate, and alarm the public, some people (like me) attempt to inform the public of the reality of global warming, its impacts, and now, the truth behind James Hansen.
Next, Byrnes took on the myth Hansen likes to purport that he is politically independent:
Hansen claims that he is an ?independent?, but he seems to be the only person who believes it. Readers may already be aware of this, but if not? James Hansen was granted a quarter of a million dollars from the Heinz Environment Award a.k.a. U. S. Senator and former Presidential Candidate John Kerry?s wife?s foundation. You know the old saying; ?nothing in politics is free.? So my first question is: what did he do to get the quarter of a million dollars? Was it the price for switching his political standing from ?independent? to democratic when he later endorsed John Kerry for President? Was it payment for interpreting his department?s data in a way that would benefit his political friends?
More evidence of his connections to the Democratic Party was his endorsement of Al Gore?s presidential campaign in 2000. James Hansen was also a science advisor to Al Gore?s movie An Inconvenient Truth.
As kids say these days, ?Oh SNAP!?
Marvelously, she was just getting warmed up:
James Hansen is a scientist who admittedly uses scare tactics to convince the public that global warming will be ?potentially disastrous?. Consider this statement from Hansen in his own document called ?Can We Defuse the Global Warming Time Bomb?? [published in the journal Natural Science] in August of 2003.
Emphasis on extreme scenarios may have been appropriate at one time, when the public and decision-makers were relatively unaware of the global warming issue, and energy sources such as "synfuels," shale oil and tar sands were receiving strong consideration. Now, however, the need is for demonstrably objective climate forcing scenarios consistent with what is realistic under current conditions. Scenarios that accurately fit recent and near-future observations have the best chance of bringing all of the important players into the discussion, and they also are what is needed for the purpose of providing policy-makers the most effective and efficient options to stop global warming.
Fascinating, wouldn't you agree? What Hansen wrote in 2003 was that he used to advocate lying to the public and policy makers to get them to act. Yet, we should believe his prognostications now because he?s decided it?s suddenly important to be truthful.
Right.
To demonstrate how Hansen clearly is still operating from his prior modus operandi regarding the need to exaggerate to impact the debate, Byrnes pointed out the following deliciously inconvenient truth:
It is important to understand that global warming has been measured in tenths of degrees, .77 degrees Celsius in the past 100 years. There has been a great deal of controversy about the accuracy of the temperature data, mainly the bias of temperature data due to urban heat island effect. This controversy has lead many to focus on rural temperature stations. Rural stations are intended to represent the cool breezy countryside, small towns, farms, trees and grass.
In recent weeks, researchers have been visiting these temperature stations. What they noticed was that there are serious problems with the quality of these temperature stations. They noticed that many of these temperature stations were located next to concrete buildings, near hot exhausts of air conditioning units, attached to metal towers and poles, surrounded by driveways and above gravel.
How delicious. And, here?s the excruciatingly painful punch line:
The photos of these temperature stations are not just a few of many; they are the first few dozen that have been visited. About 80% of the temperature stations that have been visited and photographed have serious quality problems. This brings up some more questions: How many tenths of a degree will temperatures rise when the thermometer is near the hot exhaust of an AC unit? Or how about when it is located above gravel or near a paved road or driveway? How many tenths of a degree will the temperature rise when the thermometer is above pavement and surrounded by buildings (no wind)? And in one case, as documented by the photograph below, how many tenths of a degree will the temperature rise when the caretaker of the facility burns trash in a metal barrel just 5 feet away from the temperature station?
For those interested, more pictures of these stations can be found here.
http://www.climateaudit.org/
Now, putting this is some perspective, given the position and location of some of these stations, wouldn?t this be a fabulous thing for investigative journalists to be reporting? Can?t you just imagine a segment about this on ?60 Minutes,? ?20/20,? or ?Dateline?? Why do you think that hasn?t happened?
Or, is it the job of fifteen-year-olds to point out that which adults find too inconvenient?
Brava, Kris. Brava!
?Noel Sheppard is an economist, business owner, and Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
http://newsbusters.org/node/13282
Last edited:
Believing anything Al Gore says about climate is as dumb and dupish as believing anything George Bush says about terror.
They're both richer-than-Croesus elitists, and you are the tools played for fools if you believe anything they say has any purpose but to entrench them and their class deeper in wealth and power.
They're both richer-than-Croesus elitists, and you are the tools played for fools if you believe anything they say has any purpose but to entrench them and their class deeper in wealth and power.
