nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Stupid logic.

JediKnight

It would be wonderful if Eagle got a life - any life and stopped all the "alternative facts" foolishness. The guy said he "didn't believe in man-made climate change" yet worried about picking up plastic -the question I posed to him (not you) was "why?" Why worry about plastics when the ozone layer is deteriorating due to CO2 and other harmful chemicals man is putting into the air and ground? If you're not going to keep up please just go back to sleep.....did you take your narcotics today?

Rose42

Is this a serious question? One doesn’t have to believe man is causing climate change to realize that we need to be good stewards of our planet.

JediKnight

Yes that's true - just like you don't have to actually slam your fingers in a door to know it hurts. Being a "good steward" of the planet does involve ensuring that we aren't hurting the planet by dumping, mining coal, spilling oil, etc. So, if you (or he in this case) is 'really' concerned about climate change -then why take a half-assed approach?

Rose42

Being good stewards and wanting sound environmental regulations doesn’t equate to believing man can influence climate. Thats a different issue.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Why? Because there’s a difference in pollution and climate change. One I can have a slight affect on, the other not. I have concern for what we put in the environment. Actually great concern. I just don’t worry about CO2. and this green house gas scare. Quit being willfully obtuse. You know the difference.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

I am not so sure. The force might not be with our Jedi friend.

son of witless

Oh where oh where is JediKnight ? He asked for an explanation of my remark about saying that if Hillary had won Russia and China could have expected only love from the US of A. I went into a pretty lengthy explanation of why Russia did not prefer Donald J. Trump to Hillary Roddam Clinton. I only briefly touched on China.

Obviously my answer was either too technical or too boring or intimidated JediKnight because he failed to respond to it. I have this magical power to silence Liberals. It is an unconscious power, I assure you. I do not seek to silence anyone. Well I digress. I now wish to expound on my discussion of China and the Clintons. Specifically Bill Clinton. For those stuck on stupid, in other words Trump-Russia Collusion and think foreign powers meddling in American politics is unprecedented and shocking, I wish to now warm up the Way Back Machine. I borrowed it from Sherman and Mr. Peabody.

A long time ago in a Washington DC, far, far away, 1996 specifically there was a Presidential Election. Bill Clinton was running for Reelection and needed money. Forget about the Lewinski Scandal. Small potatoes. Once upon a time in the East there was China Gate. You Liberals have microscopically small memories. I know none of you remember this.

https://spectator.org/chinagate-and-the-clintons/

emarine

I think both issues are problematic my Jedi buddy … one being easier to fix...

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Jedi; you are not worth my time; anyones for that matter.
Now at least quit lying, or improve your readnig comprehension skill.
I did NOT say that plastics should not be cleaned up.
The CO2 "problem" is another issue.
Some people are out to cash in on that. Al Gore being one of them.

Fortunately, there's a book by Mark Steyn that helps sort out the truth from the fiction. It's called A Disgrace to the Profession and features short essays and articles by scientists who speak out against the global warming / climate change hoax being perpetrated on the world.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/052317_climate_change_scientific_consensus_fraudulent_science_survey.html#ixzz4JLQI0Rxa The '97% consensus' of scientists on climate change is complete bunk... fraudulent statistic repeated everywhere is based on blatant scientific FRAUD


NaturalNews) The brain-dead leftist media isn't really in the news business anymore. It's actually in the business of zombie control... with the zombies being, of course, the leftist libtard obedient propaganda swallowers who are easily fooled by sleight-of-hand trickery being paraded as science. (Then again, there are also CONtards on the right who are easily fooled by fraudulent "GMO science," so the criticism deserves to be equally distributed across the political establishment...)

If you've ever has the misfortune of listening to the libtard leftist media, you've probably heard the claim -- repeated like a mantra chant to Gaia -- that "97% of scientists believe in man-made climate change" (or some similar paraphrased version of this fraudulent claim).

Fortunately, there's a book by Mark Steyn that helps sort out the truth from the fiction. It's called A Disgrace to the Profession and features short essays and articles by scientists who speak out against the global warming / climate change hoax being perpetrated on the world.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/052317_climate_change_scientific_consensus_fraudulent_science_survey.html#ixzz4JLQI0Rxa

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/052317_climate_change_scientific_consensus_fraudulent_science_survey.html#ixzz4JLPs9xQq

PASADENA, CA, July 21, 2015 – Arguing with people who have already come to a conclusion based on a loose understanding of half the story is difficult. Large amounts of misinformation are unfortunately common in today’s political arena thanks to social media, shoddy journalism, millennial ambivalence and a generally apathetic view toward data and public policy. Nowhere in today’s society is this idea more prevalent than the climate change debate, formally known as global warming.

Global warming was the hot topic about 10 years ago when Al Gore’s documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth”, hit theaters and almost instantly scared millions of people into believing the Earth was hanging on by a string thanks to irresponsible Americans filling up their gas tanks one two many times.

The green energy lobby took charge and didn’t look back, raising hundreds of millions of dollars and sponsoring regulation after regulation with the intent of eliminating fossil fuels and ignoring the unintended consequence of killing jobs and destroying livelihoods. Day after day, the mainstream media spread the word that temperatures were soaring, the oceans were rising, and natural disasters were growing deadlier all because of man made global warming’s detrimental effect on the earth’s atmosphere.

After a few years of hysteria, something happened that brought the global warming train to a screeching halt. Scientists began to realize that the earth’s temperature wasn’t rising. In fact, we now know that the average global temperature hasn’t gone up in at least 15 years. Try as they might, and they did try, environmentalists could not cover up this contradictory piece of evidence, so they decided to change the name of their movement to “climate change”.

Man made climate change supporters, primarily on the left, have attempted to gloss over these glaring holes in their argument by creating the illusion that the scientific community is completely on their side and that any questioning of that science is a waste of time. They did that by coming up with the false narrative that 97% of all scientists agree with them and continued to repeat it over and over until people who weren’t really paying attention started to accept it as fact.

It’s not a fact but yet for some reason, everyone from the guy in line next to you at Starbucks all the way up to the President of the United States tout this statistic as indisputable evidence. The only truth regarding this statement is that it was dubiously manufactured in order to dilute the reality that scientists have not coalesced around one position one way or the other.

The 97% number was created by meticulously selecting certain surveys using murky terminology to formulate a specific narrative.

Termites emit ten times more CO2 than humans. Should we cap-and-tax them?
http://www.iloveco2.com/2009/04/termites-emit-ten-times-more-co2-than.html

Global Warming; Alias Climate Change
http://www.skepticalscience.com/OISM-Petition-Project.htm
Over 31,000 scientists signed the OISM Petition Project
The Petition Project features over 31,000 scientists signing the petition stating "there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide will, in the forseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere". (OISM)
There are several claims that large numbers of scientists do not agree with the theory of climate change, the best known of which is a petition organised by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (the OISM petition). This petition now appears to be signed by over 32,000 people with a BSc or higher qualification. The signatories agree with these statements:
• The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.
• There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate.
No evidence has ever been offered to support the first statement, and the second statement is in flat contradiction with the scientists who study climate change. There are also valid issues regarding the methodology:
• The organisers have never revealed how many people they canvassed (so the response rate is unknown) nor have they revealed the sampling methodology, an ironic omission considering how much fuss is made about scientists being candid and making public their methods and data.
• The petition is, in terms of climate change science, rather out of date.

That’s only the tip of the “melting” iceberg of scams the IPCC is involved in using the greatest scamster of all, Al Gore, as their figurehead who then makes squillions insider-trading carbon credits through his own bank of carbon credit companies.

The scam will continue as long as people like Bob Brown can beguile opportunistic crooks like Julia Gillard.

The IPCC rejects any report that doesn’t claim anthropogenic warming, and always throws in a few goodies like its recently discredited, “the Himalayas will soon be devoid of snow” nonsense.

Figures are massaged, graphs are inverted and reports are altered in an attempt to convince the gullible of their expertise in “climate science”. “Climate” can be a science but these charlatans are certainly not scientists!

Long lunches are spent inventing emotive doomsday phrases designed for you to elect Green-sympathetic governments, like Julia Gillard’s, that will happily give them billions more of your taxes.

There is no global warming, it would be good if there was, but both ice-caps have increased in area, Europe and the US have just recorded three years of record cold conditions, atmospheric CO2 levels have continued to vary by the normal 0.1 per cent, US “Tornado Alley” had 30 per cent fewer tornados last season, there are no tidal increases anywhere and the climate is still changing normally in its own erratic way, as it always has.

The only regulators of the world’s CO2 levels, the oceans, the sun and volcanos, are the only regulators IPCC reports don’t account for.

Thank God the Abbott Government only pays lip service to this global warming myth.

Reading between their lines you can see they don’t have their hearts in it.”

NASA is not sending rockets to the moon anymore. The front page on their website is a graph about global warming. When did NASA switch from space research/travel to progressive propaganda? Was the Obama Administration the one who changed the purpose of NASA?

In an article here, former NASA Director Charles Bolden says that Obama told him that Muslim Outreach was his priority, “… inspire children to learn math and science, expand international relationships and “perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science … and math and engineering.”

NASA lists the IPCC as one of its scientific sources proving human-caused global warming. Knowing that the IPCC is a phony organization makes the entire website and NASA itself untrustworthy and irrelevant.

In conclusion,

“The CO2-induced global warming extinction hypothesis claims that as the world warms in response to the ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 content, many species of plants and animals will not be able to migrate either poleward in latitude or upward in elevation fast enough to avoid extinction as they try to escape the stress imposed by the rising temperature. With respect to plants, however, we have shown that as long as the atmosphere’s CO2 concentration rises in tandem with its temperature, most of them will not “feel the heat,” as their physiology will change in ways that make them better adapted to warmer conditions. Hence, although earth’s plants will likely spread poleward and upward at the cold-limited boundaries of their ranges in response to a warming-induced opportunity to do so, their heat-limited boundaries will probably remain pretty much as they are now or shift only slightly.

Consequently, in a world of rising atmospheric CO2 concentration, the ranges of most of earth’s plants will likely expand if the planet continues to warm, making plant extinctions even less likely than they are currently.
Animals should react much the same way. In response to concurrent increases in atmospheric temperature and CO2 concentration, they will likely migrate poleward and upward, where cold temperatures prevented them from going in the past, as they follow earth’s plants. Also as with earth’s plants, the heat-limited boundaries of their ranges should in many cases be little affected, as has been observed in several of the real-world studies that have been wrongly cited as providing evidence for impending species extinctions, or their entire ranges may simply shift with the rising temperature, as has been observed in many real-world studies of marine ecosystems.

To summarize, both theory and observation paint the same picture. A goodly portion of earth’s plants and animals should actually expand their ranges and gain a stronger foothold on the planet as the atmosphere’s temperature and CO2 concentration continue to rise. If the air’s CO2 content were suddenly to stop increasing, however, the biosphere could find itself facing a significant challenge, as the world’s plants would cease acquiring the extra physiological protection against heat stress that is afforded them by rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Consequently, the end result of curtailing anthropogenic CO2 emissions might well be just the opposite of what many people are hoping to accomplish by encouraging that policy, i.e., many species might actually be driven to extinction, rather than being saved from such a fate.”

Read more at http://victoriajackson.com/10960/global-warming

Lots of good links:
31,487 American scientists have signed this petition,
including 9,029 with PhDs
http://www.petitionproject.org/

The great global warming swindle - Full version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtevF4B4RtQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player

GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX
Lenar Whitney
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BzItCPk5j4#t=254

Dr Don Easterbrook Exposes Climate Change Hoax
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LkMweOVOOI#t=40

How the Global Warming Scare Began
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyUDGfCNC-k#t=45

NYT: Scientists 'Startled' at Great Lakes' Rise; Another Warmist Prediction Is Biting the Dust
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2014/06/30/nyt-scientists-startled-great-lakes-ri...

Al Gore's Inconvenient SCAM, Lies versus Lord Monckton Truth and Logic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElEwhE7B-8o#t=309

5 Scientific Reasons That Global Warming Isn't Happening
http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2014/02/18/5-scientific-reasons-that-global-wa...

Charles Krauthammer Destroys Global Warming Myths in 89 Seconds
http://blog.heritage.org/2014/02/18/charles-krauthammer-destroys-global-warming-myths-89-...

California’s Man-Made Drought – Dick Morris TV: Lunch Alert!
http://www.dickmorris.com/californias-man-made-drought-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/?utm_so...

All Fools' Eve 2014: The day democracy died
http://www.wnd.com/2014/04/all-fools-eve-2014-the-day-democracy-died/#Cp4c2gdIJ3deSZYh.99

Harvard's Faustian bargain dooms it to irrelevance
Exclusive: Lord Monckton challenges university president to climate-change debate
http://www.wnd.com/2014/04/harvards-faustian-bargain-dooms-it-to-irrelevance/#1CCrbWKXkQ2...

Alaskan Polar Bears Threatened…By Too Much Spring Ice....

amadjuster Loc: Texas Panhandle

Man oh man. Jedi wants us to get rid of our cars and live in log cabins or sod huts. The only problem is we will cut down all the trees to burn for heat. Maybe cow farts aren’t so bad after all.

JediKnight

Ok, now I understand your viewpoint. But why stop with pollution? You know that even a good thing like "ice cream" consumed continuously in large quantities is bad for you - and CO2 (and other harmful gases) in large uncontrolled quantities is bad for the earth's environment as well....that's just common sense J.....think about it.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Tell it to the plants. They thrive on CO2. Now methane, that's a different story. It's not like we are tallikhng about huffing CO2. As I understand it the oceans give of the most CO2. It isn't even a green house gas according to many scientists. Just for sake of argument let's say it is causing climate change. I ask this all the time by the way. What's your workable solution?

JediKnight

Plants thrive on CO2 and they also produce it, as do the oceans. God is the ultimate master scientist! The workable solution will include decreasing the amount of "man-made carbon emissions" -which is why God allowed man to discover solar energy, wind energy, and alternatives to coal. I also think we should be extremely careful when we drill for oil or fracking to mine minerals. The earth is a miracle in and of itself. However, we have recently discovered that "poking holes" in the earth through drilling is similar to poking holes in the fabric of your favorite shirt - one small hole may not be a problem - but keep poking holes in the fabric and what happens to it?

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

"and CO2 (and other harmful gases) in large uncontrolled quantities is bad for the earth's environment as well....that's just common sense J.." - jedi

No it is not!!!!
Now read my references posted earlier.