Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Quietly Burying the Truth


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 twylyght

twylyght

    The picture of how I care

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,328 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 09:20 AM

http://www.thenewame...-admits?start=3

i wish people these days would look at the "facts" we knew with certainty from 100 years ago

#2 SZ James

SZ James

    1 888 CAM PAIN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,435 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 09:35 AM

:lol:

I get my "facts" from a right-wing tabloid. GET WITH THE PROGRAM HIPPIES!

#3 venom

venom

    oneinfiniteconsciousness

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,518 posts
  • LocationPleiades

Posted 16 October 2012 - 11:57 AM

To suggest climate change and extreme weather arent very real factors today is a being more than just a little bit naive. I think it's safe to say that we're all directly experiencing this very strange weather of the last few years in many shapes and forms. Don't get me wrong though...I do not believe for a second that any of it is "man-made." That carbon footprint garbage is no more than a revenue generating scam, also perpetrated for control. Our solar system as a whole is enduring much climate change at the moment, so it's not limited to just Earth.

#4 twylyght

twylyght

    The picture of how I care

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,328 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 02:03 PM

volcanoes, oceans, and solar activity accounts for the vast majority of the variance with respect to global climate. the biggest thing mankind can do to affect global climate is to have a nuclear war. were pakistan and india alone to engage in such a war, 80% of the world's populace would be wiped out between that conflict and the ensuing fallout.

even a cursory glance at a few emails released from the climategate scandal reveals that the computer models used to analyze past data inserted the variance manually to create the supposed "hockey stick" phenomenon. take that one matrix away and the raw data shows EXACTLY what Met did a few weeks ago.

while climatologists would concentrate on the artic melting towards the pole they conveniently leave out a mass of data showing that the south pole is no covered in more ice than almost any time in earth's history.

meanwhile, billions of dollars in EU scam companies due to a pretty slide show later, we actively engage in institutionalizing western kids in their respective education systems with videos about how we are killing polar bears with our carbon footprint. We modify the format by removing tom brokaw's report of how NYC will be underwater by 2010 when it becomes obvious that said alarmism is revealed to be only that.

so yeah, keep on forgetting recent history of our arrogance of "understanding" and proceed with a green agenda regardless of the veracity of data to the contrary

#5 SZ James

SZ James

    1 888 CAM PAIN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,435 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 02:13 PM

I post this picture every time people fall for this:


Posted Image

also climategate has been thoroughly debunked as a load of hype

Edited by James, 16 October 2012 - 02:16 PM.


#6 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,318 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 02:14 PM

A nuclear war just between Pakistan and India might result in 80% of the population in that area being killed, but not 80% of the population of the world. Even the most dire predictions I have read didn't indicate anything that bad.

#7 twylyght

twylyght

    The picture of how I care

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,328 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 02:29 PM

so the rebuttal involves assuming climate doesn't exist beyond 30 years ago involving data largely in the northern hemisphere, and ignoring said comment about nuclear war fatalities involve fallout rather than direct exposure

#8 SZ James

SZ James

    1 888 CAM PAIN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,435 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 02:39 PM

so your rebuttal involves quote mining from hacked emails that were proved to be lies and selectively cherry picking data [shocker]?

every single thing in that article is bullshit and you act like a british right-wing tabloid should be taken as the final word on the subject.

there's simply nothing I can do to help you.

#9 twylyght

twylyght

    The picture of how I care

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,328 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 02:46 PM

if novelist michael crichton can effectvely put together a better research treatise than the picture book released by a politician to make a case for at least pausing to consider the facts, one would assume the actual scientist has some gravitas about him. hell, just pull up various predictions from a mere 10-15 years ago from these same experts and their authoritative claim on "irrefutable truth" and the average kid knows that something doesn't add up

#10 SZ James

SZ James

    1 888 CAM PAIN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,435 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 03:03 PM

yawn

this has already gotten more coverage than it deserves, but there's some rebuttals there for people that want to look at the whole picture from reputable people and not a gossip mag.

careful though theres a whole lot of GREENAGENDAOMG

#11 twylyght

twylyght

    The picture of how I care

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,328 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 03:22 PM

Tell ya what James... you find me the computer model that has correctly predicted what climatologists that are using to push public policy over the past 2 decades and you have a leg to stand on.

#12 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 12,431 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 04:19 PM

Anybody that denies climate change or evolution at this point is pretty much scientifically illiterate.

#13 nobody

nobody

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 365 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 04:41 PM

Or just figures its not man made and if the sun decides to go solar flare us to death we cant do anything about it. So sit back and pass the sun screen. Your scaring the fish.

#14 SZ James

SZ James

    1 888 CAM PAIN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,435 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 04:46 PM

James Hansen, the most recognizable name in climatology and GW not named Al Gore, made some climate models in the 1980s that were pretty damn uncanny even for back then when measuring tools weren't what they are now.

You might already be aware of this but back in 1981 he was right about the warming in the 1980s and accurately predicted the trend to continue for the next two decades. Even when this was shortly after the 1970s when people were still on the global cooling bandwagon.

He was also right about increased snow fall and net ice sheet growth. This where it starts to get really remarkable. Even though someone posted an op-ed the other day [stirs I think] that this proves GW is a hoax! [it doesn't] This argument is still being recycled again and again.

here's the model with the actual record added for comparison:

Attached File  image.jpg   123.87K   5 downloads

The report is here and also gets many things right that I Ieft out
http://pubs.giss.nas...Hansen_etal.pdf

-done for today

Edited by James, 16 October 2012 - 04:58 PM.


#15 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hug it chug it football

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,745 posts
  • LocationGreensboro

Posted 16 October 2012 - 05:02 PM

i would suggest that tracking the geological ice deposits left by the pleistocene and holocene suggest warming trends for a lot longer than anecdotal decade-length reports, but of course the earth is only 4,004 years old so all of those are just satan/democrat/libTARD lies


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.