How or Why we will reverse global warming

[SysError]

Having spent 20 plus in government "man-made global warming" is a complete, political fraud designed to consolidate power and wealth. Period!

Boo

While 20 years working for the gubment does not make anyone an expert (I have 28 years and counting), I agree its a lie.  Anyone with a discerning mind can take it all in and know the the "degrowther movement" is a fallacy designed to progress a lelftist agenda based on fear.  Typical

Yup. It's amazing what scientists will say when they see green eh? And I'll bet there are even more 'incentives' that go with it.

Do you really think that the government, this government together with other foreign governments, tens of thousands of scientists and thousands of educational/research institutions could have really pulled off such a fraud?  Really?

You have a lot more faith in the competence of governments than I!

[Chalenge]

It's not hard to come up with examples where millions of people have fallen into step because of such a fraud. Some by force, and some not.

[SysError]

Brooke, I forgot. 

We disagree about a lot of stuff, but I will never accuse you of the only morbid sin for which there is no path of redemption: Being an ignorant, boring person.

 

[Brooke]

I will say right up front that when I saw your comment I was a little taken back. 

Don't get flustered -- I'm poking fun at you, not seriously suggesting that you discount all those people.  It was a jest in response to your jest that I disqualified myself.

Cheer up -- we will probably have many more good debates to come. 

[Brooke]

Do you really think that the government, this government together with other foreign governments, tens of thousands of scientists and thousands of educational/research institutions could have really pulled off such a fraud?  Really?

This question wasn't directed at me, but my answer would be "Judging from history, absolutely!"

Having lived a large portion of my life in academia and having lived another portion of my life going after government grants and drawing on the history of science, I would say that an establishment holding onto a status quo and working to undermine anything contrary is quite common historically.  There are fads in science that are reinforced by cronyism, career-long investment in particular lines of thought, and the way government funding works.  My guess is that a large portion of the hype about global warming or now "climate change" will go down in history as a big example of such.  Past examples include entrenched (i.e., "settled science" and "consensus") yet as we now know erroneous opposition to:  plate tectonics, evolution, germ cause of disease, bacterial cause of ulcers, not to mention ancient ones like the earth revolving around the sun or the earth being round.

[SysError]

THe two questions required to join the "consensus" would actually make me a consensus member.

Oh you under rate yourself sir, they would make you chairman of a committee!

I could go on... The problem with warmists: you keep claiming to want totalk science but nonoe of you seen to have ever been within miles of it nor bothered to talk to any actual scientists.

I must say, if I were in your shoes, I do not think that I would have made a statement like that.  There are a number of reasons for staying quiet, removing a certain doubt that a reader might have would be one of them.



I should mention that I forwarded your post, under the subject line heading of: Well they found you out, to a colleague of mine.  (I had my post up front, followed by you observations).  I am pleased to report that your analysis was a hit!  (I am so tempted to say a big hit, or huge hit, but that would be a bit of an exaggeration.)  Keep up the good work! 

My grandmother used to say that the most important thing you can do for another human being is to bring a smile to their face.  If you believe and enjoy what you are saying let me assure you that, at least for now, there are a few people that you are bringing a smile to.

The perfect Win-Win?


“Science isn’t a democracy. It’s a dictatorship. Evidence does the dictating.”

[SysError]

It's not hard to come up with examples where millions of people have fallen into step because of such a fraud. Some by force, and some not.

I think that in a general sense you are right.  Thinking about it right now though, I would say that it usually involved religion or a State religion.

But think about it, trying to get 10 intellectuals to agree on the same thing, especially if they see themselves as “the expert in the field,” is almost always impossible.  So when you have thousands and thousands of them agreeing on more or less the same interpretation of the evidence, you are experiencing something unique.

Is science infallible?  No.  But it beats pulling facts out of your ass.


“Half of the people can be part right all of the time,
Some of the people can be all right part of the time.
I think Abraham Lincoln said that.
‘I'll let you be in my dreams if I can be in yours,’
I said that.”

       Bob Dylan

[SysError]

Ian Rutherford Plimer  is an Australian geologist, professor emeritus of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne, professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide, and the director of multiple mineral exploration and mining companies. He has published 130 scientific papers, six books and edited the Encyclopaedia of Geology.

....
PLIMER: "Okay, here's the bombshell. The recent volcanic eruption in Iceland. Since its first spewing of volcanic ash has, in just FOUR DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE  EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet - all of you.
 

So the Borg got you huh!

Your guy has been debunked a number of times:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2010/apr/21/iceland-volcano-climate-sceptics

I do think that the carbon tax and Cap and Trade are BS.  Too long a story…

(You were back on last night? Yes/No?)

[SysError]

Don't get flustered -- I'm poking fun at you, not seriously suggesting that you discount all those people.  It was a jest in response to your jest that I disqualified myself.

Cheer up -- we will probably have many more good debates to come. 

Copy

 

[eagl]

Well its clear that we need to levy a carbon tax on nations with active volcanoes.  Those countries shouldn't be permitted to ruin the earth for the rest of us, without paying for the measures necessary to offset all that horrible pollution spewed out by those countries.

[kappa]

China doesn't care about CO2 emissions.  China is scheduled to bring online more coal power plants in the next 15 years than currently exist in the US. 

(Image removed from quote.)

China is also starting their own carbon tax..

[ghi]

we are on the brink of ww3, global warming doom is not important; 

[Zimme83]

Around 97% of scientists gobally agree in that human activity have significant impact on climate. But yes - its probably a conspiracy, science is witchcraft. 

[SysError]

we are on the brink of ww3, global warming doom is not important;

Can I have your truck, assuming that it and I survive but you don’t?   

(I really do miss your missions.  Reaper does a very good job, but there is a certain flavor to your missions that I miss.  Maybe you do get on and I just do not know it.  Life has gotten in the way and there are so few times that I can get on these days.  )

[PJ_Godzilla]

Oh you under rate yourself sir, they would make you chairman of a committee!

I must say, if I were in your shoes, I do not think that I would have made a statement like that.  There are a number of reasons for staying quiet, removing a certain doubt that a reader might have would be one of them.

(Image removed from quote.)

I should mention that I forwarded your post, under the subject line heading of: Well they found you out, to a colleague of mine.  (I had my post up front, followed by you observations).  I am pleased to report that your analysis was a hit!  (I am so tempted to say a big hit, or huge hit, but that would be a bit of an exaggeration.)  Keep up the good work! 

My grandmother used to say that the most important thing you can do for another human being is to bring a smile to their face.  If you believe and enjoy what you are saying let me assure you that, at least for now, there are a few people that you are bringing a smile to.

The perfect Win-Win?


“Science isn’t a democracy. It’s a dictatorship. Evidence does the dictating.”

Beautiful. I present links to a number of articles from various journals - and it's only a minor subset of all those that are out there.

Then you have the brass to come back to me with the citation of hidden sources AND that final statement about evidence.

Nice try, but apparently the fish rots from the head right down to the fraudulent little fins.

And for the record, I'm not uncomfortable going head to head with any of your "colleagues". I took on Terry Root and Paul Ehrlich back at Stanford and got nothing but sputtering out of them . "Hidden sources" don't carry a lot of weight around here. Bluff Called: Put up or shut up.

By the way, as you try to impeach sources without evidence, you also will need to impeach this growing list of former IPCC scientists who've defected from lockstep orthodoxy - Bengtsson was only the latest: http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/05/08/leading-climate-scientist-defects-no-longer-believes-in-the-consensus/