Resisting Climate Hysteria

[Ves]

And what is it? The first cyclone in two years? Geez I remember several a year as common.

There has been 5 named cyclones during the 2016/17 season.

Yvette, Alfred, Blanche, Caleb, and Debbie. As well as tropical lows 06U, 09U, 10U, 14U, 15U, 22U (which were all close, but didn't meet the official classifications of a cyclone system).

 

[noco]

Okay, lets go along with your uncertainty hypothesis for a moment.

The main source of nasty is the alarmists, wanting to imprison or assasinate sceptics, even if they are children... remember 350.org's little video?

Hoist by your own petard there olmate.

Today we had the extremist Green DH Adam Brandt trying to convince us that TC Debbie was caused by coal fired power stations.......What a grub.

 

[explod]

"Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (methane, carbon dioxide, etc.) let visible light pass through, but absorb infrared light

This causes the earth to heat up.

The warmer atmosphere emits more infrared light, which tends to be re-absorbed

Since the industrial age began around 1750, atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased by 40% and methane has increased by 150%.

Such increases cause extra infrared light absorption, further heating Earth above its typical temperature range (even as energy from the sun stays basically the same).

Energy that gets to Earth has an even harder time leaving it causing Earth’s average temperature to increase–– producing global climate change.

Emissions are measurable. Temperature changes are measurable. The effects are measurable.

They lead to the same conclusion. 97% of scientists agree. The standouts have ties to fossil fuel industries.

Thanks Karen! "

https://www.indy100.com/article/cli...ing-lorrie-goldstein-twitter-mic-drop-7476856

The last sentence says it all really.

 

[noco]

"Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (methane, carbon dioxide, etc.) let visible light pass through, but absorb infrared light

This causes the earth to heat up.

The warmer atmosphere emits more infrared light, which tends to be re-absorbed

Since the industrial age began around 1750, atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased by 40% and methane has increased by 150%.

Such increases cause extra infrared light absorption, further heating Earth above its typical temperature range (even as energy from the sun stays basically the same).

Energy that gets to Earth has an even harder time leaving it causing Earth’s average temperature to increase–– producing global climate change.

Emissions are measurable. Temperature changes are measurable. The effects are measurable.

They lead to the same conclusion. 97% of scientists agree. The standouts have ties to fossil fuel industries.

Thanks Karen! "

https://www.indy100.com/article/cli...ing-lorrie-goldstein-twitter-mic-drop-7476856

The last sentence says it all really.

Here we again on this fictitious 97% of scientist agree....That is really old hat that you bring up again in the hope that viewers have forgotten your claim being false.

From my post #8650

Explod, here we go again on this 97% of scientists.....You are starting to go over the same ground which has been debunked.

Go back and read posts :-
8447
8457
8463
8467
8477
8480

It was 97% 0f 77 scientists paid for by the UN Climate Change Committee........there are some 35,500 who say they are wrong.

So please get off the Merry-go-round.

And from my post #8951

Al Gore's 10 year predictions in 2006 about Global Warming has come back to bite him......He now has egg on his face.


http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/01...g-point-refuses-to-answer-enters-suv-in-snow/

Coleman’s Key Climate Facts:

• 97% of scientists do NOT agree that the science of climate change is settled. Not by a long shot. That oft-quoted statistic was totally fabricated as is the claim that the tiny fraction of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as a result of mankind’s use of fossil fuels to power our wonderful civilization of smart phones, heating and air conditioning and swift and safe transportation is in some magical way destroying our climate. The 97% claim has been disproved over and over again, but Gore, government and media continue to issue horrible scare claims.

• The oceans are not going to flood our cities.
• Massive killer storms are not going to sweep the Earth.
• Heat waves are not going kill millions.
• Our crops are not going to fail.
• (More on the latest climate science here:

 

[Tink]

Adam Bandt said the same when we had the Victorian bushfires.

 

[Knobby22]

Last year was the hottest March ever. This year might break this record.
The Great Barrier Reef is dying and cruise ships can now sail over the Arctic in summer.

Everyone run around and hold their heads and say "not happening!".

 

[noco]

Al Gore gets rewarded by the Victorian Government in his efforts to close coal fired power stations.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/a...g/news-story/64b52480d71278d017ba56c0a4683e89

 

[luutzu]

Last year was the hottest March ever. This year might break this record.
The Great Barrier Reef is dying and cruise ships can now sail over the Arctic in summer.

Everyone run around and hold their heads and say "not happening!".

At first they say it's not happening; then they'll say it happen all the time, so what's the big deal?

 

[orr]

'For pro-free marketers climate change is a nasty bur in their shoe. If you accept climate change could lead to rising sea levels, coastal inundation, dislocation of large masses of people, increased intensity of tropical storms and droughts, and grave risks to food and water supply, then you have to accept the market failed to account for such impacts and not only allowed, but ensured they would happen.

Little wonder many free marketeer thinktanks and political parties have instead embraced lunatic theories about climate change being a conspiracy involving the UN, Nasa, every university in the world, China, all major meteorological bodies, the World Bank and the makers of tin foil hats.

Delusion is preferable to admitting fault.'

A very concise couple of paragraphs...

 

[noco]

'For pro-free marketers climate change is a nasty bur in their shoe. If you accept climate change could lead to rising sea levels, coastal inundation, dislocation of large masses of people, increased intensity of tropical storms and droughts, and grave risks to food and water supply, then you have to accept the market failed to account for such impacts and not only allowed, but ensured they would happen.

Little wonder many free marketeer thinktanks and political parties have instead embraced lunatic theories about climate change being a conspiracy involving the UN, Nasa, every university in the world, China, all major meteorological bodies, the World Bank and the makers of tin foil hats.

Delusion is preferable to admitting fault.'

A very concise couple of paragraphs...

And when is all this going to happen?

Reminder..Tim Flannery said 10 years ago we never get enough rains to fill the dams in Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne......They are all full.....He said we would have continous drought for decades and crops would fail.....All the Labor states at the time took his advice and built desalinization plants costing billions dollars and still costing $500,000 to maintain each day an now in moth balls.......Where did he get his information from?..Was it the UN, NASA, NOAA or the CSIRO?

 

[luutzu]

And when is all this going to happen?

Reminder..Tim Flannery said 10 years ago we never get enough rains to fill the dams in Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne......They are all full.....He said we would have continous drought for decades and crops would fail.....All the Labor states at the time took his advice and built desalinization plants costing billions dollars and still costing $500,000 to maintain each day an now in moth balls.......Where did he get his information from?..Was it the UN, NASA, NOAA or the CSIRO?

Heard some climatologist saying how there's no new water on Earth. That whatever H2O there were when the Earth was formed, it's still there now.

That means that when one part of the Earth get more rainfall than usual, somewhere else will get less than usual.

Which part of the world will get flooded and which will suffer droughts scientists cannot predict.

One thing that's predictable is that lives will be lost, property damaged, and we all pay for it.

So while QLD and NSW have been drenched like a tropical cyclone just pass through it, places like Somalia, South Sudan have been suffering drought, its crops destroyed and the population there are in a famine.

There was a drought in Syria a few years ago. Forcing its farmers to leave the land and head for the city. That create social unrest and certain faction within Syria thought to use that to overthrow the gov't. Certain friends of ours thought that's a good idea and here we are, liberating another ME country like it's never been done before.

Maybe us lucky few in rich countries are used to changing our own climate at a flick, with healthcare and developed infrastructures to know what it feels like living among open sewers, rubbish tips and general tin sheds... but a proper downfall tend to wash shiets all over the place, breed mosquitoes and viruses, or just drown them in a mudslide.

But I guess that's other people's problems and climate has always been changing.

 

[SirRumpole]

.there are some 35,500 who say they are wrong.

Name 5,000 of them.

 

[noco]

Name 5,000 of them.

LMAO.

 

[explod]

LMAO.

Because you cant. You are stuck.

Well just name a few of them.

 

[wayneL]

There could possibly be a few named here http://www.petitionproject.org

 

[SirRumpole]

There could possibly be a few named here http://www.petitionproject.org

One of the people who signed that petition was Edward Teller, famous physicist and nuclear bomb designer who was one of the first proponents of AGW.

He died in 2003, so he never saw the last 14 years of global temperature data which shows rapidly increasing warming.

The petition itself was last circulated in 2007, 10 years ago so it's somewhat out of date. It's called the Oregon Petition and has been discredited by people submitting false names, and having most of it's claimed PhD signatories not being involved in climate science.

The petition was organized and circulated by Arthur B. Robinson, president of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (described as "a small independent research group") in 1998, and again in 2007.[1] Frederick Seitz, then the chairman of the George C. Marshall Institute, wrote a cover letter endorsing the petition, emphasizing connection to the National Academy of Sciences (of which Seitz had previously served as president).[2][3] "In a highly unusual move, the National Academy held a press conference to disclaim the mailing and distance itself from its former president."[3]

Robinson asserted in 2008 that the petition has over 31,000 signatories, with 9,000 of these holding a PhD degree.[1] Most signatories with a PhD hold their degree in engineering.[4] A 2009 report of the Nongovernmental Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC)—a group that "disputes the reality of man-made climate change"[5]—lists 31,478 degreed signatories, including 9,029 with PhDs.[6] The list has been criticized for its lack of verification, with pranksters successfully submitting the names of Charles Darwin, a member of the Spice Girls and characters from Star Wars, and getting them briefly included on the list.[7]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Petition

 

[wayneL]

So its like Cookes 97%?

 

[noco]

There could possibly be a few named here http://www.petitionproject.org

Thanks Wayne...I do remember posting a similar list some tome ago.

 

[noco]

So its like Cookes 97%?

Yes, that 97% of the 77 UN Climate Change well paid goons was probably some years ago also.

So its like Cookes 97%?

I believe that 97%????? was also about 10 years ago.

 

[orr]

So its like Cookes 97%?

Of the 'scientific' Literature you like to subscribe to; who amongst them have prepared you for the bleaching and consequent death of vast areas of the barrier reef. Or do you prefer James Delingpols(on Breightbart funnily enough) assertion that these events are 'fake news'.
Which of your sources are explaining the;
* Disappearance of Arctic ice?
*East coast US and Florida's flooding?
*Exxons studies concluding the warming effects of the burning of fossil fuel on the atmosphere?
*the Koch brothers like while investigations?
*little things like the laws of thermodynamics?

*Every serious Business organisation in the country calling for an emissions trade scheme. To which the right wing of of the Federal Government seem oblivious. Oblivious is a comfortable bedfellow to delusion.

It's ok we all know....'Delusion is preferable'