Climate Change: The Way Forward

**Mikeg** · December-03-09, 01:31 AM

Minnesotans for Global Warming presents

"Hide the Decline"

ziggyselbin · December-03-09, 06:51 AM

Originally Posted by elganned

No. I just refuse to believe that every climatologist everywhere in the world is part of some vast global conspiracy to take over the world [[somehow; the mechanism is never quite explained). That's just sheer paranoia.

And Crichton never met me. I think we'd have gotten along famously. He was a great man and a great mind--unlike some who seek to use their flawed grasp of his thought to justify some arcane purpose of their own.

He certainly describes you in his piece about the religion of environmentalism. You are fanatical. You are patronizing and sarcastic as you attempt to discredit any and I mean any dispute no matter how reputable. And classically like a religious fanatic you tell us we are doomed or crazy if we do not believe.........Crichton had you in mind.

**elganned** · December-03-09, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by ziggyselbin

He certainly describes you in his piece about the religion of environmentalism. You are fanatical.

No, just not paranoid.

You are patronizing and sarcastic

Conceded. However, some ideas deserve being dismissed patronizingly with sarcasm.

as you attempt to discredit any and I mean any dispute no matter how reputable.

Dismissing an entire world body of research on the basis of two professors who overstepped the line is not, dare I say, reputable. Or reasonable. Or rational.

And classically like a religious fanatic you tell us we are doomed or crazy if we do not believe

While you tell us that we are doomed and/or crazy to believe. Your point here was...?

Crichton had you in mind.

Yes, he often thought of me fondly. We exchanged Christmas cards.

H. L. Mencken had you in mind when he said, "No one ever went broke by underestimating the intelligence of the American public."

**rb336** · December-03-09, 09:11 AM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

And that is an inflated number, and it says nothing about anthropogenic origins...nor does it say anything about CO2 as casual.

When AL Gore's hockey stick graphs were debunked...even the correlative theory of CO2 and warming was lost.

actually, the debunking of the hockey stick was debunked time and time again

**rb336** · December-03-09, 09:15 AM

Originally Posted by ziggyselbin

It really is a religion to you isn't it elganned? Crichton had you in mind...........

take a look at crichton's sources. I didn't believe the GW stuff until AFTER I read crichton's book and started exploring his sources -- not a climatologist in the bunch, and virtually every one had ties to big oil, coal, etc. then i looked at the other side -- actual climatologists, actual peer-reviewed science journal publications. and not just one or two, but hundreds, now into the tens of hundreds

**Sstashmoo** · December-03-09, 09:48 AM

Quote: "actual climatologists, actual peer-reviewed science journal publications."

There is no doubt mans activity is altering the planets ecological state. How much is conjecture. The ruse is that we, 1/20th of the worlds polluters are going to mandate any sort of change that would have any significant impact. These folks tied to Goldman Sachs and others have the money bags open waiting to collect. That is the driving force behind the hysteria.

**elganned** · December-03-09, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by Sstashmoo

Quote: "actual climatologists, actual peer-reviewed science journal publications."

There is no doubt mans activity is altering the planets ecological state. How much is conjecture. The ruse is that we, 1/20th of the worlds polluters are going to mandate any sort of change that would have any significant impact. These folks tied to Goldman Sachs and others have the money bags open waiting to collect. That is the driving force behind the hysteria.

And so we return to the answer yet again: Death Panels. It's the only affordable option.

**rb336** · December-03-09, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by Sstashmoo

Quote: "actual climatologists, actual peer-reviewed science journal publications."

There is no doubt mans activity is altering the planets ecological state. How much is conjecture. The ruse is that we, 1/20th of the worlds polluters are going to mandate any sort of change that would have any significant impact. These folks tied to Goldman Sachs and others have the money bags open waiting to collect. That is the driving force behind the hysteria.

no, it's the driving force behind the wording of the carbon credits market.

there is, by the way, no hysteria involved, except in the right-wing denialist community, who froth at the mouth at any tiny problem, real or [[as in the case of the email thefts) imaginary

**Sstashmoo** · December-03-09, 10:46 AM

Ok, the use of fossil fuels are damaging the Ozone. A simple smackdown of India and China is not going to have much if any effect. I asked this the other day in the face of this silly argument: Which fossil fuels can you get by without? Man is not going to stop using fossil fuels or even reduce the emissions beyond what we currently see. This world runs on coal, oil and natural gas, all fossil fuels. The alarmists are pointing fingers and projecting like they have some sort of solution, they don't.

Quite frankly, I'm a bit tired of people talking about how we are destroying the planet. All my life, from the science community that has been their rant. David Suzuki ended every episode of Nova with "We're killng the planet" Yea and we're all going to die eventually, what does anyone plan on doing about it? It's natural process.

**elganned** · December-03-09, 11:05 AM

Sstashmoo, we're not killing the planet. The planet will get along just fine. Google "permian extinction"; you'll see what I mean.

The problem isn't that we're killing the planet, it's that we're killing ourselves.

As George Carlin put it in a stage show I attended, in reference to several Save the Planet t-shirts in the audience:

"'Save the planet'--what hubris! What unmitigated gall! The planet will get along just fine: it's people who are f**ked!"

ziggyselbin · December-03-09, 01:15 PM

elganned the fundamentalist. He/she finds it necessary to continue to insult my intelligence because I am not a true" believer"

Here is some more stuff for you to make fun of, discredit and be your usual smarmy jerk about.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...993737848.html

You can be an ass all you like; the jig is up.

**elganned** · December-03-09, 02:51 PM

Originally Posted by ziggyselbin

elganned the fundamentalist. He/she finds it necessary to continue to insult my intelligence because I am not a true" believer"

No.

I insult your intelligence because you cavelierly dismiss a HUGE body of published research on the basis of a few emails between two less-than-stellar exemplars of scientistific integrity.

I insult it because you seem to believe that these two were the only ones advocating the theory, and since they are discredited it negates all other studies and data.

I insult it because your conclusions were preformed, and now that you've found the tiniest sliver of a crack in the stone wall you feel justified in delcaring the entire ediface to be utterly ruined and demolished.

I insult it because it deserves to be insulted.

Here is some more stuff for you to make fun of, discredit and be your usual smarmy jerk about.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...993737848.html

You can be an ass all you like; the jig is up.

An opinion piece? From someone whose political biases are painfully evident and whose distrust of science and scientists shows through with every sentence? Who doesn't himself really understand the science he's talking about any more than you do?

That's the best you can come up with? *yawn*

**rb336** · December-03-09, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by elganned

That's the best you can come up with? *yawn*

it's the best any of them can come up with

ccbatson · December-03-09, 09:33 PM

2 points, the parties making the [[now known to be fallacious) claims carry the burden of proof. Nonetheless, the emails and rapidly growing debunking evidence disprove the hoax thoroughly.

Time to man the lifeboats libs...this one is going down fast.

ziggyselbin · December-03-09, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by rb336

it's the best any of them can come up with

Enjoying the Kool-aid are you RB? Why is it that you or any of the other fundamentalists are unable or unwilling to answer a simple fucking question?

If the science is indisputable why the need for all the shenanigans? It is a simple straightforward question. Of course it can only be answered by more bullshit because the credibility is greatly compromised. But the religion of environmentalism has you and elganned boxed in. For some pathetic unknown reason you can not admit that there is a serious breach of trust here. Amusing.

Elganned is reduced to buffoonery because rather then admit that there are valid questions, insults and sarcasm are all that he/she has left.

Btw at this point there is so much info about this scandal that I could link shit from now until next week. It is amusing to watch the squirming going on here as you all trey to mitigate this pile of shit.

**elganned** · December-03-09, 11:38 PM

Originally Posted by ziggyselbin

Elganned is reduced to buffoonery because rather then admit that there are valid questions, insults and sarcasm are all that he/she has left.

They are all you are worthy of.

Btw at this point there is so much info about this scandal that I could link shit from now until next week. It is amusing to watch the squirming going on here as you all trey to mitigate this pile of shit.

Don't be shy, my friend; link away. I'll read every one of them. But if they're all op-ed pieces from Rupert Murdoch owned media, don't be surprised if I don't give them a lot of thought.

ziggyselbin · December-04-09, 12:00 AM

Why bother you'll just gulp the Kool Aid like the sheep you are. Does not matter as the damage to the credibility is done.

dfunkycity · December-04-09, 12:27 AM

Originally Posted by ziggyselbin

Why bother you'll just gulp the Kool Aid like the sheep you are. Does not matter as the damage to the credibility is done.

Please don't try to have a logical conversation with the global warming crowd.

**d.mcc** · December-04-09, 12:40 AM

Originally Posted by ziggyselbin

Btw at this point there is so much info about this scandal that I could link shit from now until next week. It is amusing to watch the squirming going on here as you all trey to mitigate this pile of shit.

Actually, from what I have read, not to mention through countless discussions with Climate Scientists, Ecologists, and Geologists, there is plenty of evidence from other sources that support evidence provided by the ONE research group that is in the firestorm

Rideron · December-04-09, 06:32 AM

Look, if logic, common sense and critical thinking had any currency with global warmists; they wouln't be global warmists to begin with.

ziggyselbin · December-04-09, 06:49 AM

Originally Posted by d.mcc

Actually, from what I have read, not to mention through countless discussions with Climate Scientists, Ecologists, and Geologists, there is plenty of evidence from other sources that support evidence provided by the ONE research group that is in the firestorm

Then why the scandal? Why the need/desire to suppress?

Stosh · December-04-09, 07:59 AM

Originally Posted by ziggyselbin

Then why the scandal? Why the need/desire to suppress?

It's being propped up and promoted by Fox news, and the conservative bloggers.

Why should it be any different? Misinformation is misinformation.

And yes, the WSJ is Fox news.

dfunkycity · December-04-09, 08:12 AM

Originally Posted by Stosh

It's being propped up and promoted by Fox news, and the conservative bloggers.

Why should it be any different? Misinformation is misinformation.

And yes, the WSJ is Fox news.

So, since FOx is only 1 media giant that is propping it up then I guess the assumption would be the remaining giants are ignoring it why?

Yea, u guessed it, liberal media

**rb336** · December-04-09, 08:14 AM

Originally Posted by Rideron

Look, if logic, common sense and critical thinking had any currency with global warmists; they wouln't be global warmists to begin with.

you are, obviously, yet another poster who has no clue what logic or critical thinking means. It means going with the evidence, and the evidence is HEAVILY on the side of anthropogenic climate change. we have the mountain, you don't even have a molehill

**elganned** · December-04-09, 08:30 AM

Originally Posted by dfunkycity

So, since FOx is only 1 media giant that is propping it up then I guess the assumption would be the remaining giants are ignoring it why?

Yea, u guessed it, liberal media

Actually, that wasn't my guess at all. My guess was that the rest of the media sees it for what it is--a tempest in a teapot.