Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
03-10-2011, 07:23 PM,
#1
The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
by Jo Nova

Almost everything you thought you knew about man made global warming might be a worthless half-truth. The evidence shows temperature controls carbon dioxide (you read that correctly). Temperatures rise first, and CO2 follows. Global warming is real, but it started a century (0r two) before our emissions. The world is warmer than in 1850, but cooler than 1,000 years ago, 8,000 years ago, 130,000 years ago, and cooler than most of the history of life on Earth. Big oil paid some skeptics, but Big Government outspent it 3,500 to 1, and even Big Oil spent far more on renewables than on “deniers”. Big Greens used to fight big corporates but now they are big-corporates. The real grassroots movement are the Skeptics. Lastly, Big Bankers want us to trade carbon. Think about that.

The Skeptics Handbook sums up the science (with cartoons)

I used to believe in man-made global warming. Then I found out that there was another side to the story and I was shocked. The good name of science is being exploited. Over $79 billion dollars has been fed into one side of a scientific question, while almost none has been put into auditing the reports, checking the results, or investigating other theories. (Which National Institute do climate skeptics apply for a job at? Answer: None.) We paid to find a crisis, and we got what we paid for. Thousands of skeptics are working pro bono because they are outraged. Retired scientists and engineers and teams of helpers are independently auditing official reports. They are busting major peer reviewed papers.

The killer question: How much will reducing emissions cost and how much warming will it save? They won’t name a number because it’s makes a parody of their policy. (See: Shut down Australia and save 0.01 degrees).

Why has this become so big?

In 2009, world carbon markets turned over $130 billion dollars. If a new global carbon market was created it will become a $2 Trillion dollar market, the largest commodity market in the world (bigger than oil). Banks want to broker those trades (thankyou, ka-ching ka-ching ka-ching). Auditors want to audit the unmeasurable, invisible gas; scientists want their rock star status, grants, and worldwide junkets; WWF would like the $60 billion in carbon credits it expects from buying Amazon forests; Solar and wind want the subsidies; Greens want votes, power and the chance to get control over everything down to the light globes you use, and most pathetically, journalists want to impress their friends at dinner parties. Few are brave enough to risk being called a “denier”. So the gravy train rolls on, and no one asks the obvious questions. Name-calling works eh?
The PDF reports that sum it up

For the overview of the only points that matters in the science, see the Skeptics Handbook (translated into 15 languages by volunteers). To find out about the massive money poured in and profits pulled out, see Climate Money.

Global Bullies want your money – expands on the money, politics, and science of the first handbook.

To see the pattern of how results are almost always adjusted in one direction, how the “science” of man-made global warming relies on data that’s hidden, adjusted, and on poor equipment, poor placement, and poor methodology, see Climate Corruption. How many excuses does it take?

The common ground?

Yes, carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. Yes it absorbs infra red and will probably make the air around it warmer. Did you know, even most alarmists will admit that doubling CO2 will only lead to 1.2 oC of warming. That’s the theoretical direct effect, see Hansen et al 1984. Did they forget to mention it? Often when people rave about how much evidence there is, they are only talking about this direct effect and this minor amount of warming*.

What’s THE bone of contention?

So why are we told the Armageddon of 3.5 degrees, or 6 degrees is coming!? Because their computer simulations assume that humidity will rise, stick around, and that water vapor (which is a more powerful greenhouse gas) will amplify that warming (along with cloud changes and other effects). This is called positive feedback. But there is no empirical (by observation) evidence that net feedbacks (mostly clouds and humidity) will amplify the warming in the long run. More>>
An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.
Mohandas Gandhi


Each of us is put here in this time and this place to personally decide the future of humankind.
Did you think you were put here for something less?
Chief Arvol Looking Horse
Reply
03-10-2011, 07:28 PM, (This post was last modified: 03-10-2011, 07:29 PM by Bluegrazz.)
#2
RE: The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
-Good stuff.
[Image: soldierpie.gif]
Reply
03-10-2011, 07:41 PM,
#3
RE: The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
Word!
Reply
03-10-2011, 08:18 PM, (This post was last modified: 03-10-2011, 08:42 PM by rsol.)
#4
RE: The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
Quote:Yes, carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. Yes it absorbs infra red and will probably make the air around it warmer. Did you know, even most alarmists will admit that doubling CO2 will only lead to 1.2 oC of warming. That’s the theoretical direct effect, see Hansen et al 1984. Did they forget to mention it? Often when people rave about how much evidence there is, they are only talking about this direct effect and this minor amount of warming*.

first off.

big bankers want us to trade in something. well thats a given. perhaps we are not actually in Afghanistan and iraq? perhaps its all a con to get your money. well no and yes. we are in iraq and Afghanistan and yes it is to get our money too.

could you make me a list of all the things bankers DONT make money from? im just saying. just because they want to make it so YOU pay and THEY dont....does that make it any less real? If they could tax the air they would. all they need is a reason. yes i whole heartedly agree with you.
carbon taxes, hydrogen fuel, biodegradable plastics. all ways to MAKE MONEY from an idea.

Almost every thing in life, there is someone making a fortune out of your fears and loves. you talk of economies destroyed by this. if you follow what these pricks are into, they pride them selves on creating economies not shutting them down. and without them, they have no power anyway. effectively shitting in your bed so no-one will sleep in it. selfish people are just not like that. they would rather get you to pay for their mistakes. remember.....MAKE MONEY. here's the kicker. they get put this into place and can now encourage more people to pollute through this propaganda campaign and make EVEN MORE!!!

Taxing car drivers has been going on for years and done nothing to stop people driving cars. so. this is not to stop global warming. its for us.

Its to make us feel like something is being done. that's all. its a way for big polluters to sponsor a tree and look like they have cleaned up their act. its ways for a bribe to be officially sanctioned from those without the friends on capital hill. Plus it keeps these dicks where they are. not one time EVER has anyone thought of homes powering themselves. Its a footnote at best.

Ill just reiterate

They use any excuse to centralise power and money, all it requires is an excuse,.it doesn't have to real any more than it has to be imagined. the real ones make it a whole lot easier.

But carry on denying...this way you just look like a kook while the MONEY goes to those paying attention. as always.

keep looking at the finger while they steal the moon.....

btw i have to lol at your cloudy day cool day thing. very funny. a total misunderstanding of heat. clouds are made of water vapour....the number 1 greenhouse gas. just because you face doesnt a nice warm shine on it you thin the whole planet reacts the same.... go to the coldest place on earth and check for humidity.... wear sun screen.
yeah no other theories that incorporate sunspot activity? none you have looked for...

what we both see is people exploiting fears to make money. can they make money from you doubting? yes. can they from you believing? yes.. sounds like them....
Reply
03-10-2011, 09:18 PM,
#5
RE: The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
(03-10-2011, 08:18 PM)rsol Wrote: what we both see is people exploiting fears to make money. can they make money from you doubting? yes. can they from you believing? yes.. sounds like them...

But if they (big banks or whatever) wants your money (and control of your activities), and they control the largest chunk of money in the world, isn't it possible that they sponsor ideas that benefit their agenda? If you get a grant for researching how man is creating global warming maybe it is easier to find it, and even believe it yourself. You then take your findings and base a computer model after them and add even more findings that show that your theory is right, when it maybe the model that is wrong. The papers look good with nice graphs and the wording is accordingly fearsome to make the CO2 taxes become a reality, the client and researcher happy both, more money coming in for both of them.

Maybe there is even more reasons for CO2 taxes. Listen to Bill bull away in this speech. He says he wants 0% CO2. Something has to go. What will he choose?



Reply
03-11-2011, 03:04 PM,
#6
RE: The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
To stop discussion:
1. Real deniers claim something needs to be peer reviewed in
order to be discussed. (Badluck for Galileo and Einstein
eh?) At the very least this slows down debate for up to
a year, instead of discussing results that are right in front
of us now.

2. Real deniers claim it only “counts” if it comes from a
certified climate scientist. (A flaw is a flaw, it doesn’t matter
who points it out.)

3. If it is peer reviewed, then real deniers claim it only counts
if it comes from certain journals. (The climate IS what
it IS, regardless of anything printed in any journal.)

4. They claim something can’t be right because it would
disagree with thousands of papers. They mock and laugh,
but provide no evidence. Not a single paper. (Then they claim
that it’s not a single paper but a “body of work”. Which
disagrees with point 1.)

5. Real deniers assert it must be wrong because there is a
“consensus”. Notice how they won’t talk about evidence?
Scientists don’t vote for natural laws. Science is not a
democracy.

6. If all else fails, they call people names: Denier,Delayer, Inactivist! This is stone age reasoning.

7. When they can’t find a real flaw, they look at “funding”.
(Real scientists research nature. Fake scientists google
for dirt.)

8. Real Deniers deny that instruments are right. No! The
simulations are more real than reality. Trust the models!

9. They threaten dissenters with jail. Climate Criminals!

The above was taken from the Skeptics Handbook
An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.
Mohandas Gandhi


Each of us is put here in this time and this place to personally decide the future of humankind.
Did you think you were put here for something less?
Chief Arvol Looking Horse
Reply
03-11-2011, 06:21 PM, (This post was last modified: 03-11-2011, 06:31 PM by rsol.)
#7
RE: The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
im sorry but a picture of rediation and sunspots telling my that having cloudy days based on radiation alone doesnt even REQUIRE peer review.

You are the one doing the denying. if you came up with sound evidence it would be worth it. EVERY skeptic picks on a few weeks in a year that is cold in winter thinking thats it its getting cooler. they say that cycles exist in climatology as though no-one knows about this.

Quote:6. If all else fails, they call people names: Denier,Delayer, Inactivist! This is stone age reasoning.
even when you make a list with you saying deniers deniers. come on you can do better.


The essence of science it to get something accurate. the aim of climate change denial is to confuse the population so they cant even make an informed conclusion.

Judging from most of the round about "it just doesnt make sense" arguments from those not willing to read.

Blame bankers for climate change theory instead of concentrating on blaming bankers for implimenting the policies. dont think you are being led down a garden path? ooowkaaay.

Quote:7. When they can’t find a real flaw, they look at “funding”.
(Real scientists research nature. Fake scientists google
for dirt.)
THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE DOING. YOU DONT LOOK AT THE SCIENCE AND DECIDE TO LOOK AT THE POLICIES AS THE REASON FOR THE THEORY. ITS A JOKE!


Quote:"But if they (big banks or whatever) wants your money (and control of your activities), and they control the largest chunk of money in the world, isn't it possible that they sponsor ideas that benefit their agenda? If you get a grant for researching how man is creating global warming maybe it is easier to find it, and even believe it yourself."
You have a point there. go and look into climate change funded by energy companies. not just now but over the past 30 years or so. most of the research money in the world is not for climatologists. its mostly low tech and doesnt require huge amounts of funding.. medical, plastics, adhesives. If you want to make money in science, climatology is not even a career choice. look at the stick you get just for releasing evidence....having rupert murdoch and isoaface OFF your side isnt exactly enticing.
Reply
03-11-2011, 07:12 PM,
#8
RE: The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
I'm sorry rsol, if you had any scientific evidence to back up your AGW claims you would have produced it. You don't have any that hasn't already been shown to be fraudulent. Hence your diatribes about how right you are and how wrong anyone who disagrees with you is. No evidence, just name calling and baseless accusations.
An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.
Mohandas Gandhi


Each of us is put here in this time and this place to personally decide the future of humankind.
Did you think you were put here for something less?
Chief Arvol Looking Horse
Reply
03-11-2011, 07:43 PM, (This post was last modified: 03-11-2011, 07:47 PM by rsol.)
#9
RE: The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
Quote:I'm sorry rsol, if you had any scientific evidence to back up your AGW claims you would have produced it.

i would like to point towards bullet point 2
right back at you mate. neither of us are qualified climatologists.

Quote:You don't have any that hasn't already been shown to be fraudulent.
i would like to point towards bullet point 3
Quote:Hence your diatribes about how right you are and how wrong anyone who disagrees with you is. No evidence, just name calling and baseless accusations.
im the denier remember? i thought this was made up by the powers that be? you talk of my baseless accusations.....

Are you telling my that the Sun, The Times. Sky news, Fox news. are all pushing this global warming agenda? or is Rupert being left out of this party?

Reply
03-11-2011, 08:54 PM,
#10
RE: The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
No, I'm not telling you anything of the sort rsol. I am saying that you don't have any evidence to support your assertion that AGW is happening.
An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.
Mohandas Gandhi


Each of us is put here in this time and this place to personally decide the future of humankind.
Did you think you were put here for something less?
Chief Arvol Looking Horse
Reply
03-11-2011, 09:18 PM, (This post was last modified: 03-11-2011, 09:41 PM by rsol.)
#11
RE: The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
yes we do.

You have decided it to be wrong.

You say suns spots. i say atmosphere. Your sunspots do actually have an effect on the earth. http://www.umpi.maine.edu/~mccartnk/nlights.htm

Do you want me to start listing all the proponants of the planets and their wobbles? do you want me to go through the history of when this was discovered?

your reasons are to do with its exploitation. you are willing to ignore evidence in order to keep them at bay, admirable but i think it plays into their hands.

Real solutions are ignored while more egregious solutions are the only opposition to you. check. this does nothing to the status quo and is as dangerous as a 40 a day habit. yeah you can take it. but at some point you're gonna get a funny feeling in your lungs.

these people have never cared about what the situation needs. they care about how to profit from the situation. if it helps then cool. if it doesn't then keep it secret. profess your success, bury your demons.

modus operandi
Reply
03-11-2011, 09:47 PM,
#12
RE: The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
(03-11-2011, 09:18 PM)rsol Wrote: You have decided it to be wrong.

You have decided it to be right. Show us some hockey sticks already!

Reply
03-11-2011, 10:16 PM, (This post was last modified: 03-11-2011, 10:18 PM by rsol.)
#13
RE: The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
lol

im feeling plenty of pot and kettle. the problem is one of new theories.

Now as you are sceptical of scientific theory. however, we can try.

Many "issues" with the theory i have explored tended to assume i dont understand how clouds form. Its a bit like the no-plane theory. It works fine as long as you know as little as possible about compositing. why waste your time listening to the guy saying you're wrong?

Ive been on this place for years. ive had a good old gander at some rather outlandish theories. in some cases just for a bit of fun or just to see who was making these. sort of know your enemy. I did find a few activist videos that i think were cointelpro because of the way they made the crowd talk of armed conflict "should the need arise" during an anti-war demo. very odd for peace protesters and far too articulate. never a missed word.

Ive looked at the moon landings, no-plane, chemtrails, zoinists, jesuits, templars, zero-point, the whole icke "thing" jones ...... i have tried to keep to a degree of trial and error. i have never believed anyone, only agree of disagree..... ive tried to keep on this. I have qualifications based mainly in maths. computing. i know a thing or two about photography and a shit load more on compositing, i play instruments and compose as best as i can. i smoke da hurb but thats about it. i dont even really like to drink.

I am even tempered and face my day with a smile.
I dont really care if you believe me. i would like you to realise your beliefs if they happen to be true. But if they are a danger to others including myself i have to say something. id be a fool not to.

One thing i have learned whilst visiting sites and sites and sites...
im less worried than i started.

some thing we may agree on.

Its not as bad as some make out.
Reply
03-11-2011, 10:33 PM,
#14
RE: The “ten second” guide to the world of skeptics
(03-11-2011, 10:16 PM)rsol Wrote: Its not as bad as some make out.

I was thinking, what's the worst that can happen if it isn't true?

Answer: The world won't end! The climate will continue to change as normal. Finally there will be an ice age and the world will be changed, but this hopefully lies in the distant future.

Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
Information The Singularity: Five Technologies That Will Change the World (and One That Won't) FastTadpole 10 4,500 01-28-2014, 05:53 PM
Last Post: FastTadpole
  Governments around the world are spying on their citizens using FinFisher Easy Skanking 2 954 03-19-2013, 02:55 PM
Last Post: CharliePrime
Information False Flag: Internet is out of IP addresses! The IPV6 Pillar to the Real World Web FastTadpole 3 1,749 12-03-2011, 03:50 PM
Last Post: sekular
Video Brave New World with Stephen Hawking FastTadpole 1 1,216 11-24-2011, 08:45 AM
Last Post: nwo2012
Exclamation Save MySQL, The World's Largest Open Source Database, from Oracle's Clutches FastTadpole 8 2,579 08-01-2011, 06:06 AM
Last Post: psilocybin
  Large Hadron Collider Could Be World's First Time Machine drummer 0 802 03-23-2011, 12:30 AM
Last Post: drummer
  What in the world are they spraying? Defendfreedom 6 1,468 02-24-2011, 10:34 AM
Last Post: rena42war
  Artificial life will revolutionize our world --- 1 776 02-18-2010, 01:27 AM
Last Post: jack
  Our world may be a giant hologram drummer 0 654 01-07-2010, 10:12 PM
Last Post: drummer
  Copenhagen climate conference: Nick Griffin calls world leaders mass murderers TriWooOx 3 1,013 12-16-2009, 09:25 AM
Last Post: humbug

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)