The USA Political Thread

[lennco]

Here you can spout your USA political views.

Rules:
1. Keep it clean
2. No fighting
3. Respect the views of others.
4. US Political views, No Religious views
5. Have fun

:wave:

 

[Keith]

Global Warming was proven to be fraud

Completely false. In fact, most scientists around the world are in agreement that global warming is occurring.

 

[Theo Goodman]

There is no way in h3ll that Germany has more sun than most states in the USA. HAHAH

 

[GILSAN]

Gilsan, my responses to you have been from what I quoted:

"the Bullshit MSM should be doing investigative reporting... but since they are owned by Big Corporations, they conveniently leave out the inconvenient truths"

My next response after the one you just quoted, I proved that to be false. MSM does talk about it. Fracking is a good topic but you always go off on your MSM nonsense, that's been taken apart many times already because it's false.

As far as fracking, I'm going to trust the people/scientists behind the environment vs. a company trying to make money from it. They've already shown there have been problems with it, leaks, increased disease in those areas etc. Kind of like that movie Erin Brockovich, they should get some of that water in those areas, some of that water that catches fire, put it in a glass and have the fracking people's kids drink it, see if they're ok with that.

Just to get the record straight, I didn't say they don't talk about it, just NOT ENOUGH. On my post #1004 I said:

"In the US there´s been an increase in gas production through the "Fracking" technique which is a very pollutant method that the media has not talked enough about".

I hear talk that the US will be self reliant on energy in 5-10 thanks to all the new found gas reserves. They hardly ever mention that it's done using "fracking"

That means that in the near future you'll have a few million more Americans with strange illnesses thanks to all the crap they'll be drinking from the water supply, as if all the Genetically Modified Crops and Foods is not bad enough already.

---------- Post added at 02:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:14 PM ----------

There is no way in h3ll that Germany has more sun than most states in the USA. HAHAH

Just check out this comparative Map of Germany, Spain and the USA
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ower-as-the-u-s-despite-alaska-levels-of-sun/

 

[DU]

For starters; Scientists who aren't financed by the Federal Government OR the Oil industry.. When the US Government cuts off all funding to Climatologists and Scientists who dispute Global Warming and fully fund the ones who do support the theory, that is NOT Science.

Global Warming was proven to be fraud, why do you think they don't use the term anymore? But of course environmentalists and our Government will never admit it, doing so would cut off Trillions of potential revenue to Governments pushing for Cap and Trade, which would amount to higher energy rates for everyone rich or poor and MORE revenue for the Federal Government to waste.

So now i know who you dont use.

Am I to infer you read journals written by unpaid scientists who proved it to be a fraud (by which I mean invalid use of the scientific method).

I just want to know where you get your incontrovertible evidence. Where you find unbiased science that details all the facts in laymans terms.

Is there ANY truth anywhere?

 

[verbster]

For starters; Scientists who aren't financed by the Federal Government OR the Oil industry.. When the US Government cuts off all funding to Climatologists and Scientists who dispute Global Warming and fully fund the ones who do support the theory, that is NOT Science.

Global Warming was proven to be fraud, why do you think they don't use the term anymore? But of course environmentalists and our Government will never admit it, doing so would cut off Trillions of potential revenue to Governments pushing for Cap and Trade, which would amount to higher energy rates for everyone rich or poor and MORE revenue for the Federal Government to waste.

"Global warming was proven to be a fraud..." is like saying Germany gets more sun than the U.S. She had no clue about what she was saying, either. Being close-minded is a disease that feeds on itself, sort of like extremists who make it a point not to let reality get in the way of ignorance no matter what the cost.

 

[RaiderGirl]

Completely false. In fact, most scientists around the world are in agreement that global warming is occurring.

When I wrote that Global Warming is a Fraud, I was referring to the LIE surrounding Global Warming, that neither Man or C02 is the root cause as so many environmentalists, scientists, politicians and the media had the public believing.

Sure the earth has warmed by 1 degree, nobody is disputing that, what's in dispute is that C02, Man made C02 in particular is NOT the cause for the temperature increase.

Al Gore and all the wacky environmentalists want you to believe that temperature follows C02, this where the LIE is... Credible and independent climate Scientists from around that world as you say, have also proved beyond a reasonable doubt that it is C02 that follows temperature and not the other way around.
FRAUD.

So to answer your question, YES there is consensus the earth has warmed, but there is NO consensus as to the reason.

Many climatolagists suggest Solar variation is the cause, but we don't fund that research because theirs nothing to benefit from it, We have to blame someone in order to Tax so we create a LIE about C02 and blame the oil and coal industry as means of taxation.

Were talking $10 TRILLION dollars in revenue to the Government;

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/042810-531731-the-10-trillion-climate-fraud.htm?p=full

Who do you think is going to pay for it?

Follow the money!

The debate is more, what's causing it. Man or just natural cycles.

Yes, sorry you didn't get that in my previous post.

---------- Post added at 09:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:06 PM ----------

I just want to know where you get your incontrovertible evidence. Where you find unbiased science that details all the facts in laymans terms.

For one, the Ice core records taken at Vostok.
http://www.climatedata.info/Proxy/Proxy/icecores.html

I trust you didn't research these before pinning your beliefs on what politicians and the mainstream media spoon feed to the public every time Globull Warming or rather the new terminology "Climate Change" is mentioned.

 

[DU]

Al Gore and all the wacky environmentalists want you to believe that temperature follows C02, this where the LIE is... Credible and independent climate Scientists from around that world as you say, have also proved beyond a reasonable doubt that it is C02 that follows temperature and not the other way around.
FRAUD.

For the two warming periods in the 20th century using your source:

" It generally accepted that the first warming period was natural and the second was a result of CO2 and other anthropogenic greenhouse gases"

Other comments:
"The results presented so far have suggested that GHGf is the main factor in explaining the underlying rise in temperature and the AMO explains why the rate of temperature increase sometimes accelerates and sometimes decelerates."

"For the full period of calculation, 1856 to 2011, virtually the whole increase has been caused by the increase in GHGs.
For the last century, 1911 to 2011, 20% of the increase is due to the AMO and the remainder to GHGf.
For the period of rapid temperature rise from 1976 to 2005, half the increase was related to the AMO."

The AMO is projected to decrease now meaning that the temperatures won't likely rise as rapidly as they have (according to his model).

The problem is that when the cycle kicks back up again rapid heating will resume in 20-30 years.

All this from your source.

Oh, and the CO2 lag is due to it being part of a feedback cycle. Warming increases C02 which increases warming.

For one, the Ice core records taken at Vostok.
http://www.climatedata.info/Proxy/Proxy/icecores.html

I trust you didn't research these before pinning your beliefs on what politicians and the mainstream media spoon feed to the public every

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to get out of the link provided. It's an examination of the use of ice core records and their accuracy as a proxy. What's the research that says something about climate change being a FRAUD?

time Globull Warming or rather the new terminology "Climate Change" is mentioned.

What's your issue with the name change?

Clearly you must understand that while underlying temperatures are increasing there are natural oscillations that cause the temperature to flatter or even decrease making the term global warming incorrect? Also,I assume you understand that the term global warming is an issue due to urban warming and other measurement issues on land?

In general that site does not state that man has no involvement in the climate change. It's clearly documented as a primary parameter in all their models. They do debate whether natural cycles account for 5-30% or 50% in the last 10 years or so but they still don't deny man made attributes.

I also don't know if Arctic methane release is fully considered as this, by all accounts, is happening at a rate far exceeding all models. In fact, in general, most models have under accounted for a number of significant tipping points (ice sheets melting rate and ice sheet formation).

I'm not sure what organizations such as NASA and the NOAA are doing reaching similar conclusions using different measurements to say that 9 of the hottest years of the last 132 have all occurred since 2000. I guess we can't trust them because they're all government paid. I don't suppose we should trust teachers either as most of them are on the payroll.

Finally:
Is there a proven causal link between smoking and cancer yet? The problem is that people want proof that climate change is caused by something... there's a difference between causation and correlation that is what sceptics always use to their advantage. There can only be modelling and prediction. There is no direct measurement of temperature only proxies (as your Vostok ice cores prove). I don't buy into the all published scientists are paid off and everyone else is held back by the men in suits. Everyone is aware of ClimateGate and all that other bullshit that went on 2008 but much of that swung the pendulum too far. The anti-climate change groups continue to hang a lot of their weight on leaks years ago.

Some exaggerated claims by the IPCC shouldn't be used to deny a correlation.

The tobacco industry has used a lack of directly proven causation as an excuse for years even though a correlation was proven by a huge study in the 1940s. You want to wait that long for climate change to get to some consensus?

I don't have kids so I'm not really that concerned with what happens in 2060. I won't have grandkids so 2100 is meaningless.. for me? it makes no difference if the earth even exists. If you have kids, you might care more than me, and I hope for their sake that you're right.

 

[DU]

Also, I don't know anything about the authors of that site. I should not be taking them at face value either I suppose.

So how do I know who to trust again?

 

[Theo Goodman]

C02 Release
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SCdqybEfy9w

 

[verbster]

I see the Republicans and Tea Party are going at it. The Tea Party co-founder mass e-mailed a photo of Karl Rove dressed as a Nazi. That's about as nasty as it gets and qualifies for my "Wackos of the Month" award. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy, but no one deserves to be portrayed as such a monster.

http://news.msn.com/politics/tea-party-email-depicts-karl-rove-as-a-nazi

 

[Domainace]

Search "bush hitler" on Google images and you'll get endless pages of these. The discourse was lowered years before the Tea Party came along, by many of the same people who are now in power.
You could maybe argue that the internet has enabled this mass lowering of standards. Not too long ago, people had to actually make an effort for their opinions/images to be widely shown.

 

[verbster]

True enough, but the fact that the leaders of political party stoop to this kind of shit, and worse yet, that millions of Americans agree with it is disconcerting.

 

[RaiderGirl]

Also, I don't know anything about the authors of that site. I should not be taking them at face value either I suppose.

So how do I know who to trust again?

Fair enough, so my questions to you are;

1) If you don't trust the site then why did you bother reading it?
2) What is the point in me responding to your questions raised on a web site that you don't trust?

BUT you DO seem to trust the parts that agree with your position....

Honestly, I pulled the first site I found in a Google search that addressed the Ice core records at Vostok, it was intended NOT as proof but for the reader to familiarize himself with collected data that clearly points to C02 lagging behind temperature, I don't know about you but I'm more willing to trust physical hard evidence as opposed to made up MODEL data used by Scientists who have a environmental agenda, such as James Hansen.

Fact is when you look at average global temperature in 2012, it is the same as it was in 1997, NO increase....

But yet C02 levels continue to increase, so if C02 drives temperature as the Global warmers want us to believe, then why hasn't temperature increased in 16 years?

It hasn't increased because Global Warming is nothing but a HOAX, just like Global Cooling was a HOAX in the 1970's..

We even have our President perpetrating the HOAX when he repeats the same LIES over and over that Man is to blame, WE are to blame, He smart enough to knowsthat if Government can point blame on mankind, it is mankind who is more willing accept a massive energy TAX, AKA; Cap and Trade.

And we never let a natural disaster go to waste do we? Obama will always capitalize on it, blaming the new term "Climate Change" for every NATURAL occurrence, Warming, Cooling, Wind, Rain, Hurricanes, Tornadoes, even Earthquakes.. It's all OUR fault.. Even though we've had ALL of these natural occurrences and disasters LONG BEFORE fossil fuels were even used.. But we don't mention that, that doesn't fit into the "Climate Change" narrative.


Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released... and here is the chart to prove it

The figures reveal that from the beginning of 1997 until August 2012 there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures

This means that the ‘pause’ in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...y-released--chart-prove-it.html#ixzz2LPjzviUd

 

[DU]

Honestly, I pulled the first site I found in a Google search that addressed the Ice core records at Vostok, it was intended NOT as proof but for the reader to familiarize himself with collected data that clearly points to C02 lagging behind temperature,

It's part of a feedback cycle. Read the papers you linked to last time.

I don't know about you but I'm more willing to trust physical hard evidence as opposed to made up MODEL data used by Scientists who have a environmental agenda, such as James Hansen.

All future predictions are based on models. Those models are based on scientific theories/explanations and attempts to understand the past and the current. There is no hard proof when it comes to climate. It's based on models and there's lots of explanation about the flaws and positives of each one.
Read the papers you linked to.

Fact is when you look at average global temperature in 2012, it is the same as it was in 1997, NO increase....

But yet C02 levels continue to increase, so if C02 drives temperature as the Global warmers want us to believe, then why hasn't temperature increased in 16 years?

And you measured average global temperature how?
You considered AMO? You considered GHG?

Perhaps you should read the papers you linked to.

It hasn't increased because Global Warming is nothing but a HOAX, just like Global Cooling was a HOAX in the 1970's..

Why 16 years? Why not 100 years?

But whatever. Obviously there's no global warming, CO2 is a big hoax so lets build more factories, remove pollution regulation and see if your kids end up lucky. Oh wait.. what's the conclusion of your conservative newspaper...

So let’s be clear. Yes: global warming is real, and some of it at least has been caused by the CO2 emitted by fossil fuels. But the evidence is beginning to suggest that it may be happening much slower than the catastrophists have claimed – a conclusion with enormous policy implications.

Well, not exactly a hoax, then.
Perhaps you should read the papers you linked to.

Frankly, if you're not reading what you post links to I don't know what you're trying to offer. You don't even appear to read simple one page articles that you link to. It's kind of a pointless exercise. You don't even understand that the ice cores aren't a definitive exact science but are based on predictions/models - you do realize that God didn't leave little thermostat recordings in there right?

The fucking world is a hoax to a solipsist.

 

[JB Lions]

From Nasa GISS Surface Temperature Analysis

"Why 16 years? Why not 100 years?"

She knows 100 years would give a clearer picture. And we can't have that.

 

[DU]

This link says something about why conservatives hate Obama:

http://www.streetsense.org/2012/06/why-conservatives-hate-obama/

Don't ask me what it says I didn't read it. He's too liberal or something.

 

[RaiderGirl]

All future predictions are based on models. Those models are based on scientific theories/explanations and attempts to understand the past and the current. There is no hard proof when it comes to climate. It's based on models and there's lots of explanation about the flaws and positives of each one.
Read the papers you linked to.

This we can agree on but you left out that a lot of these models are exaggerated, some intentionally.... Computer models is what the whole Global Warming THEORY is based upon, models that give us false predictions that opportunists like Al Gore exploit.

Or flawed and exaggerated models like NASA's James Hansen that clearly misled the American public and the rest of the world into believing something that is factually NOT true... http://www.climatechangedispatch.co...as-been-greatly-exaggerated-by-climate-models

Why 16 years? Why not 100 years?

Seems you didn't read the article.

CO2 is a big hoax so lets build more factories, remove pollution regulation and see if your kids end up lucky. Oh wait.. what's the conclusion of your conservative newspaper...

Your suggesting that C02 is a pollutant?

Protecting our environment is not a left or right issue, so please don't make it one... At one time I too believed that Global Warming was a real threat based primarily on what I heard in the media, it wasn't until I researched the subject myself and found out there is NO hard evidence to support the theory, that most of the evidence was based on flawed data, Scientists who will say almost anything to keep the flow of money coming in.. But the strongest evidence of all was Global Temperature itself, that is was NOT increasing, that it hasn't increased from 16 years ago as the article points out.

I think most ALL of us want to protect our environment, but selling the world on a LIE is not how to go about it... Government telling us theirs a consensus among Scientists when Government funds Science who agree with the theory and DE-Funds Scientists who don't, that is NOT Science, that is FRAUD.

Now for those who believe C02 is a major contributor to Global Warming, I ask that you all contribute in reducing C02, Here are some helpful hints;

Ways to stop producing carbon dioxide

Stop breathing - When you exhale you release carbon dioxide

Dont drive - We all know how bad driving is

Don't live in a house/apartment/condo or any building that uses gas or electricity - Homes produce 2-3 times as much carbon as cars.

Don't wear shoes or any sort of clothing produced in a factory. Grow a cotton field and make your own clothes by hand.

Quit school - Those school buildings produce more carbon in a year then you do in 20 years.

Eat meat raw - Whether you're using gas or electric both produce carbon dioxide.

Turn off this monitor and computer - You hypocrite.

Don't use toilets, urinate or poo in your back yard.- The water to your house is cleaned and sent to your house using pumps that use electricity.

Stop exercising - Increasing your heart rate increases the amount of oxygen you take in and turn into carbon dioxide.

Die - Dying younger means you will do all of the above less. Living one year less means you will save the earth 8.4 tons of carbon dioxide every year you're not here!

http://globalwarminglies.com/

You don't even understand that the ice cores aren't a definitive exact science but are based on predictions/models -

LOL.. .Nonsense.
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/vostok.html

 

[DU]

LOL.. .Nonsense.
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/vostok.html

Quote:

"Using semiempirical models...."

Quote (my emphasis):

"reported that the age difference between air and ice may be ~6000 years during the coldest periods instead of ~4000 years"

I'll leave you to look into what the relevance of the age difference between air and ice.

I have established you have the capability to use google with filter bubble mode full on and at least scan through the top 4 results. Well done.

 

[RaiderGirl]

I have established you have the capability to use google with filter bubble mode full on and at least scan through the top 4 results. Well done.

I have established you have the capability of cherry picking only the arguments that agree with your position while ignoring the arguments that don't... Well done.

I don't know where you've been but the Man Made Global Warming Hoax was exposed for what it was over 3 years ago, You heard of "Climate Gate" right?

Maybe this will get you up to speed;

'Climategate' Exposes the Global Warming Hoax

The Internet has been abuzz throughout the past week with the news of what everyone is calling ‘Climategate’ -- a major scandal involving leaked emails and data from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA). Located in the town of Norwich in the United Kingdom, the Climatic Research Unit is a primary center for the ‘science’ that supports the theory of Global Warming. The CRU provides ‘scientific’ advice and guidance to the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

On November 17th an anonymous whistleblower downloaded email and data files from computers at the Climatic Research Unit and, using a Internet server based in Russia, posted them on a ‘Global Warming skeptic’ website called The Air Vent. Soon thereafter the files were forwarded to numerous other ‘skeptic’ websites and news outlets. The leaked files include more than 1,000 emails and about 3,000 documents, and they provide abundant evidence of falsification of data among the scientists at the forefront of promoting the theory of Global Warming.

The leaked emails consist of correspondence between many of the top researchers in the field of climate science and Global Warming, including CRU’s Director Phillip Jones and his assistant, Keith Briffa; Michael Mann at Pennsylvania State; Malcolm Hughes at the University of Arizona; Kevin Trenberth at the National Center for Atmospheric Research; James Hansen at NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies; and James Holdren, US President Barack Obama’s new ‘Science Czar’. The authenticity of the leaked emails and documents has been verified by Phillip Jones of CRU, Kevin Trenberth, and others.

The emails and documents reveal that the scientists at the CRU and their colleagues in the USA not only falsified their data to ‘prove’ Global Warming, they also collaborated to prevent qualified scientists who disagreed with the theory of Global Warming from publishing or participating in the ‘peer reviews’ process. The belief in Global Warming among scientists is not a consensus; it is a dictatorship.

The whistleblower who downloaded and posted the CRU files worked under the username ‘FOIA’, a reference to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in the United States. The CRU has repeatedly refused FOIA requests for release of the data on which their computer models and onclusions about Global Warming are based. Obstruction of the release of information under the FOIA is a crime in both the UK and the USA, nd the guilty scientists can be punished with fines or jail time.

In the UK, former Chancellor Lord Lawson has called for an ndependent public inquiry into the facts of the CRU’s falsification of data to support the theory of Global Warming. In the USA, Republican Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma announced that he will launch an investigation into the Climategate scandal. Inhofe’s office has sent letters to the scientists involved and to federal agencies warning them to “retain (related) documents.” In Australia this week, ten Labour Party MPs (Members of Parliament) resigned their seats in protest of their government’s support of the proposed Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), an equivalent of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme and the pending Cap and Trade legislation in the USA.

‘Climategate’ is not an ordinary case of falsifying data by a few rogue scientists. The fraudulent theory of Global Warming has provided the basis for an international political movement which has the stated goal of completely restructuring the entire global economy based on that fraudulent theory. ‘Global Warming’ is a con game perpetrated by dishonest scientists and the government and corporate leaders who provide the corrupt scientists with opportunities for advancement.

If we fail to stop the further politicization and institutionalization of the fraudulent theory of Global Warming, we will most certainly experience a future of ‘science’ controlled by government decree and of a world government that facilitates the operations of corporate industries while imposing severe restrictions and arbitrary taxes on the general public.

That is a future which would fully justify resistance and rebellion among the international populations who will be the victims of this massive global fraud. If we fail to stop this fraudulent enterprise by legal means, we will certainly have a future of global oppression based on fraud, with its attendant institutionalized crimes, and whatever popular backlash might eventually result.

http://english.pravda.ru/science/earth/30-11-2009/110832-climategate-0/

Hard evidence of FRAUD

It is this hard evidence that silenced the LIARS in Washington DC from uttering the words; "Global Warming"

"Climate Change" is now the new CON, whenever theirs a storm like Hurricane Sandy or Katrina, blame it on
"Climate Change" When we experience cold weather; "Climate Change" When it's Hot "Climate Change" When it rains "Climate Change"

Obama knows that most people are ignorant when it comes to science and historical data, so he plays on that ignorance and tries to make us believe these weather patterns are something NEW, that they've never happened before and that we are to blame..

Obama is a snake oil salesman, a lot like Al Gore in a way but he does a better job at selling.. Fortunately members of his own party see right through hoax and have blocked Cap and Trade as a result, Not just Republicans, but Democrats who all have to answer to their constituents when energy prices go through the roof.

Democrats you say? that cant be true because Obama and the left say that Republicans want dirty air and dirty water. LOL.. A LIE created by left and soaked up by the gullible.

 

[verbster]

You actually cited a second-hand English translation of a Pravda op-ed piece as hard evidence of a global hoax?