More bad news for those climate change cheerleaders

[jasdon11]

These reports are starting to come thick and fast now;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6999975.ece

H2FC - I doubt you will comment, but as I and others keep telling you - follow the money.

[Creature]

These reports are starting to come thick and fast now;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6999975.ece

H2FC - I doubt you will comment, but as I and others keep telling you - follow the money.

Give me the money and the report will say whatever you want it to say, right? I'm only surprised that these reports are making it into the mainstream media and I wonder if the lying turds are being deliberately exposed by those in control.

[acesfull]

We went from "Global Warming" to "Climate Change." I think they're going to change it again - to Global Cooling. How about GLOBAL HOAX! Wake up, idiots... you've been brainwashed!

[fab]

Finally, some bipartisanship.

[Raider]

We went from "Global Warming" to "Climate Change." I think they're going to change it again - to Global Cooling. How about GLOBAL HOAX! Wake up, idiots... you've been brainwashed!

We actually went from "Global Cooling" to "Global Warming" to Climate Change" and now were heading back to "Global Cooling" again.

Does any one know if MSNBC is reporting any of this? I'd be very surprised if they are, since MSNBC is owned by GE electric who's been mostly reponsible for Global Warming fear mongering..... Many dont realize the BILLIONS of dollars GE stands to profit if Cap and Trade is passed.

Like Jas said and I agree; "Follow the Money"

[Tia Wood]

Strangely enough, I too have become very suspicious of this as well.

I remember being taught in 3rd grade about the "greenhouse effect". This has been around for a long time.

[jasdon11]

It's amusing that H2FC never comments in these types of threads - he's read it - maybe that's because there is evidence of lies from well-paid scientists, just as some of us have been saying for a while now.

[Creature]

Now Hurricane-gate AND Amazon Gate. 'How many "gates" can one report contain?'

.......and the IPCC chairman is a railway engineer not a climate scientist as advertised.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/dailypoli..._cracking.html

What next, Data Gate? I suppose that's here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8484385.stm

[HasRob]

I guess nasa lies and has an agenda too?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2_M7jMjkc4

And the epa too?

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recenttc.html

And national geographic?

http://environment.nationalgeographi...-overview.html

And greenpeace?

http://www.youtube.com/user/Greenpea...D60A0E432A43DB

The science proves the globe is warming, it's a fact. The scary part it is the rate in which it is warming and the speed of the ice melt. Just look at pictures of glacier national park from 50 years ago and now. The park is gonna need a new name soon because the glaciers are just about 100% gone now.

http://www.livescience.com/php/multi...gid=42&index=0

[jasdon11]

I think you would be very naive to think that NASA, the EPA and Greenpeace don't tell lies and don't have an agenda.

[H2FC]

It's amusing that H2FC never comments in these types of threads - he's read it - maybe that's because there is evidence of lies from well-paid scientists, just as some of us have been saying for a while now.

Why should I waste my time stating my beliefs over and over? You and the other uninformed skeptics will be proven wrong soon enough by the drastic consequencies of rampant climate change caused by MMGW.

BTW, its obvious to any person with common sense that "climate change" is the result of global warming and thats why the term is often used in place of global warming. Should someone really have to be explaining this????

Really, all the skeptics should be seriously asking themselves why the great majority of the world and industry leaders are publically asserting their belief, backed by scientific findings, that our current climate change is the result of MMGW caused by burning fossil fuels for energy. Do you really believe you're so much smarter and more informed than they are? I don't think so.

Why don't you skeptics wise up and accept the fact the minority you're following are being paid for their positions in one way or the other and you are the uninformed sheep followers? You should seriously ask yourself why you believe as you do....and don't give me that crap you've studied the facts and scientific findings....anyone can tell by the remarks, questions, and silly comments most of you don't even know the different between the climate and the weather....and don't want to learn.

[jasdon11]

Every time I have questioned our politicians about global warming they have fallen back on the mantra that "2,500 scientists can't be wrong", referring to the vast numbers supposedly behind the IPCC consensus.

But it is now clear that the majority of those involved in the IPCC process are not scientists at all but politicians, bureaucrats, NGOs and green activists.

Taken from Creature's first link above.

Not only that, but many scientists have found their names included in that 2,500 who say they should not be and have been trying unsuccessfully to get them taken off. You should be asking yourself 'why' the authorities need to lie if the situation was genuine.

---------- Post added at 01:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:58 PM ----------

Why should I waste my time stating my beliefs over and over? You and the other uninformed skeptics will be proven wrong soon enough by the drastic consequencies of rampant climate change caused by MMGW.

But you are starting to be proven wrong NOW. You keep stating "scientists say this", "scientists say that" and now due to people actually checking on this stuff, it turns out much of it is just bollocks.

Really, all the skeptics should be seriously asking themselves why the great majority of the world and industry leaders are publically asserting their belief, backed by scientific findings, that our current climate change is the result of MMGW caused by burning fossil fuels for energy. Do you really believe you're so much smarter and more informed than they are? I don't think so.

Er, that would be because they are making a lot of money out of pushing it.

Why don't you skeptics wise up and accept the fact the minority you're following are being paid for their positions in one way or the other and you are the uninformed sheep followers?

That's rich - these 'scientists' work for free do they? And I'm not following anyone - I make my own decisions based on what I know as fact.

You should seriously ask yourself why you believe as you do....and don't give me that crap you've studied the facts and scientific findings....anyone can tell by the remarks, questions, and silly comments most of you don't even know the different between the climate and the weather....and don't want to learn.

I believe as I do, because of the ACTIONS of those peddling this stuff. People tell lies you know...

[500,000]

...

[Creature]

Why don't you skeptics wise up and accept the fact the minority you're following are being paid for their positions in one way or the other and you are the uninformed sheep followers?

A bit like your IPCC chairman, the Railway Engineer (AKA Top Climate Scientist) who apparently founded GloriOil, and was a director of the Indian Oil Corp etc. One other point; sheep are not well known for being skeptical, so I'm a bit confused as to why you keep repeating that metaphor.
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/20...o-Big-Business

[jasdon11]

'New' glaciers found;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7007094.ece

[fab]

I saw some news about the glaciers as well. Seems like the melting theory is finally starting to melt down. Another set of warming hoaxes.

[H2FC]

I saw some news about the glaciers as well. Seems like the melting theory is finally starting to melt down. Another set of warming hoaxes.

I really don't understand how you guys can sum it up like that from finding 4 small glaciers in an remote area, the largest of which is the size of six football pitches,.....whatever size that is....but it doesn't sound very large.

Who is to say these glaciers weren't several times larger in the recent past?

[jasdon11]

I really don't understand how you guys can sum it up like that from finding 4 small glaciers in an remote area, the largest of which is the size of six football pitches,.....whatever size that is....but it doesn't sound very large.

Who is to say these glaciers weren't several times larger in the recent past?

I'm sure if you dig hard enough you'll be able to find some well financed scientist to say they were - but then if you go back in history to well before the industrial revelution, you'll find that glaciers have been reducing in both size and number practically since they were formed.

It's the scaremongering and lies used by the authorities on the subject in order to create stealth taxes that you should be questioning. When I was a boy, I remember a huge political playing field was income taxes; which political party would increase or decrease tax levels if elected and so on. Now that question barely gets mentioned - it doesn't need to. They know they can manipulate the tax system using stealth taxes such as these, and by using the fear/guilt factor (learnt from observing how people react to their religions) they are assured of getting no backlash from the voting public.

[Creature]

If the IPCC report were a domain name, it would have been moved to the legal section of DNF long ago. ClimateGate, GlacierGate, HurricaneGate, AmazonGate etc etc, parts of the report not peer reviewed, just lifted from a magazine and a student dissertation etc, the chairman not really a climate scientist. The weather station issues, it goes on and on. Given the amount of Gates now being exposed, I don't understand how anyone can go on believing that the mmgw theory is beyond doubt. H2FC, are you not just a little bit unsure of the mmgw theory, or do you have complete confidence in the overall scam?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/dailypolitics/andrewneil/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...-weather-fraud
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/env...e-article.html

[think]

Global warming. Fact, fiction, or somewhere in between?

Updated February 02, 2010

Trees Grow Faster Because of Global Warming

Forests could be growing faster now than they were 225 years ago as a result of global warming, a study has revealed.

The study, published on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found evidence that trees in the eastern United States were growing at an accelerated rate due to the rising levels of atmospheric CO2, higher temperatures and longer growing seasons.

Scientists in Maryland, VA documented changes to the growth of 55 plots of mixed hardwood forest over 22 years, and concluded the younger trees were growing much quicker than the eldest trees in the study, which were 225-years-old, a Smithsonian Environmental Research Center (SERC) blog reported Monday.

Forest ecologist Geoffrey Parker of the SERC and Sean McMahon of the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute discovered that, on average, the forest was growing an additional two tons per acre annually, the equivalent of a tree with a diameter of two feet sprouting up over a year.

The scientists agreed that if the older trees had grown at the same rate throughout their lives as the younger trees were now, they would be much larger.

Parker began his tree census work Sept. 8, 1987, and measured all trees that were 0.8 inches or more in diameter, and then identified their species. By knowing the species and diameter, he was able to calculate the trees biomass.

During the past 22 years CO2 levels at SERC rose 12 percent, the temperature increased by nearly three-tenths of a degree Celsius and the growing season lengthened by 7.8 days. Parker and McMahon suggested that a combination of these factors caused the forest’s accelerated biomass gain.

This article was found at FoxNews and Telegraph.co.uk

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/...-+SciTech%2529

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ear...l-warming.html