The Greatest Scientic Fraud of All Time

[phrodeau]

So on one side are the scientists who collect data, analyze it and come to a conclusion, and on the other side are non-scientists who say that there's no way it can be done.

Maybe we should read what the Bible says about it.

Rev 8:7 The first angel sounded his trumpet, and there came hail and fire mixed with blood, and it was hurled down on the earth. A third of the earth was burned up, a third of the trees were burned up, and all the green grass was burned up.

Rev 8:8 The second angel sounded his trumpet, and something like a huge mountain, all ablaze, was thrown into the sea. A third of the sea turned into blood,

Rev 8:9 a third of the living creatures in the sea died, and a third of the ships were destroyed.

Rev 8:10 The third angel sounded his trumpet, and a great star, blazing like a torch, fell from the sky on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water—

Rev 8:11 the name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters turned bitter, and many people died from the waters that had become bitter.

Rev 16:8 The fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and the sun was allowed to scorch people with fire.

Rev 16:9 They were seared by the intense heat and they cursed the name of God, who had control over these plagues, but they refused to repent and glorify him.

 

[Conager]

So on one side are the scientists who collect data, analyze it and come to a conclusion, and on the other side are non-scientists who say that there's no way it can be done.

Maybe we should read what the Bible says about it.

Actual scientists are not on a quote side unquote. It's people like you that take minor little data points and minor discoveries as science struggles to understand climate at all and then translate that into some call for action with conclusions that are not in any way shape or form justified by what we know now.

 

[about_average]

Thank you for demonstrating your complete lack of reading comprehension and ignorance of the law.


You obviously don't understand this stuff.

Then cite a reference that says blog posts are public domain.

If all you can do is resort to lame insults it's a safe bet you really have no clue.
Prove a blog is public domain.

 

[phrodeau]

Actual scientists are not on a quote side unquote. It's people like you that take minor little data points and minor discoveries as science struggles to understand climate at all and then translate that into some call for action with conclusions that are not in any way shape or form justified by what we know now.

https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/mt/2015/05/Toles2/lead_960.jpg?1431482595

 

[Conager]

https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/mt/2015/05/Toles2/lead_960.jpg?1431482595

Again: assumes facts not in evidence. We have no reason to believe that the current negligible rise in temperature will continue but for the sake of discussion let's pretend it will. That means it'll go up one degree every 50 years. Standard variation in temperature throughout the year at every location is far beyond one degree. I'm pretty sure we're not going to boil in our swimming pools.

Quick question: if we enter another ice age how quickly can we warm the average temperature of the earth and how much carbon dioxide will we have to have to accomplish that?

 

[Liar]

Can someone tell me what the motive for this alledged fraud is?

 

[Lancecastor]

Can someone tell me what the motive for this alledged fraud is?

Heat pump oligarchs.

 

[phrodeau]

Again: assumes facts not in evidence. We have no reason to believe that the current negligible rise in temperature will continue but for the sake of discussion let's pretend it will. That means it'll go up one degree every 50 years. Standard variation in temperature throughout the year at every location is far beyond one degree. I'm pretty sure we're not going to boil in our swimming pools.

Quick question: if we enter another ice age how quickly can we warm the average temperature of the earth and how much carbon dioxide will we have to have to accomplish that?

Oh, I saw that episode. First you phaser into the planet's crust to release carbon dioxide, and if that doesn't do it, use auto-phaser interlock to emit an ionizing beam from the deflector dish.

 

[Conager]

Can someone tell me what the motive for this alledged fraud is?

Prestige and grants in the short term, getting a chance to serve on boards of carbon banking entities in the long term. The entire field is designed to transfer wealth from industrialized countries to underdeveloped countries. A tax on the successful. Like with any regulatory / taxing scheme there's plenty of money to be made as bureaucrats, overseers and just people with general sticky fingers on the wealth transfers.

 

[Lancecastor]

The entire field is designed to transfer wealth from industrialized countries to underdeveloped countries.

Bingo.

I see climate change as a chess piece in the movement towards global economic parity.

 

[water505]

I wonder how many millions Al Gore made peddling this fairy tale. What a guy.

 

[Conager]

I see climate change as a chess piece in the movement towards global economic parity.

My argument against global economic parity is that it reduces the standard of living in north america.

I think the standard of living in the savage regions can be increased without messing with my chi.

Plus, I have no problem with Canada becoming a few degrees warmer.

..and people like Frodo out spreading the Gospel of Chicken Little are the useful idiots in this little socialist, redistributive scheme.

 

[Conager]

I wonder how many millions Al Gore made peddling this fairy tale. What a guy.

He and other investors have made billions. It is estimated by the small business administration environmental regulations championed by Al Gore for profit and by Frodo for salvation of his eternal soul cost the US economy 1.75 trillion dollars per year.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/11/03/blood-and-gore-making-a-killing-on-anti-carbon-investment-hype/#7739939f3750

You could build and maintain a lot of nuclear power plants for that kind of coin.

 

[KUJACK]

Worse than Global Warming.

Scientific diets touted by the government. Calories invented by Banting in th 1890's by burning carbs, protein and fats in a bunsen burner.
Duh, like there in a fire in the human body.
We still use calories as a defining result in obesity, an epidemic killing and harming millions.
This is real and no one addresses it .

 

[Lancecastor]

Scientific diets touted by the government. Calories invented by Banting in th 1890's by burning carbs, protein and fats in a bunsen burner.
Duh, like there in a fire in the human body.
We still use calories as a defining result in obesity, an epidemic killing and harming millions.
This is real and no one addresses it .

Sounds like you need to get Pink on this.

 

[gotsnowgotslush]

try, the question of why you are buying into countering awareness, puzzles me.

You pepper the blurt threads with your observations about how extremes in weather conditions affect you.

Do you not absorb what you are writing ? You are leaving a record, of the effects of the global imbalances.

We were warned in the early nineties that changes would be seen, and none of them would be beneficial.

Look. Human beings are fallible. Scientists do not work in a vacuum. In order to get the data, they interact and depend on other human beings, machinery, etc.

In the conclusion, they had the basic premise proved.

The meaning of thousands of scientists, diligently and seriously laboring, and producing evidence of the truth ?

It is going to affect you on many levels. It might not matter to you, that the consequences of inaction and denial will cost others their lives. The cascade has begun. It will cost you, in many ways.

 

[about_average]

He and other investors have made billions. It is estimated by the small business administration environmental regulations championed by Al Gore for profit and by Frodo for salvation of his eternal soul cost the US economy 1.75 trillion dollars per year.

Cite?
Never mind, I'll do it for you, I know how much you hate having to back up your claims.

Oops.
If you had bothered to actually research it rather than parrot others' words you'd know that $1.75t is the cost of all regulations, not just environmental.
Also, the report that that number comes from states clearly that is only looking at the costs imposed by the regulations. It gives no consideration to the benefits.

Government regulations pervade modern life in America and other nations with
few exceptions. Regulations are needed to provide the rules and structure for societies
to properly function. This research, while mindful of this fact, does not consider the
benefits of federal regulations, but looks at the overall costs imposed by them. Little
stock is taken of the cumulative effects.

https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/The Impact of Regulatory Costs on Small Firms (Full).pdf

You could build and maintain a lot of nuclear power plants for that kind of coin.

I don't think nuclear power plants will do much to reduce health dept regs.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/11/03/blood-and-gore-making-a-killing-on-anti-carbon-investment-hype/#7739939f3750

"A recent article by Larry Bell in Forbes went over the now-familiar ground of denying the consensus on climate change. He criticized the Doran and Zimmerman study for having too small a sample size and for asking vague questions (although, as I will discuss below, he is forgiving of similar questions and sample sizes of a study done by the Association of Professional Engineers, Geologists and Geophysicists of Alberta (APEGGA)). He cited the Oregon Petition, debunked here, while ignoring the work of Oreskes (2004) and Anderegg et al (2010). He cited the Polish Academy of Sciences PAN Committee of Geological Sciences, while ignoring the position of the General Assembly of the Polish Academy of Sciences, which endorses the IPCC conclusions, along with many other national science academies.

Most of Bell’s arguments have been debunked before and there’s little point in discussing them here again in detail. However, I have some personal familiarity with APEGGA, having been a member of this organization for many years, so I will look at that case of a supposedly dissenting scientific organisation in more detail."
-- https://www.skepticalscience.com/consensusforbes.html

 

[Colonel Hogan]

try, the question of why you are buying into countering awareness, puzzles me.

You pepper the blurt threads with your observations about how extremes in weather conditions affect you.

Do you not absorb what you are writing ? You are leaving a record, of the effects of the global imbalances.

We were warned in the early nineties that changes would be seen, and none of them would be beneficial.

Look. Human beings are fallible. Scientists do not work in a vacuum. In order to get the data, they interact and depend on other human beings, machinery, etc.

In the conclusion, they had the basic premise proved.

The meaning of thousands of scientists, diligently and seriously laboring, and producing evidence of the truth ?

It is going to affect you on many levels. It might not matter to you, that the consequences of inaction and denial will cost others their lives. The cascade has begun. It will cost you, in many ways.

The proof of the 'premise' does not establish the factual inevitability of a catastrophic trend. THAT scientific conclusion is highly disputed among environmental scientists.

That dispute is NOT a compelling reason NOT to buy an electric car or recycle or reduce carbon footprints in any number of reasonable ways. But it certainly broadens the discussion of what "reasonable" constitutes.

 

[Ishmael]

Can someone tell me what the motive for this alledged fraud is?

$

Ishmael

 

[trysail]

Can someone tell me what the motive for this alledged fraud is?

$

Ishmael

Ishmael nailed it. We are talking about a whole helluva lot of MONEY.


https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/cop22_wheresmymoney_scr.jpg?w=720


​

 

[phrodeau]

Where are the rich scientists? Hello? Anyone?

 

[Lancecastor]

http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Gore+facts+a+couple+of+al+gore+memes+he+tells_e9f944_5411078.jpg

 

[Ishmael]

Where are the rich scientists? Hello? Anyone?

Well, I can certainly name two that aren't going to have any money. Michael E. (I'm a Hockey Stick) Mann, and Prof. Andrew (I need a lot of grant money too) Weaver.

If you can't produce the data, the research and the claims are bogus. The moral being that if you're a huckster and someone calls you a huckster, don't sue them for libel.

Mann in the poor house now

Ishmael

 

[nerfhearder]

Bullshit.

The material is not copyrighted. It is in the public domain. It's a fucking blog ferchrissakes. Copyright law does not apply.

Beyond that, the quotation was a goddamn comment ( https://judithcurry.com/2017/01/03/jc-in-transition/#comment-833254 ) on a blog.

You really are a sleazebag.


​

Yes they do apply. Blogs are as protected as anything else. Fair use says you can quote them tho.

 

[water505]

http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Gore+facts+a+couple+of+al+gore+memes+he+tells_e9f944_5411078.jpg

The fact that Al Gore has raked in millions from this should be enough to make any normal person highly skeptical.