████████ Climastrology (a/k/a Climate $cience) ████████

[von_Bismarck]

by Ken Haapala


(emphasis added)

“...The measured temperature trend of the atmosphere, as measured by satellite using all data from the launch of the program in December 1978 until the present, is a rise of 1.3ºC per century. What is NOT known is how much of that warming is due to natural causes..."

source...



​

​

Also, Ken Haapala is a paid shill for the Heartland Institute. So you can fuck right off with that.

 

[trysail]

Bloomberg, NPR and the rest of their brethren in the gullible, complicit media has done nothing but get more and more shrill about their adamant superstitious belief in catastrophic anthropogenic global warming ("CAGW").


The dimwits at NPR are obviously incapable of figuring out that this potentially deadly situation is a direct consequence of the ill-informed propaganda agenda they're pushing:

Hopi Tribal Members Face Lack Of Reliable, Affordable Fuel

January 27, 20205:05 AM ET
Heard on Morning Edition

by Melissa Sevigny

Many are cheering the closure of a giant coal strip mine in Arizona, but thousands of Native Americans who burn coal for heat are scrambling. Alternative heat sources are scarce and expensive.


RACHEL MARTIN, HOST:

Members of the Hopi Nation in northeastern Arizona have traditionally heated their homes with coal dug from their land. But since the 1970s, they have relied instead on coal from this huge strip mine on tribal land that supplied a big power plant. The mine and power plant closed this past fall, and now Hopi tribal members face their first winter without reliable, affordable fuel...

JOE SEIDENBERG: There are people that are living with extreme housing disparities, with major holes in their roofs, with cardboard windows, that are at a real risk for freezing to death.

MELISSA ALCALA: So we cut them up into soh'so woods, you know, so they're not heavy to lift. We wanted to make it as easy as possible for our elders to be able to keep warm.... Because some of them are burning their clothes now.

Tenakhongva [Hopi tribe vice-chairman] says a strategy to maintain coal for heat is difficult now that the tribe is no longer getting royalties from the closed mine. That's meant an 80% drop in the tribe's budget. He says this winter, many must choose between eating and keeping warm...


source...


​

​

 

[Rightguide]

You had better wait until then before you talk about her butt.

You seem to be the only one mentioning it. You should be ashamed of yourself, weirdo.

 

[Rightguide]

Hopi Tribal Members Face Lack Of Reliable, Affordable Fuel

January 27, 20205:05 AM ET
Heard on Morning Edition

by Melissa Sevigny

Many are cheering the closure of a giant coal strip mine in Arizona, but thousands of Native Americans who burn coal for heat are scrambling. Alternative heat sources are scarce and expensive.


RACHEL MARTIN, HOST:

Members of the Hopi Nation in northeastern Arizona have traditionally heated their homes with coal dug from their land. But since the 1970s, they have relied instead on coal from this huge strip mine on tribal land that supplied a big power plant. The mine and power plant closed this past fall, and now Hopi tribal members face their first winter without reliable, affordable fuel...

JOE SEIDENBERG: There are people that are living with extreme housing disparities, with major holes in their roofs, with cardboard windows, that are at a real risk for freezing to death.

MELISSA ALCALA: So we cut them up into soh'so woods, you know, so they're not heavy to lift. We wanted to make it as easy as possible for our elders to be able to keep warm.... Because some of them are burning their clothes now.

Tenakhongva [Hopi tribe vice-chairman] says a strategy to maintain coal for heat is difficult now that the tribe is no longer getting royalties from the closed mine. That's meant an 80% drop in the tribe's budget. He says this winter, many must choose between eating and keeping warm...


source...


​

[/INDENT]

And Buffalo chips are few and far between.

 

[sygn]

Just raising awareness about trysail's paid shill job, spreading anti-science propaganda. You know, evil is as evil does.

It wasn't meant as a criticism, it amuses me. You know more part of Science, and
you're one of the 5 or so posters who keep me glued to this site. .


I don't have the background to comment on Trysail, but this site has been reduced to an arena of paid posters - talkradio, q alts vs rory vs ronmcc and so on.
Gotta start a new fresh alt and focus just on you guys, to override my anger each time I see their smug predatory followers (Bot, ogg, whoever) who pretend to be respectable on the mainstream board.

 

[trysail]

If all else fails...

To Sundar Pichai,
CEO, Google, CA

[snip intro]

As we all work together to solve this crisis [climate change], we must also eliminate barriers to action, including those as pervasive and harmful as climate denial and climate misinformation.

- That’s why I urge you to ensure that Youtube is not incentivising video’s by removing them immediately from the platform’s recommended algorithm;
- Add ‘climate misinformation’ to the platforms list of borderline content;
- Stop monetizing videos that promote harmful misinformation and falsehoods about the causes and effects of the climate crisis;
- Take steps to correct the record for millions of users who have been exposed to climate misinformation on YouTube.

Please respond by Friday February 7, to describe any efforts you plan to take in order to address these important issues.

Chair, Kathy Castor (D., FL)

US House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis

...censor them.​

Source: https://climatecrisis.house.gov/sites/climatecrisis.house.gov/files/SCCCLetterYouTube.pdf

​

 

[von_Bismarck]

If all else fails...

...censor them.​

Source: https://climatecrisis.house.gov/sites/climatecrisis.house.gov/files/SCCCLetterYouTube.pdf

​

Aww. Poor baby. Your anti-science propaganda gonna get taken down?

 

[trysail]

Current estimates of climate sensitivity (the effect on temperature of an increase in CO2) vary by more than a factor of two.





Yet the charlatans (and— in case you hadn't noticed— there are a couple of 'em around here) claim that the Catastrophic/Dangerous Anthropogenic Global Warming/Climate Change CONJECTURE is "settled science."

That's how you can tell they're charlatans.



​

 

[trysail]

It's the most amazing thing I've ever seen.


A broad swathe of supposedly mainstream "Journalists" are engaged in a brazen, outright, organized effort to disseminate climate propaganda and bend the news.


You don't believe it? Have a look at this:
https://www.cjr.org/covering_climate_now/covering-climate-now-170-outlets.php
(Columbia Journalism Review)



And you thought "journalists" were supposed to be non-partisan, honest and objective.

The Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics clearly states,

first and foremost:

“Ethical journalism should be accurate and fair. Journalists should be honest and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.”​

And specifically directs journalists to:

Label advocacy and commentary​

​

​

 

[freakinblue]

Flat Earther?

 

[von_Bismarck]

Current estimates of climate sensitivity (the effect on temperature of an increase in CO2) vary by more than a factor of two.





Yet the charlatans (and— in case you hadn't noticed— there are a couple of 'em around here) claim that the Catastrophic/Dangerous Anthropogenic Global Warming/Climate Change CONJECTURE is "settled science."

That's how you can tell they're charlatans.



​

Oh, shit, a whole factor of two!

You really got these lamestream "scientists" by the balls now, trybigot!!

 

[von_Bismarck]

Flat Earther?

trysail is on the hydrocarbon payroll. He gets paid to comment on message boards, copying and pasting from disinformation sites.

 

[trysail]

https://suyts.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/image6.png



​

 

[trysail]

Blaming Climate Change: [Completely] Bogus Wildlife Videos

by Donna Laframboise



(emphasis added)

"...Exhibit 2: In April of this year, a new nature documentary series titled Our Planet launched on Netflix. The second episode contains a harrowing sequence in which a handful of walruses tumble off a high cliff. (Editing makes it difficult to know how many separate animals we’re watching.)

The narrator, cultural icon Sir David Attenborough [caught lying, again], knows who’s to blame. His voiceover tells us:

1. Human-caused climate change has dramatically melted sea ice.
2. Less ice means walruses have no choice but to gather on land.
3. This particular location was so crowded with walruses that some were compelled to traipse up a slope, after which they fell to their death.​

The overall message couldn’t be clearer: evil humans are responsible. Once again, an upsetting wildlife video became international news.

But walruses have always gathered on land, even when sea ice is abundant. Records of them doing so extend back to the mid-1800s.

As was the case with Exhibit 1, Canadian zoologist [Dr.] Susan Crockford publicly blew the whistle. Her suspicion that most of the walruses at the bottom had actually been driven off the cliff by polar bears was later vindicated. The overcrowding claim was also difficult to believe once the producer admitted the massive gathering of walruses on screen had taken place hundreds of kilometres from the cliff..."



Source...

​

​

 

[phrodeau]

https://suyts.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/image6.png



​

You’re trying to hide the incline. Doesn’t work; it’s still there.

 

[von_Bismarck]

Blaming Climate Change: [Completely] Bogus Wildlife Videos

by Donna Laframboise



(emphasis added)

"...Exhibit 2: In April of this year, a new nature documentary series titled Our Planet launched on Netflix. The second episode contains a harrowing sequence in which a handful of walruses tumble off a high cliff. (Editing makes it difficult to know how many separate animals we’re watching.)

The narrator, cultural icon Sir David Attenborough [caught lying, again], knows who’s to blame. His voiceover tells us:

1. Human-caused climate change has dramatically melted sea ice.
2. Less ice means walruses have no choice but to gather on land.
3. This particular location was so crowded with walruses that some were compelled to traipse up a slope, after which they fell to their death.​

The overall message couldn’t be clearer: evil humans are responsible. Once again, an upsetting wildlife video became international news.

But walruses have always gathered on land, even when sea ice is abundant. Records of them doing so extend back to the mid-1800s.

As was the case with Exhibit 1, Canadian zoologist [Dr.] Susan Crockford publicly blew the whistle. Her suspicion that most of the walruses at the bottom had actually been driven off the cliff by polar bears was later vindicated. The overcrowding claim was also difficult to believe once the producer admitted the massive gathering of walruses on screen had taken place hundreds of kilometres from the cliff..."



Source...

​

​

From a blog titled nofrakkingconsensus. Yeah, I'm sure they're a pro-science site with no inappropriate financial entanglements.

 

[trysail]

Brilliant, just fucking brilliant:



On Cambridge University, Climate Change, Oppenheimer's Razor and the Re-Enlightenment

by Neil Lock

"In the early 1970s, I studied mathematics at Trinity College, Cambridge. I enjoyed it at the time, but was left with a feeling that something wasn’t quite right. Although I scraped a First, and was offered a place on Part III of the Tripos, I decided to go out into the real world instead. Never did I make a better life decision...

...And yet, I for one see no hard, objective, incontrovertible evidence being put forward that we humans are in any way guilty on this charge. Where is the evidence? Not theories, not computer models, not what-ifs, not guesstimates with huge error bounds and uncertainties. Just evidence: facts, and rational deductions from them, which can be independently verified.

Where, for example, are the millions of climate refugees? The thousands of dead polar bears, and the hundreds of thousands of square kilometres of dead coral reefs, that would have been still living without human-caused global warming? Where is the proof, beyond reasonable doubt, that weather is getting worse on a global scale, and that the cause is human emissions of CO2? And where is the proof, beyond reasonable doubt, that global sea level rise is accelerating abnormally, and for that same reason?

Is there a case to answer at all?

When I look at the supposed case against us, I wonder whether there’s actually any substantive allegation to counter at all. To put their case, the accusers would need to elucidate, using only hard evidence and logical deductions, answers to four questions. (1) Is it warming on a global scale, and if so, by how much? (2) If there is significant global warming, how much of it is caused by human emissions of CO2? (3) If human CO2 is causing significant warming, what would be the likely consequences for human civilization? (4) If there are significant likely negative consequences to civilization of human caused warming, what are the costs and benefits (to all the parties involved) of (a) reacting to problems only as they arise, or (b) putting in place preventive schemes to abate some of the problems?...


...To the first question: is it warming? Yes – it’s been warming since the 17th century. But how much is it warming? Which raises questions like: how accurate and reliable are the various sets of temperature data? How global are they? How far back do they reliably go? How affected are they by local influences, like urban heat islands? Is there hard evidence of anything unusual, above and beyond past variability, in recent decades? Where adjustments or in-filling have been necessary to raw data, how well are they justified and documented? Are their effects neutral with regard to trends, as you would expect if they were being done honestly? And, what are the uncertainties? Hint: they’re bigger than you probably think...
​

(much) more...

​

​

 

[colddiesel]

Trysail, the climate debate has already been lost; you are flogging a dead horse. There are two simple tests:

1 Try to raise capital for investment in a new coal fired power station in any western capitalist economy. Not gunna happen, the Banks will run a mile.

2. Try to arrange third party public liability insurance or reinsurance for any major carbon dioxide producer or emitter. Not possible - the worlds two larges re-insurance providers Munich Re and General Re. will not touch the risks.

The owner of General reinsurance Co. is Berkshire Hathaway. So their boss, your hero Warren Buffet has got the climate change message, even if you have not caught on yet.

 

[trysail]

R.I.P. Freeman Dyson

Notice how all the Freeman Dyson obituaries dance very carefully (or entirely skirt) mentioning his deep skepticism (flat-out rejection, in fact) of the accuracy, validity and efficacy of the mathematical climate models used to manufacture claims of “catastrophic/dangerous anthropogenic global warming?”



​

 

[trysail]

Trysail, the climate debate has already been lost; you are flogging a dead horse. There are two simple tests:

1 Try to raise capital for investment in a new coal fired power station in any western capitalist economy. Not gunna happen, the Banks will run a mile.

2. Try to arrange third party public liability insurance or reinsurance for any major carbon dioxide producer or emitter. Not possible - the worlds two larges re-insurance providers Munich Re and General Re. will not touch the risks.

The owner of General reinsurance Co. is Berkshire Hathaway. So their boss, your hero Warren Buffet has got the climate change message, even if you have not caught on yet.

If ever there was an example of a non sequitur, that's it.

Who cares? What difference does it make (assuming your assertions are accurate— which, by the way, they aren't).

What are we running here? A popularity contest?

In case you haven't noticed, I don't pander to the mob.


Go have a look at RCP 8.5 and let us know how likely that scenario is. How many of the widely publicized and reported propaganda doomcasts derive from the employment of RCP 8.5?



​

 

[SpeareChucker]

People just want to believe the worst
and act like they have some influence.
If the climate were going to change
it would have done so already...

 

[Bas_van_Fraassen]

If ever there was an example of a non sequitur, that's it.

Who cares? What difference does it make (assuming your assertions are accurate— which, by the way, they aren't).

What are we running here? A popularity contest?

In case you haven't noticed, I don't pander to the mob.


Go have a look at RCP 8.5 and let us know how likely that scenario is. How many of the widely publicized and reported propaganda doomcasts derive from the employment of RCP 8.5?



​

Neither do you pander to the science. You only pander to your hydrocarbon overlords in the service of your meager paycheck.

 

[phrodeau]

Neither do you pander to the science. You only pander to your hydrocarbon overlords in the service of your meager paycheck.

He’s only asking five questions this time, instead of the nineteen “fucking brilliant” questions of Neil Lock.

 

[trysail]

Un-freaking-believable.



Read it (and weep for what's become of "journalism"):

Fact Checking The NY Times' "Lies"

by Kip Hansen
​

​

 

[Bas_van_Fraassen]

Un-freaking-believable.



Read it (and weep for what's become of "journalism"):

Fact Checking The NY Times' "Lies"

by Kip Hansen
​

​

Hey, look, trybigot is still on Watts payroll!!