Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

an inconvenient truth!...


swyft
 Share

Recommended Posts

the world is ending, huh? for you or the whole of the populus?

 

 

The truth about global warming - it's the Sun that's to blame

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/07/18/wsun18.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/07/18/ixnewstop.html

 

the little ice age in europe

http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/lia/little_ice_age.html

 

MAN-MADE GLOBAL WARMING

IS POLITICS NOT SCIENCE

http://www.etherzone.com/2007/bend021307.shtml

 

 

http://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/npo/277645454.html

here's an add for lobbyists for the fascists at greenpeace.

pushing global warming as if it is something new to our planet.

 

Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm

 

 

 

 

 

Weather Channel Climate Expert Calls for Decertifying Global Warming Skeptics

January 17, 2007

 

Posted by Marc Morano 202-224-5762 marc_morano@epw.senate.gov (8:50pm ET)

 

The Weather Channel’s most prominent climatologist is advocating that broadcast meteorologists be stripped of their scientific certification if they express skepticism about predictions of manmade catastrophic global warming. This latest call to silence skeptics follows a year (2006) in which skeptics were compared to "Holocaust Deniers" and Nuremberg-style war crimes trials were advocated by several climate alarmists.

 

The Weather Channel’s (TWC) Heidi Cullen, who hosts the weekly global warming program "The Climate Code," is advocating that the American Meteorological Society (AMS) revoke their "Seal of Approval" for any television weatherman who expresses skepticism that human activity is creating a climate catastrophe.

 

"If a meteorologist can't speak to the fundamental science of climate change, then maybe the AMS shouldn't give them a Seal of Approval. Clearly, the AMS doesn't agree that global warming can be blamed on cyclical weather patterns," Cullen wrote in her December 21 weblog on the Weather Channel Website. This latest call to silence skeptics of manmade global warming has been the subject of discussion at the annual American Meteorological Society’s Annual conference in San Antonio Texas this week.

 

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=32abc0b0-802a-23ad-440a-88824bb8e528

 

 

 

 

“The Weather Channel” Mess

 

 

January 18, 2007, 5:45 pm | James Spann | Op/Ed

 

Well, well. Some “climate expert” on “The Weather Channel” wants to take away AMS certification from those of us who believe the recent “global warming” is a natural process. So much for “tolerance”, huh?

 

I have been in operational meteorology since 1978, and I know dozens and dozens of broadcast meteorologists all over the country. Our big job: look at a large volume of raw data and come up with a public weather forecast for the next seven days. I do not know of a single TV meteorologist who buys into the man-made global warming hype. I know there must be a few out there, but I can’t find them. Here are the basic facts you need to know:

 

*Billions of dollars of grant money is flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story. Even the lady at “The Weather Channel” probably gets paid good money for a prime time show on climate change. No man-made global warming, no show, and no salary. Nothing wrong with making money at all, but when money becomes the motivation for a scientific conclusion, then we have a problem. For many, global warming is a big cash grab.

 

*The climate of this planet has been changing since God put the planet here. It will always change, and the warming in the last 10 years is not much difference than the warming we saw in the 1930s and other decades. And, lets not forget we are at the end of the ice age in which ice covered most of North America and Northern Europe.

 

If you don’t like to listen to me, find another meteorologist with no tie to grant money for research on the subject. I would not listen to anyone that is a politician, a journalist, or someone in science who is generating revenue from this issue.

 

 

 

 

http://www.al.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/news/1169288539262650.xml&coll=2

Spann spawns cyber-storm

 

TV meteorologist disputes human role in global warming

 

Saturday, January 20, 2007

 

BOB CARLTON

News staff writer

 

James Spann is used to covering storms.

 

Not being in the middle of one.

 

But the ABC 33/40 meteorologist finds himself at the center of the global-warming controversy after the Internet site The Drudge Report posted a link to comments Spann made on his weather blog Thursday night.

 

"Everything kind of exploded," Spann said Friday. "Writing stuff like that is something I always do, but when Drudge links to it, it just brings the world to you all of a sudden."

 

All that controversy is over a cyber-disagreement Spann has with a climate scientist from The Weather Channel.

 

In essence, Spann does not believe that human activity is contributing to global warming and contends that "billions of dollars of grant money is flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon." Spann received so much traffic on his site that it was temporarily shut down Thursday night, he said.

 

"We have never been shut down with traffic before," he said. "During tornado outbreaks and hurricanes, we've been close, but we've never had a total shutdown or crash like this. It's kind of unprecedented."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
  • Replies 136
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most of your articles are not from credible sources, or they are editorial articles, with their only source being themselves or one other person. However, I'll respond to some of them.

 

"Dr Solanki said that the brighter Sun and higher levels of "greenhouse gases", such as carbon dioxide, both contributed to the change in the Earth's temperature but it was impossible to say which had the greater impact."

 

That's from your article. It acknowledges that global warming exists and that the increase in co2 is contributing to it, so why is it a bad thing to push co2 reduction?

 

And ironically, your article entitled "The cold, hard facts," yields no facts, and only the opinion of one climatologist. The shit you present is just enough to create doubt and allow lobbyists to continue destroying the enviornment, just like with a little doubt introduced, enough people believed that cigarrettes aren't harmful to your health.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That article is trash, and you should know that. Global warming is not "junk science", the guy who wrote that article is a fucking moron and should get punched in the face.

 

 

fermentor, i only posted that one article because i can't find it in the local media's sites. it's really all over the news here. his investments in mines that pollute, his power bills, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this quote, along with several others are credible

 

[H]ow Gore buys his "carbon offsets," as revealed by The Tennessean raises serious questions. According to the newspaper's report, Gore buys his carbon offsets through Generation Investment Management:

 

Gore helped found Generation Investment Management, through which he and others pay for offsets. The firm invests the money in solar, wind and other projects that reduce energy consumption around the globe...

 

Gore is chairman of the firm and, presumably, draws an income or will make money as its investments prosper. In other words, he "buys" his "carbon offsets" from himself, through a transaction designed to boost his own investments and return a profit to himself. To be blunt, Gore doesn't buy "carbon offsets" through Generation Investment Management - he buys stocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Officials Urged to Grill Al Gore About His Rich-Get-Warmer, Poor-Get-Colder Global Warming Offset Proposals

http://www.earnedmedia.org/ncppr0321.htm

 

 

al gore preaches to the choir

http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20070320-091250-3428r.htm

 

 

 

 

Hysteria over global warming not necessary

http://www.pntonline.com/engine.pl?station=portales&template=fnmStoryFull.html&id=10214

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read that and so what? The guy made investments. It's completely different than the Halliburton/Iraq connection that article mentions. He won't profit off the misery of others, instead he will profit from pollution-reducing industries. I fail to see how that immediately constitutes conspiracy, especially if the article is right and calls it "junk science". Junk science would be something along the lines of someone saying the moon is made out of cheese, then making a documentary about all the cheese we could get from the moon, and then investing all his money in cheese companies and hoping the public will buy into his scheme. Global warming is not junk science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read that and so what? The guy made investments. It's completely different than the Halliburton/Iraq connection that article mentions. He won't profit off the misery of others, instead he will profit from pollution-reducing industries. I fail to see how that immediately constitutes conspiracy, especially if the article is right and calls it "junk science". Junk science would be something along the lines of someone saying the moon is made out of cheese, then making a documentary about all the cheese we could get from the moon, and then investing all his money in cheese companies and hoping the public will buy into his scheme. Global warming is not junk science.

 

 

no, he invests in a zinc mine and a uranium mine. both of which absolutely pollute the environment.

 

of course global warming isn't junk science. we are closer to the sun. of course our pollutants have hurt the earth. absolutely. but when you get closer to the sun, there are things you will notice happening, such as the poles melting, oceans heating, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6th graders prove al gore is wrong.

 

 

http://www.longmontfyi.com/Local-Story.asp?ID=15357

 

Global warming on trial

Sixth-graders decide that humans aren’t to blame

 

By Ben Ready

The Daily Times-Call

 

LONGMONT — Humans don’t cause global warming, a jury of sixth graders at Trail Ridge Middle School concluded Thursday after hearing opposing arguments from their peers.

 

“They’re pretty young for this kind of thinking. They did great,” paleontology teacher Ken Poppe said after the 40-minute “trial” in his classroom.

 

With Earth’s warming accepted as a tenet, pre-teen “lawyers” and “scientists” debated whether humans have caused it.

 

Eleven jurors listened intently as prosecutors and defendants flashed contradictory graphs tracking global temperatures, carbon dioxide levels, polar ice cap statistics, volcanic activity and sea surface temperatures — all of which were found Wednesday in the school’s computer lab.

 

“The earth has warmed and cooled over many years. If it’s caused by CO2, why haven’t the charts shot up?” Poppe’s son and lead prosecutor Caleb argued during a rebuttal.

 

In a climax that sent half the class to its feet and forced the judge to call for order, opponent Monique Nem slapped a contradictory graph onto the prosecution’s table.

 

“We’ve proven you wrong! The CO2 levels have shot up,” she said.

 

The jury responded more warmly, however, to Caleb Poppe’s response: The graphic cited a Hawaiian source; Hawaii has volcanoes; volcanoes emit CO2.

 

In closing arguments, Alexia Hegy said global temperatures actually decreased in the 1960’s, while the global population rose. Humans cannot be at fault, she concluded.

 

With the final word, defense attorney Sarah Steed countered: “It all comes back to us, the people — not the sun, not the weather. We need to turn off lights when we don’t need them. Bikes can work. The environment can be richer.”

 

Seven of 11 jurors decided humans are not to blame, but everyone agreed classroom debates make for fun learning.

 

“It was a hard decision, because both sides made good points,” said student Samantha Roberts.

 

Ken Poppe said he let students choose which side of the debate to argue. Poppe personally believes global warming is cyclical and not affected by humans, while his Colorado State University student aide David Richards believes the opposite. Both, however, said they presented both sides equally to the students leading up to Thursday’s debate.

 

“What I think is not the issue. It’s what the students dig up and how they present the case,” Poppe said.

 

Only one parent questioned Poppe’s decision to hold a global warming debate. That mother expected him to present Al Gore’s global warming movie “An Inconvenient Truth” as indisputable facts, Poppe said. After he explained his neutrality in the classroom, the mom allowed her child to participate in the debate, he said.

 

“You don’t understand someone’s position until you can argue it to their satisfaction,” Poppe said, quoting a famous physicist. “I don’t believe in Darwinism either, but I can argue it as well as any Darwinist.”

 

 

 

What Al Gore Really Wants

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/03/what_al_gore_really_wants.html

 

 

Heartland President Debunks Global Warming Myths

 

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=20810

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like that thought Dawood. It's so true on so many levels. Is there a quote from the Qu'ran that expresses that idea of shared responsibility? The book is always so poetic...

 

And hold fast, all of you together, to the Rope of Allâh (i.e. this Qur'ân), and be not divided among yourselves, and remember Allâh's Favour on you, for you were enemies one to another but He joined your hearts together, so that, by His Grace, you became brethren (in Islâmic Faith), and you were on the brink of a pit of Fire, and He saved you from it. Thus Allâh makes His Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.,) clear to you, that you may be guided. (Aali Imran 3:103)

this is the closest thing I could find to a collective responsibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah i was about to say.

 

ANd goddamn that is soem trashy journalism you jsut posted casek. I like it how you're always on the "the media is putting subliminal messages in your head" tip and then you post some crappy article thats supposed to make people think "well duh if even 6th graders can see global warming isnt true then i'd be an idiot to think that it's man's fault".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah i was about to say.

 

ANd goddamn that is soem trashy journalism you jsut posted casek. I like it how you're always on the "the media is putting subliminal messages in your head" tip and then you post some crappy article thats supposed to make people think "well duh if even 6th graders can see global warming isnt true then i'd be an idiot to think that it's man's fault".

 

and you could cite some real journalism? or are you just on the "attack dog" tip?

i like how you fuckers will cite some shit like al gore's movie and then try to back it up with some journalism that is obviously biased in his favor, but when you see opposition, you instantly attack it.

 

for the last time, we are in a seven year cycle. the sun is alot closer than it has been in a while.

 

the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you'd have to be a fool to beleive there are no consequeces to your actions. (as an example) Do you think AIDS just popped up of nowhere? It surfaced because of peoples promiscuity and iv drug use. those things created the right conditions for the virus to be transmitted and BAM, you have an epedemic, look at countries where drug use and promiscuity is not a prevelant and I'll GUARANTEE Aids is not a problem there, or very little. I said that to say that gloal warming is in fact a reality that as our consumption of raw materials and expulsion of waste continues it will no doubt have and adverse affect on our enviroment. You can't drop 3000 dueces in your toilet a day and expect for it not to smell like a 1000 miles of shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...