Barack Obama: Climate Change Is a National Security Issue
Posted by Jim Hoft on Friday, December 11, 2009, 3:44 PM
Climate hawk Barack Obama announced yesterday that global warming is a national security issue.
How?
FOX Nation reported:
Giving the Nobel Peace Prize to US President Barack Obama “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,” has been seen as a means of boosting international climate talks.
In his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech in Oslo, President Obama stressed the importance of confronting climate change:
“There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, more famine, more mass displacement – all of which will fuel more conflict for decades,” and then he drew attention to the question of security in the climate problem:
“It is not merely scientists and environmental activists who call for swift and forceful action – it’s military leaders in my own country and others who understand that our common security hangs in the balance.”
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Featured Story:
Republican Military Hero & First Female to Command Fighter Squadron Will Announce Run For Congress Today
Published February 8, 2012 at 8:42 pm - 18 Comments
bigkahuna commented:
This BS from the same jerkoff who last week scolded the evil GOP for scaring voters on Obama / Healthcare / Death of private insurance and freedom care. Freaking prick. This man is no better than a common thief. I ask you how many would trust their dog with this Noballs Peace prize winner much less their children ? The man is a complete and total embarresment as a President, CIC, Leader and diplomat. Thanks Libs for nothing 2010 cant get here fast enough so we can hopefully vote these morons out of office and fix whats wrong. Or more importantly get govt out of the way and let people and business get on with life.
sjs commented:
“little scientific dispute” Must not have heard about that climategate thing.
Otter commented:
Which military leaders?
The ones who were ORDERED to produce such a study,
Or
The one who took a GLOBAL COOLING study and just replaced ‘cooling’ with ‘warming’?
ADVERTISEMENT
Chris Vehr commented:
WTF?
Bruce commented:
Cap & Trade is really about national security.
Nationalizing health care is really a jobs creator.
Welcome to New America. Please check your brain at the door.
Mike in VA commented:
Next, coming soon… Martial Law?
Moonbat Killer commented:
i support impeachment now….or next year.
Joanne commented:
Name names Obama, dirtbag extraordinaire. Obama makes me sick.
And Bruce, it isn’t ‘check’ your brain at the door, it is ‘leave’ your brain at the door, because the level of stupidity needed doesn’t warrant a brain or even any brain activity.
I wonder if Obama knows everyone thinks he is a jacka**.
Anon commented:
NO!!! HELL NO!!!
An in-depth study is “National Security: Not a Good Argument for Global Warming Legislation,” October 28, 2009, by Dr. James Carafano, Testimony before the Environment and Public Works Committee, Unites States Senate, October 28, 2009, at http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/tst102709a.cfm
Alaskan commented:
If ‘it’s a National Security issue’ then why did the moron fly across the pond to get his reward…..couldn’t they have Fedex’d it to him?
He should shut down the list of NON-Essential businesses immediatly:
Hollywood—–Huge carbon output.
Professional Sports——–Huge carbon output.
Nightclubs, bars, casinos—Huge carbon output.
Bob commented:
There really isn’t a lot of dispute (among scientists) about global warming. I don’t see how Climategate has changed that either — in my mind it’s made me more convinced that global warming is real. As for whether or not it is man-made, it’s hard to prove it, but it seems likely.
If global warming is real — work with me — wouldn’t it be a national security issue?
I’d be happy to debate that with anyone on this forum as long as they can be respectful. There’s no need to call anyone names.
kate commented:
Doesn’t speak well for a Harvard education, does it.
Sarge commented:
Full-of-crap opportunist is full of crap; no surprise there.
LytnUp commented:
How many scientists over the 31000 that have already disputed are required to be more than “little dispute”?
Male Silverback commented:
Alaskan your right on.
Bob commented:
LytnUp: Have 31,000 scientists disputed global warming? That seems high to me, but it makes me wonder… how many scientists are there? How many agree with it?
I can’t think of a reason not to believe it. I know that Gateway Pundit as a whole does not (hence the Junk Science comment in every global warming post), but it seems reasonable to me. Even Wikipedia’s data seems relevant as proof that global warming is real.
bigkahuna commented:
Bob, Are you serious? No debate among scientists ? You have to have your head so far up Al Gores behind you couldnt hear all the deebate and disagreement. Tere are tens of thousands scientist who disagree. The EPA is now trying to blackmail congress to control co2 you know what you ugly evil humans spew. I say if all the liberal weenies who believe in this garabe kill themselves we would save the planet and be happy! These people are at best socialists at worst communists and there is in your words no debate they are freaking morons. NO DOUBT the debate is over. The economy is getting worse not better and nothing this bunch of losers has done is making it better. Al Gore REFUSES to sit down and debate with anyone who doesnt buy into his get rich al gore warming scheme EVER. The scientist who claim there is no doubt this is real and justified wont give up the data and emails etc requested for years now under federal freedom of information act. They spend millions if not billions of taxpayer dollars and wont show their data, they delete data, they fake data and they are hipocrits to the nth degree. Does this sound like reasonable scientific behavior?????? If so you are to stupid to breath and should save us all and commit suicide( now known as saving the planet to normal people) These jerkoffs could use internet and webcams to do this meeting but NO cant have anyione possibly knowing the private converstaions ofd these scammers. They have to fly private jets around the world and waste money and gas and spoil the pristine planets so they can doicytate every aspect of our lives by a hoax. The emails leaked are just the tip of the so called melting iceburg. They want to control ALL water for gods sake. See the latest proposals. These people need to be stopped not encouraged. And by stopped I mean locked up and imprisoned for overeaching and abusing the constitution. Tar and feathers are to good for these people. They are liars and thieves and need to be treated as such. I propose we drop them all off near the biggest families of the ever dwindling( 5 x more than ever counted now)polar bears and see if they are worried about how many there are. Not in doubt my a$$. The only thing not in doubt in most peoples mind is that we are being bent over and pumped like no time in history. Let the cleansing begin. Start with Natzi Pelosi and Harry the scumbag Reid.
Robert commented:
By the end of next week he has to try and make a big power grab related to the climate conspiracy in Copenhagen. Expect to see more statements made in the coming days to lay the groundwork for this farce.
Any binding commitment he made in this context would be unconstitutional, as it would amount to a treaty and must be ratified by the Senate.
Alaskan commented:
Supposedly, we have had 2 ice ages, and 2 times it warmed up.
Where was man’s massive industrialization and factories back then that caused the 2 ice ages to go away? That would be alot of cave-man fires!!
To say man is responsible for Global Warming would be like saying, man is responsible each spring for making it warm up.
We have had…depleting ozone, acid oceans, global cooling, global warming, climate change, acid rain…and I’m sure a few more.
There are over 20,000 active volcano’s on land and under the sea…..man’s complete global carbon output is a mere 2% of the total output of all the volcano’s. Maybe..volcano’s are a National Security Issue?!?!?!?
bigkahuna commented:
Bob yes 31000 and thats growing daily and MILLIONS of the worlds population who can use their head as well…. and Al Gore Wont debate anyone who disagrees and emails and data are delted, destroyed and hidden when requested under federal freedom of information acts for years now? The data has many times been shown to be faked or massaged and thats just what we have been privy to. Every time Al Gore shows up to give a major speech it becomes the coldest day in history for that area. You cant be paying attention or you are just plain ignorant if you believe the scientific data they wont allow to be seen is not disputed. Science is being railroaded and turned into a joke. If there is no debate why is it now global climate change when it started as Global cooling in the 70s-80′s and then became Global warming and now Climate Change? Is this the hope and change we were promised? Based on all the other lies Obama the chief Teleprompter reader and offender of foregin heads of state I guess so. They cant predict weather tomorrow 50% of the time yet we can tell what it was 10,100,1000,and 5000 years ago when we were not around and had NO MEASURING DEVISES TO CONCLUSIVELY MEASURE IT ANYWHERE. I have seen a photo of one weather /temp gathering station on a roof of a building next to the a/c unit. Im absolutely sure( no debate here) that its not a very accurate way to take accurate readings. They have found under glaciers and snow covered arwas that there were civilizations there and farming and so on in the past. Does that give you a hint that climate is constantly changing ? Ice ages and since then warming…Hmmm change???? Yep. Oh and the silly lil ole sun and its cyclical sunspot cycles dont have anything to do with the settled no dispute debate right ? If you dont dispute the Govt controlled findings on this when you look at very simple data and lack of transparency and who stands to gain billions who is pushing for this junk science to be fact then you are plain and simply a fool or dishonest.
bg commented:
++
so many different posts on the same topic, like they’ve changed course on Climate Change.. good luck with that, it’s a done deal.. that is unless we are prepared to pick up our pitchforks & stop the NWO monster by December 31, 2009..
also don’t know how many times i can post the same comments & info links..
but i love America and my grandchildren, i also want their children to have the same freedoms we’ve been afforded through the blood, sweat & tears of many who have not only gone before us, but are still out in the battlefields risking their very lives & limbs to keep US free, so here you go anyways..
too much to post, taking a short cut..
bg @ 11:47 am #4 & 3:00 pm #29
please do you & yours a favor & at least check them out, thanks..
==
Bob commented:
Yet the questions remain:
1) If we aren’t responsible, what do we do about the current global warming?
2) If we are responsible, can changing our actions now prevent a global warming from occurring?
If you accept that it exists — regardless of who started it — it certainly is a national security issue.
ar05075 commented:
So marshall law will be justified if he does’nt get his way????
These commie clowns have got to go.
Robert commented:
The emails are the smoking gun that casts doubt on the available research. This has come, not from a fringe or outside advocacy group, but from within the involved scientific institutions, indeed, from the very center of the investigation. No, one cannot point to this scandal and say that it proves that man has not caused some of the global warming. Neither can one now say that man is responsible for global warming.
What one can say with certainty is that the science is NOT settled. Therefore, it is imprudent to enact such a broad, sweeping, and costly program as the adherents advocate. Instead, we must go back and re-evaluate the implications of this new information, and try again to determine the validity of the theory.
To do any less would be unscientific. To do any more in the political sphere would be immoral.
CDR M commented:
Bob, if you are convinced of global warming, what is your source? Give us the link that states that we are warming that also shows where the data originated. Tell us why you believe with links. Then we’ll discuss.
LytnUp commented:
Scientists are skeptics. If there is no dispute, someone isn’t being invited to the party.
http://www.petitionproject.org/
The OA spoke of 2500 on the side of AGW.
It always helps if no one was curious about the source data.
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/12/10/taking_liberties/entry5964504.shtml
http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/fraudulent-hockey-sticks-and-hidden-data/
Someone still has to explain to me what the right temperature is, and how, exactly, we would know.
And of course, there is always the possibility that we aren’t looking through the right end of the lens:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1qGOUIRac0
I might suggest one reason to be skeptical, imagine who will be bankrupt should this all prove to be fraud.
It would seem reasonable to me to want to know what is going on (possibly with a model that could actually predict) before we all decided on a solution. My point is not to convince you that there has been no global warming, just to suggest there may be some reason to skeptical that anyone really has a grasp on the climate.
LytnUp commented:
By the way, Bob. It has been cooling for 11 years, would you stop that as well?
Daniel commented:
Well, we certainly know the identity of the Head Idiot now for sure.
His initials are Barak Obama.
Robert commented:
Bob
You are asking the wrong questions. Those questions at this time are now made premature by the falsifications of data.
We are further back than that, now wondering if the raw data will have to be re-constructed and re-modeled on a more open basis.
Now, this does not necessarily mean that it will take decades to regain our present (heretofore) position. Much of the data could be re-constructed from available information, but some would have to be re-submitted to the process. It would take some time, and might be slowed down by debate and deliberation by the larger involved numbers of people.
As it should be.
bigkahuna commented:
Yet the question remains
1. How much money and freedom and liberty are you willing to give up so the so called science can maybe save us from the so called gloabl warming, cooling, change we have endured since we have lived on this planet?
Answer. We adapt if we have to and we go back and look at real data and do real scientif study and do it in the open and with sceptics evenly involved in the study and we dont grant them more and more money if they tell us the sky is falling. We kick Al Gore in the nuts and put him in jail for inconvieniently telling lies.
If we are not responsible for global warming, cooling , change why should we do anything ? ???? Its called NATURE I thought all lefties are telling us we have to preserve nature. As others have said volcanoes are much more influence than all of man by far and we KNOW that it was warmer and colder in our planets history. Oh my God that cant be…we all know that the Earth never changes right ?well except for weather, temperature, sunlight, rivers, oceans, islands, continets, forests and just about every single thing on earth. Well except for the stupidity of liberals. Its constant. Oh and we are part of nature just like polar bears. Just smarter….well some are. Please Liberals just save the planet of your co2 and pull the trigger. Think how many people you would put to work making bullets, planning and executing funerals and all the tears would water all our gardens.
Bob commented:
bigkahuna: I’m sure there are people out there who want to profit off of this. Also, our science isn’t perfect. Anyone who says otherwise is selling something. Our current science shows that the climate has been getting progressively warmer for decades. We know that CO2 traps heat and we know that we’re releasing more of it into the atmosphere than anything else on the planet. While that isn’t definitive proof, it’s a pretty good correlation.
The ClimateGate emails haven’t made the data any sketcher than it was. Should it be looked into? Of course — it seems that some ethics were breached and that is unacceptable. Does it destroy the global warming theory? Nope, it doesn’t even dent it.
Like the possibility of cancer, we cannot ignore the possibility of man-made global warming. We need to keep running tests, but we’re going to find it hard to definitively prove once and for all that our Co2 emissions are doing it. So it seems to me that the smartest course is to be careful in what treatments we select but to go ahead and start acting before we find out that yes we are responsible and it’s too late. And again, we need to be very careful to not destroy our sovereignty and economy in the process.
Bob commented:
Robert: What data was falsified? I didn’t read the entire 61MBs of emails, code, and whatnot but I’m a computer guy and I can’t see how the words “trick” or “hide the decline” really prove that anything was falsified? Are you referring to something else?
LytnUp: I’m not saying we should be a react to everything science tells us. There are a lot of things that science hasn’t proved that I believe in (I believe in God and I don’t believe in the evolution of man). That said, I think we need to take steps to help those in need. I think that global warming is real and we need to help those who are going to suffer the worse from it: those by the coasts and those who have farmland that is drying up.
CDR M: I haven’t read enough to provide that data. But, I will. And then we can discuss.
Currently my sources are slashdot and arstechnica along with the thoughts of my friends who are in various scientific disciplines. I’ll be reading more and learning more about this though and I’ll come back with sources… but it might take a while.
Bob commented:
Also, I want to thank everyone for being respectful. It’s fun to talk to people (even though we may disagree) when there is civility.
Robert commented:
From the cbsnews link by Lytn Up #33
“It is Socolow whose entire research funding stream, well over a million dollars a year, depends on continued alarm over global warming,” says William Happer, a fellow Princeton University professor and head of the Happer physics lab who has raised the question of a conflict of interest. The reason: the ostensibly neutral person charged with evaluating a statement endorsing man-made global warming is a leading proponent of precisely that theory whose funding is tied to that theory.
This situation applies to much of the scientific community. There is a vested interest in presenting a certain point of view.
So, the conclusions that have been presented to policy-makers, and even scientific integrity itself, are now called into question.
LytnUp commented:
Bob,
Why would it be the smartest course of action? What if our action actually hurt the climate as well as the economy? What if we put large portions of our economy towards aims that don’t affect it at all?
Why if the CO2 is the cause of this rise in temperature, has it not warmed for 11 years while the CO2 level has continued to rise? Why could the models not predict it? The correlation over time seems pretty weak.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-temperature-correlation.htm
Are you invested in Carbon credits?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6778003/Copenhagen-climate-summit-Carbon-trading-fraudsters-in-Europe-pocket-5bn.html
Nothing to see here folks.
Liberty60 commented:
I think part of the engine that drives this debate is the sense that this is all a proxy war- that climate change is really a stand-in for the debate between capitalism and socialism.
So you have the predictable people on the predictable sides.
But lets look at it from another perspective- regardless of climate change, what is undeniable by anyone is that our industrial processes- how we extract natural recources, how we refine them, how we use the finished products, and how we dispose of them- is causing tremendous damage to the natural environment, and harm to the very agricultural systems that we rely on.
The good news, is that this is NOT incompatible with commerce and capitalism; the same energy and creativity that is used to create prosperity can be used to create industrial processes that are sustainable, and lead to a world that is both prosperous and environmentally sustainable.
An example is in my own field- as an architect, I have seen that with a little bit of creativity, we can design buildings that are energy efficient, and have an overall lower life-cycle cost than they would otherwise.
In other words, a win-win scenario.
The cost to all this, is that we need to look at long term life cycle costs, instead of short term upfront costs.
Mike W commented:
Just was reading that the EPA is purchasing 40 Glocks for their agents. EPA armed and dangerous.
Valerie commented:
Bob,
Here’s a link for you, explaining the issues and showing the original data and the adjustments made to it for one location.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/08/the-smoking-gun-at-darwin-zero/
After these jokers said they no longer had the original data, smart people figured out where to find it, and then compared the two sets of figures.
Robert commented:
About the shoddy computer code:
http://theblogprof.blogspot.com/2009/12/fraud-discovered-in-climategate.html
From Eric Raymond:
From the CRU code file osborn-tree6/briffa_sep98_d.pro , used to prepare a graph purported to be of Northern Hemisphere temperatures and reconstructions.
;
; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!
;
yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]
valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,- 0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,$
2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor
if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,’Oooops!’
;
yearlyadj=interpol(valadj,yrloc,timey)
This, people, is blatant data-cooking, with no pretense otherwise. It flattens a period of warm temperatures in the 1940s 1930s — see those negative coefficients? Then, later on, it applies a positive multiplier so you get a nice dramatic hockey stick at the end of the century.
All you apologists weakly protesting that this is research business as usual and there are plausible explanations for everything in the emails? Sackcloth and ashes time for you. This isn’t just a smoking gun, it’s a siege cannon with the barrel still hot.
Bob commented:
Robert: While there may be a conflict-of-interest I feel deep-down that, just as doctors are more about helping patients than performing operations to get paid, the vast majority of scientists are more concerned with improving the world than their own funding.
LytnUp: What would _what_ be the smartest course of action? The only thing I said in my last response was that we should act to help those who are suffering. If we thought a hurricane was going to hit we would act to help prepare those in the storm’s path.
We definitely need to be careful — just as we should be in all our other spending. We can’t spend what we don’t have.
Maybe I misread your link to skeptical science but it seems that it is showing a strong correlation, not a weak one. ?
LytnUp commented:
Bob,
I am more of the “our climate is going to change and if we can figure out how/why we probably won’t be able to change it, but we might be able to adjust so as not to kill ourselves” kind of guy. Unfortunately, I haven’t seen any predictions dire or otherwise come out of these folks that gave a lot of confidence that they could really predict anything other than who would butter their bread.
I recommend Michael Creighton’s novel “State of Fear” for those who enjoy novels with research footnotes. I will wait while you all go out and get/read it.
Robert,
You sound like another friend who says the same thing. It always makes me feel like there is another shoe yet to drop.
Bob commented:
Robert: As a computer scientist, I’d say that code doesn’t prove that the data has been “cooked.” Most computer code is full of hacks like that — it turns out when you do math on a computer things get tricky. The real problem, imo, is that his comments are ambiguous. Seems like they need a more professional programmer.
flownover commented:
well fisting might be considered an inalienable right in certain circles !
look ! the glistening winter moon warms the city park as the confused teens wander looking for some “guidance”
mark commented:
I thought global warming was leading to mass floods. But O says droughts. Which is it? Both? If so, wouldn’t the drought areas enjoy a cold glass of melted ice cap water to quench their thirst? Is anyone even listening to him anymore?
Robert commented:
Bob
The point is that the “settled science” is not settled at all, and the politicians are trying to enact huge sweeping legislative and administrative actions that will have huge financial impacts on our lives and the economy as a whole.
Add in the fact of fraud at the information end and fraud at the policy end, and you have a huge global conspiracy, in effect if not in fact, to initiate a huge power grab and transfer of resources and wealth.
Solaratov commented:
It seems that bob is a true believer in the cult of global warming. Of course, he claims to just be “concerned” (where have we heard that before?) about our future.
He’s connncerrrnnned that we might “stop believing in agw – as though any thinking person believed in it in the first place.
Bob’s aim is NOT to discuss and debate agw in the light of climategate – but to persuade us that it’s real; and that we should join the cult.
Cutting to the chase: bob’s as phony as agw.
Bob commented:
Well, Robert, very little of science is really settled. I think it would be best to just accept that global warming is and that it is man-made and focus our energies on getting the politicians to make good decisions over it (no redistribution of wealth, etc).
I haven’t seen any kind of monster conspiracy for a power grab. I see scientists who have results the public doesn’t like. I see politicians on both sides who will try to use this to their advantage. I see corporations who will try to positions themselves to make billions off of this information. But a conspiracy? I just don’t see one. I see ClimateGate as a hacker’s very successful attempt to try and shut down any real talks at Copenhagen by making the public nervous.
aprilnovember811 commented:
“This man is no better than a common thief.”
This man is a common thief, and to think this is all being done by a Indonesian citizen. Yes, he isn’t even American. He was Kenyan born, and remains Indonesian after his adoption. Doesn’t it make you feel good that not one person in a position to do something, is siding with the criminal, Barack Hussein Obama.
Valerie commented:
Bob,
http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2009/12/awesome-analysis-of-urban-biases-on-surface-temperature-records.html
aprilnovember811 commented:
Bob
December 11th, 2009 | 6:48 pm | #55
Well, Robert, very little of science is really settled. I think it would be best to just accept that global warming is and that it is man-made and focus our energies on getting the politicians to make good decisions over it (no redistribution of wealth, etc).
I haven’t seen any kind of monster conspiracy for a power grab. I see scientists who have results the public doesn’t like. I see politicians on both sides who will try to use this to their advantage. I see corporations who will try to positions themselves to make billions off of this information. But a conspiracy? I just don’t see one. I see ClimateGate as a hacker’s very successful attempt to try and shut down any real talks at Copenhagen by making the public nervous.”
There you have it everyone, Barack Hussein Obama Indonesian citizen, global president, and Bob say it is real. That settles it.
Hussein is the real national security threat, him and his little communist friends, former Hippie freak drug addicts.
Solaratov commented:
I see ClimateGate as a hacker’s very successful attempt to try and shut down any real talks at Copenhagen by making the public nervous.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Copenfrauden conference is totally unnecessary. It’s just a way for people who want to assume total control over our lives to attempt to put an air of “respectability” on their agenda. And obama is there selling us out as fast as he can.
It’s a scam – a fraud of the worst kind. And there is the real possibility that real science will feel the repercussions from this charade for years to come.
And bob – you’re just a “concern troll”. You aren’t prepared to debate. You just want others to accept that agw actually exists. You want more members for the cult.
Give it up, kid.
Robert commented:
I think you are being disingenuous at best. That computer code applies a negative correction in the 1930-40′s to drop what was a bit warmer temperatures and thus smooth out the curve. After all, we wouldn’t want any hot years before all the carbon dioxide had been belched from our smokestacks, would we? Then positive corrections are made for the latter part of the century to get the desired uptick in temperatures. You are looking at the genesis of the famous and now-discredited “hockey-stick” graph.
If you really were a “computer scientist” you would be able to discern the results of this kind of programming, and its implications.
Robert commented:
Plotting programs such as data4alps.pro print this reminder to the user prior to rendering the chart:
IMPORTANT NOTE: The data after 1960 should not be used. The tree-ring density records tend to show a decline after 1960 relative to the summer temperature in many high-latitude locations. In this data set this “decline” has been artificially removed in an ad-hoc way, and this means that data after 1960 no longer represent tree-ring density variations, but have been modified to look more like the observed temperatures.
Bob commented:
Solaratov: I’m not really interested in getting more members into “the cult”. I really don’t think all these people are meeting in Copenhagen just under false pretense either. Maybe it’s because I like to believe that in the best of people. And, since you accuse me of being insincere, what makes me phony? You talk about discussing and debating, yet can I not be a voice of dissent? Why do I have to agree with you in order to be real and true?
Valerie: That was an interesting video. It shows that we shouldn’t use urban data as it is skewed (probably from all the cement) upwards.
aprilnovember811: So the drama!
AuntieMadder commented:
Ugh. Concern trolls are sickening.
DaveinPhoenix commented:
Obama is a national security issue
Bob commented:
Robert: I’m being sincere and I believe I fully understand what that code does. It completely alters the data.
Does that make it completely invalid? I say no, it doesn’t. I don’t know exactly why they would make that change — since the comments don’t explain why. Was that put there as a normalization to correct for issues with the data collection process? Was that code ever used in production or was it just test code? Was it just a hack to smooth the curve? I’d have to write my own analysis software to really figure that out.
Chisum commented:
More Hoax and Change!
Obama Tells GOP Not to Scare People with the Truth
http://www.floppingaces.net/2009/12/11/obama-tells-gop-not-to-scare-people-with-the-truth/
CDR M commented:
Bob, you clearly stated that you know the planet is warming. What is the specific site/chart/data that says so. Should be easy if it is a settled fact.
Stu commented:
The EPA and Congress are already addressing Global Baloney and it
doesn’t sound good at all for America.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/10/leave-our-fish-ponds-alone/
Bob commented:
CDR M — actually I didn’t say that. I’ve said this: “Our current science shows that the climate has been getting progressively warmer for decades. We know that CO2 traps heat and we know that we’re releasing more of it into the atmosphere than anything else on the planet. While that isn’t definitive proof, it’s a pretty good correlation.” I’ve also said: “it seems reasonable to me. Even Wikipedia’s data seems relevant as proof that global warming is real.”
I’ve also said that “very little of science is really settled.” That’s how it should be! As a favorite teacher of mine, Ms Frizzle, would say Science is about taking chances, making mistakes, and getting messy. It’s about asking questions which is why it is constantly in movement. It’s the continually hacking away of falsehoods in the hope of discovering the truth.
I don’t know that global warming is happening — I think it is. Currently science says it’s happening and many scientists (31k+) and people disagree. I’ve also said I don’t think ClimateGate proves anything and I stand by that.
Chisum commented:
AccuWeather Forecaster on Climate Change: ‘It’s Ice not Fire You’re Going to Be Worried about Down the Road’
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jeff-poor/2009/12/11/accuweather-forecaster-climate-change-it-s-ice-not-fire-you-re-going-be-w
bg commented:
++
re: bg @ 5:15 pm #28
Climate Change Is a National Security Issue
i agree with Obama..
GW is a matter of National Security..
OURS — NOT EARTHS!!
“In searching for the new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. In their totality and in their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which demands the solidarity of all peoples. But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap about which we have already warned, namely mistaking symptoms for cause. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changing attitudes and behaviors that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”
if that doesn’t top all of the evidence that has proved
GW to be a HOAX.. nothing will stop them, nothing!!
disclaimer: there is global warming, there is also global cooling.. Climate Change is a phenomenon that has been occurring throughout the ages right here on Planet Earth, our entire Solar System, and the Galaxy from here to eternity & beyond..
but the bottom line FACT is, Climate Change is NOT caused by HUMANS.. it’s caused by people who know they cannot control Mother Nature but want to control mankind, ergo, they not only use Climate Change to make billions for themselves & their Utopian future, but have every intention of depopulating the planet while doing it (food will be the next big scare, wait for it, it’s coming)..
(most of the videos featuring Lord Monckton are
being flushed down Obama’s black hole machine..)
==
Robert commented:
[The code] completely alters the data.
Does that make it completely invalid? I say no, it doesn’t.
How can it not? And it doesn’t even seem to have introduced any doubt into your discourse. Meanwhile, you have not provided any rebuttal to the scientific and reasoned attack on your position other than a plaintive pleading. Kind of like the public advocates of AGW. ‘It’s settled science because we say so and they’re just deniers.” Al Gore will not debate anyone, yet claims that the temperature inside of the earth is millions of degrees.
Maybe that’s why it’s getting warmer…
We shall see. Good evening, I must go.
Agent 99 commented:
bg I know …btw mentioned this before but SOROS has been in Copenhagen since Dec 10 … We The People need to stand up soon. Bloggers from the UK and beyond believe by a large margin that the demise of mankind is near ….very near SOROS wants to use IMF Gold for Green Loans to the tune of 100 Billion for the first year http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6778960/Copenhagen-climate-summit-George-Soros-urges-use-of-IMF-gold-for-green-loans.htm
Valerie commented:
Bob,
As it turns out, they’ve been throwing out the rural data, not the urban data.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/13/how-bad-is-the-global-temperature-data/
“The world’s climate data has become increasingly sparse with a big dropoff around 1990. There was also a tenfold increase in missing months around the same time. Stations (90% in the United States which has the Cadillac data system) are poor to very poorly sited and not properly adjusted for urbanization. Numerous peer review papers suggest an exaggeration of the warming by 30%, 50% or even more. The station dropout can be clearly seen in the two maps below with the number of station going from over 6000 to just 1079 from April 1978 to April 2008.”
“Most of the stations that dropped out were rural. More of the missing data points are having their missing months filled in with more urban data in the grid boxes.”
Agent 99 commented:
STU @ 69 Thanks … That IS bad. Our Water for the love of God… Dems/Libs/Socialists/Marxists/Fascists/Maoists are one and the same….They have to GO..
Agent 99 commented:
I must go also….The denier will never believe…. Goodbye Bob…And thank you to my friends….
KR commented:
AGW is not honest science,
it is the art of deception.
Alana commented:
Everything Obama wants is a matter of “national security.” In addition to being an emergency and a crisis and something that Has To Be Done Right Now.
coco
Beto Ochoa commented:
If this is such a dire situation, why do the people who’ve set themselves up as the authority behave as if it is not?
Why is their answer to set up a corporation that will exist solely to gather carbon taxes and do nothing to mitigate this alleged crisis?
Why have the wealthiest citizens on the planet bought millions of share in this corporation?
The planet has been cooling for over a decade now.
There is no accurate predictor of it’s temperature cycles because the earth is heated by the sun and other cosmic radiation from a hundred billion stars as it is encountered while our planet, revolving at 900 mph and revolving around the sun at 19 miles per second, and the rest of our solar system screams through space at nearly a million miles per day.
The fact is our planet and a few of the others in our system are giant gas factories. The physics involved are in numbers so gigantic that mans puny involvement is minuscule. Do people heat areas where they gather in mass. Yes, temporarily. Are there heat islands around major cities? Yes but the scope of those areas emissions on a planetary level is .002% of the planets production.
The planet is at the top of a warming curve that started over 10,000 years ago and if nature holds true to form, we are getting ready to enter a new glacial period. All the taxes man can invent will not stop it.
ar05075 commented:
Bob
December 11th, 2009 | 5:23 pm | #29
—————————————-
You’re a nut.!!
ar05075 commented:
Chisum
December 11th, 2009 | 7:31 pm | #66
More Hoax and Change!
==========================
Hoax and Chains
bg commented:
++
Stu @ 7:39 pm #69
[And no wonder. Consider a case highlighted in a 2008 report issued by the Washington Legal Foundation. Massachusetts small business owner James Knott had won awards for manufacturing pollution-control technology, but that didn't protect him from the EPA. Twenty-one EPA agents, many of them armed, took over Mr. Knott's plant commando-style in November 1997 as they tested the pH of the facility's rinse-water discharges. A U.S. Attorney eventually indicted Mr. Knott on two felony counts of discharging water that was supposedly too acidic. The charges later were dropped when it turned out the lab reports had been tampered with; the actual discharges were fine all along. In the meantime, however, Mr. Knott lost hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees.]
we ain’t seen nothing yet!!
sarc on/
oh btw, aside from ObamaCare part 1 (including death panels), do we know
what else became law in that UNREAD stimulus bill that was passed back in
February yet??
ps: did they find the 57th district yet??
Stimulus Stolen??
nah, that’s impossible..
not with some sort of god watching over it!!
/sarc off
==
EricTheRed commented:
Bob
Science isn’t about majority rule. Its about proving theories. Have you read the HARRY READ ME files from the CRU charged with trying to sort through the temperature records and enter them into the modeling programs? They are listed at Wattsupwiththat.com. Have you looked at the temperature graphs before and after the adjustments?
bg commented:
++
Robert @ 6:09 pm #47
The IPCC removes the Hockey stick [2007]
==
LytnUp commented:
Bob,
Throwing out the rural data – great. Read “State of Fear.”
Debate is great. Points of fact v. points of fact. Unless you actually present some evidence instead of just repeating what is commonly regurgitated, this is not debate, it is just you saying that you have faith in AGW and no one can break it.
You’re right, there is no conspiracy for a power grab, its more of a club really — it’s right out there. They don’t even deny it.
Is it just me or does it seem like every time someone wants to have a big AGW soiree, a record cold spell comes blasting in and makes the whole thing look ridiculous?
Once again, what is the right temperature?
All anyone can ask is that you have some slight bit of curiosity. You are only being faithful to science if you demand that the theory stand up to the facts. If all that has been presented here doesn’t tickle the skeptic in you, then I am just going to go have a beer (probably will anyway).
bg commented:
++
LytnUp @ 5:30 pm #33
unfortunately what it boils down to is..
do you want to keep being funded??
lots of scientists are going to get pink slips for not cooperating (heck,
lots have already been blacklisted/balled or whatever they call being shunned these bass ackwards days)..
it’s the B Hussein O way, period..
==
Bob commented:
Valerie — I will check out “State of Fear” I’ve enjoyed a lot of Michael Crichton’s books. Also, I’ll definitely look more into the urban-rural dropout.
Robert — the data alteration doesn’t affect where I stand because I can see reasoning for them doing it and I’ve notice the vast majority of the scientific community stand behind what was done (http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/12/05/137203/Scientific-Journal-Nature-Finds-Nothing-Notable-In-CRU-Leak, http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/11/30/0152244/Where-the-Global-Warming-Data-Is). I’ve also read dozens of peer-reviewed journal articles where they spend the entire paper explaining a theory and then in the appendix you find out how under x conditions they had to modify it to get their sample results. This doesn’t seem any different to me.
To the rest of the group, thanks for the discussion. It’s been fun. I’m going to be watching Al Gore’s movie this weekend and I’ll be spending the holidays checking out various books and whatnot from both sides of the debate. It’s neat to learn things.
gus commented:
The Kool aid Kult doesn’t care if Obama is liar.
They don’t care if Climategate shows these scientists to be LIBTARD liars.
They have nothing else. Libtards need something to hang their hats on. They are not moral, they do not achieve. They are misfits.
They needs a CAUSE to make them morally superior. It used to be eating TOFU now it’s fuking the golden goose.
bg commented:
++
Agent 99 @ 8:05 pm #74
thanks..
why is that old evil (fitb) still alive?? gah!!
Copenhagen climate summit in disarray after ‘Danish text’ leak
[The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations.]
the move by Tuvalu halted for the second day
the process of advancing the Kyoto Protoco
[Now the major decisions to come out of this summit are being discussed behind closed doors, with the Danish government preparing another “political declaration” that it will circulate this weekend, though it was forced to withdraw its last draft in the face of concerted opposition from developing countries.]
good for Tuvalu!! another country with more gumption than all the Obama arse kissers & Rep RHINO’s combined that are running ours!! (thumbsup)
btw, your link didn’t work, but i knew which one it was
because i had read it earlier today & almost puked.. :p)
==
bg commented:
++
Bob @ 9:18 pm #88
be sure to check out Als book..
About “Our Choice”
[I’m offering you the choice of life or death.
You can choose either blessings or curses.
–Deuteronomy Chapter 30, Verse 19]
More on Al Gore’s climate fraud promotion book “Our Choice”
[Maurice Strong, who is regularly credited as founding father of the modern environmental movement, serves on the board of directors of CCX. Strong was a leading initiate of the Earth Summit in the early 90s, where the theory of global warming caused by CO2 generated by human activity was most notably advanced.
Both Strong and Gore come from the Club of Rome clique, who in their 1991 Report, “The First Global Revolution” openly admitted how they were planning to exploit the contrived hoax of global warming in order to further their agenda.
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.,” they wrote.]
With Hurricanes At Thirty Year Low, Gore Turns To Photoshop
[..] Al Gore has turned to photoshop in order to make a CO2-choked earth look scary enough to sell his cap and trade scam.
The latest example of climate cult fakery comes in the form of the front cover of Al Gore’s new book, Our Choice; A Plan To Solve The Climate Crisis.]
why not give these movies a few minutes of
your time bedfore Al makes them go “poof”..
1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Part 1)
1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Part 2)
too bad they felt the need to try & pull off such a scam; what a shame; we would have been way ahead of the game had they only been honest with us.. but no, they need to make their billions first & damn who lives or dies due
to their lies (also too bad there’s no part 3, etc)..
==
Anon commented:
What causes the climate and its changes on earth?
The sun, the oceans, the atmosphere, the land masses, volcanoes, and nonlinearities of the sun, the oceans, the atmosphere, the land masses, volcanoes, and probably, a low, or insignificant AGW effect, as well as, the AGW theory couldn´t be 100% proven, due to quantum mechanics, the uncertainty principle, and quantum fluctuations, as well as, if true, it´s not, solved by socialism, i.e. Cap and Trade, with a total world price tag of $145 trillion.
Say No To Climategate!!!
Say No To Cap And Trade!!!
Say No To Global Governance!!!
Say No To Junk Scientists!!!
Say No To Fold AGW Into National Security!!!
Say No To Copenhagen!!!
Say No To All!!!
bg commented:
++
Anon 9:56 pm #92
re: [it´s not, solved by socialism, i.e. Cap and
Trade, with a total world price tag of $145 trillion.]
Amen!! (thumbsup)
the ones who ask US to “sacrifice” won’t even sign themselves on to Public Option Health Care, why would they ever give up their jets, yachts, limos, fine wining & dining, etc.. they are a JOKE, and Obama is the head clown..
re: bg @ 9:50 pm #91
forgot to add this cool little video..
i nicknamed it “Earths heartbeat”..
==
Sasja commented:
Obama, Gore, Pelosi,et al and their brain-dead minions are what I see as dangerous to our national security. I agree with an earlier post that if they really believe humans are responsible for their fairy tale called global warming (or climate change-take your pick), they should set the example and off themselves. Losing all that hot air emanating from their lying breaths would help cool the planet even faster than it’s cooling now.
Anon commented:
Non-weapons science almost to 100% died with Climategate. RIP.
Weapons science (nuclear, and non-nuclear) is alive, and it is normally in conjunction with the scientific method, experiment, testing, hydrodynamics, computer simulation, quantum mechanics, special – and general relativity, the uncertainty principle, and in the future, if needed, with quantum fluctuations, as well.
Say No To Climategate And Junk Scientists!!!
/—/
bg, thanks. Interesting and important video of the nonlinearities of the Arctic Ice Area NSIDC 2000, and Antarctic Ice Area NSIDC 2000, as well as, important comments against the AGW theory at GATEWAY PUNDIT.
Brian commented:
Bob:
I’m a scientist and programmer myself. Very familiar with statistics and model fitting. What we know from climategate was that the original data isn’t available and the statistical fitting is neither well documented, nor is it well implemented. Statistical models need to be clear, apparently these are not.
That brings us to the validity of the statistical models themselves…these “popular ones (man is responsible for global warming)” haven’t predicted trends, and data was hidden or disregarded because they didn’t meet the model (note nasa’s recent tendencies to cook/toss data).
Easy conclusion to make: the data is questionable, the models are bad (or grossly insufficient). To push for action on any of this is pretty irresponsible, and negligent, if not criminal to push for any organized governmental action based on these models and this data.
S. Wolf commented:
It is a NS issue. It will ruin the American economy. Just ask this sap.
Lefties lose a billionaire sugar daddy
“What did him in?
Obamanomics and global warming.
He invested heavily in alternative energy projects.”
Denise commented:
Bob:
The whole point of ClimateGate is that the fraudulent manipulation of data has been exposed. The “peer review” you cite as reason to still(!) accept AGW is called into question by ClimateGate. Therefore, you need to prove that the scientists who reviewed the data did their due diligence. Basically, why isn’t the raw data available? That way EVERYONE (skeptics and true believers) can review each and every data massage and discuss the merits/biases of each. If you are truly concerned, and not just a troll, you will demand review of the climate change data and release of the raw data. After all, it’s not SCIENCE if it can’t be replicated.
You are very naive to believe that science isn’t biased. The emails document the bias. It is laudable to try to see the best in people. It is folly to trust people who have revealed themselves to be liars.
bg commented:
++
re: bg @ 9:32 pm #90
it’s not as if the UN being in charge of the New World Order isn’t scary enough.. but doesn’t anyone else but me consider this even scarier (not shakin’ in your boots kind)..
“the circle of commitment”
[The agreement, leaked to the Guardian, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol's principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.
The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as "a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks".
A confidential analysis of the text by developing countries also seen by the Guardian shows deep unease over details of the text. In particular, it is understood to:
• Force developing countries to agree to specific emission cuts
and measures that were not part of the original UN agreement;
• Divide poor countries further by creating a new category
of developing countries called "the most vulnerable";
• Weaken the UN's role in handling climate finance;
• Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon
per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes.
Developing countries that have seen the text are understood to be furious that it is being promoted by rich countries without their knowledge and without discussion in the negotiations.
"It is being done in secret. Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process,” said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.]
i mean, all this crapola is supposedly about
helping “poorer” countries play catch up..
ironically, it reminded me of what the scientists said about
what will happen to “poorer” countries towards the end of this film @ approx 1:07-08 mark.. sad, truly sad that anyone goes hungry or w/o basic needs in this bass ackwards world, why don’t billionaire’s like Soros & Gore put their money into feeding the hungry etc.. vs creating more victims.. *sigh*
==
Sandy commented:
Obama should do infomercials because all he does is sell. Everything he wants is vital to our existance–it always costs a fortune in taxes and cuts down on our quality of life. There’s a patter here.
Rivka commented:
Bob, just use common sense. I thought it was true at first until I started thinking about it. The universe is vast and complicated and so is the system by which our climate changes-even scientists will say that.
Ask yourself this.. If it took hundreds of years for us to be where we are at, so how can we fix it in 10 years by changing our lightbulbs, driving electric cars and doing the carbon credit thing. We would need to go back to the cave man days and chuck all modern technology immediately to save our planet from the destruction they are touting is going to happen soon. If we are getting ready to burn up I would think they would take more drastic measures than they have.
The next question should be, if we aren’t going to go extreme to ‘save the planet’, then why are they doing what they are doing at Copenhagen and why would they do Cap and Trade.-it obviously is too little to turn the course our planet it on around fast enough. The only answer to the ‘why’ of this is that it has nothing to do with saving the planet but it is merely a hoax in order to have control over our lives. That is the only conclusion one can come to who actually thinks.
Our mistake was throwing common sense to the wind and putting all our trust in Scientists who are holding hands with politicians who believe this.
You seem to question whether or not ‘for sure’ man has caused it or contributed to it. If one isn’t for sure then why take the huge leap of calling it a national security issue.
Bob, it is simple, just observe what is going on around you and ask questions. Even Scientists get it wrong sometimes and even Scientists can be corrupt. They are fallible men like the rest of us.
Otter commented:
Bob~
There is a great deal of research coming out demonstrating that the Mideival Warm Period was as much as 3 degrees C warmer in some parts of the world, as it is today. Yet the ‘science’ behind ‘man-made’ global warming claims that we will has ‘runaway’ global warming if the temperatures go up just 2 more degrees.
Which they are not, as the Earth has Cooled nearly one full degree since 1998. This despite a 5% increase, which the ‘science’ claims should be making the Earth hotter.
I believe there IS global warming.
AND global cooling.
It is called Natural Climate Change, and it has been going in cycles for a billion years. We can’t change it without consequences.
You also mention the Earth has been getting warmer for decades…. the Little Ice Age, by proper scientific research, officially came to an end in the 1850s. The Earth was several degrees cooler then. Now, compared to the much warmer MWP and RWPs, what would you consider too warm?
maverick muse commented:
Norway’s laws formally protect freedom of speech. Christian protesters peacefully gathered with banners outside of the Nobel festivities. The Oslo police told them to move across the street; and they complied. Next the police told them to lower their voices; and they did. Then the police told them to leave and if they returned they’d be arrested. No opposition tolerated by the Nobel Fraud party.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=118717
maverick muse commented:
“There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, more famine, more mass displacement.”–Barack Obama
Whether you do nothing or something, whether you live or die, droughts occur as a course of nature. And what has Barack Obama done to help the mass displacement and genocide in Dafur?
What Obama does is the matter. He holds to the fanatical view that alpha and omega defines Obama; it’s all about himself. No crisis is ever his own fault. All catastrophes can only be cured by the dogma that Obama, Inc. is omniscient and omnipotent. And if that doesn’t work for you, so what because you are expendable and of no account beyond problematic and in need of resolution. Government will own all rights to your DNA and all the elements of the earth soon enough.
Arch commented:
Look at the scenario the warmies are predicting. CO2 doubles from 384 to 768 parts per million. [FYI: In our nuclear submarines, CO2 levels average 4,100 ppm without adverse effects on the crew.] Although I do not believe the greenhouse effect would have a significant effect on temperature, let’s say I’m wrong and average temperatures rise from 15°C to 20°C. Living conditions in Alaska, Canada, Scandinavia and Siberia would be more pleasant.
Growing seasons would be extended by a month per year adding 15% to 30% capacity. Plants grow faster and larger, absorbing more CO2 and producing more O2 through photosynthesis. Tree lines on mountains move higher. Farming and timber production boom. Food and building materials become less expensive. More land becomes arable.
Oceans warm more quickly, adding more water vapor to the atmosphere. Rainfall, perhaps even monsoons, provide more fresh water and mountain snow. As Arctic ice recedes, increased evaporation prevents major rise in mean sea levels, just as it did during the Medieval Warm Period. Cost of heating drops, but cooling cost increase. Overall, a wash.
Severe weather is caused by the variation in air temperature. The variation between tropical and temperate zones would move storms toward the poles, lessening the number of hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico.
I’m having trouble imagining a downside here.
Global warming is not a national security problem.
anonymous commented:
Global warming is not a national security problem.
youth commented:
Global warming is not a national security problem.
Keep repeating it until you believe it. Like, uh, as if you were in a religion.
If someone disagrees with you, call them a member of the Hitler Youth, like nutcase denialist Lord Monckton of old Europe. You can do this even if the person you are calling a member of the Hitler Youth is himself Jewish.
Brian commented:
youth -
you are out of line, accusing someone else of something they’ve never done or asserted. That is exactly what the worst regimes in history have done…fraudulently charging others for things they never did. Trolling gets you nowhere.
Chisum commented:
When the UN’s involved: Follow the Money
And if you follow the money on the Copenhagen conference it leads right to the pockets of the head of the chairman of tne U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/12/when_the_uns_involved_follow_t.html
Flavia commented:
and now he’ll declare anyone who denies it or argues against it an enemy of the state
Bobbi commented:
“There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, more famine, more mass displacement – all of which will fuel more conflict for decades,”
Listen to what he just said (if it was transcripted correctly) there’s little scientific dispute”
He’s talking to people who have a slective hearing/seeing problem.
Atomic Lib Smasher commented:
What is OBummer planning to do since “Global Warming is a national security issue”? Blow up the sun? Because that would definitely work due to the fact that it is 99% responsible for “Climate Change”.
Valerie commented:
To me, at best, the “evidence” of global warming shows that the temperature of the earth hasn’t changed much.
I did not assume the temperatures themselves had been faked, or even cherry-picked. Further, I was not heavily impressed by early charges of cherry-picking, because I know very well that throwing out experiments in an effort to get rid of bad data (caused by unforeseen differences between the experiments) is a normal and necessary part of making sense of a series of experiments.
I was also not, at first, terribly impressed by the emails. That is because I have had the responsibility of disciplining scientists to keep from making jokes and speculating in their emails. I know far too well how bad a joke can look when it is taken out of context.
But then these “scientists” said they had gotten rid of their raw data. Further, they said they did it because they transferred to a new computer system.
I knew both of those statements to be lies.
Researchers never get rid of their original data. That data is their life. They copy it, multiple times, in multiple places, and they keep it. Further, it is an ordinary part of publication of a Journal article to embed the data plus an explanation of any manipulations to it, within the article itself.
A person of ordinary skill in the art is supposed to be able to reconstruct the data and the experiments from the text of the Journal article. A report, that the experiment cannot be replicated from the information in a Journal article, is a devastating rebuttal.
Further, the advances in available memory space have been such that there has never been any need to lose data because of a computer transfer. What used to take a supercomputer now fits with ease on a laptop.
So, here we have two lies that point to fraud: not overenthusiasm, not mistake, not legitimate selection among experiments, but fraud.
Barack Obama has not, and should not, yet changed his position with respect to his attendance at the climate conference. These events need to be digested, first. The cap-and-trade legislation, however, has been tabled for the moment, and that is the proper result.
Valerie commented:
Are anonymous # 106 and youth # 107 the same person?
JPL17 commented:
If someone disagrees with you, call them a member of the Hitler Youth, like nutcase denialist Lord Monckton of old Europe.
They did a lot more than “disagree” with Lord Monckton, you idiot; they disrupted and shut down the whole conference, depriving the lawful organizers and speakers of their right to hold their conference. This is exactly the behavior of brownshirts; given their youthfulness, Lord Monckton’s use of the term “Hitler Youth” to describe them was perfectly apt.
And please keep using the term “denialist” for those of us who refuse to blindly follow the global warming fad. It serves the useful “cow bell” function — warning us, “here comes another member of the global warming cult.”
bg commented:
++
youth @8:11 am #107
oh yeah!!
“We’re Building a Religion”
“I am confident that we can CREATE A KINGDOM right here on EARTH”
“My INDIVIDUAL SALVATION is not gonna come about
without a COLLECTIVE SALVATION for the Country” ~
B Hussein O
so toss LM out with the bath water..
you do trust this guy don’t you??
Obama Calls For New World Order In Berlin
oh yeah, Hitler and Hitler youth..
someone had to do it, why not me..
old world order..
new world order..
this is cool too..
==
Bob Belvedere commented:
Thanks for bring that to our attention, Jim.
Quoted from and Linked to at:
GIVE ME A BREAK!
Can you say D-i-c-K tatorship? commented:
We have no say–the Sunni Muslim leader who pays $2M to hide his college records–this traitor to America & his communist felonist perverted CZARs who surround him has bankrupt and raped America. Dear GOD look at NYC? These Americans are ONE of us. You attack NYC-you attack ALL of us-good working people 3000+ Americans needlessly killed. No more muslims allowed in our country to “JHAD”. Keep them out. Shut down CAIR! And this sunni muslim President allows NY to be spit on? A slap in the face. All my life I’ve always loved NY, memories, parades, the dropping of the New Yrs ball, baseball, coney Island, Statue of “Liberty” a beacon of HOPE of Freedom-then, the BASTARDS declared WAR on our soil! on our NY citizens, on our Ft. Hood soldiers-Holden & H.Husssein cares NOTHING, NOTHING about Americans-is this the HOPE&CHANGE the demogods wanted? Just like in Austrailia-we didn’t ask you to come here, repsect our LAWS or leave. But no they come here and want to kill us, attack us-change our culture, they don’t assimulate! Our congress ignores us. WE the people!! This should be bipartism it affects ALL of us. The demogods who voted for these treasonists–did this to ALL of us. They voted for the devil. No more of him–Kick him out–he doesn’t go to church, celebrate ramdaden-whtever-& puts a PERVERT in charge of our schools, & holdren is a treasonist. How dare he do this!!!! Nobel peace prise, pleze. And now a CAP&TAX SCAM!!! And EPA says we are going to push it down your throats..we are under a dicatorship. I say we need to fight..IMPEACH OBAMA NOW for treason to AMERICA! I say NO Hell no you cannot try the enemy in NY. Not NOW, NOT EVER! IMPEACH OBAMA HUSSEIN and Holdren;I love you NY and don’t think we aren’t supporting YOU because we are….
youth commented:
“This is exactly the behaviour of the brownshirts?”
How exact is that, precisely? Pretty sure there weren’t many Jewish kids in the Hitler Youth.
Fugazi commented:
How is it a national security issue? Are you serious? Have you not heard of the Six-Day War?
http://securityandclimate.cna.org/
“Global climate change presents a serious national security threat which could impact Americans at home, impact United States military operations and heighten global tensions, according to a new study released by a blue-ribbon panel of retired admirals and generals from all branches of the armed services.”
madnesslol commented:
3 and 4 star generals are paid by the government, therefore they are liars. Please try to fit in here Fugazi, this is not the sort of site for rational comment or evidence.
Chisum commented:
Rational comment?
This coming from a troll who posts here under 3 or 4 different names?
Go away!
madnesslol commented:
ok so why is it not a national security issue then?
You love an appeal to authority.
Fugazi appeals to an authority.
Chisum responds “look at the troll”
Still don’t know why it is not a national security issue.
Explain please.
Fugazi commented:
It will be clear to Jim Hoft how this is a national security issue when we are fighting a war over water.
madnesslol commented:
oil, water, its all the same to conservatives, as long as they are fighting a war, it doesn’t matter what it’s over.
Fugazi commented:
Good point
madnesslol commented:
Military and government get the best healthcare – publicly funded of course. They will be fine whatever happens to the earth.
bg commented:
++
madnesslol @ 7:09 pm #123
re: [ok so why is it not a national security issue then?]
read S-L-O-W-L-Y.. i wouldn’t want you to miss
the answer to your B-R-I-L-L-I-A-N-T question..
MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX!!
==
JPL17 commented:
Pretty sure there weren’t many Jewish kids in the Hitler Youth.
Re-read my post, a-hole. I was specifically comparing the protestors’ behavior to the behavior of brownshirts. Your idiotic defense of brownshirt behavior when it’s practiced by Jews simply shows that you’re perfectly OK with brownshirt behavior when it’s practiced by Jews.
Which, in turn, proves that you’re an idiot.
bg commented:
++
madnesslol @ 7:30 pm #126
American Leadership & War
think your brain sprung a leak, oh wait..
==
bg commented:
++
madnesslol @ 7:09 pm #123
i answered yours now you answer mine..
why is Climate Change a national security issue??
yes indeed, explain please..
==
madnesslol commented:
“This is exactly the behavior of brownshirts; given their youthfulness, Lord Monckton’s use of the term “Hitler Youth” to describe them was perfectly apt.”
See that bit at the end? Hitler Youth is a “perfectly” apt term to describe them. A perfect term to describe a protester who is Jewish is “a member of the Hitler Youth.” 100% perfect.
Or what is the meaning of perfect, exactly?
JPL17 commented:
idiocylol
December 13th, 2009 | 7:01 am | #133
Really? You really don’t know what “perfect” means? Here’s a pretty good definition:
“perfect \ ‘per-fikt \ adj: satisyfing all requirements: accurate”
–Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary
OK, I’ve answered your question. Now you answer mine: What term do YOU use to describe a young Jewish protestor who behaves exactly like a brownshirt?
madnesslol commented:
it doesn’t “satisfy all requirements”
The Hitler Youth were not simply brownshirts who happened to be young.
They were the elite, trained, chosen loons, and they weren’t Jewish, on the whole.
Very few young brownshirts were in the Hitler Youth, therefore very few young people behaving like brownshirts could be “perfectly” described as being like the Hitler Youth.
madnesslol commented:
How I describe young Jewish protestors depends entirely on whether they agree with my pre-existing political beliefs.
If they are behaving like brownshirts in defence of Israel, or some other nutty right wing cause, then of course they are freedom fighters and heroes etc.
If they are behaving like brownshirts because they are quite worried about the planet they have to live on for the next 80 years, then they are obviously fascistic, elitist, and perfectly described as being like the Hitler Youth.
JPL17 commented:
“defence”
You’re a Brit.
A far-leftist Brit.
Now everything is clear.