Air Pollution and Global Warming

[B. Max]

I don't think scientists are deliberately leaving data out.

That's exactly what they've been doing.

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?c...6b-f55e0881ec34

[jdobbin]

No one said he was. He compiles the research points out the misrepresentation of the junk science. The oil industry is hiding nothing. In fact they have helping to expose the agenda of the anti capitalist one worlders. An agenda we want nothing to do with.

The way to expose bad science is better science. The right wing wishes to discredit all science as theory and no fact.

[jdobbin]

That's exactly what they've been doing.

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?c...6b-f55e0881ec34

Risk management is how science should be applied. In the case of DDT, the potential damage of the chemical is far less than the death caused by malaria.

[B. Max]

No one said he was. He compiles the research points out the misrepresentation of the junk science. The oil industry is hiding nothing. In fact they have helping to expose the agenda of the anti capitalist one worlders. An agenda we want nothing to do with.

The way to expose bad science is better science. The right wing wishes to discredit all science as theory and no fact.

The left like to repeat their lies hoping they will become true.

[jdobbin]

The left like to repeat their lies hoping they will become true.

If the right wing believes that then do actual scientific research rather than claim that universities are lying. Do the work. Stop being lazy.

[B. Max]

The left like to repeat their lies hoping they will become true.

If the right wing believes that then do actual scientific research rather than claim that universities are lying. Do the work. Stop being lazy.

We are, and at the same time exposing the junk science missleading information and out lies spewed by the global warming scare mongers of the gloom and doom industry.

For example, in May of 1996, unannounced and possibly unauthorized changes to the United Nation’s report on climate change touched off a firestorm of controversy within the scientific community. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the science group that advises the United Nations on the global warming issue, presented a draft of its report in December 1995, and it was approved by the delegations. However, when the printed report appeared in May 1996, it was discovered that substantial changes and deletions had been made to the body of the report to make it conform to the Policymakers Summery. Specifically, two key paragraphs written by the scientists were deleted. They said:

1. “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases.”

2. “No study to date had positively attributed all or part of the climate change to …man-made causes.”

http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom52.htm

[jdobbin]

http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom52.htm

Tom Deweese is paid by Exxon and Philip Morris. He is not a scientist. Show me a real scientist who backs up the claim that global warming is a myth.

The right wing just can't do that.

[daniel]

Double post, but these two threads are almost identical.

The psychology of the skeptics is described in here:

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentSe...st1100775995758

As I was reading an international survey of experts concerning their views about global warming, I couldn't help thinking about Jared Diamond's book, Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed....

This is Jared Diamond territory: an acknowledged threat, and a disinclination to change. In analyzing why societies won't change, Diamond notes that failed societies are afflicted with "creeping normalcy" — deterioration occurs over such a long period of time that people think each stage of decline is normal. Consequently, they feel no urgency for change. Another phrase he uses is "landscape amnesia" — forgetting the past and being unable to see the slide toward trouble.

The good news, both in the survey and elsewhere, is that disaster can be averted. But as survey respondents pointed out, it will require governments to create an aggressive framework for change — and so far, in Canada, that hasn't happened.

[B. Max]

http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom52.htm

Ton Deweese is paid by Exxon and Philip Morris. He is not a scientist. Show me a real scientist who backs up the claim that global warming is a myth.

The right wing just can't do that.

I have no idea who he is payed by and neither do you. Who he is payed by doesn't matter and doesn't change the facts. Once again you demonstrate the smear tactics of the global warming fanatics.

I guess Harper took these folks advice and stepped back from the abyss of global climate nonsense perpetrated by the gloom and doom industry.

I would urge him to go much further and write economic treason laws to deal with the fear merchants and the doom and gloom industry.

Meanwhile, more than 60 leading international climate change experts have gone on record to urge Canada’s new Prime Minster to carefully review global warming policies, warning that ‘“Climate change is real’ is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause.”

[B. Max]

Double post, but these two threads are almost identical.

The psychology of the skeptics is described in here:

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentSe...st1100775995758

As I was reading an international survey of experts concerning their views about global warming, I couldn't help thinking about Jared Diamond's book, Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed....

This is Jared Diamond territory: an acknowledged threat, and a disinclination to change. In analyzing why societies won't change, Diamond notes that failed societies are afflicted with "creeping normalcy" — deterioration occurs over such a long period of time that people think each stage of decline is normal. Consequently, they feel no urgency for change. Another phrase he uses is "landscape amnesia" — forgetting the past and being unable to see the slide toward trouble.

The good news, both in the survey and elsewhere, is that disaster can be averted. But as survey respondents pointed out, it will require governments to create an aggressive framework for change — and so far, in Canada, that hasn't happened.

What a phony outfit.

[jdobbin]

I have no idea who he is payed by and neither do you. Who he is payed by doesn't matter and doesn't change the facts. Once again you demonstrate the smear tactics of the global warming fanatics.

I guess Harper took these folks advice and stepped back from the abyss of global climate nonsense perpetrated by the gloom and doom industry.

I would urge him to go much further and write economic treason laws to deal with the fear merchants and the doom and gloom industry.

Meanwhile, more than 60 leading international climate change experts have gone on record to urge Canada’s new Prime Minster to carefully review global warming policies, warning that ‘“Climate change is real’ is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause.”

Those 60 have been discredited, one has recanted. Many aren't even climate specialists. Economists? Agronomists?

Dr. Tim Ball was my professor. That was a very long time ago. He has been retired and has never published anything on climate in just as long. He is the leading voice for Friends of Science. The Globe reported that Barry Cooper set up a fund through the University of Calgary and the Calgary Foundation to funnell cash to the people like Ball. Most of the donations comes from the oil industry.

Right wing tripe and no science.

[B. Max]

I have no idea who he is payed by and neither do you. Who he is payed by doesn't matter and doesn't change the facts. Once again you demonstrate the smear tactics of the global warming fanatics.

I guess Harper took these folks advice and stepped back from the abyss of global climate nonsense perpetrated by the gloom and doom industry.

I would urge him to go much further and write economic treason laws to deal with the fear merchants and the doom and gloom industry.

Meanwhile, more than 60 leading international climate change experts have gone on record to urge Canada’s new Prime Minster to carefully review global warming policies, warning that ‘“Climate change is real’ is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause.”

Those 60 have been discredited, one has recanted. Many aren't even climate specialists. Economists? Agronomists?

Right wing tripe and no science.

No they haven't been discredited. The only ones discredited have been the scare mongers like Al Gore.

[jdobbin]

No they haven't been discredited. The only ones discredited have been the scare mongers like Al Gore.

Please let me know what academic work they have done on this. Tim Ball, for example. What university in the last ten years? What paper? The answer is none.

Right wing stooge is what he is.

[watching&waiting]

I will be in Ottawa later this week and I still have my privilages at the National Reaserch Labs Library. I will go dig up lots of the things that the real scientists have said but never got put into papers because it did not agree with the government position. It will be mostly from the Liberals times and their failure with Kyoto etc. I had already read many ofd these and believe when I say that a very large number of government scientists have gone on record that Global warming is not a looming danger and they call in question just what man can do about it and what affect it really has. Yes you will not see these 1000 of hours of real lab work and their reports on them, because it was not what the main stream wanted to be said.

You will see now more then ever that under CPC these scientists feel more free to say what they think and are just now becoming more open about this.

[B. Max]

No they haven't been discredited. The only ones discredited have been the scare mongers like Al Gore.

Please let me know what academic work they have done on this. Tim Ball, for example. What university in the last ten years? What paper? The answer is none.

Right wing stooge is what he is.

Looks credible to me. http://www.fcpp.org/main/publication_detail.php?PubID=864

Again we see the one worlder leftwing spear carriers and their smear tactics at work.

[jdobbin]

You will see now more then ever that under CPC these scientists free more free to say what they think and are just now becoming more open about this.

Faith based science won't give us answers. If the Conservatives distrust the universities they should fund other institutions. But don't tell them what answer you expect first.

Look up Tim Ball, the leading man of Friends of Science. Find out when his last research paper was.

[jdobbin]

Looks credible to me. http://www.fcpp.org/main/publication_detail.php?PubID=864

Again we see the one worlder leftwing spear carriers and their smear tactics at work.

He retired. He has not done research in years.

[watching&waiting]

NRC is one of the great teachers for the universities and they do not go looking for ways to prove an answer. You are very insulting in all of this I at least have my Biochemistry dregree behind what I say and have worked with PHD scientists for many years. Just what qualifications do you have to be so condensending to any scientist no matter who they are or how they are paid.

[jdobbin]

NRC is one of the great teachers for the universities and they do not go looking for ways to prove an answer. You are very insulting in all of this I at least have my Biochemistry dregree behind what I say and have worked with PHD scientists for many years. Just what qualifications do you have to be so condensending to any scientist no matter who they are or how they are paid.

I have no criticism of you. I do have some criticism for Tim Ball who has't written a paper in a decade and who won't submit to peer review of his work.

[jbg]

You will see now more then ever that under CPC these scientists feel more free to say what they think and are just now becoming more open about this.

Exactly my point. Under the Liberals, and under the US Democrats, contrary scientists were cowed by the risk of funding cutoff. In the US it hasn't gotten much better because the universities, now in deep "PC" mode, will cut off and fire any scientist who deigns refute the fraudulent global warming orthodoxy.

[B. Max]

NRC is one of the great teachers for the universities and they do not go looking for ways to prove an answer. You are very insulting in all of this I at least have my Biochemistry dregree behind what I say and have worked with PHD scientists for many years. Just what qualifications do you have to be so condensending to any scientist no matter who they are or how they are paid.

I have no criticism of you. I do have some criticism for Tim Ball who has't written a paper in a decade and who won't submit to peer review of his work.

As if that has anything to do with it. You are critical of anyone who does not agree with the global warming scam.

[cybercoma]

Attack the people not the facts.

Global warming does exist, but the extent of warming caused by humans is virtually impossible to determine. The IPCC range from 1.whatever-5.8C is laughable as those figures never took into account changes in CO2 concentration due to world treaties and people's concern for global warming. They also never took into account the effects of cooling particles and land use changes which effect global temperatures. They also don't take into consideration ocean current changes and solar cycles.

There's a whole bunch of crap it doesn't take into consideration. No one can say without a doubt that we are facing catastrophy within the next 100 years. The warming effects from 1900-1940 were at the same rate as they have been from 1970 to present and the CO2 concentrations and emissions were nothing like they are today. Why was there a 30 year period of cooling? How do we know that won't happen again?

The agendas are misleading. Having the public believe we face catastrophy if we don't do something immediatly is wholly dishonest.

[jdobbin]

Attack the people not the facts.

Global warming does exist, but the extent of warming caused by humans is virtually impossible to determine. The IPCC range from 1.whatever-5.8C is laughable as those figures never took into account changes in CO2 concentration due to world treaties and people's concern for global warming. They also never took into account the effects of cooling particles and land use changes which effect global temperatures. They also don't take into consideration ocean current changes and solar cycles.

There's a whole bunch of crap it doesn't take into consideration. No one can say without a doubt that we are facing catastrophy within the next 100 years. The warming effects from 1900-1940 were at the same rate as they have been from 1970 to present and the CO2 concentrations and emissions were nothing like they are today. Why was there a 30 year period of cooling? How do we know that won't happen again?

The agendas are misleading. Having the public believe we face catastrophy if we don't do something immediatly is wholly dishonest.

Tim Ball has not done any climate work in a decade. What facts are there to attack? He dosn't have a research paper out there to even refute.

Some of the other people on the Friends list are also retired. No current work done.

[cybercoma]

Tim Ball has not done any climate work in a decade. What facts are there to attack? He dosn't have a research paper out there to even refute.

Some of the other people on the Friends list are also retired. No current work done.

Get off the Tim Ball kick, who cares about him? He signed his name to a letter to the Prime Minister that you're saying is irrelevant because the scientists are not climatologists, nor are they Canadian. Moving right along, answer some of the questions that I've raised in every thread so far. You're obviously educated on the issue.

How do we determine what CO2 concentrations will be in the future? How can we possibly know what temperatures will be? What portion of rising temperatures can be attributed to industrialization? Gerry keeps saying all warming is due to us, but there isnt' a single scientist on the planet who'd make that claim. Since those things, admittedly by the IPCC, cannot be answered....how do we know the severity of the problem? How do we know how much to invest in the problem? How do we even know there is a catastrophic problem?

Since you're educated on the topic, you know that we know very little about the cooling effects of particles and things like land use changes in the tropics.

Can we get past the argument that "Tim Ball has no research papers"? I could care less about him and what he says, I was never referencing him. I told you whose data I was referring to when I said the planet was cooling during the 5 centuries prior to the 1900s. I wasn't making a claim that the earth is cooling now, as obviously it is not.

[jdobbin]

Get off the Tim Ball kick, who cares about him? He signed his name to a letter to the Prime Minister that you're saying is irrelevant because the scientists are not climatologists, nor are they Canadian. Moving right along, answer some of the questions that I've raised in every thread so far. You're obviously educated on the issue.

How do we determine what CO2 concentrations will be in the future? How can we possibly know what temperatures will be? What portion of rising temperatures can be attributed to industrialization? Gerry keeps saying all warming is due to us, but there isnt' a single scientist on the planet who'd make that claim. Since those things, admittedly by the IPCC, cannot be answered....how do we know the severity of the problem? How do we know how much to invest in the problem? How do we even know there is a catastrophic problem?

Since you're educated on the topic, you know that we know very little about the cooling effects of particles and things like land use changes in the tropics.

Can we get past the argument that "Tim Ball has no research papers"? I could care less about him and what he says, I was never referencing him. I told you whose data I was referring to when I said the planet was cooling during the 5 centuries prior to the 1900s. I wasn't making a claim that the earth is cooling now, as obviously it is not.

The Friends of Science is something you referenced. In Canada, Tim Ball is the face of the group. You have his name as a credible scientist on the subject.

There is one way to find out what CO2 concentrations will be. It is for the Conservatives to commission scientific studies from legitimate people. If they don't believe the universities then go to institutes or whoever.