Shadowy Figure, Maurice Strong, Behind Global Warming Swindle

[gutb]

Well, I followed climate change science only sparingly keeping abreast of major studies and developments over the past few years just so I could avoid embarrassing myself when discussing the issue. The actual research papers are very technical and outside of my comfort level for political bullet-point arguments with people over broad topics so I tend to just pay attention to the key points and results. For example, we know that human activity been responsible for the lion's share of CO2 due to isotope analysis from geological samples -- however, right-wing ideological debaters need to deny this fact because they have incorrectly determined that to deny the other side's access to their wealth they need to first deny the science. To the other side of the fight, the science is just seized upon opportunistically to sell their own agenda -- and, what I hope we all realize, will continue to be their goals with or without climate change.

[TimG]

For example, we know that human activity been responsible for the lion's share of CO2 due to isotope analysis from geological samples

Part your problem is your are woefully uninformed on what the sceptical scientific arguments actually are. For example, almost no sceptic disputes that humans are the source of the extra CO2. Nor do most sceptics dispute the greenhouse effect (although there are a few). The majority of scientific sceptics dispute the predictions of catastrophe. i.e. they believe the effect of CO2 is much less than claimed as are the consequences of any warming. Most importantly, there are serious scientific arguments that support this belief even if they are disputed by the chicken little crowd. Edited June 1, 2011 by TimG

[Sir Bandelot]

Well, I followed climate change science only sparingly keeping abreast of major studies and developments over the past few years just so I could avoid embarrassing myself when discussing the issue. The actual research papers are very technical and outside of my comfort level for political bullet-point arguments with people over broad topics so I tend to just pay attention to the key points and results. For example, we know that human activity been responsible for the lion's share of CO2 due to isotope analysis from geological samples -- however, right-wing ideological debaters need to deny this fact because they have incorrectly determined that to deny the other side's access to their wealth they need to first deny the science. To the other side of the fight, the science is just seized upon opportunistically to sell their own agenda -- and, what I hope we all realize, will continue to be their goals with or without climate change.

A testament to the sad state of affairs we are in. Let's hope that someone preserves comments like these, so that whatever comes after us will know what we really did wrong.

We were political.

[sunsettommy]

Well, I followed climate change science only sparingly keeping abreast of major studies and developments over the past few years just so I could avoid embarrassing myself when discussing the issue. The actual research papers are very technical and outside of my comfort level for political bullet-point arguments with people over broad topics so I tend to just pay attention to the key points and results. For example, we know that human activity been responsible for the lion's share of CO2 due to isotope analysis from geological samples -- however, right-wing ideological debaters need to deny this fact because they have incorrectly determined that to deny the other side's access to their wealth they need to first deny the science. To the other side of the fight, the science is just seized upon opportunistically to sell their own agenda -- and, what I hope we all realize, will continue to be their goals with or without climate change.

Bla,bla,bla.

The usual irrational attacks and then a layer of ad homonyms.

You apparently have no idea what has been going on in the world of climate science.

[Sir Bandelot]

Bla,bla,bla.

The usual irrational attacks and then a layer of ad homonyms.

You apparently have no idea what has been going on in the world of climate science.

such irony

[RNG]

Strong was a Liberal hack, appointed by the ultimate Liberal hack, Trudeau. A total joke.

[sunsettommy]

such irony

LOL,

He did admit at post # 29:

Well, I followed climate change science only sparingly keeping abreast of major studies and developments over the past few years just so I could avoid embarrassing myself when discussing the issue.

my emphasis

Just sparingly he says.

I had stated: "You apparently have no idea what has been going on in the world of climate science."

He also wrote this nonsense:

For example, we know that human activity been responsible for the lion's share of CO2 due to isotope analysis from geological samples -- however, right-wing ideological debaters need to deny this fact because they have incorrectly determined that to deny the other side's access to their wealth they need to first deny the science.

He now contradicts the IPCC report.Where they show that each year nature emits about 97% of the yearly total.Mankind the other 3%.His isotopic arguments are not credible because Nature can also produce some of the same signature isotopes that man produces.

Then he goes on attacking "right-wing ideological debaters".A typical ad homonym.

The AGW "science" is mostly based on unverified climate models.The ones that have already been shown to be wrong.In just the first 10 years of temperature data.Note that James Hansen's 1988 3 scenarios modeling is way off the mark.Note that the 2001 IPCC report produced a PROJECTED temperature chart,starting for the year 2000 to 2050 and beyond.Based on a dozen modeling runs.They are way off too.

It is simply not warming anywhere near the rate that have been predicted/projected.Not even close!

Actually the people who are peddling the AGW scaremongering,are making a lot of money from it.Al Gore wealth greatly increased because of it.So has the Wind power companies,and Solar Companies and other low mass power production stupidities.They are very heavily subsidized just to keep them in business.

The oceans are cooling down slightly.

The atmosphere is cooling down slightly.

The Arctic ice pack has doubled in thickness since 2008.Implies a GROWING mass trend.Antarctica ice cover are near record levels,based on data trends of the last 30+ years.

North American winters and in parts of Europe and Asia.The last few years have been above normal snow cover and depth.

Global Warming is not happening at this time.

[Michael Hardner]

Global Warming is not happening at this time.

Hi Sunset Tommy - you may indeed want to reopen this topic, which as I said has been discussed quite a bit in the past. I suggest this thread, which is a little more on topic and fairly recent:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=17958&view=&hl=warming&fromsearch=1