Topic: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. - page 173. (Read 636458 times)

Lol.
Well, the opposite would be more believable:
Bergmann's Rule

Hey, can't we have some really scary stories?

I don't know, like

Sucky Liberal Mag Warns that Climate Change Will Hasten Attack of 50 Foot Tall Women

WaPo Warns that Climate Change May Hasten Spread of Ebola





The Ebola outbreak is “out of control” in parts of West Africa, says the head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  Could climate change hasten the spread of the deadly virus?  Perhaps, but the linkages are complicated, according to limited scientific literature on the topic.

Ebola is a disease caused by the Ebola virus. Scientists don’t currently know how the disease originates, nor how to cure it. They know the virus is transmitted via contact with an infected animal.

It appears that in most cases, Ebola outbreaks begin when humans eat infected bush meat — wild animals like bats and monkeys – which is cooked and used for sustenance in regions where food is scarce.

Scientific and health organizations have long held that climate change poses risks to human health, that warming may expand the range of certain water- and air-borne diseases. For example, given that it thrives in warm water, Cholera has been found to correlate with rising sea surface temperature. And while adaptive measures like improved medical care and vaccines could control their spread, Malaria, Dengue fever, and Lyme disease are all expected to expand in geographical area as global temperature increases, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

However, the connection between climate and Ebola is more complex since it’s related to changes in precipitation characteristics, rather than directly linked to temperature.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2014/08/05/will-climate-change-worsen-ebola-outbreaks/

---------------------------------------------------------------
That image is so cool looking ...err... I meant dry... Dry looking!

Kerry Tells Africans Not To Create More Farms For Starving Children Because It Will Cause Global Warming…

http://youtu.be/HlynApdHtfw

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought this was a headline from The Onion! I really did this time 

I could certainly be convinced to go piss on certain peoples' yards.  Radical ecological freaks, for example.  And we could all take our doggies there so they can do their stuff there, too.

Anything to help a worthy cause!

gee, they really have some weird conceptions. such totalitarian, much propaganda.

I have talked about this before in other threads. The global warming, LGBT, Feminist, and minority groups have banded together into one brand to jam their activist talking points down the world's throats like it or not. Oppose them and you are a homophobic misogynistic racist who hates the environment. This merger of these groups is an attempt to give man man global warming regulation supporters the seemingly untouchable political status of the other minority groups via association. Apparently it has become official policy now. This will not end well.

Feds To Spend $450K To Help Native Americans Adapt To ‘”Climate Change”…


The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) plans to spend up to $450,000 in taxpayer dollars to teach Native American tribes in the Great Basin region ”climate adaptation plans” for their hunting, fishing and gathering activities.

“Due to climate change, the natural landscapes are becoming impacted,” and the “traditional practices for hunting, fishing, and gathering for ceremonial purposes” can potentially create further impacts,” according to BLM’s Cooperative Agreement announcement.

“It is important to educate those who are engaging in these gathering activities to reduce impacts on public lands. If tribes are able to develop adaptation plans for their gathering activities, they would have a process to follow that could reduce negative impacts on the landscape,” the Request for Applications (RFA) explains.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/lauretta-brown/feds-will-spend-450k-help-native-americans-adapt-climate-change

I can't even parse that.

U.N. Climate Chief: Current Plans To Fight Global Warming Are Sexist…



Nobody could accuse Christiana Figueres of being hard-hearted. Her passion for tackling climate change has many times spilled over into tears.

Yet as UN climate chief, she must be hard-headed. Her reputation hinges on striking a deal between nearly 200 parties with vastly divergent interests and priorities.

And as a woman, she tells RTCC of her determination to put gender equality at the heart of efforts to tackle climate change.

The core task of UN climate talks is to agree a plan to cut the greenhouse gas emissions heating up the planet. The deadline is December 2015, when negotiators meet in Paris. [...]

If Paris is to be a success, Figueres must praise the ambitious, spur on the stragglers and keep minds focused on the goal.

In heading for that goal, there needs to be a move away from the “explicit male focus” of policy, she says.

“It is critical that that new economy not only re-establish the relationship between man and nature, which has been thoroughly not respected, but it also re-establishes the balance that is needed between the genders.”


http://www.rtcc.org/2014/08/04/christiana-figueres-climate-deal-must-bring-gender-equality/

We wouldn't want people putting adds on TV or such saying that it hasn't been warming for almost 20 years.

My my.

No, that wouldn't do.

That wouldn't do at all....

Can ants save Earth from global warming?


NEW YORK: Ants may be cooling the Earth by helping trap carbon dioxide from the environment, a new study has claimed.

A long-term experiment tracking the ants' effects on soil suggests they cooled Earth's climate as their numbers grew.

"Ants are changing the environment," said lead study author Ronald Dorn, from the Arizona State University in Tempe.

Certain ant species "weather" minerals in order to secrete calcium carbonate — better known as limestone. The process traps and removes a tiny bit of carbon dioxide gas from the atmosphere, Dorn said.

This ant limestone factory is a small-scale version of the massive planetary-cooling process that takes place in the oceans, known as carbon sequestration, 'Live Science' reported.

Dorn discovered that ants were powerful weathering agents by tracking the breakdown of basalt sand.

His experiment shows that ants appear to break down the minerals 50 to 300 times faster than sand left undisturbed on bare ground.

According to Dorn, the ants may be scavenging calcium and magnesium from the minerals and using these elements to make limestone.

In the process, the insects may trap carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, in the rock, the report said.

The transformation could take place when ants lick sand grains and stick them on the walls of their nests, but Dorn said the process is truly a scientific mystery.

The study was published in the journal Geology.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/global-warming/Can-ants-save-Earth-from-global-warming/articleshow/39547238.cms

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the sake of global warming people... Hope those are not... FIRE ANTS!!!

World's top PR companies rule out working with climate deniers
Ten firms say they will not represent clients that deny man-made climate change or seek to block emisson-reducing regulations


Some of the world’s top PR companies have for the first time publicly ruled out working with climate change deniers, marking a fundamental shift in the multi-billion dollar industry that has grown up around the issue of global warming.

Public relations firms have played a critical role over the years in framing the debate on climate change and its solutions – as well as the extensive disinformation campaigns launched to block those initiatives.

Now a number of the top 25 global PR firms have told the Guardian they will not represent clients who deny man-made climate change, or take campaigns seeking to block regulations limiting carbon pollution. Companies include WPP, Waggener Edstrom (WE) Worldwide, Weber Shandwick, Text100, and Finn Partners.

“We would not knowingly partner with a client who denies the existence of climate change,” said Rhian Rotz, spokesman for WE.

Weber Shandwick would also not take any campaign to block regulations cutting carbon emissions or promoting renewable energy. “We would not support a campaign that denies the existence and the threat posed by climate change, or efforts to obstruct regulations cutting greenhouse gas emissions and/or renewable energy standards,” spokeswoman Michelle Selesky said.

“There may be scenarios in which we could represent a client that has different views on climate change, just not on this issue.”

The UK-based WPP, the world’s largest advertising firm by revenue and parent company of Burson Marsteller and Oglivy Public Relations, said taking on a client or campaign disputing climate change would violate company guidelines.

“We ensure that our own work complies with local laws, marketing codes and our own code of business conduct. These prevent advertising that is intended to mislead and the denial of climate change would fall into this category,” the company said.

However, Fiona McEwan, a spokeswoman for the company, said the 150 companies within WPP made their own decisions on clients and would not rule out campaigns opposing regulations to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

The US-based Edelman, which is the world’s largest independently owned PR firm, did not explicitly rule out taking on climate deniers as clients.

“Expanding the dialogue in a constructive manner, and driving productive outcomes to solve energy challenges are the key criteria for evaluating client engagements,” said spokesman Michael Bush.

He said Edelman takes on clients on a case-by-case basis.

The PR firms were responding to surveys conducted independently by the Guardian and the Climate Investigations Centre, a Washington-based group that conducts research on climate disinformation campaigns. This could have a knock-on effect on the advertising and lobbying campaigns targeting Barack Obama’s regulations limiting carbon emissions from power plants, and the international negotiations for a climate change treaty, now entering a critical phase.

“The PR industry is a major component of the influence peddling industry that stretches across Washington and the world, and they are making large sums of money from energy companies and other important players that have businesses connected to fossil fuels and energy policy,” said Kert Davies, the founder of Climate Investigations.

Davies said his group took on the research to try to get a better grasp of the mechanics behind the framing of messages on climate change – and the disinformation campaign.

Over the past few years, environmental groups and scientists have been looking more closely at the messaging around climate change, in part to examine their own failings to build broader public support for action.

In the process, PR firms have grown even more influential in shaping the debate around climate policy, said James Hoggan, who ran his own public relations firm in Vancouver and founded DeSmogBlog, a blog that describes itself as “clearing the PR pollution that clouds climate science”.

“I think that public relations people are right at the elbow of powerful people in industry and government,” he said. “You are an insider – a very trusted insider – and you can have a huge influence. It really does matter. These are influential organisations.”

Some of the firms, such as Finn Partners, have a strong reputation for taking on environmental causes. “Finn Partners would not work on any campaigns that deny the reality of climate change nor would we take on a campaign that would obstruct regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or renewable energy standards,” said managing partner Peter Finn.

WE said it had worked on campaigns to expand production tax credits for wind energy. Oglivy Public Relations told CIC that it recognised the risks of climate change, and that it had worked on campaigns for WWF and Greenpeace. But it declined to comment on whether it would represent clients that deny climate change. Qorvis, a Washington DC-based PR company, and its parent company MSL Group, also declined to answer that question.

Other companies however appear concerned with trying to represent environmental campaign groups as well as industry, according to Davies.

Only 10 of the 25 firms responded to multiple emails, phone calls and certified letters from the CIC, either directly or through a parent company.

Firms that refused to comment include those that have worked for groups calling for action on climate change – as well as those seeking to block those efforts.

Hill & Knowlton, for example, was hired as the official media sponsor for the United Nations climate conference in Copenhagen in 2009. The company declined to respond to the CIC survey.

Several of the companies, such as WPP, WE, Oglivy, and Edelman have ambitious in-house programmes for reducing their carbon footprint. Qorvis Communications , a subsidiary of Publicis Groupe, said it had been calculating its carbon footprint since 2009.

But even those firms with robust internal carbon accounting systems, such as Edelman, were reluctant to go on record.

Edelman’s client list includes the American Petroleum Institute, the main energy lobby, which opposes Barack Obama’s climate change agenda. Edelman also carried out campaigns supporting the Keystone XL pipeline, a proposed pipeline to carry tar sands oil from Canada to refineries on the Gulf coast of Texas.

An initial response to CIC from Edelman inadvertently included an internal email which said: “I don’t believe we are obligated in any way to respond. There are only wrong answers for this guy.”

Edelman did in the end respond to the CIC and the Guardian.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/aug/04/worlds-top-pr-companies-rule-out-working-with-climate-deniers



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They are already on the payroll of the warmists. They do not need the money.

Should We Return The Nutrients In Our Pee Back To The Farm?



More than 170 volunteers in the Brattleboro, Vt., area have contributed urine to the Rich Earth Institute field trials.

Let me guess how you feel about your urine: Get that smelly stuff away from me as fast as possible?

A small group of environmentalists in Vermont isn't as squeamish. Instead of flushing their pee down the drain, they're collecting it with special toilets that separate No. 1 and No. 2.

Then they're pooling the urine of the 170 volunteers in the pilot project (a quart or so, per person, daily) and eventually giving it to a farmer, who's putting it on her hay fields in place of synthetic fertilizer. The goal is to collect 6,000 gallons this year.

The logic driving this avant-garde project of the Rich Earth Institute, based in Brattleboro, Vt., is that it's foolish and wasteful to part with the precious nitrogen and phosphorus that moves from the food we eat right through us — especially when farmers have to buy fertilizer at great expense to put those very same nutrients back into the soil.

What's more, founders Abraham Noe-Hays and Kim Nace tell The Salt, once our urine enters the wastewater system, drinking water carries it to a treatment facility, where the nutrients become pollutants that can contaminate waterways and cause algal blooms, among other issues.

"One goal is preventing the pollution caused by peeing in water — keeping pee out of the waterways and protecting water quality," says Noe-Hays. "And we can also make agriculture more sustainable and resilient by returning these nutrients to the soil. Urine is an inherently local and renewable source of fertilizer."

The idea of "pee-cycling" has much in common with the "night soil" tradition, as well as the newer practice of using biosolids, or sewage sludge that's been transformed into soil amendment for farmers. Several wastewater treatment plants in the U.S. have been making and donating biosolids, which are regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency, to farmers for years. But the practice is controversial because some activists claim that even certified biosolids could contain harmful chemicals.

The average human generates 8 pounds of nitrogen and almost 1 pound of phosphorous in a year's worth of urine. And those nutrients come in a form that plants can use. Though Rich Earth is the only legally authorized and publicly documented urine reuse project in the U.S., many other countries — rich and poor alike — have recognized its potential, and are conducting their own research.

Urine from a healthy person is sterile, so using it on farmland is considered safe: Even the World Health Organization has guidelines for reusing urine in agriculture.

The problem, though, is that with the urine-diverting toilets, which some of the REI volunteers are using (others have waterless urinals with removable containers), the pee may get contaminated. So to kill off germs, Nace and Noe-Hays are testing two sanitization methods: pasteurization and storing it for a month or more, which allows the alkalinity to develop over time and kill microbes.

They are also trying to determine if there are medicines in the waste that might wind up in plants grown for food. So they're sending samples to researchers at the University of Michigan and University of Buffalo to find out, for a study funded by the EPA.

So far the only farmer using the product grows hay as a forage crop for animals. When the Rich Earth team measured the impact of the urine applied to her hay fields in 2013, they found that yields increased dramatically. And word has gotten around their community; they now have a waiting list.

Seth True of Best Septic pumps urine from the 275-gallon tank. A family of three can fill a tank this size in eight months.

"We have more farmers who want urine brought to them than infrastructure to do it," says Nace. "But we can only begin to service this region. We would like to have enough [scientific] documentation that it could be replicated at the state level."

Scaling up such a project isn't just a hope of hippie Vermonters. Samantha Antonini, a researcher at the Center for Development Research at the University of Bonn in Germany, assessed two rather complex and expensive technologies for turning urine into fertilizer and found that agricultural yields with urine fertilizers were comparable to those achieved with commercial fertilizers.

Europeans, and particularly the Swedes, are intrigued by the idea. But, Antonini tells us in an email, "there's a long way to go before you can even think of using urine as a commercial fertilizer given the rather stringent regulations in the EU."

In the developing world, however, she thinks these systems could be especially helpful for those who don't currently have access to any sanitation. But so far, there isn't much demand for it. Still, "ecological sanitation" is becoming a bit of a buzzword — the wonky version of "pee-cycling."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2014/07/31/336564120/should-we-return-the-nutrients-in-our-pee-back-to-the-farm?


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please! Give World Piss A Chance!

Below-Average Temperatures Leave Some With Summertime Sadness


The area is on track for our coolest summer since 2009, but that’s leaving some people with seasonal depression, CBS 2’s Cindy Hsu reported.
Staten Island high school seniors Gabriell Vinci and Antoinette DiStefano said summer is going by way too fast.
“It’s very depressing,” Vinci said.
Even though summer is only  halfway over, Donna Barnes said she is feeling the frantic rush.
“I have to admit, I’ve got a little bit of a panic of like there’s so many things that I wanted to do that I haven’t done yet,” Barnes said.
Barnes said she is trying to slow things down with pictures; she snapped one of the green trees in Central Park during the summer in the same spot she took a picture of snow-covered trees back in February.
Psychotherapist Jonathan Alpert said this year’s summer sadness has a lot to do with the weather.
“Following the long, cold winter, they just expected a really long, hot summer, so they’re not seeing that,” Alpert said.
As CBS 2 reported, this July was the coolest one the area has seen in five years and so far, there have been no heat waves.
Back-to-school sales are already in full swing and best friends Anya Milberg and Lyla said they feel the summer rush.
“It goes really fast because then suddenly you’re back at school and then you’re like, ‘Oh no, winter is coming, it’s going to be so cold,’” 10-year-old Anya said.
Candice Hoyes said she is feeling it too, especially with her daughter growing up so fast and at summer day camp for the first time.
“It does feel shorter, it feels like it flew by,” Hoyes said.
Meanwhile, children like James keep dreaming and told CBS 2 he wants the summer to last a whole year.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/08/01/below-average-temperatures-leave-some-with-summertime-sadness/

-----------------------------
So Much Sad Very Much...

Leaked Memo Gives Away Dem' "Extreme Weather" Talking Points


Democrats are working hard to convince the public that regulations to limit carbon dioxide emissions are necessary to avoid economic and ecological catastrophe, according to a memo obtained by The Washington Post.

The memo from Senate Budget Committee Chairman Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat, tells members how to talk about global warming’s budgetary impact. The memo details how “disaster relief; transportation and infrastructure; national security and agriculture” will all be affected by global warming, reports the Post.

“Climate change, if left unaddressed, will both weaken economic growth and impose additional direct budgetary costs on the federal government,” Murray wrote in the memo sent out Friday. “As a result, climate change poses an increasing threat to the federal government’s already challenging long-term fiscal outlook.”

Murray’s memo puts a lot of focus on budgetary impacts due to “extreme weather” — a major talking point of President Obama during his second term. Murray argues that global warming will increase extreme weather events, like hurricanes and droughts, therefore increasing disaster relief, infrastructure and other types of spending.

“Without action, climate change will undoubtedly affect our country’s ability to produce goods and services, costing jobs and weakening growth,” Murray wrote. “These effects are already being felt due to events such as Hurricane Sandy—which was estimated to have caused $65.7 billion in economic damage—as well as the massive droughts gripping parts of the country.”

http://dailycaller.com/2014/08/01/leaked-memo-gives-away-dems-extreme-weather-talking-points/?

-------------------------------------------------------
The science of political manipulation is settled...

“Free” Ice Cream To People If They Agree Global Warming Is Real…


Two days of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hearings began Tuesday in Denver. Outside the EPA’s LoDo offices were some interesting attractions. There was a tent set up to tout solar energy and another one with a giant inflatable inhaler. The most interesting attraction outside the EPA offices in Denver, however, was the “free” ice ream truck. But just like anything else labeled “free” it wasn’t really free.

A non-profit group called The Climate Reality Project sponsored the truck. To get a scoop of Ben & Jerry’s milk and cookies ice cream you were pushed into a line and handed an iPad. Representatives of The Climate Reality Project then told those eager for some free ice cream that first they had to sign their name and provide an email address. They said they were going to send this info to the Senate to show how many people want action on climate change…or really, free ice cream.

The organization’s materials claimed that the climate is “too hot” (hence the ice cream) and that they want the government to cut carbon pollution. They we also pushing their agenda through social media, calling on the Governor to support the EPA’s proposal to limit carbon pollution from existing power plants. The organization tried to start a trend using the hashtag #imtoohot. We’re pretty sure it was used for things other than climate change awareness.

http://revealingpolitics.com/blog/2014/07/free-ice-cream-for-climate-change/

Personally I think the AGW stuff has just about ruined environmentalism, not sure it can recover.  Sad really.

I believe this to be the most common sense way of understanding the situation. IMHO.

globalwaming is some occidental system BS to keep us from thinking about the real problems, aka pollution, deforestation etc..