Author

Topic: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. - page 201. (Read 636458 times)

legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon





It cited the risk of death or injury on a widespread scale, probable damage to public health, displacement of people and potential mass migrations.

“Throughout the 21st century, climate-change impacts are projected to slow down economic growth, make poverty reduction more difficult, further erode food security, and prolong existing and create new poverty traps, the latter particularly in urban areas and emerging hotspots of hunger,” the report declared.

The report also cites the possibility of violent conflict over land or other resources, to which climate change might contribute indirectly “by exacerbating well-established drivers of these conflicts such as poverty and economic shocks.”

The scientists emphasized that climate change is not just some problem of the distant future, but is happening now. For instance, in much of the American West, mountain snowpack is declining, threatening water supplies for the region, the scientists reported. And the snow that does fall is melting earlier in the year, which means there is less meltwater to ease the parched summers.


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/31/science/earth/panels-warning-on-climate-risk-worst-is-yet-to-come.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=1




-----------------------------
http://youtu.be/O3ZOKDmorj0


legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon


“The human impact on global climate is small, and any warming that may occur as a result of human carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gas emissions is likely to have little effect on global temperatures, the cryosphere (ice-covered areas), hydrosphere (oceans, lakes, and rivers), or weather.

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts, the subject of this Summary for Policymakers, examines the scientific research on the impacts of rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2 levels on the biological world. It finds no net harm to the global environment or to human health and often finds the opposite: net benefits to plants, including important food crops, and to animals and human health.”

[...]
The scholarly reports produced by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), an international network of climate scientists sponsored by three nonprofit organizations: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), and The Heartland Institute. Previous volumes in the Climate Change Reconsidered series were published in 2008, 2009, 2011, and 2013. Those volumes along with separate executive summaries for the second, third, and fourth reports are available for free online on this site.

Whereas the reports of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warn of a dangerous human effect on climate, NIPCC concludes the human effect is likely to be small relative to natural variability, and whatever small warming is likely to occur will produce benefits as well as costs.

Climate Change Reconsidered II consists of three parts, the two being released now and an earlier volume, subtitled Physical Science, released on September 17-18, 2013 in Chicago, Illinois USA. Additional release events took place the following weeks in Washington, DC, New York, Florida, St. Louis, England, Germany, Holland, and California. That volume can be viewed here.



http://climatechangereconsidered.org/

http://heartland.org/media-library/pdfs/CCR-IIb/Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf

legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
....The truth may lay somewhat in the middle....
Hell no.

It is the case that we are seeing a ratcheting up of the more extreme claims, the least provable ones, and those which are most usable for making emotional claims - these are the claims of extreme weather of one sort or another.  And we're seeing the association made with virtually every extreme weather event.  If it is reported on the media systems, it's associated with the "climate change" meme.

Orchestrated?

That quote was specifically targeting the video I included regarding how the WWF was born and the 1001 Club and its consequences, etc. The truth in the middle is what someone who would watch those videos would conclude based on his own research, on his own bias. His "middle" may not be my middle, his "extremes" may not be my extremes. I had to add myself as a bias variable.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
....The truth may lay somewhat in the middle....
Hell no.

It is the case that we are seeing a ratcheting up of the more extreme claims, the least provable ones, and those which are most usable for making emotional claims - these are the claims of extreme weather of one sort or another.  And we're seeing the association made with virtually every extreme weather event.  If it is reported on the media systems, it's associated with the "climate change" meme.

Orchestrated?
hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 500
Time is on our side, yes it is!
seems like Reddit has some control freaks running the show.  I new I got a weird vibe when I was there for a short period of time.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
.....I had actually not thought that deeply about this until I saw this stupid article, these people are fucking insane.
yeah, but consider this....after the stupid headline...

"Cow farts cause global warming..."

Next thing is the "FIX" through TAXING IT.

That's what it's always about.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
What kind of scientist are you? I didn't get

Same as you.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon


UN IPCC’s scariest climate prediction ever – ‘a global surge in the number of golfers’










member
Activity: 74
Merit: 10
“Everyone Is A Bank”
What kind of scientist are you? I didn't get
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
Quote

The fuck? I immediately did think this was from onion at first, what the global warming guys fail to realise that in order to halt the Carbon Dioxide emissions so much they would have to kill a significant amount of human and animal population and I'm not joking which is why I think this whole thing about Carbon Dioxide is ridiculous, the fact is our planet can't sustain these numbers anymore and people are predicting that unless we go to space within a century our species will go extinct.

Even if you switched to renewable energy and drastically reduced your living standards as a result, the carbon dioxide is still going to rise because living things excrete carbon dioxide, I had actually not thought that deeply about this until I saw this stupid article, these people are fucking insane.

I would agree with that last description. But again they are not insane. What you are describing has been their master plan all along: mass elimination of human beings (excluding them and their family members)

http://youtu.be/PQ9mFw1WM_w

http://youtu.be/D2Mh1-jpE4M

Don't forget: everybody has an agenda including myself. So watch the videos, learn the viewpoint and counter argue with a bigger perspective by using all the tools we have now. The truth may lay somewhat in the middle, but this is fascinating to see this happening in real time in front of us for so long, building historical facts day by day.



legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
Quote

The fuck? I immediately did think this was from onion at first, what the global warming guys fail to realise that in order to halt the Carbon Dioxide emissions so much they would have to kill a significant amount of human and animal population and I'm not joking which is why I think this whole thing about Carbon Dioxide is ridiculous, the fact is our planet can't sustain these numbers anymore and people are predicting that unless we go to space within a century our species will go extinct.

Even if you switched to renewable energy and drastically reduced your living standards as a result, the carbon dioxide is still going to rise because living things excrete carbon dioxide, I had actually not thought that deeply about this until I saw this stupid article, these people are fucking insane.
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 1038
The warmies are fighting a war on trees. First by cutting off the trees supply of CO2 in the name of carbon footprint taxes. Then using that revenue to fund geo-engineering chemtrail mega projects that smother the trees with toxic metals in the name of combating global climate change.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon






Man-made climate change happens. Man-made climate change kills a lot of people. It’s going to kill a lot more. We have laws on the books to punish anyone whose lies contribute to people’s deaths. It’s time to punish the climate-change liars.

This is an argument that’s just being discussed seriously in some circles. It was laid out earlier this month, with all the appropriate caveats, by Lawrence Torcello, a philosophy professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology.

There is a clear precedent, Torcello says, in L’Aquila, Italy, where six seismologists were convicted of manslaughter in connection with a 2009 earthquake that killed 309 people. The scientists weren’t convicted because they failed to predict an earthquake; no one can make such a prediction with reliable precision. But they were convened to study a series of tremors the week before the quake, and tacitly signed off on a government official’s public message that “the situation looks favorable” and residents should chill out with some wine.


http://gawker.com/arrest-climate-change-deniers-1553719888?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_twitter&utm_source=gawker_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

....that might have some merit.  Arresting and convicting scientists who just agreed with some politician instead of doing due diligence.

ARREST THE WARMIES!

Unfortunately the "warmies" have all those "good" scientists like Bill "No Tornado in Norway" Nye in their pocket.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386






Man-made climate change happens. Man-made climate change kills a lot of people. It’s going to kill a lot more. We have laws on the books to punish anyone whose lies contribute to people’s deaths. It’s time to punish the climate-change liars.

This is an argument that’s just being discussed seriously in some circles. It was laid out earlier this month, with all the appropriate caveats, by Lawrence Torcello, a philosophy professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology.

There is a clear precedent, Torcello says, in L’Aquila, Italy, where six seismologists were convicted of manslaughter in connection with a 2009 earthquake that killed 309 people. The scientists weren’t convicted because they failed to predict an earthquake; no one can make such a prediction with reliable precision. But they were convened to study a series of tremors the week before the quake, and tacitly signed off on a government official’s public message that “the situation looks favorable” and residents should chill out with some wine.


http://gawker.com/arrest-climate-change-deniers-1553719888?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_twitter&utm_source=gawker_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

....that might have some merit.  Arresting and convicting scientists who just agreed with some politician instead of doing due diligence.

ARREST THE WARMIES!
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon






Man-made climate change happens. Man-made climate change kills a lot of people. It’s going to kill a lot more. We have laws on the books to punish anyone whose lies contribute to people’s deaths. It’s time to punish the climate-change liars.

This is an argument that’s just being discussed seriously in some circles. It was laid out earlier this month, with all the appropriate caveats, by Lawrence Torcello, a philosophy professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology.

There is a clear precedent, Torcello says, in L’Aquila, Italy, where six seismologists were convicted of manslaughter in connection with a 2009 earthquake that killed 309 people. The scientists weren’t convicted because they failed to predict an earthquake; no one can make such a prediction with reliable precision. But they were convened to study a series of tremors the week before the quake, and tacitly signed off on a government official’s public message that “the situation looks favorable” and residents should chill out with some wine.


http://gawker.com/arrest-climate-change-deniers-1553719888?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_twitter&utm_source=gawker_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow


legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon






As part of its plan to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, the Obama administration is targeting the dairy industry to reduce methane emissions in their operations.

This comes despite falling methane emission levels across the economy since 1990.

The White House has proposed cutting methane emissions from the dairy industry by 25 percent by 2020. Although U.S. agriculture only accounts for about 9 percent of the country’s greenhouse gas emissions, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, it makes up a sizeable portion of methane emissions — which is a very potent greenhouse gas.

“Cows emit a massive amount of methane through belching, with a lesser amount through flatulence,” according to How Stuff Works. “Statistics vary regarding how much methane the average dairy cow expels. Some experts say 100 liters to 200 liters a day… while others say it’s up to 500 liters… a day. In any case, that’s a lot of methane, an amount comparable to the pollution produced by a car in a day.”

“Of all domestic animal types, beef and dairy cattle were by far the largest emitters of [methane],” according to an EPA analysis charting greenhouse gas emissions in 2012. Cows and other animals produce methane through digestion, which ferments the food of animals.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/28/white-house-looks-to-regulate-cow-flatulence-as-part-of-climate-agenda/#ixzz2xHqYITaT



legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
.....
Man-made global warming can't be falsified.....
So, like, dude....it's not just right...

It's Righteous!

 Wink
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386

It looks like the National Science Foundation has been handing out grants for some unorthodox research projects, according to House Republicans.

This includes $700,000 in funding for a climate change musical......



This is very, very wrong.

That money would have bought a lot....of beer....
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon

It looks like the National Science Foundation has been handing out grants for some unorthodox research projects, according to House Republicans.

This includes $700,000 in funding for a climate change musical.

House Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith questioned White House science czar John Holdren in a Thursday hearing over whether or not the National Science Foundation (NSF) should have to justify its use of taxpayer dollars to fund projects. Smith pointed out some examples of questionable projects the NSF has funded.

$700,000 on a climate change musical
$15,000 to study fishing practices around Lake Victoria in Africa
$340,000 to examine the “ecological consequences” of early human fires in New Zealand
$200,000 for a three-year study of the Bronze Age around the Mediterranean
$50,000 to survey archived 17th Century lawsuits in Peru
$20,00 to look at the causes of stress in Bolivia
“The Administration’s willful disregard for public accountability distracts from the important issues of how America can stay ahead of China, Russia, and other countries in the highly-competitive race for technological leadership,” said Smith, a Texas Republican.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/26/feds-spent-700000-on-a-climate-change-musical/

legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
.....But he has now asked for his name to be removed from the document.

He said: ‘The message in the first draft was that through adaptation and clever development these were manageable risks, but it did require we get our act together.

‘This has completely disappeared from the draft now, which is all about the impacts of climate change and the four horsemen of the apocalypse. This is a missed opportunity.’


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2589424/UK-professor-refuses-apocalyptic-UN-climate-change-survey.html

And what is the other thread here that is interesting?

Why do we hate environmentalists?

LOL...
Jump to: