Topic: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. - page 209. (Read 636458 times)

Armstrong slamdunks on the AGW fraud:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/02/18/global-warming-snow-everywhere-proof-now-of-global-warming-they-never-heard-about-thermodynamics/

Can you say "indoctrination" class? School has become like church, but now the religion is AGW:

https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/4911
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/12/two-high-school-students-take-on-teacher-over-climate-and-win-standing-ovation/
http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/14/exposing-common-core-kids-are-being-indoctrinated-with-extreme-leftist-ideology/

Problem is our only alternative for kids is christian fundamentalism, which is another mind control ideology. Are there any non-ideological private schools any where in the world today? Seriously.

Sure, yah...let's have it this way....I'll quote from the source linked to which you say is scientists...

....If you can trust your family, take them, but perhaps make a contingency plan for which one you'll all eat first, and discuss it in secret with the others. (You might also make another plan about who'll be eaten second, and discuss this with whoever's left. If no one discusses eating anyone with you, distrust them all.) If your family includes any young children you are not prepared to eat then your chances of success are more or less zero, but you're probably accustomed to that feeling.

Wake up, dude....don't make yourself a fool of a troll.

so for you climate change scientists are no scientists, they are reporters? keep laughing, pal

funny how you call reporters scientists, then thinking this misrepresentation would be overlooked, use that basis to produce an ad hominem attack.

Anyway, you are making me laugh more than the article.  Assuming the persons whom I call "propagandists" you call "scientists", then it is scientists posing the question?

Should I take my family (and could I eat them)?

Now, personally, I think I could do better than that.

funny how you call scientists "propagandists", that tells me alot about you

Pretty funny, 'climate change' propagandists, they beat all for delusions...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/17/time-to-join-preppers-survive-climate-change-apocalypse

I do kind of like the idea of being the last one left standing, though, somehow...not sure I like the way the article put it...

Should I take my family (and could I eat them)?

climate change deniers are even more delusional than creationists

Statistical isolation of other factors is not necessary to accurately measure, and actually develop based on measured signals, a greenhouse theory.  And this is the core of the warmies extrapolations.

I may not have explained this very well, so let me try again.  Scientists know quite well what a co2 molecule does singly or in partial pressure from lab experiments.  From this they suggest it is influential in warming an atmosphere.  (at this point there is great contention and uncertainty between scientific views, make no doubt about that.)

What they do not know is the change in release of infra red energy into space from the upper atmosphere, under conditions of increasing change in co2 and variations in cloud cover.

In the real world there is multiple direction cause and effect between variables such as co2, temperature, cloud cover, upper atmosphere energy release to space.  There is no simple laboratory independent and dependent variable scenario.  However....

Energy in - Energy out = heat balance, ie, temperature

Could we just imprison for life all producers of spaghetti charts?

The world...

would be a better place

just wait...

and see...

A quick update for sea ice extent:

Global Sea Ice is 93,000 sq km below the 1981-2010 mean.  That is 0.5% below “normal”
Antarctic Sea Ice is  706,000 sq km above the 1981-2010 mean. That is 25% above ”normal”.  Antarctic Sea Ice Extent actually rose 38,000 sq km from day 46 to day 47. Minimum could be near.
Arctic Sea Ice is 799,000 sq km below the 1981-2010 mean.  That is 5.25% below “normal”.
Graphs below. Click for bigger.











http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2014/02/17/sea-ice-update-february-17-2014-antarctic-sea-ice-extent-still-25-above-normal/

I'd still like one of these clowns to try to define skeptic.

Could have a lot of committee meetings about that. 

Blue Ribbon Panels.

Britain's Green Party has called for the ouster of climate change sceptics within the British government, in what critics have called a 'quasi-fascist' move to force the issue.
Green Party leader Natalie Bennett, whose party has one Member of Parliament in former leader Caroline Lucas, specifically targeted Conservative government ministers Owen Paterson and Eric Pickles, demanding that those who refuse to accept "the scientific consensus on climate change" should be removed from the positions.
Australian-born Bennett told the BBC that "...those are situations that cannot be allowed to continue in government. People need to accept the reality and need to act to take the choices we need to deal with climate change".
When asked if her comments were being interpreted correctly, and if she really meant that every senior government adviser, even those not linked to environmental issues, should be removed for their climate change scepticism, Bennett responded, "Yes... we would ask the government to remove them."
But her comments have been slated as 'quasi-fascistic' by leading climate change sceptic Dr. Benny Peiser of the Global Warming Policy Foundation.
Peiser, speaking to the Express, said, "[Sacking climate change sceptics] is a quasi-fascist policy. Do they want a ministry of climate change truth to vet every member of the Government? They might have to torture them to find out if they are a sceptic or not. It's a policy you would get in the Soviet Union."
Bennett's comments come as Professor Mat Collins, an expert in climate systems at the University of Exeter, dismissed claims that Britain's recent flooding was a result of climate change, but instead a result of the jet stream being stuck further south than usual.
Prof. Collins told the Mail on Sunday: "There is no evidence that global warming can cause the jet stream to get stuck in the way it has this winter. If this is due to climate change, it is outside our knowledge."

http://youtu.be/DHivCQQShNA

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/02/17/Greens-want-ouster-of-cabinet-climatesceptics

A Nipa hut?  That's pretty nice, if you have a climate to support it.  Here in and around Texas, that wouldn't work too well.  Large areas only came to be inhabited after air conditioning.  In fact that's true for a wide area Texas - - - > Arizona.

Well, unfortunately we are at a moment when solar scientists have issued their warnings, but governments and politicians have not/can not, apparently, listen.

http://pjmedia.com/blog/cooling-kills-governments-must-shift-to-cold-preparation/

I am not saying that there is any certainty of another Little Ice Age, and nobody can.  Only that of the short and medium term possibilities of climate change, this is the most serious and the least (read:zero) prepared for.

Hey, free food!

Attribution of any ill effect on humans from climate to 'climate change', really just the new word for 'global warming', has a remarkable similarity to astrology.

All hail myth making!

After all ....  the science of astrology is settled...

The science of phrenology is settled....

http://www.phrenology.org/intro.html

Piltdown man has proved evilution!  The science is settled!

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/hoax/

Nine planets revolve around the Sun!  The science is settled!

uh...let's not even go there...

http://www.universetoday.com/15568/how-many-planets-are-in-the-solar-system/

Regardless, we all agree....THERE'S A CONSENSUS...

Onward Plogistons!  Who would Deny Plogistonomy?

https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Phlogiston_theory.html


The theory holds that all flammable materials contain phlogiston, a substance without color, odor, taste, or mass that is liberated in burning. Once burned, the "dephlogisticated" substance was held to be in its "true" form, the calx.

"Phlogisticated" substances are those that contain phlogiston and are "dephlogisticated" when burned; "in general, substances that burned in air were said to be rich in phlogiston; the fact that combustion soon ceased in an enclosed space was taken as clear-cut evidence that air had the capacity to absorb only a definite amount of phlogiston. When air had become completely phlogisticated it would no longer serve to support combustion of any material, nor would a metal heated in it yield a calx; nor could phlogisticated air support life, for the role of air in respiration was to remove the phlogiston from the body."[5]

Giraffes WISHED TO BE TALL!!!!!  And so they became.

http://www.skepdic.com/lysenko.html

....due to Lysenko's efforts that many real scientists, those who were geneticists or who rejected Lamarckism in favor of natural selection, were sent to the gulags or simply disappeared from the USSR. Lysenko rose to dominance at a 1948 conference in Russia where he delivered a passionate address denouncing Mendelian thought as "reactionary and decadent" and declared such thinkers to be "enemies of the Soviet people"....

Under Lysenko's guidance, science was guided not by the most likely theories, backed by appropriately controlled experiments, but by the desired ideology.......Lysenko's methods were not condemned by the Soviet scientific community until 1965, more than a decade after Stalin's death.

Could something similar happen in the U.S.?

ALL HAIL THE CONSENSUS

.... OF THE FEW!

President Barack Obama offered the desperate farmers and farmworkers of the drought-stricken Central Valley a desultory relief package last week: $1 billion for a "climate resilience fund," plus "summer meals" and various other kinds of aid. For a president who boasts of his willingness to use executive action, it was a pathetic display of sophistry, full of mumbles about how water management is not a "zero-sum game"--though in this case, it is.


As the Investor's Business Daily and countless others have noted, water management in California is a trade-off between the needs of farmers and the demands of the environmental movement, which has embraced the delta smelt, an obscure endangered species in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River delta. The Democrats, and Obama, have supported the environmentalists over the farmers--and the subsequent flushing of California's reservoirs.

It may be true that the delta smelt is a species on which the whole regional ecosystem depends, and that its disappearance could have a negative effect on fishing, among other impacts. But that calls for wise management involving all stakeholders--not the blunt instrument of the federal courts, which utopian environmental activists have used precisely because they do not want to have to face the real challenges of water conservation.

Predictably, Obama used his appearance in Fresno to tout climate change as the cause of the drought, as well as to offer spending on climate change as the solution. It is precisely because of a hyperfocus on climate change, however, that there has been no progress on solutions to California's water problem. Both the state and federal governments have been seized with a potential problem rather than a glaring resource management issue.

The same seems to be somewhat true of the policy community. At the Rand Corporation, which is based in Santa Monica (full disclosure: my wife is a Ph.D. Fellow at the Pardee Rand Graduate School), policy analyst David Groves has done valuable work on the challenges facing California water management as a result of climate change. However, at a lecture in 2011, he warned his audience: "Unfortunately, I don't have the silver bullet solutions to climate change for California's water problems. I'm sorry if that's why you were coming today."

Groves does have some useful advice, however. In a report prepared in 2013 with Evan Bloom for the California Department of Water Resources, he suggests that increasing the efficiency of water use, as well as improving the state's existing water infrastructure, can best mitigate the impacts of a warmer, drier future for California.

The only way that current water management processes might succeed, he suggests, is if precipitation increases--an unlikely outcome. (Perhaps President Obama, who seemed to promise on the campaign trail in 2008 that he would be able to change global weather, has something like that in mind when he claims water is not a "zero-sum game.") So, Groves implies, it is necessary to change current policy. But Obama is offering no new ideas.

Climate change has proved a diversion from the practical scientific and political problem of managing water problems that scientists say have nothing to do with rising global temperatures. There has been little movement on developing new reservoir infrastructure, or upgrading old management to deal with new environmental concerns without cutting farmers off entirely. That is why the president's "aid" merely adds insult to injury.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/02/16/Planning-for-Climate-Change-Has-Made-California-s-Water-Crisis-Worse

And you'd need to isolate all other possible complex interaction of variables such as make the sun constant or measure over 1000s of years to statistically isolate the other oscillations we've seen throughout history, etc.. In short, it is impossible.

Such an experiment would have to be done from space, would require more than one satellite. 

It would require very, very sensitive instruments monitoring moment to moment infra red emissions.

The goal would be to actually assay the "bottling up of heat" per the supposed "Greenhouse effect".    By comparing day to night changes in IR emissions, one could develop a model of response of the atmosphere to heat, and know the rate of change of temperature with outbound emissions.

There might be technical reasons why this is impractical or could not be done.  However, without it, even the "greenhouse effect" is only a poor conjecture.

In quite a few cases, they end up killing millions of humans...