Pages:
Author

Topic: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. - page 30. (Read 636455 times)

legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
"The greatest rationale to become a Leftie is immunity from the rules they impose on the rest of us.  The sanctioning of the double standards and hypocrisy."--Andrew Breitbart

How wonderful you would quote Breitbart....
Certainly, since you insist.

The last three years may eventually come to be seen as the final death rattle of the global warming scare. Thanks what’s now recognised as an unusually strong El Nino, global temperatures were driven to sufficiently high levels to revive the alarmist narrative – after an unhelpful pause period of nearly 20 years – that the world had got hotter than ever before.

It resulted in a slew of “Hottest Year Evah” stories from the usual suspects. As I patiently explained at the time – here, here, and here – this wasn’t science but propaganda. If you’re a reader of Breitbart or one of the sceptical websites this will hardly have come as news to you. But, of course, across much of the mainstream media – and, of course, on all the left-leaning websites – these “Hottest Year Evah” stories were relayed as fact. And, inevitably, were often cited by a host of experts on Twitter as proof that evil deniers are, like, anti-science and totally evil and really should be thrown in prison for sacrificing the future of the world’s children by promoting Big-Oil-funded denialism.

This is why there is such an ideological divide regarding climate change between those on the left and those on the right. The lefties get their climate information from unreliable fake news sites like Buzzfeed.

Just recently, I had to school my former Telegraph colleague Tom Chivers, now of Buzzfeed, with a piece titled Debunked: Another Buzzfeed ‘Hottest Year Evah’ Story.

Perhaps I’m wrong: I don’t actually look at Buzzfeed, except when they’re doing something worthwhile like “Five Deadliest Killer Sharks” or “Ten Cutest Kitten Photos”. But I’ve a strong suspicion they haven’t yet covered this 1 degree C temperature fall because, well why would they? It just wouldn’t suit their alarmist narrative.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/11/30/global-temperatures-plunge-icy-silence-climate-alarmists/
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276
...

 Global warming/climate change, you'll never find  doubter who also doesn't hate government. I also like to keep government to a minimum but that doesn't make me see reality different.

'Never' is a strong term.

I'm probably typical in that I'm not especially or ever remotely 'anti-government'.  I'm 'anti-corrupt-government'.

The 'global climate change' thing is a hoax and a fraud, but it's not really spawned from any particular government level.  It's the brain-child of a group of multi-nationals who have a huge amount of influence in a lot of governments and have made these governments highly corrupt.  That includes my own here in the U.S..

More importantly for the purposes of this discussion, these global interests which have mind-boggling resources at their disposal have had the same impact on academia.  Indeed, they have pretty much succeeded in turning 'science' into a new form of religion.  Typical of religion, the notion of a 'fact' has a different meaning than it does in classical science.

By controlling both academia and government, and by augmenting 'fact' with input injected from other entities which the globalists also control (media, NGO, etc) they have succeeded in 'controlling the narrative' with respect to 'climate change' to a significant degree.  Not as much as they would like to have and need to have however.  Look for this new 'fake news' invention to have an immediate and tangible impact on the climate change discussions.

full member
Activity: 193
Merit: 100
I have now outside temperature is -15 degrees and somehow do not really believe in global warming. This winter seems to be very cold. What trust after this scientist.
sr. member
Activity: 405
Merit: 250
"The greatest rationale to become a Leftie is immunity from the rules they impose on the rest of us.  The sanctioning of the double standards and hypocrisy."--Andrew Breitbart

How wonderful you would quote Breitbart in this thing. Read the link below for some real lolz involving Mr Breitbart.

https://weather.com/news/news/breitbart-misleads-americans-climate-change?cm_ven=T_WX_CD_120616_2


Here is a quote if you don't wish to click. "Note to Breitbart: Earth Is Not Cooling, Climate Change Is Real and Please Stop Using Our Video to Mislead Americans"

Quite ironic when I see Mr Breitbart playing the victim card. A favorite of the right.

 Global warming/climate change, you'll never find  doubter who also doesn't hate government. I also like to keep government to a minimum but that doesn't make me see reality different.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
How can you ban the other side? Banning the other side is totalitarian action and it will only result in death of freedom. Don't ban them, dispute them, ignore them, if they are being trolls I guess you could kick them out since they are not respecting rules of the forum though.

Leftists have shown that free speech only matters to them when it agrees with their views. If you do not agree you should encourage more speech to understand the other side, not less. I feel they are too afraid their ideas will not hold up to scrutiny, as much science actually defends the opposite of a climate change apocalypse being caused by emissions and cow farts. http://reason.com/blog/2016/11/30/californias-new-cow-fart-regulations-tot

That is, alas, basically true currently.  I don't think it was always the case though.  Back when I was at my most leftist phase 20-30 years ago, I and most of my peers were just fine with hearing the other side's point of view because we considered our points of view to be superior and the other side to be dogmatic.....


Clearly you were not with the program.  

Now you must be sentenced for your Climate Denial mental problems for one year of following close behind a cow and inhaling cow farts before they pollute the atmosphere.

Smiley
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276
How can you ban the other side? Banning the other side is totalitarian action and it will only result in death of freedom. Don't ban them, dispute them, ignore them, if they are being trolls I guess you could kick them out since they are not respecting rules of the forum though.

Leftists have shown that free speech only matters to them when it agrees with their views. If you do not agree you should encourage more speech to understand the other side, not less. I feel they are too afraid their ideas will not hold up to scrutiny, as much science actually defends the opposite of a climate change apocalypse being caused by emissions and cow farts. http://reason.com/blog/2016/11/30/californias-new-cow-fart-regulations-tot

That is, alas, basically true currently.  I don't think it was always the case though.  Back when I was at my most leftist phase 20-30 years ago, I and most of my peers were just fine with hearing the other side's point of view because we considered our points of view to be superior and the other side to be dogmatic.

Leftists since then have, for whatever reason(s), adopted positions which are not sustainable and 'global climate change' is a good example of this.  Equally importantly they have become every bit as dogmatic as their adversaries on the right ever were.  The rise in political correctness exemplifies this.

That's the way I see things, though like everyone my perception is subject to cloudiness and revision.  I now call myself a 'former Leftist' and 'classical Liberal.'  As is often the case I apply myself diligently and I believe quite effectively sometimes against the 'Leftists' who I used to align with (or who used to align with me Smiley )  The phenomenon an example of what Yuri Bezmenov spoke about when he described how and why it was the local Communists who were on top of the kill list if/when the Soviets engineered a revolution.

hero member
Activity: 910
Merit: 1004
buy silver!
"The greatest rationale to become a Leftie is immunity from the rules they impose on the rest of us.  The sanctioning of the double standards and hypocrisy."--Andrew Breitbart
legendary
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1004
How can you ban the other side? Banning the other side is totalitarian action and it will only result in death of freedom. Don't ban them, dispute them, ignore them, if they are being trolls I guess you could kick them out since they are not respecting rules of the forum though.

Leftists have shown that free speech only matters to them when it agrees with their views. If you do not agree you should encourage more speech to understand the other side, not less. I feel they are too afraid their ideas will not hold up to scrutiny, as much science actually defends the opposite of a climate change apocalypse being caused by emissions and cow farts. http://reason.com/blog/2016/11/30/californias-new-cow-fart-regulations-tot
member
Activity: 168
Merit: 12
How can you ban the other side? Banning the other side is totalitarian action and it will only result in death of freedom. Don't ban them, dispute them, ignore them, if they are being trolls I guess you could kick them out since they are not respecting rules of the forum though.
hero member
Activity: 910
Merit: 1004
buy silver!
If you know the Earth is flat motionless plain within an enclosed system like me than this concept of global warming is just plain old hell on Earth. Fortunately man's output is equivalent to a volcano and um, wait a minute I'm living next to a mountain that's actually an atomic bomb? Fuck... maybe chemtrails and geoengineering will make hell freeze over before that happens.

This concludes my brief rant.

So if you really believe that, then why havent you abandoned your 21st century lifestyle?
sr. member
Activity: 560
Merit: 252
Have the FBI agents and judge been killed to avenge his death? I hope so
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 1038
If you know the Earth is flat motionless plain within an enclosed system like me than this concept of global warming is just plain old hell on Earth. Fortunately man's output is equivalent to a volcano and um, wait a minute I'm living next to a mountain that's actually an atomic bomb? Fuck... maybe chemtrails and geoengineering will make hell freeze over before that happens.

This concludes my brief rant.
hero member
Activity: 910
Merit: 1004
buy silver!
http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.ca/2016/11/global-warming-climate-change-whats-it.html



    “I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.
    “Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical...The main basis of the claim that man’s release of greenhouse gases is the cause of the warming is based almost entirely upon climate models. We all know the frailty of models concerning the air-surface system.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology, and formerly of NASA, who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”
    Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
    “The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists.” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.
    “So far, real measurements give no ground for concern about a catastrophic future warming.” - Scientist Dr. Jarl R. Ahlbeck, a chemical engineer at Abo Akademi University in Finland, author of 200 scientific publications and former Greenpeace member.
    “Anyone who claims that the debate is over and the conclusions are firm has a fundamentally unscientific approach to one of the most momentous issues of our time.” - Solar physicist Dr. Pal Brekke, senior advisor to the Norwegian Space Centre in Oslo. Brekke has published more than 40 peer-reviewed scientific articles on the sun and solar interaction with the Earth.
    “The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico
    “It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.
    “Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.
    “After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review.
    “The Kyoto theorists have put the cart before the horse. It is global warming that triggers higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, not the other way round…A large number of critical documents submitted at the 1995 U.N. conference in Madrid vanished without a trace. As a result, the discussion was one-sided and heavily biased, and the U.N. declared global warming to be a scientific fact,” Andrei Kapitsa, a Russian geographer and Antarctic ice core researcher.
    “I am convinced that the current alarm over carbon dioxide is mistaken...Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science.” - Award Winning Physicist Dr. Will Happer, Professor at the Department of Physics at Princeton University and Former Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy, who has published over 200 scientific papers, and is a fellow of the American Physical Society, The American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the National Academy of Sciences.
    “Nature's regulatory instrument is water vapor: more carbon dioxide leads to less moisture in the air, keeping the overall GHG content in accord with the necessary balance conditions.” – Prominent Hungarian Physicist and environmental researcher Dr. Miklós Zágoni reversed his view of man-made warming and is now a skeptic. Zágoni was once Hungary’s most outspoken supporter of the Kyoto Protocol.
    “For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.
    “Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.
    “The quantity of CO2 we produce is insignificant in terms of the natural circulation between air, water and soil... I am doing a detailed assessment of the UN IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science.” - South Afican Nuclear Physicist and Chemical Engineer Dr. Philip Lloyd, a UN IPCC co-coordinating lead author who has authored over 150 refereed publications.
    “Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.
    “All those urging action to curb global warming need to take off the blinkers and give some thought to what we should do if we are facing global cooling instead.” - Geophysicist Dr. Phil Chapman, an astronautical engineer and former NASA astronaut, served as staff physicist at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
    “Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” - Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.
    “CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another….Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.” - Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.
    “The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.” - Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata.
    “Whatever the weather, it's not being caused by global warming. If anything, the climate may be starting into a cooling period.” Atmospheric scientist Dr. Art V. Douglas, former Chair of the Atmospheric Sciences Department at Creighton University in Omaha, Nebraska, and is the author of numerous papers for peer-reviewed publications.
    “But there is no falsifiable scientific basis whatever to assert this warming is caused by human-produced greenhouse gasses because current physical theory is too grossly inadequate to establish any cause at all.” - Chemist Dr. Patrick Frank, who has authored more than 50 peer-reviewed articles.
    “The ‘global warming scare’ is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes and decision making. It has no place in the Society's activities.” - Award-Winning NASA Astronaut/Geologist and Moonwalker Jack Schmitt who flew on the Apollo 17 mission and formerly of the Norwegian Geological Survey and for the U.S. Geological Survey.
    “Earth has cooled since 1998 in defiance of the predictions by the UN-IPCC….The global temperature for 2007 was the coldest in a decade and the coldest of the millennium…which is why ‘global warming’ is now called ‘climate change.’” - Climatologist Dr. Richard Keen of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at the University of Colorado.
    “I have yet to see credible proof of carbon dioxide driving climate change, yet alone man-made CO2 driving it. The atmospheric hot-spot is missing and the ice core data refute this. When will we collectively awake from this deceptive delusion?” - Dr. G LeBlanc Smith, a retired Principal Research Scientist with Australia’s CSIRO (The full quotes of the scientists are later in this report)
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
So what subreddit did this happen on? I never heard about but thats probably cuz i only go on reddit
full member
Activity: 206
Merit: 100
I am sure that the problem with climate change is there, but I'm not sure that this is a consequence of human activity. It was also the times to the people when the earth had periods of warming and cooling.

It's just a little sped up due the industrial revolution and heavy usage of fossil fuel, but yeah it's natural occurrence.
Probably a fair assessment.  Be funny if that "little speed up" protects us from a little ice age that seems to be coming, wouldn't it?

If anything saves us it will be the spraying program....
Spraying program?

What spraying program would that  be?
I think no need to spray. Just need to switch to alternative energy sources. I'm sure the technology is. It is opposed by major players in the energy market. They do not care what will happen to earth, if only to earn money.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
I am sure that the problem with climate change is there, but I'm not sure that this is a consequence of human activity. It was also the times to the people when the earth had periods of warming and cooling.

It's just a little sped up due the industrial revolution and heavy usage of fossil fuel, but yeah it's natural occurrence.
Probably a fair assessment.  Be funny if that "little speed up" protects us from a little ice age that seems to be coming, wouldn't it?

If anything saves us it will be the spraying program....
Spraying program?

What spraying program would that  be?
full member
Activity: 206
Merit: 100
I am sure that the problem with climate change is there, but I'm not sure that this is a consequence of human activity. It was also the times to the people when the earth had periods of warming and cooling.

It's just a little sped up due the industrial revolution and heavy usage of fossil fuel, but yeah it's natural occurrence.
Probably a fair assessment.  Be funny if that "little speed up" protects us from a little ice age that seems to be coming, wouldn't it?

If anything saves us it will be the spraying program. Lets hope they can stave off the warming long enough to avoid the coming ice age.


Yes an ice age scares me more than warming. Though of course the earth has existed for billions of years and how it survived. Can scientists really making stuff up to get funding?
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1005
My mule don't like people laughing
I am sure that the problem with climate change is there, but I'm not sure that this is a consequence of human activity. It was also the times to the people when the earth had periods of warming and cooling.

It's just a little sped up due the industrial revolution and heavy usage of fossil fuel, but yeah it's natural occurrence.
Probably a fair assessment.  Be funny if that "little speed up" protects us from a little ice age that seems to be coming, wouldn't it?

If anything saves us it will be the spraying program. Lets hope they can stave off the warming long enough to avoid the coming ice age.

legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276
I read Trump ....

is appointing Myron Bell of CEI as the head of the EPA.

Ebell looks a fantastic choice at first glance.  Strong property rights advocate which is in direct opposition to 'collectivists' who are milking the 'environmental issues' arguments to further their goals.  Offsets the sec-education choice which, when scratching the surface, seems abysmal.

If this Ebell guy doesn't pour ice-water on the whole climate change pseudo-science it will add a lot of weight to my hypothesis that one of the driving forces behind the scam is an excuse to do wide scale weather modification.  I don't trust that Trump and his minions would be anything but delighted to have and control this capability.

legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 1038
I am sure that the problem with climate change is there, but I'm not sure that this is a consequence of human activity. It was also the times to the people when the earth had periods of warming and cooling.

It's just a little sped up due the industrial revolution and heavy usage of fossil fuel, but yeah it's natural occurrence.
Probably a fair assessment.  Be funny if that "little speed up" protects us from a little ice age that seems to be coming, wouldn't it?
Ice age is when there is cold. Now there is warming. To be honest I like more heat so global warming is more like it. And the consequences it seems to me greatly exaggerated.

I'm sorry, but we don't live on a globe.
Pages:
Jump to: