Global Warming or Global Bullshit?

Search
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,984
Tokens
[ Look what the maggot libtards are blaming global warming for now.... un-fucking-believable how low these maggots will go ]

[h=1]Global Warming Caused Hitler[/h]
1401


5





Der-Fuehrer-48-640x480.jpg
Central Press/Getty Images

by JAMES DELINGPOLE25 Nov 2015745
[h=2]Global warming’s reputation as the most evil and dangerous thing ever to happen in the history of the world has just gone full Godwin: apparently – among all its myriad other crimes – it may have been responsible for the rise of Adolf Hitler, the spread of fascism across Europe and, by extension, the death of six million Jews.[/h]This novel theory, first reported on in an American newspaper in 1941, has just resurfacedin the wake of claims by John Kerry and others that climate change was responsible for creating ISIS. Researchers were naturally keen to discover whether there was any precedent for such “global warming” related idiocy. And indeed it turns out that there was.

Little is known about what became of Dr Clarence A Mills, professor of experimental at the University of Cincinnati, and his amazing theory that “gradually warming temperatures of the world” helped bring Hitler and Mussolini to power because “people are more docile and easily led in warm weather than in cold.”
But Dr Mills would surely be proud to know that his legacy lives on among such great 21st century thinkers as ex-jailbait-choral-nymphet Charlotte Church, the Prince of Wales, John Kerry, Thomas Friedman and the fifth most obnoxious Social Justice Warrior on Twitter, Graham Linehan.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Messages
39,838
Tokens
I have something to say about Global warming that the Liberals have been screaming bloody murder about lately.....How about they go after World Population Control instead?...Consider how much 1 person consumes throughout their lifetime...How much heat they use to heat their house which contributes to global warming?....How much heat gets thrown out of one persons car over a lifetime?...How many trees get cut down for the newspapers ect over 1 persons lifetime?...Lets get to the root of the problem that contributes to Global warming & that is World population explosion which just might contribute to the global warming & pollution they keep bitching about....Is the answer 2 kids per couple the world over?.....I think as far as Conservatives & Liberals are apart on most subjects this is something that maybe just maybe we can agree on & try to help the situation in some of the Countries that has a real problem with overpopulation & thus global warming...If this all sounds too crazy please let me know & Ill just shut up about it but look at this clock first & see more of what is going on with this planet...Lets get the real bull by the horns & that IS too many people overcrowding the planet...
http://www.peterrussell.com/Odds/WorldClock.php
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Messages
39,838
Tokens
& NO I dont believe abortion is OK to help allieviate the population problem....Birth control IS Ok....Now lets comment Vitterd,Guesser,Dafinch....ect ect
 

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2006
Messages
24,884
Tokens
[h=3]COP21: The Only Six Things You Need to Know About the Paris Climate Debacle[/h] By JAMES DELINGPOLE, BREITBART
GettyImages-500943028-640x480.jpg

Sometime round about now the negotiators at the Paris COP21 climate conference will be thrashing out the final details agreement which will make no measurable difference to “climate change” but will definitely cost all of us a great deal of money.
Here is what you need to know.
1. All that stuff you’ve read and heard about “time running out”, “deadlock” , “last minute deals” — it’s all a charade; everything was pre-ordained.


Every COP conference there has ever been has run on exactly the same lines. Whatever comes out of this one, it will be a fudge and a compromise whose only certain achievement will be to ensure that there are more such conferences next year (in sunny Marrakech, Morocco) and the one after and the one after that…

In truth, COP is not really about saving the planet. Rather, it’s a massive jobs fair for activists, shyster politicians, bureaucrats, corporate scamsters, and people with otherwise worthless degrees in “sustainability”, “conservation biology”, “ecology”, etc.


2. No serious person in the world believes in man-made climate change any more. They just don’t.
When did the edifice finally collapse? Well there are lots of competing candidates. But if you haven’t seen the testimony presented by John Christy, Judith Curry, or William Happer at the hearings in Congress earlier this week, that’s a good place to start. Then, in a league of his own, is Mark Steyn — who doesn’t mince his words…


3. If you live by fairies you will die by fairies.
So if no serious person in the world believes in man-made climate change any more, who does? Only people like US Secretary of State John Kerry — who, as we know, has staked the reputation of the Obama presidency on how well it deals with this non-existent problem.
In order to do this, of course, he must somehow engineer a global agreement on carbon dioxide emissions reductions. But for that to happen everyone — not just the Western delegations — must pretend to believe in climate fairies. And unfortunately, the non-Western delegations, led by China and India, just aren’t playing ball. Hence Kerry’s reported frustration and threatened walk-out.
The night saw an ugly brawl as US Secretary Of State John Kerry threatened that developed countries would walk out of the agreement if they were asked to commit to differentiation or financial obligations. “You can take the US out of this. Take the developed world out of this. Remember, the Earth has a problem. What will you do with the problem on your own?” he told ministers from other countries during a closed-door negotiation on the second revised draft of the Paris agreement.
“We can’t afford in the hours we are left with to nit-pick every single word and to believe there is an effort here that separates developed countries from developing countries. That’s not where we are in 2015. Don’t think this agreement reflects that kind of differentiation,” he added. Making a veiled threat that the agreement could fail if the US was pushed for financial obligations, Kerry said, “At this late hour, hope we don’t load this with differentiation… I would love to have a legally binding agreement. But the situation in the US is such that legally binding with respect to finance is a killer for the agreement.”
The problem here is very simple. Kerry has become a victim of his own fantasy game. If you accept the theory that man-made carbon dioxide produced by industry has been driving the earth’s temperatures towards catastrophe, then it follows that the developed nations are largely to blame for the damage done thus far. The countries of the developing world are entirely within their rights to demand reparations for this, and Kerry has no right to complain.


4. China and India are running this show.
We know what China thinks: tell the gwailo what they want to hear — and go ahead with industrialization anyway. The same is true of India: and who can blame it? If the Western nations choose to bomb their economies back to the Dark Ages by cutting carbon dioxide emissions and driving up energy prices, that’s their problem. But it shouldn’t become the problem of those developing countries whose first priority, quite rightly, is giving their people a better stand of living. And to do that, you need cheap energy (from fossil fuels), not expensive, unreliable renewable energy which is only viable with government subsidy.
This, as the Times reports, is the cause of the deadlock.
Britain and other rich countries face demands for $3.5 trillion (£2.3 trillion) in payments to developing nations to secure a deal in Paris to curb global warming. Developing countries have added a clause to the latest draft of the text under which they would be paid the “full costs” of meeting plans to cut emissions. The amount paid by rich countries is a key unresolved issue at the climate conference in Paris.
Essentially, China and India have got the Western nations over a barrel because, unlike the Western nations, they don’t believe in climate fairies and therefore feel they have no moral obligation to reduce their carbon dioxide emissions to save the world because they know it won’t save the world. Therefore, all they need to do is sit back, watch people like John Kerry stew, and ramp up their demand for compensation in the full knowledge that the West needs this climate agreement far more than the developing world does.


5. If this doesn’t end in stalemate then you know the West has lost.
See 3. and 4. above. China and India (and the rest of the developing world) have nothing to gain from making concessions. Therefore they won’t make concessions. At least not meaningful ones.


6. Never forget: this whole show is the biggest waste of time and money in history.
In Paris, the stated aim was to prevent the earth’s temperatures rising more than 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels. To experience a similar temperature change, simply walk from the top of the Eiffel Tower to the bottom; or move from downtown San Francisco to Berkeley. That’s the temperature change on which the global economy is being staked in Paris.
Remember also that we know already what difference this conference is going to make to global temperatures because the participating nations have already announced what their carbon dioxide emissions are going to be.
If all the world’s leading nations stick to the carbon-reduction commitments they will make in Paris this week, then they will stave off “global warming” by the end of this century by 0.170 degrees C.
Oh – and that’s the optimistic scenario, calculated by Bjorn Lomborg, assuming that countries like, say, China don’t lie or cheat about how much CO2 they’re burning secretly.
At an annual cost to the global economy of $1.5 trillion.
Lucky we’ve all got a great sense of humor, eh?
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,984
Tokens
[ These liberals are so comically stupid. ]

Leonardo DiCaprio: We Can’t Elect a Candidate Who Doesn’t Believe in Climate Change


leonardo-dicaprio-in-japan-AP-640x480.jpg
Kento Nara/Geisler-Fotopress/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images

by Kipp Jones24 Mar 2016553
Oscar-winning actor Leonardo DiCaprio told reporters in Japan on Wednesday the United States must elect a president who takes climate change science seriously.

At a press conference in Tokyo promoting The Revenant, the actor and environmental activist told the media, “We should not have a candidate who doesn’t believe in modern science to be leading our country,” according to the AFP.
He added: “Climate change is one of the most concerning issues facing all humanity and the United States needs to do its part.”
Of his filmmaking partner Fisher Stevens, who produced the 2010 documentary The Cove, DiCaprio said, “We’ve been traveling around the world documenting climate change.”
DiCaprio is working on a climate change documentary that will be released before November, and he reportedly visited China, India, and the North Pole and South Pole with Stevens.
Republican presidential candidates
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
97%​




and Donald Trump have both expressed doubts about the science behind climate change. Trump described the hysteria as a “very, very expensive form of tax,” adding, “A lot of people are making a lot of money.”
Trump has also tweeted about his opinion on climate change on numerous occasions in recent years.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,984
Tokens
NASA REPORT: Antarctic Ice Sheet is Actually… Growing By Billions of Tons


Anyone who questions the bizarre cult totally infallible science behind global warming cooling climate change is supporting junk science, so sayeth the Church of Liberalism. So we can totally dismiss this latest report from the right wing extremists at…wait, NASA?
As in…NASA, NASA?
A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.
The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.
According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.
All this time, the “melting” of glaciers and ice caps has been the driving force behind leftists claims that we have to run in fear of man made global warming. Except there’s more ice.
Now allow me to clarify, because some of you may be saying “Hey Crowder, ‘more’ is a relative term.” That’s true. But in this case, ‘more’ actually equates to hundreds of billions of tons. That, my friends, is what we call, “statistically significant.”
Here’s some more to chew on; the worst case scenario – meaning the absolute worst case that is even humanly feasible, let alone possible – is that if the net gain continued to slow at its current rate… it would still take at least three decades before we got to a point of beginning to see net losses.
Meaning we’d still gain trillions of tons of ice between now and say 2046 before we started to see a net loss of ice. Meaning at that point, continuing at the worst rate we can possibly project, we’d have many decades before ice volume fell to 2015 levels . Let alone levels of 30 years ago, before this whole scare started.
Sorry, was that too much math?
So yes, all this time, while leftists were claiming we were losing so much ice and all the ice-dwelling animals were going to die in a sea of fire and despair, Antarctica was showing a net gain of ice. So for those of you hoping for maybe even a little bit of warming…

It’s almost as if they make up this stuff as they go along.
So this “the polar ice caps are melting” nonsense we’ve been hearing from global alarmists for the past too-many years, has been as true as that time I won World’s Strongest Man and turned down Kate Upton’s sexual advances.
She’s so aggressive you know.
Of course it’s been a hoax. Of course man-made global warming climate change is fake. Every “solution” government proposes involves more government and more taxes, all the while ensuring third world countries are never afforded the opportunities to enter the first world through technology and fossil fuels. If it were benign you could laugh it off. But in actuality, net-environmentalism takes countless lives ever year. Watch below to learn more.
Also, this:


 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,984
Tokens
[ but but but libtard maggot Alec Bawwwwldwin says if you don't believe in man-made global warming, you have a mental disorder. ]

[h=1]Alec Baldwin: Climate Change Denial ‘A Form of Mental Illness’[/h]
1016


1








by JEFF POOR22 Apr 20162,299
In an interview with AFP, actor and comedian Alec Baldwin sounded off on climate change at the United Nations.
Baldwin touted the importance and described those skeptical of the theory to be suffering from “mental illness.”
“There can be no successful climate agreement and no future for our planet without greater protection of the world’s forests, everyone in the room understands this,” Baldwin said in his appearance at the UN.
“And so much of what’s coming on now is something that we have to treat as some kind of mental illness,” he added in his interview with AFP. “I believe the climate change denial is a form of mental illness.”
 

Life's a bitch, then you die!
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
28,910
Tokens
[ but but but libtard maggot Alec Bawwwwldwin says if you don't believe in man-made global warming, you have a mental disorder. ]

Alec Baldwin: Climate Change Denial ‘A Form of Mental Illness’

1016


1








by JEFF POOR22 Apr 20162,299
In an interview with AFP, actor and comedian Alec Baldwin sounded off on climate change at the United Nations.
Baldwin touted the importance and described those skeptical of the theory to be suffering from “mental illness.”
“There can be no successful climate agreement and no future for our planet without greater protection of the world’s forests, everyone in the room understands this,” Baldwin said in his appearance at the UN.
“And so much of what’s coming on now is something that we have to treat as some kind of mental illness,” he added in his interview with AFP. “I believe the climate change denial is a form of mental illness.”
Well he certainly is an expert on the subject of mental illness.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,984
Tokens
[ No Surprise Here... ]

[h=1]Icegate: Now NSIDC Caught Tampering With Climate Records[/h] 3289
13


GettyImages-175634139-640x480.png
Joe Raedle/Getty Images

by James Delingpole28 Apr 2016469
[h=2]You’ve read about the climate fraud committed ‘on an unbelievable scale’ by the shysters at NASA.[/h] You’ve read about how NOAA overestimated US warming by 50 percent.
Now it’s NSIDC’s turn to be caught red-handed fiddling the data and cooking the books.
NSIDC – National Snow and Ice Data Center – is the US government agency which provides the official statistics on such matters as sea ice coverage in the Arctic.
Naturally its research is of paramount importance to the climate alarmists’ narrative that man-made global warming is causing the polar ice caps to melt. At least it was until those ice caps refused to play ball…
Where the alarmists have for years been doomily predicting ice free summers in the Arctic – according to Al Gore in 2007, 2008 and 2009 it would be gone by 2013 – the truth is that multi-year ice has been staging a recovery since 2009.

So what do you do if reality doesn’t suit your narrative? Simple. If you’re NSIDC (and NASA and NOAA…) you just change reality.
NSIDC’s latest attempt to breathe new life into the corpse of the alarmist narrative comprised a press release a few weeks ago claiming that 5+ year old sea ice is at its smallest level on record. To prove it, they’ve produced a new chart that looks like this.

But according to Steven Goddard of the Real Science website this claim needs to be taken with a huge pinch of salt.
Note how, to confuse matters, NSIDC have upended their chart so that 5+ year ice instead of being at the bottom is now at the top. Far worse, though, they’ve gone and deleted all the old style maps from their archive.
At least they thought they had.
But a sharp eyed reader of Goddard’s managed to find one old style map that NSIDC had forgotten to delete. This enabled Goddard to compare the new style map with an old style map for the same week. What he discovered is that NSIDC has been making some dramatic and unexplained adjustments to the record: about half the 5+ year sea ice which should be there, for example, has been mysteriously erased.
Here is a chart Goddard has composed showing the differences.

And here are the two maps, new and old. Note how much larger the 5+ year sea ice coverage is on the old one than on the new one. Note also that there is no scientific reason for this.



NSIDC must know that what they are doing is unethical. Why else would they have gone to the trouble not just of deleting their old records – but of trying to block the auto-archiving of that data?

We’re often told by the alarmist establishment that the ‘science is settled’, that there’s a 97 per cent consensus on man-made global warming and that the debate is over. Well, fine. But normally when a case is rock solid the facts are allowed to speak for themselves. Usually, the only time you need to tamper with the evidence is when you’re really desperate and when, you might say, you’re skating on really thin ice…
 

Rx Normal
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
51,836
Tokens
Getting NASA off this "climate change" bullshit and back into space exploration will be a challenge.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,984
Tokens
[ The lying maggot has taken over the conman job from Al Gore on this issue, fucking scumbags ]

[h=1]Obama Warns: Manhattan Will Be ‘Underwater’ If We Don’t Act On Climate Change[/h]
36


1





GettyImages-538930670-640x480.jpg
Aude Guerrucci - Pool/Getty Images

by CHARLIE SPIERING9 Jun 2016369
[h=2]SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER[/h]





[h=2]President Barack Obama insists that Americans have to take climate change seriously, or else a key part of one the world’s greatest cities could end up underwater.[/h]“When scientists tell us that the planet is getting warmer and we need to do something about it, the majority of people think that’s a good idea, let’s do something about that, because we don’t want Manhattan to be underwater,” Obama said during a fundraiser in New York City.
Obama observed that people are frustrated by the current presidential election campaign.
“The bad news is that our politics has been a little screwed up lately,” he said, pointing to the Republican party’s nomination process.
But he urged his donors to help the Democratic party organize against Trump.
“We got to get busy and we got to organize, and we got to work,” he said. “And the only way we do that effectively is when we have support from folks like you.”
 

New member
Joined
Apr 7, 2016
Messages
6,600
Tokens
al gore is trying to make loads of money off this bullshit. wonder if obuma is trying to muscle in- when his term is over
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,984
Tokens
[ You can't make this shit up, and libtards are still falling for this billion dollar scam ]

[h=1]Ship of Fools II: Green Arctic Expedition Frustrated by Large Quantities of Ice[/h]
2629


9





by JAMES DELINGPOLE1 Sep 2016309
[h=2]SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER[/h]





[h=2]An Arctic expedition designed to raise awareness of the perils of man-made climate change is being frustrated by unexpectedly large quantities of ice.[/h]The Polar Ocean Challenge, whose aim is to circumnavigate the Arctic in a sailing boat while the summer ice-melt allows, is being led by veteran explorer David Hempleman-Adams. He justifies the expedition thus:
Permanent irreversible change in the sea ice landscape of the Arctic seems inevitable. This will / is already having global economic political, social and environmental implications. A significant change in my lifetime.
I see this possibility to circumnavigate the Arctic as one I wanted to take despite the risks associated with it in order to increase the worlds attention on the effects of Arctic climate change. There may be a possibility still to curb this progressive warming and melting in the Arctic. But even if this is not possible the next most important thing is to at the very least highlight the need to ‘Navigate the Future of the Arctic responsibly’.
Well, yes, of course, David. That’s just the kind of eco-friendly blah which will have landed your expedition sponsorship from a City of London finance firm. But what if, as the real world evidence increasingly suggests, your prognostications of climate doom are flat out wrong?
Already the expedition is around 4 to 6 weeks behind schedule having been held up in the Laptev Sea by the kind of ice which experts like Cambridge University’s Peter Wadhams – of whom more in a moment – assure us will soon disappear permanently from the Arctic in summer.
Here, for example, is an entry from their August 18 ship’s log:
Well I came up on watch this morning at 0800. ice, ice and more b****t ice.
and here
A Stamukha is an iceberg that is touching the bottom.
We had to turn round from the ice by the coast last night and find somewhere safe to moor/anchor. There were strong winds so we needed to find somewhere else to sit them out, and the answer was a stamukha.
We knew it might drift, and it did, so when it had drifted into a more dangerous situation, Ben (who was on anchor watch) woke Nikolay and we’ve moved off it to go and have a look at the ice situation just up ahead again
and here’s one from crew member Ben Edwards, who is 14 years old
We’re still running into ice, aaaagggghhhh! We’ve had patches of clear water just large enough that you can’t see the other side, just large enough that you start to think maybe we’ve seen the last of the ice, and then it looms out out of the horizon like a piece of homework that you’ve been trying to avoid doing by moving to India only to find that school exists there as well. Hmpf. We’ve put in three new tracks today each one further south than the last in the vain hope that we’d finally escape the ice by running away from it. Unfortunately it seems that ice is a vindictive substance and refuses to leave us alone.
Poor Ben. Like every other 14-year old in Christendom he has never lived in a period of global warming (it hasn’t happened for 18 years) but yet has been assured non-stop by teachers and other experts that it represents a serious threat to the planet’s future.
And given how the world’s big media organisations so love to ramp up scare stories about this non-existent problem is it any wonder?
On BBC Radio 4’s Today programme this week we heard from Cambridge professor Peter Wadhams that the Arctic is more doomed than ever before.
But apart from being something of a conspiracy theorist – he once claimed that secret agents, possibly in the pay of Big Oil, have been bumping off climate scientists, presumably because they know too much [not, it must be said, a major handicap of any alarmist climate scientist I’ve ever encountered] – he has an embarrassingly dismal track record on forecasting Arctic ice melt. Indeed, as I reported at Breitbart, even within the climate alarmist community he is now considered such a liability that even hardcore enviro loons prefer not to be associated with him.
Yet the BBC goes on featuring him as if he were an expert whose predictions should be taken seriously.
For the record, here – courtesy of Paul Homewood – is what Arctic Sea Ice coverage currently looks like:

Note that the coverage is already pretty extensive – raising understandable questions about whether Polar Ocean Challenge is going to be able to complete its mission before the winter freeze sets in. Tony Heller, who has been following the expedition closely at Real Climate Science, says “they are taking a big risk heading into the Northwest Passage now with winter setting in. Even if they don’t encounter ice, it will be cold and the weather rough.”
Note too that summer sea ice coverage has increased and thickened quite a bit since Wadhams first started peddling his “ice free North Pole” predictions in 2007.

But the really sad thing – sad, at least in a “Death of Little Nell” way – is this: all these expeditions, like this David Hempleman-Adams one, and the doomed one a few years ago by explorer Pen Hadow is that the point they are trying to make is an utterly meaningless one.
All this nonsense you regularly hear from alarmists about the polar regions being navigable by ship for the first time because of global warming is historically and scientifically illiterate. Here, for example, is a history by the Ecotretas blog going back to the 1490s of all the various ships and explorers which have previously negotiated the North East Passage (as recently but-barely navigated by the Polar Ocean Challenge). It also looks like it was pretty toasty up there during the “Arctic Heat Wave” of 1923.
One of these days, someone’s going to get themselves hurt on one of these polar Ship of Fools expeditions. But until that day, I say: “Bring them on!” If idiots want to freeze their balls off, take City investment firms and insurance brokers for a ride, and make utter dicks of themselves for our delectation and amusement while making a mockery of current climate ‘science’, then I’d say they are performing a truly valuable public service.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,118,705
Messages
13,558,554
Members
100,672
Latest member
nhacaihb88help
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com