After initializing and parametrizing hundreds of unknown factors,inserting divergent proxy data and ignoring any difficult natural forcing factors,we ran hundreds of simulations until we obtained the results we wanted–an ensemble of meaningless projected results,which we then averaged. We utilized the liberally unprincipled component method to homogenize and sensitize this to produce a new hockey stick,which gave a very robust prediction (95% probability) that we are totally screwing all of you
Morons here fail to admit that their research is political and religious research, not scientific research. Unaudited information is dubious information.Peer review is not audit. Grow up and grow a dick for a change.
Tax takes naturally fall as payers find other ways to do business so Govts. constantly need new taxes, that's what this is about especially because Govts. run everything on forward estimates and they have already started spending the money! Disband the IPCC immediately on the basis of Fraud Emails and begin the task of prosecuting the scientists.
Well research about Global warming is still being done, plus we do not know everything there is to Global Warming or even climate change. Yet, from the things I learned in all the courses I took and all the information I read has made it clear to me that IPCC is the last organization that posts information to the world with any bias. In my opinion, you can't look at just the short term effects but the long term as well. I mean would it kill you to have a cleaner and greener world?
@diggyzerox you dont make any sense. We all want a clean environment....the question is do you want a centrally planned economy via obama's cap and trade?
The believers tell you that crap n tax wont have any measurable effect while the useful idiots continue to support government take over of the rest of the free market.
This is about political power....you think al gore was in it for the environment when he walked with a cool $170 million by selling his carbon exchange contraption?
@PhilJonesLIED : How exactly is an environmental market to whom everybody can participate without restriction planned economy?
Long story short - the US does not do the right thing and will leave to me and the 95% of people on this planet a much worse situation? Then I wish for the US to be destroyed. What happens when with increasing temperatures and resulting effects everybody wishes for the same? it means the biggest national security ever for your children - enjoy - we'll get them.
@msCoffman, it's evident that you're passing off opinions as fact, which would make it difficult for you to provide any REPUTABLE LINKS. You have none. Your links to congress and nocapandtrade aren't relevant.
Who is climate analyst John MacLean? A link?
Freedom of information? Who authored what is clearly declared in the IPPC reports.
62 reviewers ADDED COMMENTS? Yeah for ONE CHAPTER
Only 4 WITH NO VESTED INTEREST? Who decides who's vested? SPPI, a big oil funded VESTED INTEREST shill
I've studied those exact reports in graduate school. She's entirely correct. The IPCC is a politically driven process, not a scientific one, and quite frankly it is an embarrassment that such body exists on such a level of government.
@greatleaper I agree with you who dont agree with IPCC. But am interested to know that how many of you believe in evolution theory? Because it seems to me that those who believe in evolution theory many times also believe that IPCC is right. Am I right here? Or there is no correlation between these 2 things? Just an observation... SEems like evolution theory ppl dont believe in conspiracy theories at all.
@jpkfox I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. I for one agree with evolution. But the thing is that all conspiracy theories are not qualitatively equal but depend on particular facts. Some are very wild and easily shown to be nonsense and some end up as mainstream facts, so I don't think you can find a clear correlation with believers in evolution. I for one believed all the hype about global warming, and so I decided to study it and then was quite amazed how flimsy the evidence was.
@greatleaper I agree that some conspiracy theories are weak. Like that 7/7 was an inside job. For example I have heard couple of people witnessing who were standing beside the suiside bombers how they saw them detonating the bombs. So that alone is a strong evidence that the bombs were not planted inside the trains. So I stopped believing 7/7 inside job-theory :) . But I am always open to the facts...
@greatleaper I guess the idea is that evolution theory "believers"/leaders are also making some kind of theory where they hide the facts (like concerning the fossils... they can be manipulated to look how you want them to look ). So there is a possibility for evolution theory to be a "conspiracy theory" as well.
@jpkfox Also it would be possible for evolution theory supporters to hide evidence which is against their theory (like fossils and facts regarding to them). The motive would be obviously money (to keep their job they need to badly provide results-or make them up!).
@jpkfox I agree that evolution is at times VERY dogmatic, though some of its foundation is also very strong. As for 7/7, have you heard what Peter Power of Visor Consultants said?: "At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off PRECISELY at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now." That's strong, no?
@greatleaper "As for 7/7, have you heard what Peter Power of Visor Consultants said?:" Ye, I know all this... have seen a lot of documents. I donno, but this could be a co-incidence, although quite strange I know. But how do you explain that couple of people inside the train witnessed seeing the bombers? Are they lying?
@jpkfox I agree with your thoughts on evolution, patriotism and especially medicine. As for 7/7...but do you know these people? Remember the Mi6 strategy is to have eyewitnesses telling people what 'really' happened. I don't know for sure of course, but 7/7 seems pretty suspicious to me for many reasons (Netanyahu, missing CCTV tapes, arguing over fares, the bus bomb, evidence that the explosions came from beneath the trains, Peter Power, etc.), although you are entitled to doubt it of course.
@greatleaper "7/7 seems pretty suspicious to me for many reasons " . I agree-there are many strange things there. The point I wanted to issue was that only *one* very strong evidence, if true, can falsify the inside job-theory. I was just thinking that this passenger evidence might be one.... but I have to do some more research is it possible what you said about eyewitnesses. I dont really have an agenda, so am just interested about the truth here .. :)
@jpkfox Although, getting back to your wondering, in America, it is urbanite liberals who are evolutionists and tend to be IPCC supporters, while rural people tend to be conservative creationists very skeptical of Al Gore and his claptrap, so you may have something. On the other hand, with say, 9/11, probably it is urban dwellers who are more likely to think it a conspiracy while the rural people tend to trust the President or be blinded by patriotism. Likelihood may rather be tied to the issue.
@greatleaper "blinded by patriotism" Ye, patriotism really can blind. To be honest, I have sometimes difficulties to trust things like medicines, leaders of countries etc. How can I know that they want my best? How can I know that the medicines they offer are best for me, and there is no other agenda like money? because I think it has happened before that they have missused their position. Its a difficult situation...
@greatleaper " in America, it is urbanite liberals who are evolutionists and tend to be IPCC supporters" Also I think in universities certain things are taboo, like creation vs evolution. Going against the flow, which is evolution in uni s, you get a bad reputation. Its not good to be against the majority, even if you are honest to yourself. There is not much freedom to believe what you want to believe.
Oh lord this woman is such an idiot. Talk about digging for data to support your claim while ignoring EVERYTHING else that conclusively counters it....
@mscoffman Thank you. We need more videos like this. I never really looked into the IPCC as an organization although I knew it was a fraud from a scientific viewpoint.
The IPCC is a body composed largely of government bureaucrats. Former head of IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri was not a scientist but a railroad engineer, who was finally forced to step down for profiting too heavily from the Carbon Trading derivatives scheme.
Al Gore's An inconvenient truth, with data not scientifically changed or what ever postmodernist Climate Change Critics like to call it, but simply from FACTUAL measurements. Watch and then think again who might have modeled the truth to fit their own interests... - I don't think that was the democrats -
DONT WAIT FOR CLIMATE CHANGE TO BECOME A FULL-BLOWN CRISIS BEFORE ACTING
Getting individuals and nations to act on climate change is difficult as the problem is slow-burning but if no action is taken, it will become a "full-scale emergency," head of the U.N. Environmental Programme Achim Steiner said on Friday.
You're 69 year old stalker. Youre a global warming DENIER with no peer-reviewed science so all you can do is play silly games. Further proof global warming deniers are frauds
That IPCC said it is 90% sure that global warming exist and is antropogenic, is in itself an idiotic joke. There is no mathematics who can make such things "sure". They pretend it is more than a subjective statement, when it is exactly that - nothing else than an opinion.
Because I have a brain and researched the facts here & they seem to be correct .
One that calls this BS has the intelligence of a grasshopper & lost in there own ego fear driven ignorance who prefers to live propaganda half truths & lies rather than using an ounce of intelligence to spend a few hours researching instead they let there ego make up excuses like green screens and dodgy book scams to divert there non intellectual pea brains away from the fact they have been coned.
@chotaboy66 Research isn't scientific research but scientific research is research. Clearly by your ad hominem attack I imply that you have the intelligence of a virus.
A regression analysis only shows correlation between variables, not the cause-effect of the system.
In the 70s there was a hysteria concerning the fear of a new ice age, basically based on the same data. Then later they wanted to justify a new energy policy, building nuclear power plants. So they let Bolin aboard to spread his CO2 theory which was politically welcomed. At that time, scientists scorned this theory and found it ridiculous. But Ms Thatcher pushed the whole thing. And as Lenin said: "If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomse the truth."
Once again Troll, The average June-August 2009 summer temperature for the contiguous United States was below average the 34th coolest on record, according to a preliminary analysis by NOAAs National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. August was also below the long-term average. The analysis is based on records dating back to 1895.
I forgot to mention the US Supreme Court. The USSC ruled that the EPA is legitimately allowed to declare CO2 a pollutant and regulate it.
Maybe, that's where you need to be. How could a court with a chief justice appointed by the last president not rule in your favor? My bad. That court and in spite of the chief justice did rule that the EPA is mandated to take action regarding CO2.
Hey....moron....Ever heard of poltical PRESSURE? Are you serious? You actually BELIEVE that the GOVERNMENT agencies in CONCERT are some indication of TRUTH?? lol...Why don't you just take your little naive BUTT out for a RESEARCH stroll to the HUNDREDS of NON U.N. and Government FUNDED studies on the issue that PROVE...SCIENTIFICALLY that HCCC is a FARCE. You sheeple amaze me! You didn't listen to a word she said. You blindly follow mommy govt without EVER suspecting foulplay. jeez kid
Am I serious? You must be joking. This video is one of the most intentionally misleading pieces of work on YT to date. Here's why!
There isn't a single published research that begins to disprove the work of Arrhenius. Not one. There isn't even .1 publication that begins to disprove Arrhenius.
I personally like the idea of Cap and Trade or even a Carbon Tax on the polluter as a substitute for Personal Income Tax. I could drive a Maserati if that came to pass. A Quattro Porte in the garage!
@TRUMPHENT No one disagrees that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. However, even Arrhenius admitted that CO2 by itself is incapable of raising the temperature that much because it only blocks two narrow bands in the electromagnetic spectrum, which are already nearly saturated. He predicted about a 1.6 degree increase, and most of that was because of a positive feedback from water vapor. Lindzen and Spencer have proved water vapor has a negative feedback, lowering increased temp to about .5 degrees.
@Atom299 Odd that there is no global warming yet, Arctic sea ice is virtually nonexistent. Greenland is losing 220 cubic km of ice per year double the rate of 5 years ago. Ice shelves along the Antarctic peninsula are not collapsing such as Larsen B, Wilkens and Ross.
My Arrhenius? His only failing was using the best instruments available to him. He still got the science right.
Your father/son team don't have a published and reviewed paper. Ask them to submit it to the NAS.
@Atom299 Hey! Arrhenius had good thermometers too. That wasn't his problem. It was accurately measuring the CO2 content of a sample of gas. Charles Keeling solved that problem with the invention of a special interferometer. He started measuring CO2 in 1957. You should remember 1957, of course you do. It was the International Geophysical Year. Much of Keeling's budget was funded by the Navy and you will never guess why.
Personally I couldn't give a monkeys about Arrhenius or Charles Keeling or CO2.
I notice however that you can't dispute the fact that there's been no increase in average temperatures in the isolated areas of the US over the past 100 years.
I wonder why that is.
Strange anomaly that if the planet is supposed to be warming, wouldn't you say?
@Atom299 Probably because global warming doesn't mean warmer air temperature?
Global warming means warmer average temperature, but what moderates our temperature? The Ocean.
The ocean is getting warmer and warmer over the years. It can result in colder and hotter air stream, and cause extreme weather conditions. The Great Ocean Conveyor Belt is what keeps the ocean currents moving and life living, and is governed by water temperature.
Yeah, I've heard of political pressure. I remember the Dixie Chicks. What's your point? And we are not discussing the polar region of your tiny little cranium.
After initializing and parametrizing hundreds of unknown factors,inserting divergent proxy data and ignoring any difficult natural forcing factors,we ran hundreds of simulations until we obtained the results we wanted–an ensemble of meaningless projected results,which we then averaged. We utilized the liberally unprincipled component method to homogenize and sensitize this to produce a new hockey stick,which gave a very robust prediction (95% probability) that we are totally screwing all of you
1000frolly 2 weeks ago
Morons here fail to admit that their research is political and religious research, not scientific research. Unaudited information is dubious information.Peer review is not audit. Grow up and grow a dick for a change.
Researchrules 1 month ago
Tax takes naturally fall as payers find other ways to do business so Govts. constantly need new taxes, that's what this is about especially because Govts. run everything on forward estimates and they have already started spending the money! Disband the IPCC immediately on the basis of Fraud Emails and begin the task of prosecuting the scientists.
BTsmoke 3 months ago
typical american distortion of the facts. I bet she watches FOX
IncognitoShhh 8 months ago
Well research about Global warming is still being done, plus we do not know everything there is to Global Warming or even climate change. Yet, from the things I learned in all the courses I took and all the information I read has made it clear to me that IPCC is the last organization that posts information to the world with any bias. In my opinion, you can't look at just the short term effects but the long term as well. I mean would it kill you to have a cleaner and greener world?
diggyzerox 8 months ago
@diggyzerox you dont make any sense. We all want a clean environment....the question is do you want a centrally planned economy via obama's cap and trade?
The believers tell you that crap n tax wont have any measurable effect while the useful idiots continue to support government take over of the rest of the free market.
This is about political power....you think al gore was in it for the environment when he walked with a cool $170 million by selling his carbon exchange contraption?
PhilJonesLIED 8 months ago
@PhilJonesLIED : How exactly is an environmental market to whom everybody can participate without restriction planned economy?
Long story short - the US does not do the right thing and will leave to me and the 95% of people on this planet a much worse situation? Then I wish for the US to be destroyed. What happens when with increasing temperatures and resulting effects everybody wishes for the same? it means the biggest national security ever for your children - enjoy - we'll get them.
nigelelsass 7 months ago
it is amazing that there are still kooks out there that have their heads firmly up Al Gore's ass.
pete5668 1 year ago 2
@msCoffman, it's evident that you're passing off opinions as fact, which would make it difficult for you to provide any REPUTABLE LINKS. You have none. Your links to congress and nocapandtrade aren't relevant.
Who is climate analyst John MacLean? A link?
Freedom of information? Who authored what is clearly declared in the IPPC reports.
62 reviewers ADDED COMMENTS? Yeah for ONE CHAPTER
Only 4 WITH NO VESTED INTEREST? Who decides who's vested? SPPI, a big oil funded VESTED INTEREST shill
ZangaroZen 1 year ago
I've studied those exact reports in graduate school. She's entirely correct. The IPCC is a politically driven process, not a scientific one, and quite frankly it is an embarrassment that such body exists on such a level of government.
greatleaper 1 year ago
@greatleaper I agree with you who dont agree with IPCC. But am interested to know that how many of you believe in evolution theory? Because it seems to me that those who believe in evolution theory many times also believe that IPCC is right. Am I right here? Or there is no correlation between these 2 things? Just an observation... SEems like evolution theory ppl dont believe in conspiracy theories at all.
jpkfox 1 year ago
@jpkfox I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. I for one agree with evolution. But the thing is that all conspiracy theories are not qualitatively equal but depend on particular facts. Some are very wild and easily shown to be nonsense and some end up as mainstream facts, so I don't think you can find a clear correlation with believers in evolution. I for one believed all the hype about global warming, and so I decided to study it and then was quite amazed how flimsy the evidence was.
greatleaper 1 year ago
@greatleaper I agree that some conspiracy theories are weak. Like that 7/7 was an inside job. For example I have heard couple of people witnessing who were standing beside the suiside bombers how they saw them detonating the bombs. So that alone is a strong evidence that the bombs were not planted inside the trains. So I stopped believing 7/7 inside job-theory :) . But I am always open to the facts...
jpkfox 1 year ago
@greatleaper I guess the idea is that evolution theory "believers"/leaders are also making some kind of theory where they hide the facts (like concerning the fossils... they can be manipulated to look how you want them to look ). So there is a possibility for evolution theory to be a "conspiracy theory" as well.
jpkfox 1 year ago
@jpkfox Also it would be possible for evolution theory supporters to hide evidence which is against their theory (like fossils and facts regarding to them). The motive would be obviously money (to keep their job they need to badly provide results-or make them up!).
jpkfox 1 year ago
@jpkfox I agree that evolution is at times VERY dogmatic, though some of its foundation is also very strong. As for 7/7, have you heard what Peter Power of Visor Consultants said?: "At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off PRECISELY at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now." That's strong, no?
greatleaper 1 year ago
@greatleaper "As for 7/7, have you heard what Peter Power of Visor Consultants said?:" Ye, I know all this... have seen a lot of documents. I donno, but this could be a co-incidence, although quite strange I know. But how do you explain that couple of people inside the train witnessed seeing the bombers? Are they lying?
jpkfox 1 year ago
@jpkfox I agree with your thoughts on evolution, patriotism and especially medicine. As for 7/7...but do you know these people? Remember the Mi6 strategy is to have eyewitnesses telling people what 'really' happened. I don't know for sure of course, but 7/7 seems pretty suspicious to me for many reasons (Netanyahu, missing CCTV tapes, arguing over fares, the bus bomb, evidence that the explosions came from beneath the trains, Peter Power, etc.), although you are entitled to doubt it of course.
greatleaper 1 year ago
@greatleaper "7/7 seems pretty suspicious to me for many reasons " . I agree-there are many strange things there. The point I wanted to issue was that only *one* very strong evidence, if true, can falsify the inside job-theory. I was just thinking that this passenger evidence might be one.... but I have to do some more research is it possible what you said about eyewitnesses. I dont really have an agenda, so am just interested about the truth here .. :)
jpkfox 1 year ago
@jpkfox Although, getting back to your wondering, in America, it is urbanite liberals who are evolutionists and tend to be IPCC supporters, while rural people tend to be conservative creationists very skeptical of Al Gore and his claptrap, so you may have something. On the other hand, with say, 9/11, probably it is urban dwellers who are more likely to think it a conspiracy while the rural people tend to trust the President or be blinded by patriotism. Likelihood may rather be tied to the issue.
greatleaper 1 year ago
@greatleaper "blinded by patriotism" Ye, patriotism really can blind. To be honest, I have sometimes difficulties to trust things like medicines, leaders of countries etc. How can I know that they want my best? How can I know that the medicines they offer are best for me, and there is no other agenda like money? because I think it has happened before that they have missused their position. Its a difficult situation...
jpkfox 1 year ago
@greatleaper " in America, it is urbanite liberals who are evolutionists and tend to be IPCC supporters" Also I think in universities certain things are taboo, like creation vs evolution. Going against the flow, which is evolution in uni s, you get a bad reputation. Its not good to be against the majority, even if you are honest to yourself. There is not much freedom to believe what you want to believe.
jpkfox 1 year ago
its complete fraud. Any professor of academic knows that if any student produced this quality of "research" he would probably be expelled.
LovingPoontang69 1 year ago
Oh lord this woman is such an idiot. Talk about digging for data to support your claim while ignoring EVERYTHING else that conclusively counters it....
robhoneycutt 1 year ago
@mscoffman Thank you. We need more videos like this. I never really looked into the IPCC as an organization although I knew it was a fraud from a scientific viewpoint.
mattyelle1 1 year ago
IPCC = fake
shackle5 1 year ago
Why does this only have 2615 views?Are people that far gone?That brain washed?Why do videos that speak the truth get no views?
IdunCareLesSn00b 1 year ago
The IPCC is a body composed largely of government bureaucrats. Former head of IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri was not a scientist but a railroad engineer, who was finally forced to step down for profiting too heavily from the Carbon Trading derivatives scheme.
AnonymousWhitePerson 1 year ago
Al Gore's An inconvenient truth, with data not scientifically changed or what ever postmodernist Climate Change Critics like to call it, but simply from FACTUAL measurements. Watch and then think again who might have modeled the truth to fit their own interests... - I don't think that was the democrats -
youtube(dot)com(slash)watch?v=Jxi-OlkmxZ4
xavierschmit 1 year ago
This woman should get a Nobel prize: not Al Gore.
Rickardio54321 1 year ago
Climate news
DONT WAIT FOR CLIMATE CHANGE TO BECOME A FULL-BLOWN CRISIS BEFORE ACTING
Getting individuals and nations to act on climate change is difficult as the problem is slow-burning but if no action is taken, it will become a "full-scale emergency," head of the U.N. Environmental Programme Achim Steiner said on Friday.
REUTERS
March 20 2010
Nightversionn 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Niightversionn
Spitfiremacx,
(I mean N ii ghtversionn Nig tversionn (no h)
Nigh tt versionn
Nightver ss ion,
Knigh tt vision
Nigh ttt version
Nightversiom,
Nightverslon, Nightversionnn, aryhuk, etc...)
You're 69 year old stalker. Youre a global warming DENIER with no peer-reviewed science so all you can do is play silly games. Further proof global warming deniers are frauds
Nightversionn 1 year ago
That IPCC said it is 90% sure that global warming exist and is antropogenic, is in itself an idiotic joke. There is no mathematics who can make such things "sure". They pretend it is more than a subjective statement, when it is exactly that - nothing else than an opinion.
Stroheim333 1 year ago
I call truth
Because I have a brain and researched the facts here & they seem to be correct .
One that calls this BS has the intelligence of a grasshopper & lost in there own ego fear driven ignorance who prefers to live propaganda half truths & lies rather than using an ounce of intelligence to spend a few hours researching instead they let there ego make up excuses like green screens and dodgy book scams to divert there non intellectual pea brains away from the fact they have been coned.
chotaboy66 2 years ago 8
@chotaboy66 Research isn't scientific research but scientific research is research. Clearly by your ad hominem attack I imply that you have the intelligence of a virus.
A regression analysis only shows correlation between variables, not the cause-effect of the system.
Researchrules 1 month ago
Disinformation, when you hold us; or how people are paid to spread doubt into laymen's mind.
Paid actress in front of a green screen with a shot of the Capitol? Unlike scientists, science itself is apolitical.
No facts are actually discussed in this video, except completely random (and easily refutable) numbers pulled out of nowhere.
And the original poster's "official website", which is no more than an outlet to sell books and DVDs,,,
I call bullshit.
IxoZ 2 years ago
Is this a joke?
This looks like a self parody.
Watch out for Zeitgeist!
megoku 2 years ago
In the 70s there was a hysteria concerning the fear of a new ice age, basically based on the same data. Then later they wanted to justify a new energy policy, building nuclear power plants. So they let Bolin aboard to spread his CO2 theory which was politically welcomed. At that time, scientists scorned this theory and found it ridiculous. But Ms Thatcher pushed the whole thing. And as Lenin said: "If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomse the truth."
Dorfkanal 2 years ago
Global warming is garbage. Hey, wake up. This is a trick to pass a new carbon tax on you.
cyanzone 2 years ago 2
global warming global fraud
qwuad61 2 years ago 2
Kristie Pelletier is Amazing! She's intelligent and beautiful.
TheTempestSpark 2 years ago
Man-made Glowbull Warming, or is it Climate Change?, is the new opiate of the masses (religion). All Aboard!
tealeaf56 2 years ago
Here are a few of the US departments, organizations and agencies that have been united in consensus that global warming is real and manmade.
DOD, DOE, NASA, NOAA, EPA, CDC, NAS, USGS etc
Many of the IPCC scientists are working/teaching professors at UC, Stanford, Penn State and Harvard.
You should take on the Pentagon for its heretical stance regarding global warming.
CIA Opens Center on Climate Change and National Security, September 2009. Out a few spooks. It worked for Cheney and Bush.
TRUMPHENT 2 years ago
Once again Troll, The average June-August 2009 summer temperature for the contiguous United States was below average the 34th coolest on record, according to a preliminary analysis by NOAAs National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. August was also below the long-term average. The analysis is based on records dating back to 1895.
johnknoefler 2 years ago
I love copy pasting.
johnknoefler 2 years ago
I forgot to mention the US Supreme Court. The USSC ruled that the EPA is legitimately allowed to declare CO2 a pollutant and regulate it.
Maybe, that's where you need to be. How could a court with a chief justice appointed by the last president not rule in your favor? My bad. That court and in spite of the chief justice did rule that the EPA is mandated to take action regarding CO2.
TRUMPHENT 2 years ago
Comment removed
johnknoefler 2 years ago
Hey....moron....Ever heard of poltical PRESSURE? Are you serious? You actually BELIEVE that the GOVERNMENT agencies in CONCERT are some indication of TRUTH?? lol...Why don't you just take your little naive BUTT out for a RESEARCH stroll to the HUNDREDS of NON U.N. and Government FUNDED studies on the issue that PROVE...SCIENTIFICALLY that HCCC is a FARCE. You sheeple amaze me! You didn't listen to a word she said. You blindly follow mommy govt without EVER suspecting foulplay. jeez kid
Stratslayer 2 years ago
Am I serious? You must be joking. This video is one of the most intentionally misleading pieces of work on YT to date. Here's why!
There isn't a single published research that begins to disprove the work of Arrhenius. Not one. There isn't even .1 publication that begins to disprove Arrhenius.
I personally like the idea of Cap and Trade or even a Carbon Tax on the polluter as a substitute for Personal Income Tax. I could drive a Maserati if that came to pass. A Quattro Porte in the garage!
TRUMPHENT 2 years ago
@TRUMPHENT No one disagrees that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. However, even Arrhenius admitted that CO2 by itself is incapable of raising the temperature that much because it only blocks two narrow bands in the electromagnetic spectrum, which are already nearly saturated. He predicted about a 1.6 degree increase, and most of that was because of a positive feedback from water vapor. Lindzen and Spencer have proved water vapor has a negative feedback, lowering increased temp to about .5 degrees.
mscoffman 2 years ago
@TRUMPHENT
Maybe your Arrhenius should check this out. Maybe you should too.
THERE'S NO GLOBAL WARMING!
Global Warming US Cities Getting Warmer
/watch?v=F_G_-SdAN04
This is 100% scientific proof positive. Straight from the horses mouth.
Arrhenius (or anyone else) can have all the theories they like but there's the real proof.
Atom299 2 years ago
@Atom299 Odd that there is no global warming yet, Arctic sea ice is virtually nonexistent. Greenland is losing 220 cubic km of ice per year double the rate of 5 years ago. Ice shelves along the Antarctic peninsula are not collapsing such as Larsen B, Wilkens and Ross.
My Arrhenius? His only failing was using the best instruments available to him. He still got the science right.
Your father/son team don't have a published and reviewed paper. Ask them to submit it to the NAS.
TRUMPHENT 2 years ago
Oh..so you've been to the Arctic sea recently have you?
My Father and son team didn't do anything that you couldn't do yourself.
It looks like your Arrhenius has been wasting his time. We do have excellent instruments for measuring temperature called thermometers.
Unfortunately we know all about publishing reviews Thanks. (hint..Thrash can)
Obviously GISS haven't even read their own site.
Atom299 2 years ago
@Atom299 Hey! Arrhenius had good thermometers too. That wasn't his problem. It was accurately measuring the CO2 content of a sample of gas. Charles Keeling solved that problem with the invention of a special interferometer. He started measuring CO2 in 1957. You should remember 1957, of course you do. It was the International Geophysical Year. Much of Keeling's budget was funded by the Navy and you will never guess why.
TRUMPHENT 2 years ago
Oh..a know it all are we?
Personally I couldn't give a monkeys about Arrhenius or Charles Keeling or CO2.
I notice however that you can't dispute the fact that there's been no increase in average temperatures in the isolated areas of the US over the past 100 years.
I wonder why that is.
Strange anomaly that if the planet is supposed to be warming, wouldn't you say?
Atom299 2 years ago 12
@Atom299 Probably because global warming doesn't mean warmer air temperature?
Global warming means warmer average temperature, but what moderates our temperature? The Ocean.
The ocean is getting warmer and warmer over the years. It can result in colder and hotter air stream, and cause extreme weather conditions. The Great Ocean Conveyor Belt is what keeps the ocean currents moving and life living, and is governed by water temperature.
Neosaigo 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Neosaigo "The ocean is getting warmer and warmer over the years" And the air is not?
Who told you that? Tell them to go back to physics 101 and look up "Entropy".
They'll see that that's simply not posible except during very short time periods, like days, weeks or months.
Atom299 9 months ago
Yeah, I've heard of political pressure. I remember the Dixie Chicks. What's your point? And we are not discussing the polar region of your tiny little cranium.
TRUMPHENT 2 years ago
I was wondering if you can direct me to some of those NON U.N. and Government FUNDED studies. I would like to read some of them. Thank you.
aaronbalthaser 2 years ago