This is paring a fact with an idea: "People get colds more often in the winter because they need to bundle close together for warmth". It is a fact yes that people get colds more often in the winter but the cause that is attached to it is an idea. "Green washing is a form of commodification", yes I agree but this doesn't lead to "Therefore humans are not contributing to climate change".
This is paring a fact with an idea: "People get colds more often in the winter because they need to bundle close together for warmth". It is a fact yes that people get colds more often in the winter but the cause that is attached to it is an idea. "Green washing is a form of commodification", yes I agree but this doesn't lead to "Therefore humans are not contributing to climate change".
Anyone studying crisis or disaster capitalism knows that it doesn't matter whether the crisis is real, imagined are constructed, the outcome ends up the same because you can capitalize and fear monger either way.
Al Gore gets money to look a globel warming and till you cut his check off. There will be globel warming.
The CO level of the earth goes up and down by 3% every 600 years and is a natural thing that happens. If the CO level went up by 1% we could feed all the hargery people of the world !
This guy just talks about politics. Climate change has nothing to do with politics, it's about scientific theory and if you choose not to believe in it, or if a douche bag starts taking it up as his cause, none of that effects whether or not it's true. It's guys like these man...
One must bear in mind that Science does not progress by CONSENSUS, but by falsification and what scientists refer to as 'paradigm shifts'. Beliveing something to be true and knwing it to be true are often world's apart'. The theory of anthropogenic global warming rests solely on computer-models which project a variety of possible future climate states! However, in reality, computer-models are only as accurate as the assumptions that get programmed into them and one must take heed of this!
@MegaPostman77 AGW rests only on computermodels? from where have you got that idea? AGW rests on the observation of rising temperature manifested by increased humidity increased rainfall, melting tundras and glaciers and some other indicators. The Co2 increase in the atmosphere of 2ppm is likemly the culprit as CO2 is a green house gas (known since 1896) the computer models reconstruct past and current climate to do predictions about how bad our continuation of release of co2 will be.
One must bear in mind that Science does not progress by CONSENSUS, but by falsification and what scientists refer to as 'paradigm shifts'. Beliveing something to be true and knowing it to be true are often world's apart'. The theory of anthropogenic global warming rests solely on computer-models which project a variety of possible future climate states! However, in the real world, computer-models are only as accurate as the assumptions that get programmed into them and one must take heed of this
Ask who pays the pro AGW scientists ? They lie and lie. This climate scam is evil and the irony is people who support them are not evil but just taken in. The statistics are false ! Why the hell do some people just quote what they have read by so called peer reviews as Gospel ? Why the hell don't these same people study international politics and THEN join the dots together ?
If your a pro AGW theorist and genuinely care about the planet, look at the bigger picture or your doomed !
@ALBIONTYKE What lies have they told you? the only false statement I have found is the himalya prediction in the IPCC report of 6000 pages, darn good work if thats the only error in such imense collction of data. On the other hand it only takes a few seconds of internet search to find missleading and false arguments from the other side. But what can you expect from spindoctors paid by the oillobby? trust honest scientists or trust people paid to spin the truth? for me the choice is easy :)
@Fyhrtheflame As I said in my previous comment, you need to study international politics in some detail. Just focusing on AGW is never going to make you think any different. I know this probably wont make sense to you, but The Rothschild's,9/11 The international economic crash, HAARP, Iraq , Afghanistan, The Bilderberg Group, The Tri-Lateral Commission, The growth of the EU, Common Purpose, The Fabian Society, Davos, The Fed , The Bank of England & the Deutsche Bank are all linked in to AGW.
@ALBIONTYKE Well I do not think CO2's green house properties has anything with politics to do and you are right it will take me a lot of evidence to make me belive so. If you can show me anything that points in that direction you are welcome. I rather think the bipedal genetransporter called man mabye has reached it's evolutionary end. Seems like this one (AGW) might be a to hard nut to crack as it takes a lot of cooperation to solve. (call it tax if you want)
@ALBIONTYKE Just wait. You're rushing to conclusions without knowing anything. You're watching too much crap. You should try to find out from the scientists, not from the self-elected "experts" on youtube who smell a scam wherever they go - just to earn clicks. Anyway, the laughter will be on my side. Your wishful thinking won't help you out.
@MlTher You have no idea what I am watching or reading. One thing I have done amongst many others is print off the 53 pages of emails from the University of East Anglia & read the whole lot. Any idiot who believes the crap the British Government made to "prove" that the scientists were naive but essentially correct is lacking in brain cells. If there is a man made threat to our climate, study the Russian PEER reviewed papers on HAARP. Contact the University of Moscow for the English papers,
I've noticed lots of people don't recognize the difference between global warming and pollution. These are two different things. Former is a new type of religion, because you have to believe in it in order to make it alive since there are false evidence everywhere nowadays, and the latter is what we must take care of, each individual person for itself.
@cristop5 Actually everything you have written has been debunked. Read "The Deniers.". See how many who are paid to agree with you disagree. The climate scientists are closer to mafia members than scientists. Science defends its points with data. Mafia members insult, degrade, and eliminate those who disagree by force. And for your information, the earth has cooled in the past 10 years. That's why Mann feels the need to "hide the decline."
@runr100 Could you show me the data that shows that earth has cooled the last ten years? Well I thought so, hard to explain why it rains in december on greenland why the glaciers melts in increasing rate. why tree lines moves upwards etct. I just can't get it why some people so stubbornly put ther head in the ground. Take a look at the evidence yourself if you don't trust the scientiffic world.
MONEY is THE religon of the past few centuries,either way you look at it! We just gotta learn how to live without them and to accompish that WE have to improve inside ourselves in the first place . Oh and BTW Klaus is nothing but a populist self-loving fag who buys young boys asses. (prooved)
satan is the new religion, and we have to start depopulating the planet in order to save it.
ENOUGH.
who is responsible for the dirty unorganized industrialisation years !? the governments, not the people........they are not held accountable. Refuse to pay for a problem you didn't cause....
Environmental debate heats up; global warming is melting away
by James H. Shott
Data show that the Earth cooled last year rather than warmed, following a trend that began in 2000, and in light of this evidence much of the doomsday talk has quieted down. However, while activists still cling to their flawed theory, they have replaced the term “global warming” with “climate change,” using the same theory to now account for any change that occurs
@Dayversion "Data show that the Earth cooled last year.." What data? I went to the original story and found that "James H. Shott" does not cite the source for this "data" he bases his claim on. Well I can tell you it's not the NASA database. According to the NASA data, 2009 was the 3rd hottest year on record, and it was hotter than 2008.
But if you go to his website (w ww.jshott.com) it all becomes clear. He's not a science reporter. He's just some right wing ideologue.
Global warming is a misconstrued scientific hypothesis that over simplifys and makes no mention of other sources of interference. IE the sun, chemistry, algae, ect... Those of you who believe it dont know natural history, otherwise you would know we need more orgainc chemistry in our bio-sphere...
CO2 is a trace gas when half the life here lives on it, shamefull...
Didn't big Al also say he invented the Internet? We use to lock up people like Al and give him a lobotomy. It's called delusion of grander, Al has the Messiah complex!
The ending contradicted his point that politicians use the promise for current gain. if so, why did three lose their office after making the promise to reduce emissions. he hasn't thought this out coherently. But I agree that Al Gore is a lying selfish rat who doesn't know jack about science or economics but preaches fear to advance a socialist power grab. He should be in jail.
For more info google "Foundation Watch Al Gore's Carbon Crusade"
Its a 7 page report, I'd advise all interested in the financial motivation to promote the Global Warming crisis creation of Al Fraud & his Corporate flunkie friends read it
I'm from Czech republic and to tell the truth I'm not a big aficionado of Mr Klaus but I think he is spot on in this matter . Who I don't like at all however is that cowardly traitor Václav Havel I mean he should be brought to court and tried for treason and if found guilty he should be executed at Strahov stadium . I am not some attention grabbing freak at all but I do mean it for his support of Sudeten Germans and his endorsement of the humanitarian bombardment of Serbia.
We need a new Pecora Commission to investigate the taxpayer funded bank bailout (which included Goldman Sachs & Gore friends) and we also need an investigation into this Global Warming scam starring Gore & Goldman Sachs shysters.
Keep in mind, we need to stop Cap & Trade, while explaining to your government robotoid that Cap & Trade is set to make Gore & Corporate shysters billions, tell them you want this Global Warming charade investigated
Long live the brave president of the Czech republic! Long live the great Czech Nation, and their love of freedom and their commitment to truth! You are the intellectual light in Europe!
I'd like Mr. Vaclav Klaus to become the president of the European Union!m Stop the global carbon tax!
climate change exists because the climate has been changing since it began. i would be more worried if it stopped changing. what do they want an individual to do - fight against the combined industrial pollution of america, china, india and russia. it won't happen. it's the best tax idea since bringing in illegal income tax. it cant be proved or disproved and they say your saving the planet. we are the stupid ones
Politicans realised that they could make a lot of money if they made enviroment laws and fees for emissions the industries let out and for the exhaust from cars and makeing it look like it's beneficial to buy green cars when they really are ripping you off.
So yeah they make people belive anything just so their wallet gets even fatter than it already is.
Global warming: The name was changed because the globe is COOLING. Now it's 'climate change'. Oh no! Everything that happens is bad. Truth deniers on the GW bandwagon sound like cavemen!
"Ug. Temperature rising bad! Ug. Temperature cooling bad! Ug. Tropical storm bad! Ug. Less rain bad. Ug. More rain bad. Ug. Wind bad. Ug. No snow bad. Ug. Early snow bad."
Re: "Global warming: The name was changed because the globe is COOLING. Now it's 'climate change'... Idiots the lot of you"
I suspect I AM an idiot, because I'm replying to one. I'm sure it's futile to explain the temp record to you. (lol - as if you'd reply to the facts with "Ok, I get it now."). But surely even you can see that the 'name' didn't just switch from 'Global Warming' to 'Climate Change.' The IPCC was formed in 1988. That's the Intergovernmental Panel on CLIMATE CHANGE you moron.
Yeah, I completely agree. The millions of tons of non-biodegradable and toxic waste we dump into the ecosystem won't do shit to it. And who the fuck cares that we are messing with the atmospheric content of greenhouse gases. The earth will take itself to equilibrium in a few years. That's how the planet works. There's dramatic change to it, then all of a sudden, it fixes itself.
*L* What a bass-ackwards way of thinking. No sir, considering our productivity, the United States is one of the least polluting countries on the planet. So you need to go where the MOST pollution is first, obviously, and get that under control. Our policies with respect to the environment are very 'green', if you want to know the truth, and already stifle growth and productivity - so much so that companies are moving to China. Again, GO TALK TO CHINA.
Oh cmon, cite me some sources saying that America is one of the "least polluting countries"... I haven't followed this issue extremely closely lately, but no way they went from #1 to #50's in a couple of years, especially with our hold in the global market.
And we are talking to China, Copenhagen anybody? Going green stifles everybody's productivity at first, but if enough reform is done, markets should return to a decent balance of producitivity and non-tree-burning...
You didn't follow up to my request, you failed to provide any sources that America was not contributing to the problem.
I didn't say anything about the Chinese, Indians, etc. not having a large impact on our Earth, on the contrary, I think it is rather dismal seeing the massive electronic waste they contribute.
However, being overly redundant about your problems with "Chinese, the Indians, etc." just makes you sound like an ignorant racist. Evidence that they are as bad as you say?
Oh I'm sorry - do you not know how to work 'google?'
When you get the Chinese and Indians in shape, we'll talk. In the meantime, the USA is doing far more than its share for the fraud of man made global warming.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Ok, now you've just reached dumbass level. First you say we should tell the Chinese to fuck off with polluting but you think there's the fraud of global warming. If global climate change is a fraud, the solution should be "eliminate all green policies held by america", instead of "talk to china".
And no, I don't know how to use google, show me some sources that say America is a great green country that doesn't produce waste relative to the rest of the world.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
lol
I'm done arguing with someone who doesn't argue back. You have yet to do anything but restate your thesis.
Grow up and open your eyes, the world isn't a fuckin' conspiracy theory. And you must have some ego to think you can outwit the "folks who've been had"
Oh you wanted to ARGUE? Sorry, that's not what I do. And yes, there absolutely, positively was a conspiracy to fake, fudge and fiddle with the data to make global warming look real while the world's been COOLING over the last decade.
I know - that was my first reaction to this vid. By not immediately recanting that quote, denying it, or qualifying it, he discredited himself and anything he had to say after.
@cristop5 try to think. In history we had Ice age and global warming, its just normal thing that is happening to the planet independently on human kind. On the other hand there are many businessmen and politician that see in this a great business and great power how to control people just like communists did.
@carcaril "..its just normal thing that is happening to the planet independently on human kind."
The planet does not simply cool & warm for no reason. So why is it warming? It's not due to solar activity - this has waned. Likewise Al Gore has little effect on temperature. The best explanatory factor is CO2 - that's risen 40% over the last 120 yrs.
But if you know of any research that shows what (besides CO2) has heated the troposphere to record highs over the last 40 years or so, please share.
@cristop5 To confirm GW you need at the very LEAST 15 years of temperature data with very fancy equipments in very specific places. At the beginning, as the environmentalist didn't have those data, they were using a bunch of indirect data : like migratory path of birds, the growth of corals, etc. But all those could be explained by other causes like the development of human demography, pollution, sickness, etc. And some were just creating numbers ! One just couldn't be 100% sure, as Gore was.
@philoposos "To confirm GW you need at the very LEAST 15 years of temperature data.."
When global surface air temperatures, satellite measurements & ocean temperatures all show warming, you might suspect it's warming. When the ice cap & glaciers retreat together you might sit up & take notice.
Then when most of the world's biological systems behave as you'd expect if warming were happening - you must either close your eyes or run to wattsupwiththat and wail "Waah! Please tell me it isn't true!"
@cristop5 I thought it was clear I was talking about the past (Bush vs Gore was 10 years ago). All those data you are talking about is recent stuff. Indeed today the scientific community is coming to a consensus that GW is a confirmed hypothesis. Witch was just a hunch by that time. Therefore it is still irresponsible to make (inter-)national politics (to affect the life of billions) based just in hunches. Klaus is right : it was ideological mass-manipulation by that time.
@cristop5 Nevertheless you are wrong. A bunch of data by itself wouldn't suffice to confirm GW. No matter how good is the data. The climate global temperature can oscillate greatly a in short period of time. You need a very long span of time to confirm (or not) a long-term tendency. We may have it today. But people weren't observating and measuring for long enough to be able to come to conclusions about 10 years ago. Gore, and all those hysterical environmentalists, were just speculating then.
@philoposos The ability of CO2 to "trap" heat has been known since 1896. The increase of CO2 in the atmosphere has been tracked since the 1950s. From 1965-79, 7 studies predicted cooling, but 42 predicted warming. The consensus was starting. An analysis of outgoing long wave radiation from 1970-97 showed an increased absorption at wave lengths corresponding to CH4, CO2, O3, CFC-11 and CFC-12.
"We may have it today." Yes. I'm sorry if you think people jumped to the right conclusion too early.
@cristop5 I think you are talking about the brilliant and exiting part of science : the emergence of the hypothesis. Those are indeed very good reasons to formulate that the global climate is warming. But I'm talking about the boring part : the empirical test of the hypothesis. [If the GW is being tested, it's bcuz it is a plausible hypothesis].
Anyway, no matter how plausible is the hypothesis (or those defending it) It shouldn't be politically instrumented before undoubtable confirmation.
@philoposos I don't know what you would consider "testing" to be. The fact is many have tried to disprove the theory and failed. As a result there is as close to a scientific consensus on AGW as there is on anything. A new study shows that 97-98% of publishing climate researchers "support the tenets of anthropogenic climate change" (ht tp://ww w.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.full.pdf+html).
Are you saying we should delay action until we have say, a 99.5% consensus?
@cristop5 If you think taxing CO2 is the answer then there is no point having a discussion with you. You have been brainwashed by computer models, funded by vested interests. You have forsaken your common sense, and your intellectual honesty. Try looking at what the sceptics are saying, you've been had. Start with Henriks 5 part series, the first one is on my channel, watch them all, unless you want to continue with your blinders on.
@TheKickerboy99 If you have a peer reviewed study that explains why the earth has warmed 0.6-0.8C since 1975, and which doesn't factor in CO2, I'd love to see it.
cristop5 - You can't determine global warming by taking one or two days out of the year and compare to that date in previous years. You have to average daily temperatures out of a full calendar year, dumbass!
6 of the past 7 years have been hotter than the others in that period.. Thats a fact crsitop5 j Try going back 10 000 years and whats with neptune getting warmer..? The name Denier is changing sides
You cant imagine what this has cost me — to actually allow the operator to assign false WMO codes!! But what else is there in such situations? Especially when dealing with a Master database of dubious provenance
The Deniers are now becoming hysterical to the point of using caps to signify screaming. Reminds us of Ed Begley screaming , " Peer review peer review ! " It`s both amusing and pathetic all at once.
I'm not a scientist and consider myself a simple woman, but this whole argument about climate change/global warming/global cooling seems to be merely a semantic argument. If the Earth is cooling instead of warming, why are the polar caps melting at an exaggerated rate? Regardless what it's called, it's clear the planet is going through some sort of change and perhaps more thought should be given as to how it will impact man instead of worrying what it's called.
Who are 'they' and how are 'they' accomplishing that? So I suppose that those icebergs that split from Antarctic ice sheets floating near New Zealand are a part of their plan? We need a rise in the sea levels? Why?
NASA has reported a decline in the arctic ice caps, as satellite photos show a decrease in mass from 1979 to 2003.
Ice core drilling in the fast ice off Australia's Davis Station in East Antarctica by the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Co-Operative Research Center shows that last year, the ice had a maximum thickness of 1.89m, its densest in 10 years.
Not talking about thickness, but the size of the mass which once again, satellite photos show a marked decrease in mass. Theres less delineation between the seasons from what I can see from living on the East Coast of America; the rise in sea levels something has to account for that.and we might be wise to address it now versus later. It's fascinating to hear so much concern about the financial legacy being left to future generations, but not so much concern about the environmental aspect.
I do agree that we should be good stewards of our environment....however.....a global tax on Carbon......which plants breath........is not the answer.....and the real data shows that the Earth has been cooling since 1998
You do know it was Kenneth Lay, the CEO of ENRON, that invented this Carbon Credit Scheme, right ?
No, I didn't, but I do know it's based on the same principles that were used to reduced emissions that was at the cause of acid rain and that the doom-and-gloom scenarios that are being predicted with cap-and-trade never materialized.
JExecutiveOrder11110 "the Earth has been cooling since 1998"
I'm afraid not. In 1998 there was the largest el nino event on record. This meant the release of a massive amount of heat into the atmosphere from the eastern Pacific. If you do a global temperature trend line from normal years, say 1997 or 1999 to 2009, you will find the temperature is still rising.
The loltrolls will thumb this comment down, but they will not refute the data.
There are several drivers of climate change - solar activity, greenhouse gases, the configuration of continents, Milankovitch cycles etc. and associated feedback mechanisms. These all shift in importance and ranking over time. In the last 200 yrs we've destroyed half the planet's forests, and converted billions of tonnes of coal and oil to CO2, so its concentration has risen from 280ppm to 385ppm.
Why wouldn't such a change in CO2 over so short a short period of time have no impact?
I have encouraged VEPZ to do his own research, and to read through all the material that is now available - articles and stories and op ed pieces but of course he refused.
Instead, he spams this thread with all kinds of hissy fits and emotional rants, name calling and such, because that's the last resort of the scoundrel. The truth is out, and he is desperate.
The emails and code refer to the hairy details of the scientific data compilation, reduction, and calculation. Only an idiot would claim to understand their meanings and purposes unless they were deeply involved in the process.
Re: you encouraged me to do my own research
I told you I downloaded the emails days ago. And fyi, to "research" climate change doesn't mean tracking the latest insane conspiracy arguments (though I try to keep up on those too).
By contrast, I DO understand the scientific case for human global warming. There are two ways to achieve that. The easy way is to listen to the global scientific community. The hard way is to keep up with the scientific details. I do the former, and some of the later. You, by contrast, do neither, and instead smugly mouth off - grounded in pure ignorance and Industry-funded propaganda and punditry. So yeah dude, I'm a real idiot. Can't fool you...
"A scientist who is one of the central figures in the controversy over hacked e-mails from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit announced Tuesday that he is stepping down."
Haha. If this was all just nothing, he'd never step down.
What? So you think that if someone in authority is accused of something you can determine their guilt or innocence by seeing whether or not they step down?
Interesting idea. It would save a lot of time on inquiries, but it's not how things work in the real world. Fact is it is not appropriate for Phil Jones to keep working there as a director while he is under investigation. Lets just wait for the findings of the investigation shall we.
@VeryEvilPettingZoo LOL Are you serious !? Read the CRU code file osborntree6/briffasep98 email and tell us that is not blatant data cooking? They deliberately used negative coefficients to flatten out the `30s and then use positive multipliers to achieve their desired results at the end of the century. U R a Denier.
I've downloaded the stolen documents, and searched for osborntree6 and briffasep98, and found nothing. I can't comment about that until you direct me to the correct file.
I can say this. I know enough to know what I don't know, but the utterly ignorant are under no such restrictions. Many of them think they can discern the transparent meaning of things they are completely clueless about. From what I've read so far, this email "controversy" is a gigantic exercise in stupidity.
Among ordinary schmucks following this, I'm pretty competent in understanding it. I'm a computer programmer, and have done graduate work in physics at a top 20 American university. On this topic, I've read dozens of abstracts, some papers, the IPCC reports (summaries and parts of the full science reports), the NRC and Wegman reports, etc.. I've corrected several of your "scientific arguments" on this vid (now marked as spam, of course), and could correct the rest.
And the point is, I know there's NO WAY I can understand, at face value, what many of those email comments and data manipulations mean. I don't know the details, the rationales, or the background. Those involved weren't kind enough to lay it all out for us because those were PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS between co-workers who all understood the meaning and purpose without it needing to be said.
I also know that the average shithead is DEFINITELY not capable of evaluating them. Scientists manipulate and correct data all the time - it's their job, and they'd produce bad science if they didn't. To detect a nefarious conspiratorial manipulation, you have to REALLY UNDERSTAND the hairy details and known-relevant physical factors bearing on the measurements.
Without evidence to even SUGGEST a conspiracy (there is none!), there's no reason at all to suspect anything dishonest here.
PRICELESS !!! I`m now officially done with this Denier. Why? The the CRU code file osborntree6/briffasep98 was read by and commented on by non other than Eric S. Raymond ! Oh the irony of labeling anyone who disagrees with your religious belief system as clueless and utterly ignorant ! LOL
Eric has a message for all you Deniers: All you apologists weakly protesting that this is research business as usual and there are plausible explanations for everything in the emails? Sackcloth and ashes time for you. This isnt just a smoking gun, its a siege cannon with the barrel still hot.
You tell me to check a certain file, and when I search the downloaded emails and code, I tell you that there's no file that has those words. I guess...um...you think you've really nailed me with something, but...um...I have no clue what it is. The stolen emails don't contain the text you used to direct me to a particular example...er...I guess that's a horrible comment on my integrity...um... ?????
You "can`t find it". I just used any web search page and found 593 returns ! Yes, yes of course, you`re a genius with decades of experience who conveniently cannot find any of the authenticated emails. Keep denying Denier.
I'm not going off the web - I'm going off the hacked emails themselves - which I downloaded from a site as direct by the Wall Street Journal. It might be a shocker for you, but the internet isn't the most reliable source, especially when it comes to nonsense like this... strange habits of omission, as well as outright fabrications, aren't uncommon.
LOL - what do your comment's bunch of context free jibbersih mean to me? LOL - absolutely nothing. That's KINDA MY POINT.
So, if you think you have something damning, by all means, MAKE YOUR CASE. BE SPECIFIC.
(You tried with this briffa_sep98_d, but as soon as I confronted you with the SPECIFIC details - you ran off and completely change the subject - producing a barrage of equally disjointed meaningless contextless peices).
Make a SPECIFIC CASE of SPECIFIC wrongdoing based on DETAILS that prove your point. I've been waiting for days, and heard LOTS of bluster, but NOTHING substantial.
....Hehehe, I Once stood in a Uranal next to him ....
imbabazane 1 week ago
Al Gore enjoys "the thrill of being forced", as he says in An Inconvenient Truth. What self-respecting man is that submissive?
Torgo1969 2 weeks ago
Al G knows the economics of global warming fills is bank accounts.
Sarando1 2 months ago
In 70's I've seen a Czech scifi movie about someone making and selling air which was high price commodity. Anyone knows the name of this movie?
Hobby331 6 months ago
@Hobby331 I don't know if it was a czech movie, but I think that was a commodity in the movie ''circuitry man''
bastardchildofmary 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is paring a fact with an idea: "People get colds more often in the winter because they need to bundle close together for warmth". It is a fact yes that people get colds more often in the winter but the cause that is attached to it is an idea. "Green washing is a form of commodification", yes I agree but this doesn't lead to "Therefore humans are not contributing to climate change".
kraexaie 6 months ago
This is paring a fact with an idea: "People get colds more often in the winter because they need to bundle close together for warmth". It is a fact yes that people get colds more often in the winter but the cause that is attached to it is an idea. "Green washing is a form of commodification", yes I agree but this doesn't lead to "Therefore humans are not contributing to climate change".
kraexaie 6 months ago
Anyone studying crisis or disaster capitalism knows that it doesn't matter whether the crisis is real, imagined are constructed, the outcome ends up the same because you can capitalize and fear monger either way.
kraexaie 6 months ago
Al Gore gets money to look a globel warming and till you cut his check off. There will be globel warming.
The CO level of the earth goes up and down by 3% every 600 years and is a natural thing that happens. If the CO level went up by 1% we could feed all the hargery people of the world !
turtle4aire 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i hate him so much!
KarolinaKrvava 9 months ago
somesings... i really cant understand how he can speak english so well and have so fucked up prenountiation at a same time...
Stuchlo 9 months ago
This guy just talks about politics. Climate change has nothing to do with politics, it's about scientific theory and if you choose not to believe in it, or if a douche bag starts taking it up as his cause, none of that effects whether or not it's true. It's guys like these man...
Mehtaphorical 9 months ago
i hate when people pronounce th as [s] its so fokin disturbing. it sonds like some sink
denodeno222 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@stupidkid629 If you find original video you could see that:
1. Mr. Klaus put the pen into his pocket.
2. Then he put the pen out off his pocket.
3. He signed the contract
4. He put the pen back into the box.
mrosbaumm 9 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
lol what a fucking idiot
LeProutski 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
go steal a pen
stupidkid629 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@stupidkid629 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHA I WAS ABOUT TO WRITE THE EXACT SAME THING THEN I SAW YOUR COMMENT.
xRABEE123x 9 months ago
One must bear in mind that Science does not progress by CONSENSUS, but by falsification and what scientists refer to as 'paradigm shifts'. Beliveing something to be true and knwing it to be true are often world's apart'. The theory of anthropogenic global warming rests solely on computer-models which project a variety of possible future climate states! However, in reality, computer-models are only as accurate as the assumptions that get programmed into them and one must take heed of this!
MegaPostman77 11 months ago
@MegaPostman77 AGW rests only on computermodels? from where have you got that idea? AGW rests on the observation of rising temperature manifested by increased humidity increased rainfall, melting tundras and glaciers and some other indicators. The Co2 increase in the atmosphere of 2ppm is likemly the culprit as CO2 is a green house gas (known since 1896) the computer models reconstruct past and current climate to do predictions about how bad our continuation of release of co2 will be.
Fyhrtheflame 9 months ago
One must bear in mind that Science does not progress by CONSENSUS, but by falsification and what scientists refer to as 'paradigm shifts'. Beliveing something to be true and knowing it to be true are often world's apart'. The theory of anthropogenic global warming rests solely on computer-models which project a variety of possible future climate states! However, in the real world, computer-models are only as accurate as the assumptions that get programmed into them and one must take heed of this
MegaPostman77 11 months ago
Ask who pays the pro AGW scientists ? They lie and lie. This climate scam is evil and the irony is people who support them are not evil but just taken in. The statistics are false ! Why the hell do some people just quote what they have read by so called peer reviews as Gospel ? Why the hell don't these same people study international politics and THEN join the dots together ?
If your a pro AGW theorist and genuinely care about the planet, look at the bigger picture or your doomed !
ALBIONTYKE 1 year ago 3
@ALBIONTYKE What lies have they told you? the only false statement I have found is the himalya prediction in the IPCC report of 6000 pages, darn good work if thats the only error in such imense collction of data. On the other hand it only takes a few seconds of internet search to find missleading and false arguments from the other side. But what can you expect from spindoctors paid by the oillobby? trust honest scientists or trust people paid to spin the truth? for me the choice is easy :)
Fyhrtheflame 9 months ago
@Fyhrtheflame As I said in my previous comment, you need to study international politics in some detail. Just focusing on AGW is never going to make you think any different. I know this probably wont make sense to you, but The Rothschild's,9/11 The international economic crash, HAARP, Iraq , Afghanistan, The Bilderberg Group, The Tri-Lateral Commission, The growth of the EU, Common Purpose, The Fabian Society, Davos, The Fed , The Bank of England & the Deutsche Bank are all linked in to AGW.
ALBIONTYKE 9 months ago
@ALBIONTYKE Well I do not think CO2's green house properties has anything with politics to do and you are right it will take me a lot of evidence to make me belive so. If you can show me anything that points in that direction you are welcome. I rather think the bipedal genetransporter called man mabye has reached it's evolutionary end. Seems like this one (AGW) might be a to hard nut to crack as it takes a lot of cooperation to solve. (call it tax if you want)
Fyhrtheflame 9 months ago
@ALBIONTYKE Just wait. You're rushing to conclusions without knowing anything. You're watching too much crap. You should try to find out from the scientists, not from the self-elected "experts" on youtube who smell a scam wherever they go - just to earn clicks. Anyway, the laughter will be on my side. Your wishful thinking won't help you out.
MlTher 7 months ago
@MlTher You have no idea what I am watching or reading. One thing I have done amongst many others is print off the 53 pages of emails from the University of East Anglia & read the whole lot. Any idiot who believes the crap the British Government made to "prove" that the scientists were naive but essentially correct is lacking in brain cells. If there is a man made threat to our climate, study the Russian PEER reviewed papers on HAARP. Contact the University of Moscow for the English papers,
ALBIONTYKE 7 months ago
I've noticed lots of people don't recognize the difference between global warming and pollution. These are two different things. Former is a new type of religion, because you have to believe in it in order to make it alive since there are false evidence everywhere nowadays, and the latter is what we must take care of, each individual person for itself.
Hope I made any sense.
pssecho 1 year ago
@cristop5 Actually everything you have written has been debunked. Read "The Deniers.". See how many who are paid to agree with you disagree. The climate scientists are closer to mafia members than scientists. Science defends its points with data. Mafia members insult, degrade, and eliminate those who disagree by force. And for your information, the earth has cooled in the past 10 years. That's why Mann feels the need to "hide the decline."
runr100 1 year ago
@runr100 Could you show me the data that shows that earth has cooled the last ten years? Well I thought so, hard to explain why it rains in december on greenland why the glaciers melts in increasing rate. why tree lines moves upwards etct. I just can't get it why some people so stubbornly put ther head in the ground. Take a look at the evidence yourself if you don't trust the scientiffic world.
Fyhrtheflame 9 months ago
MONEY is THE religon of the past few centuries,either way you look at it! We just gotta learn how to live without them and to accompish that WE have to improve inside ourselves in the first place . Oh and BTW Klaus is nothing but a populist self-loving fag who buys young boys asses. (prooved)
Tolmalion 1 year ago
satan is the new religion, and we have to start depopulating the planet in order to save it.
ENOUGH.
who is responsible for the dirty unorganized industrialisation years !? the governments, not the people........they are not held accountable. Refuse to pay for a problem you didn't cause....
manelmariarodrigues 1 year ago
....... global warming is melting away.
Environmental debate heats up; global warming is melting away
by James H. Shott
Data show that the Earth cooled last year rather than warmed, following a trend that began in 2000, and in light of this evidence much of the doomsday talk has quieted down. However, while activists still cling to their flawed theory, they have replaced the term “global warming” with “climate change,” using the same theory to now account for any change that occurs
Dayversion 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Dayversion "Data show that the Earth cooled last year.." What data? I went to the original story and found that "James H. Shott" does not cite the source for this "data" he bases his claim on. Well I can tell you it's not the NASA database. According to the NASA data, 2009 was the 3rd hottest year on record, and it was hotter than 2008.
But if you go to his website (w ww.jshott.com) it all becomes clear. He's not a science reporter. He's just some right wing ideologue.
cristop5 1 year ago
Let me see...and this guy is.......a politician.
Wow, what a surprise. Tell you what why don't we listen to scientists tell us what is science and what is politics. This guy is a liebertarian boob.
rugbyguy59 1 year ago
Al Gore is a stinkin liar and his sidekick BONO the wanker!
Sheviera 1 year ago
Global warming is a misconstrued scientific hypothesis that over simplifys and makes no mention of other sources of interference. IE the sun, chemistry, algae, ect... Those of you who believe it dont know natural history, otherwise you would know we need more orgainc chemistry in our bio-sphere...
CO2 is a trace gas when half the life here lives on it, shamefull...
WoodlandRavah 1 year ago
Comment removed
tsuikjoshiomatsu 1 year ago
nonsense.
jak1428 1 year ago
Didn't big Al also say he invented the Internet? We use to lock up people like Al and give him a lobotomy. It's called delusion of grander, Al has the Messiah complex!
Pfsif 1 year ago 23
@Pfsif "Didn't big Al also say he invented the Internet?" No. Did you seriously believe that?
ht tp://dir.salon.com/tech/col/rose/2000/10/05/gore_internet/index.html
cristop5 1 year ago
this dude is a politician and knows not... but knows not that he knows not
jfxcoll 1 year ago
Algore is a paid political front man for Wall Street. They want to market and trade derivatives and futures based on this fake theory.
bertly71 1 year ago
The ending contradicted his point that politicians use the promise for current gain. if so, why did three lose their office after making the promise to reduce emissions. he hasn't thought this out coherently. But I agree that Al Gore is a lying selfish rat who doesn't know jack about science or economics but preaches fear to advance a socialist power grab. He should be in jail.
JoeyFudd 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Al Gore & Goldman Sachs Company
Generation Investment Management
For more info google "Foundation Watch Al Gore's Carbon Crusade"
Its a 7 page report, I'd advise all interested in the financial motivation to promote the Global Warming crisis creation of Al Fraud & his Corporate flunkie friends read it
Great expose website of the Global Warming Scam
CLIMATEDEPOT(dot)com
Thisawareness 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm from Czech republic and to tell the truth I'm not a big aficionado of Mr Klaus but I think he is spot on in this matter . Who I don't like at all however is that cowardly traitor Václav Havel I mean he should be brought to court and tried for treason and if found guilty he should be executed at Strahov stadium . I am not some attention grabbing freak at all but I do mean it for his support of Sudeten Germans and his endorsement of the humanitarian bombardment of Serbia.
Jirix 1 year ago
We need a new Pecora Commission to investigate the taxpayer funded bank bailout (which included Goldman Sachs & Gore friends) and we also need an investigation into this Global Warming scam starring Gore & Goldman Sachs shysters.
Keep in mind, we need to stop Cap & Trade, while explaining to your government robotoid that Cap & Trade is set to make Gore & Corporate shysters billions, tell them you want this Global Warming charade investigated
Pecora Commission now!
Thisawareness 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Long live the brave president of the Czech republic! Long live the great Czech Nation, and their love of freedom and their commitment to truth! You are the intellectual light in Europe!
I'd like Mr. Vaclav Klaus to become the president of the European Union!m Stop the global carbon tax!
judomagyar 2 years ago
climate change exists because the climate has been changing since it began. i would be more worried if it stopped changing. what do they want an individual to do - fight against the combined industrial pollution of america, china, india and russia. it won't happen. it's the best tax idea since bringing in illegal income tax. it cant be proved or disproved and they say your saving the planet. we are the stupid ones
trj23100 2 years ago
Politicans realised that they could make a lot of money if they made enviroment laws and fees for emissions the industries let out and for the exhaust from cars and makeing it look like it's beneficial to buy green cars when they really are ripping you off.
So yeah they make people belive anything just so their wallet gets even fatter than it already is.
CrystalClearRamen 2 years ago
Global Warming is the new religion!
jachim718 2 years ago 59
He told one TV station that it's not science it's a religion.
nhteaparty 2 years ago 2
Cool, politic explaining political thinking. But of course: he is exceptional Vaklav Klaus
joliteal1 2 years ago
Global warming: The name was changed because the globe is COOLING. Now it's 'climate change'. Oh no! Everything that happens is bad. Truth deniers on the GW bandwagon sound like cavemen!
"Ug. Temperature rising bad! Ug. Temperature cooling bad! Ug. Tropical storm bad! Ug. Less rain bad. Ug. More rain bad. Ug. Wind bad. Ug. No snow bad. Ug. Early snow bad."
Idiots the lot of you.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
Re: "Global warming: The name was changed because the globe is COOLING. Now it's 'climate change'... Idiots the lot of you"
I suspect I AM an idiot, because I'm replying to one. I'm sure it's futile to explain the temp record to you. (lol - as if you'd reply to the facts with "Ok, I get it now."). But surely even you can see that the 'name' didn't just switch from 'Global Warming' to 'Climate Change.' The IPCC was formed in 1988. That's the Intergovernmental Panel on CLIMATE CHANGE you moron.
VeryEvilPettingZoo 2 years ago
VEPZ continues the denial of truth.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago 2
Yeah, I completely agree. The millions of tons of non-biodegradable and toxic waste we dump into the ecosystem won't do shit to it. And who the fuck cares that we are messing with the atmospheric content of greenhouse gases. The earth will take itself to equilibrium in a few years. That's how the planet works. There's dramatic change to it, then all of a sudden, it fixes itself.
Global climate change, what a novel concept.
evilelton 2 years ago
@evilelton Polution is an entirely different issue. Talk to China about that - they are quite the polluter, yes?
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
@dumbass - You have a rather flawed philosophy on life if you think that because someone else wrongs, you are obligated to follow suit.
evilelton 2 years ago
*L* What a bass-ackwards way of thinking. No sir, considering our productivity, the United States is one of the least polluting countries on the planet. So you need to go where the MOST pollution is first, obviously, and get that under control. Our policies with respect to the environment are very 'green', if you want to know the truth, and already stifle growth and productivity - so much so that companies are moving to China. Again, GO TALK TO CHINA.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
Oh cmon, cite me some sources saying that America is one of the "least polluting countries"... I haven't followed this issue extremely closely lately, but no way they went from #1 to #50's in a couple of years, especially with our hold in the global market.
And we are talking to China, Copenhagen anybody? Going green stifles everybody's productivity at first, but if enough reform is done, markets should return to a decent balance of producitivity and non-tree-burning...
evilelton 2 years ago
Going green stifles period. Again, the problem are the Chinese, the Indians, etc. Talk to me when you have their 'carbon footprints' in control.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
You didn't follow up to my request, you failed to provide any sources that America was not contributing to the problem.
I didn't say anything about the Chinese, Indians, etc. not having a large impact on our Earth, on the contrary, I think it is rather dismal seeing the massive electronic waste they contribute.
However, being overly redundant about your problems with "Chinese, the Indians, etc." just makes you sound like an ignorant racist. Evidence that they are as bad as you say?
evilelton 2 years ago
Oh I'm sorry - do you not know how to work 'google?'
When you get the Chinese and Indians in shape, we'll talk. In the meantime, the USA is doing far more than its share for the fraud of man made global warming.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ok, now you've just reached dumbass level. First you say we should tell the Chinese to fuck off with polluting but you think there's the fraud of global warming. If global climate change is a fraud, the solution should be "eliminate all green policies held by america", instead of "talk to china".
And no, I don't know how to use google, show me some sources that say America is a great green country that doesn't produce waste relative to the rest of the world.
evilelton 2 years ago
Oops, I'm sorry, I did not realize you were one of the folks who've been had. *L*
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
lol
I'm done arguing with someone who doesn't argue back. You have yet to do anything but restate your thesis.
Grow up and open your eyes, the world isn't a fuckin' conspiracy theory. And you must have some ego to think you can outwit the "folks who've been had"
*end one-sided semi intelligent discussion*
evilelton 2 years ago
Oh you wanted to ARGUE? Sorry, that's not what I do. And yes, there absolutely, positively was a conspiracy to fake, fudge and fiddle with the data to make global warming look real while the world's been COOLING over the last decade.
Stupid liberals.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
thats why change the topic from "global warming" to "climate change"
tralalak4444 2 years ago
co2 is 00.037% of what we breathe.
80% is nitrogen..
we need co2 to live and survive..
hypobusa 2 years ago
I believe Global Warming is real too. Especially up around the ice caps.
Ecksntrick8 2 years ago
google "global warming hoax ice caps" and read the top entry in the web search results.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
@thejimmyzshow Ah shit, I flamed the wrong person... ignore the "@dumbass", all of the rest can stay though.
Seriously, global reform needs to happen, but I think America can make pretty great strides to reduce their share of the shit.
evilelton 2 years ago
America already has.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
"Global warming is a myth, and every serious person and scientist says so."
Did he really say that?
Was he trying to be stupid, or was it "taken out of context" somehow?
cristop5 2 years ago 3
I know - that was my first reaction to this vid. By not immediately recanting that quote, denying it, or qualifying it, he discredited himself and anything he had to say after.
VeryEvilPettingZoo 2 years ago
@cristop5
no, he is only to be considered stupid if you are intelligent. but as it is very highly unlikely, let's say, that only stupid here is you.
CassiusChrysanthe 1 year ago
@cristop5 Global warming has affected humanity is just a myth
ondrando 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ondrando "Global warming has affected humanity is just a myth"
That's a relief. So the people who died due to the record high temperatures in Pakistan and Russia were just faking it. Alarmists no doubt.
cristop5 1 year ago
@cristop5 try to think. In history we had Ice age and global warming, its just normal thing that is happening to the planet independently on human kind. On the other hand there are many businessmen and politician that see in this a great business and great power how to control people just like communists did.
carcaril 1 year ago
@carcaril "..its just normal thing that is happening to the planet independently on human kind."
The planet does not simply cool & warm for no reason. So why is it warming? It's not due to solar activity - this has waned. Likewise Al Gore has little effect on temperature. The best explanatory factor is CO2 - that's risen 40% over the last 120 yrs.
But if you know of any research that shows what (besides CO2) has heated the troposphere to record highs over the last 40 years or so, please share.
cristop5 1 year ago
@cristop5 To confirm GW you need at the very LEAST 15 years of temperature data with very fancy equipments in very specific places. At the beginning, as the environmentalist didn't have those data, they were using a bunch of indirect data : like migratory path of birds, the growth of corals, etc. But all those could be explained by other causes like the development of human demography, pollution, sickness, etc. And some were just creating numbers ! One just couldn't be 100% sure, as Gore was.
philoposos 1 year ago
@philoposos "To confirm GW you need at the very LEAST 15 years of temperature data.."
When global surface air temperatures, satellite measurements & ocean temperatures all show warming, you might suspect it's warming. When the ice cap & glaciers retreat together you might sit up & take notice.
Then when most of the world's biological systems behave as you'd expect if warming were happening - you must either close your eyes or run to wattsupwiththat and wail "Waah! Please tell me it isn't true!"
cristop5 1 year ago
@cristop5 I thought it was clear I was talking about the past (Bush vs Gore was 10 years ago). All those data you are talking about is recent stuff. Indeed today the scientific community is coming to a consensus that GW is a confirmed hypothesis. Witch was just a hunch by that time. Therefore it is still irresponsible to make (inter-)national politics (to affect the life of billions) based just in hunches. Klaus is right : it was ideological mass-manipulation by that time.
philoposos 1 year ago
@cristop5 Nevertheless you are wrong. A bunch of data by itself wouldn't suffice to confirm GW. No matter how good is the data. The climate global temperature can oscillate greatly a in short period of time. You need a very long span of time to confirm (or not) a long-term tendency. We may have it today. But people weren't observating and measuring for long enough to be able to come to conclusions about 10 years ago. Gore, and all those hysterical environmentalists, were just speculating then.
philoposos 1 year ago
@philoposos The ability of CO2 to "trap" heat has been known since 1896. The increase of CO2 in the atmosphere has been tracked since the 1950s. From 1965-79, 7 studies predicted cooling, but 42 predicted warming. The consensus was starting. An analysis of outgoing long wave radiation from 1970-97 showed an increased absorption at wave lengths corresponding to CH4, CO2, O3, CFC-11 and CFC-12.
"We may have it today." Yes. I'm sorry if you think people jumped to the right conclusion too early.
cristop5 1 year ago
@cristop5 I think you are talking about the brilliant and exiting part of science : the emergence of the hypothesis. Those are indeed very good reasons to formulate that the global climate is warming. But I'm talking about the boring part : the empirical test of the hypothesis. [If the GW is being tested, it's bcuz it is a plausible hypothesis].
Anyway, no matter how plausible is the hypothesis (or those defending it) It shouldn't be politically instrumented before undoubtable confirmation.
philoposos 1 year ago
@philoposos I don't know what you would consider "testing" to be. The fact is many have tried to disprove the theory and failed. As a result there is as close to a scientific consensus on AGW as there is on anything. A new study shows that 97-98% of publishing climate researchers "support the tenets of anthropogenic climate change" (ht tp://ww w.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.full.pdf+html).
Are you saying we should delay action until we have say, a 99.5% consensus?
cristop5 1 year ago
@cristop5 If you think taxing CO2 is the answer then there is no point having a discussion with you. You have been brainwashed by computer models, funded by vested interests. You have forsaken your common sense, and your intellectual honesty. Try looking at what the sceptics are saying, you've been had. Start with Henriks 5 part series, the first one is on my channel, watch them all, unless you want to continue with your blinders on.
TheKickerboy99 1 year ago
@TheKickerboy99 If you have a peer reviewed study that explains why the earth has warmed 0.6-0.8C since 1975, and which doesn't factor in CO2, I'd love to see it.
cristop5 1 year ago
@cristop5 Hope it warms up some more its friggin freezin here, lmao. I'm sorry I just can't take you seriously.
TheKickerboy99 1 year ago
@TheKickerboy99 All I do is refer people to the science and ask others to do the same when voicing an opinion.
So it's really the science you cannot take seriously.
But we both knew that anyway.
cristop5 1 year ago
@cristop5 All you do is spout the same crap that has been thoroughly debunked and rejected. Fail.
TheKickerboy99 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheKickerboy99 "All you do is spout the same crap that has been thoroughly debunked and rejected"
1. Nothing I have written has been debunked. That's probably why you didn't give an example, but feel free to do so now.
2. You apparently don't even think it's warming - because winter hasn't been abolished where you live!
Look at any the global databases & you'll see it IS warming:
1. CRU database watch?v=OS44qirIOcU
2. NASA database watch?v=8Q97zVngPGU
3. UAH satellite data watch?v=I3q3zs0EVDU
cristop5 1 year ago
@cristop5 Sorry, I just realised I was a bit rude. Please, believe-me: it wasn't the intention.
philoposos 1 year ago
@philoposos You weren't rude at all.
cristop5 1 year ago
We could use Vaclav Klaus in the White House.
alfazedz 2 years ago
Did he really say cut CO2 emissions by 120%? This guy is a moron!
mrwhite692000 2 years ago
I noticed that I have so nuked the supporters of science fraud, fakery and fudging, they aren't responding to my posts of truth, honesty and insight.
*LOL* Climategate is the beginning of the end of the LIE of climate change.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
bad interview. softball questions. either way who cares what he thinks. I rather hear what the scientist experts say.
AtheistKharm 2 years ago
AtheistKornball: You mean the scientists who are fudging, faking, fudging and falsifying their science? THOSE experts? *LOL*
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
your one of those conspiracy theorist who still thinks the moon landing was a hoax huh?
AtheistKharm 2 years ago
No, I'm one of those honest Americans who wants science not to be politicized, faked, forged, fudged, or fiddled with.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
old man jim is still yapping like a lap dog... oh lolz.
OhNoItsGojira 2 years ago
Izzat all you got? Poor liberals...
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
You again embarrass yourself with unfortunate assumptions.
OhNoItsGojira 2 years ago
When it's over, liberals focus on personalities and not substance. Hahaha!
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
When what's over? Why do you always talk like a 12-year old?
OhNoItsGojira 2 years ago
You forgot the topic? Poor liberal...
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
Oh, more childish generalizations; and continues no attempt to salvage any minute credibility he had.
OhNoItsGojira 2 years ago
Ooh, third person insults! Aren't you a clever liberal! Never seen THAT before!
Stupid liberal...
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
Fuck you, Dracula!
13wolfmoon 2 years ago
This science is settled, GLOBAL WARMING IS A FRAUD!
dantheleo 2 years ago
Who needs the planet's scientists when we've got dantheleo?
VeryEvilPettingZoo 2 years ago 3
Amen, Dantheleo. Exactly right.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
July 2009 was the 5th warmest July since 1880.
June 2009 was the 2nd warmest June since 1880.
May 2009 was the 4th warmest since 1880.
The boreal spring of March-May 2009 was the 5th warmest since 1880.
For more information see the National Climatic Data Center website.
For misinformation, lies, half truths, opinions and spin ignore the primary data and check out the GW denier websites & message boards.
To kid yourself it's cooling, start your trendline in 1998, the biggest el nino on record.
cristop5 2 years ago
cristop5 - You can't determine global warming by taking one or two days out of the year and compare to that date in previous years. You have to average daily temperatures out of a full calendar year, dumbass!
dantheleo 2 years ago
dantheleo:
Monthly and seasonal global averages for a year are "one or two days"?!
Work on your numeracy and comprehension skills. Even the GW deniers would find your comment an embarrassment to their cause.
And perhaps you should give the National Climatic Data Center website a miss. You wouldn't understand all those graphs and shit.
cristop5 2 years ago
You've just admitted a whole bunch of really warm periods in 1880!!! How do you explain those???
NickTony29 2 years ago
LOL! Nice one.
Of course 1880 marks the beginning of instrumental temperature records.
cristop5 2 years ago
Well that's why it's important to explain the temperature record's beginning point.
NickTony29 2 years ago
You're quite right about that.
cristop5 2 years ago
6 of the past 7 years have been hotter than the others in that period.. Thats a fact crsitop5 j Try going back 10 000 years and whats with neptune getting warmer..? The name Denier is changing sides
guslingus 2 years ago
guslingus.
I'm not sure what you're saying or even getting at with the first two points, so I can't respond.
Regarding warming on Neptune, check out the following link:
skepticalscience. com / global-warming-on-neptune. htm
cristop5 2 years ago
CRU:
You cant imagine what this has cost me — to actually allow the operator to assign false WMO codes!! But what else is there in such situations? Especially when dealing with a Master database of dubious provenance
classic7890 2 years ago
The Deniers are now becoming hysterical to the point of using caps to signify screaming. Reminds us of Ed Begley screaming , " Peer review peer review ! " It`s both amusing and pathetic all at once.
classic7890 2 years ago
It is about lawmakers, laws stay as leaders rotate..
eurogoldexchange 2 years ago
Al Gore just wants to fill his coffers...
xennelul 2 years ago
I'm not a scientist and consider myself a simple woman, but this whole argument about climate change/global warming/global cooling seems to be merely a semantic argument. If the Earth is cooling instead of warming, why are the polar caps melting at an exaggerated rate? Regardless what it's called, it's clear the planet is going through some sort of change and perhaps more thought should be given as to how it will impact man instead of worrying what it's called.
wildpeachatl737 2 years ago
They are not, they are building back up, and NASA reported the highest levels of sea ice since 1979
ShiekYerbooty 2 years ago
Who are 'they' and how are 'they' accomplishing that? So I suppose that those icebergs that split from Antarctic ice sheets floating near New Zealand are a part of their plan? We need a rise in the sea levels? Why?
NASA has reported a decline in the arctic ice caps, as satellite photos show a decrease in mass from 1979 to 2003.
wildpeachatl737 2 years ago
Ice core drilling in the fast ice off Australia's Davis Station in East Antarctica by the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Co-Operative Research Center shows that last year, the ice had a maximum thickness of 1.89m, its densest in 10 years.
ShiekYerbooty 2 years ago
Not talking about thickness, but the size of the mass which once again, satellite photos show a marked decrease in mass. Theres less delineation between the seasons from what I can see from living on the East Coast of America; the rise in sea levels something has to account for that.and we might be wise to address it now versus later. It's fascinating to hear so much concern about the financial legacy being left to future generations, but not so much concern about the environmental aspect.
wildpeachatl737 2 years ago
I do agree that we should be good stewards of our environment....however.....a global tax on Carbon......which plants breath........is not the answer.....and the real data shows that the Earth has been cooling since 1998
You do know it was Kenneth Lay, the CEO of ENRON, that invented this Carbon Credit Scheme, right ?
JExecutiveOrder11110 2 years ago
No, I didn't, but I do know it's based on the same principles that were used to reduced emissions that was at the cause of acid rain and that the doom-and-gloom scenarios that are being predicted with cap-and-trade never materialized.
wildpeachatl737 2 years ago
JExecutiveOrder11110 "the Earth has been cooling since 1998"
I'm afraid not. In 1998 there was the largest el nino event on record. This meant the release of a massive amount of heat into the atmosphere from the eastern Pacific. If you do a global temperature trend line from normal years, say 1997 or 1999 to 2009, you will find the temperature is still rising.
The loltrolls will thumb this comment down, but they will not refute the data.
cristop5 2 years ago
@ShiekYerbooty I'm not jumping onto one side or the other, but listing a maximum of a range as proof of a trend is pretty bad statistics.
iowacub1 2 years ago
In the drama of global warming, the fat lady is singing, and the stage hands have pulled the curtain shut in front of her.
JMBSM61 2 years ago
The climate denier community put the following arguments.
1. Global warming is not happening.
2. Global warming is happening, but it's nothing to do with CO2.
3. Global warming may be caused by CO2, but mankind isn't responsible.
4. Global warming was caused by anthropogenic CO2, but the horse has bolted so we shouldn't try to do anything about it.
No two of these arguments can be embraced at the same time without producing a contradiction.
I think #4 may have some merit.
cristop5 2 years ago
There is no global warming. The planet is COOLING. *L* Idiots!
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
There are several drivers of climate change - solar activity, greenhouse gases, the configuration of continents, Milankovitch cycles etc. and associated feedback mechanisms. These all shift in importance and ranking over time. In the last 200 yrs we've destroyed half the planet's forests, and converted billions of tonnes of coal and oil to CO2, so its concentration has risen from 280ppm to 385ppm.
Why wouldn't such a change in CO2 over so short a short period of time have no impact?
cristop5 2 years ago
None of those things are affecting the globe's climatee. It's bullshit.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
Quoting VEPZ: "I know there's NO WAY I can understand, at face value, what many of those email comments and data manipulations mean."
*L* But he sure knows GW is real, right? LMAO! Good God, the idiocy.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
I have encouraged VEPZ to do his own research, and to read through all the material that is now available - articles and stories and op ed pieces but of course he refused.
Instead, he spams this thread with all kinds of hissy fits and emotional rants, name calling and such, because that's the last resort of the scoundrel. The truth is out, and he is desperate.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
jimmyz,
Try Reason - it's FUN!
The emails and code refer to the hairy details of the scientific data compilation, reduction, and calculation. Only an idiot would claim to understand their meanings and purposes unless they were deeply involved in the process.
Re: you encouraged me to do my own research
I told you I downloaded the emails days ago. And fyi, to "research" climate change doesn't mean tracking the latest insane conspiracy arguments (though I try to keep up on those too).
VeryEvilPettingZoo 2 years ago
(cont)
By contrast, I DO understand the scientific case for human global warming. There are two ways to achieve that. The easy way is to listen to the global scientific community. The hard way is to keep up with the scientific details. I do the former, and some of the later. You, by contrast, do neither, and instead smugly mouth off - grounded in pure ignorance and Industry-funded propaganda and punditry. So yeah dude, I'm a real idiot. Can't fool you...
VeryEvilPettingZoo 2 years ago
Ah, "economics". The magic word. Screw the planet, as long as we keep the economy running.
sunny256 2 years ago
Oh no!
"A scientist who is one of the central figures in the controversy over hacked e-mails from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit announced Tuesday that he is stepping down."
Haha. If this was all just nothing, he'd never step down.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
What? So you think that if someone in authority is accused of something you can determine their guilt or innocence by seeing whether or not they step down?
Interesting idea. It would save a lot of time on inquiries, but it's not how things work in the real world. Fact is it is not appropriate for Phil Jones to keep working there as a director while he is under investigation. Lets just wait for the findings of the investigation shall we.
cristop5 2 years ago
Scientists are 'in authority'.
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
Yes. Phil Jones is director of the Climatic Research Unit. Hence in the context of the investigation he is "someone in authority".
And he is being investigated.
Think it over.
Take as much time as you need.
cristop5 2 years ago
Apparently the authority he assumed was that they would fake, fudge, and fiddle with data. *L*
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
Klaus says this is a "cheap argumentation". Oh the irony.
Politicimo 2 years ago
lol
ronpaul101789 2 years ago
lol
ronpaul101789 2 years ago
@VeryEvilPettingZoo LOL Are you serious !? Read the CRU code file osborntree6/briffasep98 email and tell us that is not blatant data cooking? They deliberately used negative coefficients to flatten out the `30s and then use positive multipliers to achieve their desired results at the end of the century. U R a Denier.
classic7890 2 years ago
classic7890,
I've downloaded the stolen documents, and searched for osborntree6 and briffasep98, and found nothing. I can't comment about that until you direct me to the correct file.
I can say this. I know enough to know what I don't know, but the utterly ignorant are under no such restrictions. Many of them think they can discern the transparent meaning of things they are completely clueless about. From what I've read so far, this email "controversy" is a gigantic exercise in stupidity.
VeryEvilPettingZoo 2 years ago
(cont)
Among ordinary schmucks following this, I'm pretty competent in understanding it. I'm a computer programmer, and have done graduate work in physics at a top 20 American university. On this topic, I've read dozens of abstracts, some papers, the IPCC reports (summaries and parts of the full science reports), the NRC and Wegman reports, etc.. I've corrected several of your "scientific arguments" on this vid (now marked as spam, of course), and could correct the rest.
VeryEvilPettingZoo 2 years ago
(cont)
And the point is, I know there's NO WAY I can understand, at face value, what many of those email comments and data manipulations mean. I don't know the details, the rationales, or the background. Those involved weren't kind enough to lay it all out for us because those were PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS between co-workers who all understood the meaning and purpose without it needing to be said.
VeryEvilPettingZoo 2 years ago
(cont)
I also know that the average shithead is DEFINITELY not capable of evaluating them. Scientists manipulate and correct data all the time - it's their job, and they'd produce bad science if they didn't. To detect a nefarious conspiratorial manipulation, you have to REALLY UNDERSTAND the hairy details and known-relevant physical factors bearing on the measurements.
Without evidence to even SUGGEST a conspiracy (there is none!), there's no reason at all to suspect anything dishonest here.
VeryEvilPettingZoo 2 years ago
Comment removed
classic7890 2 years ago
PRICELESS !!! I`m now officially done with this Denier. Why? The the CRU code file osborntree6/briffasep98 was read by and commented on by non other than Eric S. Raymond ! Oh the irony of labeling anyone who disagrees with your religious belief system as clueless and utterly ignorant ! LOL
classic7890 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
(cont`d)
Eric has a message for all you Deniers: All you apologists weakly protesting that this is research business as usual and there are plausible explanations for everything in the emails? Sackcloth and ashes time for you. This isnt just a smoking gun, its a siege cannon with the barrel still hot.
classic7890 2 years ago
classic7890,
Ummm...priceless?
You tell me to check a certain file, and when I search the downloaded emails and code, I tell you that there's no file that has those words. I guess...um...you think you've really nailed me with something, but...um...I have no clue what it is. The stolen emails don't contain the text you used to direct me to a particular example...er...I guess that's a horrible comment on my integrity...um... ?????
VeryEvilPettingZoo 2 years ago
Yes of course/sarc off
You "can`t find it". I just used any web search page and found 593 returns ! Yes, yes of course, you`re a genius with decades of experience who conveniently cannot find any of the authenticated emails. Keep denying Denier.
classic7890 2 years ago
classic7890,
I'm not going off the web - I'm going off the hacked emails themselves - which I downloaded from a site as direct by the Wall Street Journal. It might be a shocker for you, but the internet isn't the most reliable source, especially when it comes to nonsense like this... strange habits of omission, as well as outright fabrications, aren't uncommon.
VeryEvilPettingZoo 2 years ago
classic7890,
OK - I found it. FYI - the file is briffa_sep98_d (dot) pro. The presumably sinister section:
; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!
;
yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]
valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,$ 2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor
What exactly can do you deduce from this?
(There's a rational answer, and then there's the answer I'm guessing you're going to give, but I'll let you speak for yourself.)
VeryEvilPettingZoo 2 years ago
VEPZ is conducting a science quiz - but God forbid he would actually look over the reports coming out constantly about the Climategate FRAUD. *LOL*
thejimmyzshow 2 years ago
Don`t know , what does, " these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to; the real temperatures"
or
" stop in 1940 to avoid ; the decline"
or
" NOTE: recent decline in tree-ring density has been ARTIFICIALLY REMOVED to facilitate calibration."
or
" artificially removed (i.e. corrected) the decline "
mean to you ?
classic7890 2 years ago
classic7890,
LOL - what do your comment's bunch of context free jibbersih mean to me? LOL - absolutely nothing. That's KINDA MY POINT.
So, if you think you have something damning, by all means, MAKE YOUR CASE. BE SPECIFIC.
(You tried with this briffa_sep98_d, but as soon as I confronted you with the SPECIFIC details - you ran off and completely change the subject - producing a barrage of equally disjointed meaningless contextless peices).
So I'll say to you what I've repeated for days:
VeryEvilPettingZoo 2 years ago
Regarding these emails:
PUT UP OR SHUT UP
Make a SPECIFIC CASE of SPECIFIC wrongdoing based on DETAILS that prove your point. I've been waiting for days, and heard LOTS of bluster, but NOTHING substantial.
VeryEvilPettingZoo 2 years ago
@VeryEvilPettingZoo = To lazy to Google, and read the criminal emails himself.
putittogether 2 years ago
CRU: &q