I'm sorry, no offense, but this video is lame. There are no specifics whatsoever. And this Denis Rancourt guy looks a little disturbed based on his other YouTube videos. I really don't want to get too personal here, but if this is the best climate deniers can do, you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel.
What does the world look like at 500ppm CO2 concentrations? Is it not warmer? If not, why not? If it's warmer, are we denying that there are likely to be some very substantial global changes? If the Arctic ice sheet, for instance, is already on a "death spiral" at 392ppm, what does that look like at 500+ppm?
I'll grant that no one can say for sure what the world will look like. But, we can also not say for sure that this isn't a gigantic experiment with very grave potential consequences.
Its a bizarre issue in that there are special interests fighting on both sides. American capitalism has evolved to the state were financial interests will prevail over genuine scientific curiosity. Its the unfortunate iron law of oligarchy.
You should read this article :- Google Left-wing Env. Scientist Bails Out Of Global Warming Movement: Declares It A ‘corrupt Social Phenomenon…strictly An Imaginary Problem Of The 1st World Middleclass’
Who gives a f**** about CO2 anyway. Nobody can stop the people from multiplying and turning the world into a lifeless dump.
It's something like a 1000 maggots eating an apple.
If the population of the world were only 10% of what it is and everyone had a normal(comfortable) standard of living the world would be a peacful and healthy place. But hey, birth control is a sin! Economy rules! And we will spread to mars if needed so the economy can grow endlessly. Nothing can stop us, yay!
Good lord. What a bunch of dumb fucks. I love the responses... basically "no it's not." Like Doger481, who says there is "no" evidence when there is actually plenty and the only errors seem to be that the planet is now heating up faster than expected. But hey, just ask the corporations who are lining up to drill under the melting arctic... they certainly believe the planet is warming up. DoomHippie... just shut the fuck up, you don't know anything and only parrot other bullshit.
hey @Dodger... what do you do for a living? are you a physicist? or even an environmental scholar of any level? cuz im going to tend to believe someone who has actual education.. not someone who thinks they do cuz they are passionate about being a leftist follower... :)
@Dodger: Really? That's odd because the actual records show a sharp increase that starts with the industrial revolution and 2010 tied for the warmest year on record which is 2005. And that's just in the past FIVE years. But that's okay, I've learned that now amount of facts or actual evidence will convince people like you. You have have a brain disorder.
Actual records also lose many cold-weather research facilities after the collapse of the Soviet Union. With the cold weather data being lost, we see a sharp increase in temperature that coincides with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the shut-down of Soviet climate research facilities. In fact, compare Gore's "hockey stick" chart to a chart of the number of Soviet research centers and you see a trend.
Stop listening to rich, corporate special interests, do research.
Facts aren't neutral. Anyone trying to say otherwise is lying to you or manipulating you. Max Weber has clearly demonstrated there are only interpreted facts not facts per se. Debates occur between a clash of two or more interpretations not between facts. Nature scientists are generally unaware of their own scientist ideology which make them believe they speak on behalf of the Truth. Nature scientists should start reading social scientists and philosophers.
" Global Climate is Changing NOT because of SU N OR CO2. MANY Iceshelves collapsed during WINTER. FOR more information Welcome to visit Sarva Kala Vallabhan Group in facebook & comment "
Good lord. What a joke. It's like a watching a mildly retarded child continue to jam square pegs into round holes. Marc Moran is just a hack for oil and mine interests since his PR website it just a product of Exxonmobil funding. There is nothing to support the the idea that Rancourt is a left wing environmentalist. The essay, not a research paper, was written in 2007. It's now 2011 and the science between now and then only supports further warming.
Except the evidence does not support any statistically signifigant warming for the past 15 years. Manmade Global warming is not happening and is not real
I hate it when people go on about anti-AGW media being secretly funded by Oil Companies. Do they really think oil companies are going to lose out in all this? If you own an oil reserve your not going to lose out on anything ever. I guarantee you every drop of that oil will be burned by someone global warming or no global warming.
@1982CFD science is science, global warming is just uncientific and taking atention away from the real enviormental problems we face. this scientific hoax is probably financed by oil owners who are also land owners. sure oil owners are desperate , but the evidence speaks for itself . co2 is you , when they say cut co2 down to cero , it means no more you , take a look at the georgia guidestones , maybe a new perspective will arrise , maybe not , this is just my opion (matanga69)
So instead of listening to environmentalists why don't we listen to the scientists. There are skeptical scientists. If AGW is so easy to disprove than they should produce a paper or two that refutes it. Despite the big lie that people are "bailing out" on global warming the consensus and evidence for AGW gets stronger and stronger.
And if I shouldn't listen to environmentalists, as deniers keep telling me, why would I listen to this one.
Check out confirmation bias in wikipedia. If you begin by thinking that GW is a scam, you'll believe the evidence that supports this hypothesis and undermine the evidence that discredits it. Science doesn't work in this way, it analyses data objectively and posits the most likely explanation. In fact, most scientists in the 60s were skeptical of a possible anthropogenic rise in temperature, but evidence and sound models convinced them otherwise. It is, however, too late to solve the problem.
@AlgeKalipso 30 years ago the science said we were heading for global cooling. Power hungry opportunists couldn't hold the general public financially responsible for that though, could they? With record-breaking freezing temperatures already this year, along with the recent evidence exposing many climate scientists as liars, who do you think should ultimately be "discredited"? I wouldn't trust Wikipedia as far as I could throw the bunch of toadies who control its content.
5) Venus is FURTHER from the sun than Mercury, and yet is WARMER why is that exacly?
6) Most of the warming is at night and in winter what else can explain this fact?
7) Jim Hansen has said that the evidence is now so overwhelming 9If you aint a bigot of corse) that those who make a living denying the evidence should be put on trial for crimes against humanity - what should the sentence for killing BILLIONS be?
8) St Ronnie Reagan STOPPED ACTION FIRST on tackling the MAN Y
@StunnedByStupidity Oh forgot to mention that Earth can recover from a mass extinction where more than 50% of lifeforms go extinct - BUT IT TAKES 10-100 MILLIONS YEARS to do this - literally TRILLIONS of people will live in a MASSIVELY impoverished world - we will be THE most vilified generation to EVER walk the planet if we let this happen. And YOU ARE DENYING ITS REALITY - HAVE YOU NO SHAME (oooh there's that psychopath suggestion again!)!
Look, Morano is an evil psychopath. And Rancourt is obviously insane. If either has SCIENTIFIC PROOF then publish in a PEER REVIEWED journal and collect their Nobel prize and save us all a fortune. If they don't then they should shut their ignorant bigoted mouths and STOP KILLING 300,000 a year through inaction. Oh, and BILLIONS oven the next century! These people are scum and a curse on the poster of this video - have you no shame? BTW you might want to look up 'theory' and 'hypothesis'...
@StunnedByStupidity The panic of climate change alarmists is evident in your tone.
Perhaps you can provide us with the scientific proof, published in a peer-reviewed journal, that supports the following claims in your hysterical monologue:
1) Morano is a psychopath.
2) Rancourt is insane.
3) They are killing 300,000 people a year through their inaction.
4) They will kill billions of people over the next century.
Despite alarmist manipulation of the peer-review process, none of that is fact.
@philWynk Do fuck off smart ass, I'll provide evidence for my assertions the YOU you pig ignorant anti human right winger will provide evidence for MY questions.
1) The behaviors of Morano SHOUTS and I mean screams psychopathic tendencies. Now, smart ass, they haven't as fact as I know sat him in a room (yet). But he is representing corporations and here is the worlds leader on psychopaths Robert Hare analyzing the traits of those institutions:
':: Corporation : Clinical Diagnosis (PCLR) :: ' On youtube
You can get TONS of other info with the following:
'I Psychopath' on you tube
'Political Ponerology' - book free on the internet.
'The Sociopath next door'
'Snakes In Suits'
One of THE defining features (though Morano has a selection) is the lack of a conscience - they are inhuman lizard people who bask in egoism, bullying and chaos. Also goto 'psychopathy' on wiki and go to 'characteristics'.
2) one of the definitions of insanity is a failure to confront reality. Now he is a scientist and will know that the problem has been know for AT LEAST 50 years:
'1958 global warming' on you tube
All and I mean EVERY SINGLE one of the worlds TOP scientific institutions agree its man. 97-98% of the worlds CLIMATOLOGISTS and just about ALL the peer reviewed science. EVERY large report from the mid 70's onwards has agreed:
'Earth The Climate Wars - Episode 1' on google video
The ice caps are melting, bird migrations changing, insects are laying at earlier times, fish are changing their migration, animals going extinct, Hadley cells expanding, extreme weather increasing, the sun is cooling - NOTHING else explains the warming yet Rancourt (and you) think NONE of this matters and EVERYONE else is wrong. Just like the person who shout that they are Napoleon.
@StunnedByStupidity Oh and let us not forget THE biggest collection of scientific papers on a subject - the IPCC reports - are just cast aside by these arrogant men - and you I'll bet.
3) 300,000 a year are being killed a year through inaction:
'Global warming causes 300,000 deaths a year, says Kofi Annan thinktank' on google
As soon as 2060 we could be at 4oC higher in temperatures. Here are some analysis of papers:
''M.I.T. doubles its 2095 warming projection to 10°F — with 866 ppm and Arctic warming of 20°F''
and
'Hadley Center: “Catastrophic” 5-7°C warming by 2100 on current emissions path'
Now to get to an ice age you need to cool the planet by around 5oC if you warm it from here by a further 4oC (the most likely at present under current emissions) you leave around 1/3 of the planet as DESERT 40-70% of ALL species extinct and 90% of humanity! Here is a map from New Scientist:
'Bill Rees: The Vulnerability and Resilience of Cities' on google. Then scroll down to the little box with1/37 in it and replace the 1 with a 29 giving 29/37. Now, smart ass those brown and orange areas ARE UNINHABITABLE - that's BILLIONS killed or displaced. 90% off HUMANITY DEAD!
Now going back to question 1) tell me who could spend his day being paid by psychopathic institutions to destroy the biosphere - way way way way way way worse than any war man could create?
@StunnedByStupidity Just to hammer home the point. In a war how many out of every hundred troops up to Vietnam (new techniques have been developed since to overcome this 'problem') would actually point their weapons at the enemy to shoot? Yeah we've all seen the movies with the 'hero' mowing down bad guys like they were blades of grass. Well its only about 15-20% of soldiers that can even point their gun and shoot at the enemy! This is a stunning stat. Oh and you know the 'hero' well there are
@StunnedByStupidity only about 2% that behave like they do in the movies - oh, and they are PSYCHOPATHS!
'The Truth About Killing - Episode 1 Part 1 ' on you tube - watch all parts of both episodes. Now the only people that can kill others without suffering traumatic psychological impacts are psychopaths and Moran makes a living working towards killing BILLIONS - way way way way worse than any mass murders - and YOU think he ISN'T a psychopath?
@StunnedByStupidity Oh and you are no doubt aware there is a range of how bad the next century will be (and beyond). Those who know fuck all about the science (that would include you) think that the range is from little or no effects to IPCC/Al Gore's inconvenient truth. Well these are all to the LEFT of the bell curve of probabilities - contrary to the nonsense going on in your right wing mind.
The majority of climate scientists think wankers like Morano have so confused the people that
@StunnedByStupidity we will not stay below the critical 2oC rise in temperature - t6he point at which +ve feedbacks kick in and leave future action out of out control. This means we will lose massive amounts of ice at the poles. The Amazon will dry out and burn -destroying the largest concentration of life forms on the planet. Just about all the coral reefs. Massive food shortages and disease forcing mass migrations, dictatorial governments,cannibalism,armed gangs and wars on scales unheard of.
@StunnedByStupidity And then things will get VERY VERY VERY bad indeed (just as the scum bag Morano hopes).
;The real global warming numbers 1 ' on you tube - 7oC rise is a world killer - just about nothing will survive that!
Then there is this:
'Peter Ward: Earth's mass extinctions ' see MOST extinction events is caused bu the rise in CO2. Warming the planet and killing life. But it happens in a stunningly bad way. The warmth stops the oceans from overturning stopping oxygen from getting
@StunnedByStupidity down into it this kills all oxygen breathers in it. It also STOPS KILLING these really nasty microbes (who are usually killed by oxygen) that produce hydrogen sulphide. This spreads into the ocean and kills all the life in it. Then leaks out. It rise and DESTROYS THE OZONE LAYER, turning the sky green and finally leaks out over land killing the lifeforms on the land! VERY VERY VERY nasty indeed. And this aint science fiction it has happened numerous time before!
'Peter Ward: Earth's mass extinctions ' is a TED lecture on you tube. He goes into more details in his books 'The Medea hypothesis' and 'Under a green sky'. But that still aint all. See rise the temperature by CO2 and you get to a point that MASSIVE amounts of methane is rel;eased. The last time this happened was 55 million years ago in the 'Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximun' - google it or watch an old documentary here:
@StunnedByStupidity IF NOTHING ELSE - if as I am almost certain you dismiss everything else (after all you ARE a right wing fruit cake) GO WATCH THIS SHORT VIDEO:
'History Channel Mega Disasters - Methane Explosion ' on you tube.
Yes it can explode with a combined explosive potential of 10,000 TIMES ALL THE WORLDS NUCLEAR ARSENAL! YOU FUCKING UNDERSTAND WHY SOME PEOPLE WITH A HEART MIGHT BE A LITTLE UPSET ABOUT WHAT WE ARE *******NEEDLESSLY********* DOING NOW?
@StunnedByStupidity Of course, atmospheric CO2 was at least 10 times higher than what it is now during the Paleolithic era, and the world did NOT explode like a bomb. So the likelihood of it happening now is... shall we say, slight?
I'd say "calm down," but it's pretty evident that whatever it is that's driving you, it isn't facts about the climate.
BTW, explain how you infer "You're a right-wing fruitcake" from my merely having asked you to support your vicious personal attacks. Interesting.
@philWynk Ok, I watched your Methane Explosion film. Explain to me what collections of subterranean methane in undersea pockets has to do with human contributions to CO2 on the surface (hint: "Nothing"). And did you notice how his theory is described as "controversial?" And how his support even for the POSSIBILITY of a CH4 explosion is a relatively small eruption of a different gas from a lake? This is fringe science, and human industry doesn't affect it in any way. Calm down.
@philWynk And you mhave read NOTHING on the subject have you? See 'methane clathrates' sit under the oceans and will happily sit undisturbed for millions of years. But if you lower the pressure OR RAISE THE TEMPERATURE there is massive out gassing! Are you too lazy to follow my effin links?
Yes its controversial but that is WAY MORE SCIENTIFIC than anything the deniers have to offer - I am SURE I made that explicit - something causes MASS EXTINCTIONS - and this is a candidate! UNDERSTAND!
@StunnedByStupidity The methane issue in that video had to do with releases from subterranean pockets, which -- listen carefully now -- is NOT the same as "outgassing." Outgassing is the release of gas suspended IN THE WATER, and is affected by temperature and pressure changes on the surface. Also, subterranean rock formations are constantly subject to tectonic shifts, so, no they're not "happily undisturbed" for millions of years. You're talking voodoo, not science.
@philWynk And during the Paleolithic CO2 concentrations were 10 times higher? REALLY? You one of these idiotic morons that just pulls shit from their bigoted ass aren't you? For the last 850,000 years CO2 concentrations have been between 180and280 ppm they are now at 392. And who the fuck thinks the world will explode like a bomb from CO2? Look I am obviously arguing with a very low IQ individual and am probably wasting my time!
@StunnedByStupidity But the climate has been in operation more than 850K years, hasn't it? PaleoClimatic concentrations of CO2, based on peer-reviewed papers by Pagani (2005) and Berner and Royer (2008), went as high as 1800 ppm as recently as 35 million years ago, and may have been as high as 7000 ppm 500 million years ago. Oh, and there were plenty of living things back then, and no climate disasters or sea explosions caused by excessive CO2.
YOU are the one touting a methane explosion, son.
Your claim, repeated now several times, is that I'm potentially causing the death of BILLIONS of people by permitting the continued emission of CO2, which is possibly going to trigger the release of methane from subterranean sources via out-gassing (your words, not mine) which will then explode as in the video you referenced. Ergo, it is you who is thinking CO2 will be the cause of the world exploding like a bomb. I'm just repeating what you said.
@philWynk No I think you will aid in the death of BILLIONs because the most likely scenario IN THE SCIENCE is that we will hit 4oC by the end of the century AND THIS ALONE will kill billions and 40-70% of all species on the planet
You are shouting that you are a hair splitting bigot - and on that we can both be agreed. You are A VERY arrogant human being - and are just about totally unable to argue in a fair and sophisticated manor. YOU came in on the side with your smart assed comments.
@StunnedByStupidity You wrote: "Those who know [nothing] about the science ... think that the range is from little or no effects to IPCC/Al Gore's inconvenient truth. Well these are all to the LEFT of the bell curve of probabilities"
Even the partisans at RealClimate org would dispute this laugher. The IPCC's disaster probability curve is far to the left of Gore's (proved in court, BTW), and we now know how little peer-reviewed science supports the IPCC position. Fail, son. Sorry.
@StunnedByStupidity Well, since Patchuri, the Chair of the IPCC, was caught falsifying Himalayan glacier melt statistics to increase contributions to his own activist organization, I'd say we have reason to question the IPCC's veracity, wouldn't you?
Not to mention the dozen or more supporting "peer-reviewed" items that turned out to be speculation from the World Wildlife Federation...
Real scientists (you're not one) take these falsifications seriously, and question the IPCC.
@philWynk There was 1 mistake in 3000 fucking pages and the bigoted wanker thinks this discredits EVERYTHING! Oh and guess tho spotted the mistake - THE IPCC!
Working group one (completely independent to the other 2) is where the facts of the science are and there is NO MISTAKES BIGOT! And a dozen wrong? Well lets see your evidence eh?
Now moron WITH PEER REVIEWED EVIDENCE what has caused the warming over the last 30 years-Boy your arrogance has got my back up -I have wasted my time on a BIGOT!
@StunnedByStupidity There were far, far more than merely 1 mistake -- and the summary of effects was not 3000 pages. For a pretty good summary of the growing consensus that the IPCC's process is badly flawed, visit plumbbobblog com and follow the URL with a slash and ?p=6502.
@philWynk The reports are 3000 pages and you offer no proof for errors (the only other is sea level rise in the Netherlands - which was the Dutch governments fault NOT the IPCCS). The African thing you head has been retracted by the liers as has the Amazon thing!
@StunnedByStupidity A fair summary of the errors is at the link I posted: plumbbobblog com slash ?p=6502, and associated links. The SUMMARY FOR POLICY MAKERS, which is 22 pages long, purports to be based solely on peer-reviewed science, but bases more than a dozen claims on quotes borrowed from World Wildlife Fund brochures and other, apocryphal and unfounded sources. Pachauri's conflict of interest is just the tip of the iceberg.
@StunnedByStupidity And by the way, your continued use of epithets, uppercase, and the rage you display, continually confirms my assessment that I'm arguing with a person driven by something far more serious than facts about the climate. While nobody sane would attempt diagnosis on the basis of sketchy internet contact (like you tried with Morano,) I feel confident in ignoring you as a crank.
Oh, and I've got more sound science stuck under my fingernails than you have in your head.
@philWynk Yews dear PEOPLE ARE DYING and the only rational response is the psychopathic calm dismissal - ONE of us is showing its true colors here and I'll give you a clue it aint me.
@StunnedByStupidity I do love it when the unstable get rolling. It's pretty obvious who's unstable here, isn't it?
@Stunned writes: "All and I mean EVERY SINGLE one of the worlds TOP scientific institutions agree its man."
I'm betting you can't name 5 off the top of your head, and I'm absolutely certain you did not acquire this "fact" by way of polling them yourself. It's simply not true, as those who HAVE polled them know perfectly well. Go read Larry Solomon's "The Deniers" if you doubt.
@philWynk I bet I can and I take it when I do you will then give up trying to destroy the planet? I bet a BILLION you are a right wing bigot and it wont make a bit of difference to you. So, you ready...
'scientific consensus on global warming' on google scroll down to:
'With the release of the revised statement[93] by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no scientific body of national or international standing rejects the findings of human-induced effects on global warming'
@StunnedByStupidity "I bet I can and I take it when I do you will then give up trying to destroy the planet?"
My point is that your claim that "not one major org disputes" is not based on your reading of peer-reviewed science, but on 3rd and 4th hand reports from partisan sources.
Your counter is from a Wikipedia article. Aside from Wiki's known lack of rigor, it's edited by climate alarmists who immediately alter anything from the opposing view. Not very impressive, son. Try again.
@philWynk Oh FUCKOFF you idiotic moron. If anyone was miss leading people with lying quotes the constitutions would go ape shit. 3rd and 4th hand? REALLY and your evidence? OF COARSE NOT because when you ly your tits off thats just fine its only the otherside that needs to be perfect. NOW YOU LIST OF SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTIONS...
And wiki is NOT lacking in rigor ass wipe:
'Wikipedia survives research test ' on google
OR JUST CHECK SOME OF THE QUOTES MORON - it aint rocket science!
@StunnedByStupidity You might want to peruse Wiki's list under "List of Scientists Opposing the Mainstream Scientific Assessment" (which is itself is a laughably biased title) for a little balance. Or, from your recommended Google search, Richard Lindzen's article entitled "Global Warming: The Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus" discusses the flimsiness of the "consensus" from the view of a scientist -- which you, clearly, are not.
@philWynk And now suddenly wiki IS reliable cos now they apparently support you - you are stunningly, jaw droopingly disingenuous. So which of those scientists (and remember there is roughly ONE ORGANIZATION that agrees to each of those scientists that deny) do you think is right and why? Lindzen is a NOTORIOUS bullshit merchant - when even the deniers were discrediting his last abortion, he should be throwing in the towel. But thats 1 fucking scientist vs 100,000s? YOU ARE INSANE!
@StunnedByStupidity BTW, what's with your obsession with organizations? It's the science that matters, not which org puts pithy alarmist language in its public statement. The recent flap over the public position statements of the American Physical Society and the British Royal Society, both of which make claims that cannot be supported from any peer-reviewed science, illustrate the problem. It's why some highly-regarded scientists are resigning from these organizations.
@philWynk Oh and I am obsessed with organizations am I? What a stupid comment. Yes its the science that matters but you you childish scum bag wont play fair intellectually and as I have said I'd bet a billion that the organizations would matter if they agreed with the bigot! And MORON they might be alarmist because there is something to be alarmed about your VERY VERY VERY stupid human.
And you keep claiming peer reviewed references you are beyond contempt for dis-ingenuousness.
@StunnedByStupidity The point, again, is that your claims suggesting that 100,000s of scientists all hold the same position, is not based on your reading of those scientists, but is merely partisan ranting. Anybody who ACTUALLY READS peer-reviewed literature, knows how much variety there is in scientists' positions, and how utterly false it is for partisans like yourself to claim a unified agreement where none exists.
@philWynk And you are claim a mass exodus from the societies? Yeah right your evidence? Tell you what why not STUPIDLY assert that the peer reviewed evidence say they are leaving and offer NO - absolutely fuck all - proof of that assertion - just to stay true to your bigoted form.
And when a INSTITUTION puts out a report that is obviously unrepresentative of its members - of course it it - are you fucking retarded? Look I know you are lying to me - just stop lying to your bigoted self!
@StunnedByStupidity Now Mr king of the peer reviewed science you want to man up play intellectually fair and answer my questions? Cos we both know you have FUCK ALL just sophistry and calling just about all the scientific community liars!
Rancourt was removed from all teaching duties in the fall of 2008 because the dean of the faculty of science did not agree with his high grades to 23 students in one course of the winter 2008 semester.[1] In December, the Allan Rock administration of the University of Ottawa began dismissal proceedings against him and he was banned from campus
@bernzeppi And, of course, this means that whatever he says about climate change and the environmental movement has no meaning. Right? Explain how that follows.
It's pretty frightening how quickly the left eats its own as soon as they stop reciting the party line. It would be hilariously funny if it weren't so vicious and destructive.
@philWynk Ah so change the argument. Heave the goal posts on your back and head on down the field and I GUARANTEE when I score a goal through those the bigot will then just heave them up again and move further down the field - NEVER QUESTIONING A THING!
It means that he can say and do anything and NEVER be burdened by guilt or remorse - and the ONLY people who can still do this with the MASSIVE consensus are PSYCHOPATHS!
The left are right on juts about everything just for the record!
@bernzeppi I take what everybody says cautiously. And by accusing me of believing that his words are "inerrant truth," you perform precisely the act that you accuse me (falsely) of performing -- putting words in my mouth. So you may now apply your conclusions to yourself.
You're also playing one of the left's favorite control games: you posit an accusation with an obvious implication, but when someone echoes the implication explicitly, you plead innocence. COMPLETELY dishonest!
@bernzeppi Besides, according to you, he was disgraced for AWARDING TOO MANY A's. I object to awarding too many A's, myself, and I'm glad he's not teaching anymore, but I don't see how that affects the veracity of his observations about how the left is playing climate change politics. Can you enlighten me? Is your claim that anyone who awards undeserved A's is a liar, and liars cannot be believed? Are you sure he doesn't just disapprove of grading altogether? I'm just asking...
@bernzeppi Yeah, yeah. You keep calling me names, and all I've done is ask pertinent questions. You call me names and refuse to answer, because you can't answer without examining your own, shoddy logic, or perhaps you already know how shoddy it is and you're just playing politics. Pitiful -- and frightening, because if you continue on this path you'll end up a body without a soul, incapable of either reason or life. Beware.
"If you tell a DENIER: Stick to the data, they get very upset..." , "Someone's gonna make a lot of money from this DENIAL-schemes"... so easy to turn the words in his mouth, because essentially he's just babbling empty phrases. I mean: What you have a PHYSICIST for if he only comes up with phoney POLITICAL arguments?
@BillyBlofeld I'm very left wing, and I think the idea that humans are causing Global Warming or climate change or whatever we're supposed to call it is ridiculous, and just another excuse to tax us to the hilt.
@spackhollogay Yeah same I am a Libertarian Socialist and against the idea of global warming. It is simple a loud of rubbish with scientists getting far to close to politicians with agendas. It annoys me that the left wing is getting into the climate change farce as much as they are. I want to seek the truth and I will continue to do so regardless of my political view.
Direct observations find that CO2 is rising sharply due to human activity. Satellite and surface measurements find less energy is escaping to space at CO2 absorption wavelengths. Ocean and surface temperature measurements find the planet continues to accumulate heat. This gives a line of empirical evidence that human CO2 emissions are causing global warming. There is no conspiracy.
In the 70s, scientists said the US (including Florida) would be covered in ice by the mid 1990s. . . Climatologists were saying it, scientists on the nightly news were saying it, and they were showing us charts and graphs in biology class that "proved" it. . . . Back then, anyone who didn't believe that the US would be covered in ice by the 90s, was told that they "didn't understand science"
@Dajuro The fact is that around 1970 there were 6 times as many scientists predicting a warming rather than a cooling planet. Today, with 30+years more data to analyse, we've reached a clear scientific consensus: 97% of working climate scientists agree with the view that human beings are causing global warming.
My comment is that volcanoes are causing the climate temperature to rise abnormally, and that no one should use this seemingly insurmountable problem to claim monies and the like to produce a solution. The time it would take to implement effect change is past. Noonesholdtake oil and gas money in order to heal the planet from something they had little or nothing to do with.
While actually not believing in AGS I too would like to see the whole thing. There's some more about his views in climate depot article on their site.
I feel that there might be a misunderstanding, especially based on the comments I've read. If global warming isn't a "real" thing, that does not mean we -- human beings -- are not destroying the globe.
I really enjoy the critical analysis, though, especially the idea that the real problems are being masked by those who are benefiting from/causing them. I don't believe Rancourt is saying there isn't a problem, but that the problem (as far as he sees it) is coming from a different direction.
Ignore people who say AGW is not real. There's some conjecture over feedbacks and sensitivity but that doesn't mean humans aren't contributing.
If people want to talk about the political agenda of the left such as the rampant misuse of environmentalism & humanitarian to spread socialism, that's a separate issue.
If they wish to discuss misinformation disseminated by the tabloids etc, then that's a separate thing. Discredit the hype but not the validity of AGW. There's much to learn.
Ignore people with another view? We get blatantly faked test results and an inquisition-like purging in the academic community of all opinions not locksetep with AGW and you think that political agendas and misinformation are separate issues? They're the very heart of the issue. So to whom should we turn? Where is the real science, IYO? No, this whole thing is massive world power grab and I'm not inclined to 'ignore' opinions that seem to be proving that very fact.
This guy is a shill. It isn't about what "activists" have to say on this issue. Activists normally aren't scientists of any note. This is all about Climatology, Meteorology, and their effect on biological systems. In fact the global warming debate has a lot in common with the "debate" about cigarettes causing cancer. Corporations know their bottom line will be affected and so they find shills to con people into accepting comfortable suicide rather than face the truth.
Morano is trying to spindoctor this into a newsworthy story by making it seem like Rancourt is someone who was completely accepting of the scientific reality of climate change and then just woke up one morning last week and decided to jump ship.----
June the average sea ice extent in the Arctic was the lowest on record. It´s tracked since 1979 (with sattelites) with a DRAMATIC DECLINE over the last 30 years. Thicker ice now only makes up 10%! That's down from 30% to 40% in the 1980s and 1990s.
The real science is primarily represented in peer-reviewed science journals but these scientific journals are typically not accessible to the general public and can be highly mathematical. Global warming misinformation is primarily published on Web pages, blogs, television shows, radio, and other forms of mass media, all of which are much more accessible to the general public than scientific journals. The result is that the misinformation is reaching more people than the real science.
"Thus, the notion that environmental skeptics are unbiased analysts exposing the myths and scare tactics employed by those they label as practitioners of ‘junk science’ lacks credibility. Similarly, the self-portrayal of skeptics as marginalized ‘Davids’ battling the powerful ‘Goliath’ of environmentalists and environmental scientists is a charade, as skeptics are supported by politically powerful CTTs funded by wealthy foundations and corporations."
"Consensus as strong as the one that has developed around global warming is rare in science."--- Donald Kennedy, editor of Science
"I think we understand the mechanisms of CO2 and climate better than we do of what causes lung cancer...In fact, it is fair to say that global warming may be the most carefully and fully studied scientific topic in human history."
--- Ralph Cicerone, President of the National Academy of Sciences
Whether you believe in man made global warming OR NOT, why would you give politicians your MONEY (taxes) ? (Like that will make it go away , THINK about it people!!!)
Crime Inc. doesn't want you to see this video. Those that stand to make tons of money from the climate change scam don't want this information to be made public. I guess that is why they are starting to say there is just too much information available.
I find it hard to believe its taking so long for people to wake up. GW is a scam. Our present US administration still wants to take our money with Cap $ Trade. They are scum!
The world as we know it will be destroyed by a minor gas that accounts for 3/1000's of 1% of the atomosphere. CO2 has been historically much higher than it is today. Greenland was once green and is a frozen tundra right now. Data has been manipulated by activists charading as scientists. When will the public realize, CO2 is green. Without it, all life would cease. With its increase comes longer growing seasons and more food for all!!!
Regional climate change is real and is due to many factors and has always occurred. There is no evidence that present regional climate changes are driven by increases in atmospheric concentration in CO2. This is explained in great detail in Rancourt's on-line 2007 article "Global Warming: Truth or Dare?" Likewise, it is the nature of weather that there will always be extreme weather events never before seen.
umm. what about the climate refugees in India whose homes are sinking underwater? Or the droughts that are occurring in Thailand that have never happened before?
@mrtyles --- Regional climate change is real and is due to many factors and has always occurred. There is no evidence that present regional climate changes are driven by increases in atmospheric concentration in CO2. This is explained in great detail in Rancourt's on-line 2007 article "Global Warming: Truth or Dare?" Likewise, it is the nature of weather that there will always be extreme weather events never before seen.
@mrtyles Never happen that we know of. What you are describing is an affect of enviromental change. Like all eco terrorist it states no facts or figures of just what is really happening. Oh my roof is leaking we must have too much rain! It certainly would be because its old and just needs replaced.
Some people (on the Titanic) need to have their nose crashed on the iceberg to believe it's really a threat. Hummmm, they won't even have this "chance" since icebergs are melting too...
For all you who "still" believe "global warming" to be real, why did these state sponsored scientists screw with the actual data to hide the decline of temperatures? If global warming was real, then why change the term into "climate change" instead of keeping it as "global warming?'
I mean global warming was a good name, there is no reason to change it, but since global warming is not real :/
Sorry, you folks don't want to believe that you're being lied to. You're just in denial. Wake up.
Refreshing to see a «Liberal Environmentalist» waking up to this fact. There are so many better environmental problems to take action with, ACTUAL air pollution (particulates, soot, etc--- USA has cleaned up its act a lot, China needs help here), water pollution, and deforestation due to people's lack of cheap fuels (look at Haiti).
Refreshing to see a «Liberal Environmentalist» waking up to this fact. There are so many better environmental problems to take action with, ACTUAL air pollution (particulates, soot, etc--- USA has cleaned up its act a lot, China needs help here), water pollution, and deforestation due to people's lack of cheap fuels (look at Haiti).
Fantastic! I'm not a liberal, I lean towards fiscal conservatism and I agree w/the doctor 110%. Let's address the REAL issues of deforestation, pushing indigenous people off their land, REAL pollutants like mercury, sulfur dioxide, over development, wasteful use of limited resources, hemp oil as a REAL alternative fuel source. Kudos to him for exposing the corporate lie that makes douche bags like Al "sex poodle" Gore rich while he tells us WE need reduce our consumption.
For a great-read background article and relevant links please google "some big lies of science" (with quotation marks included in the google search box).
The article "Some big lies of science" is posted on GlobalResearch, on ActivistTeacher and on several other sites including a Spanish translation. It will be in the next print issue of the international magazine Nexus.
Global warming scam. Dead in the water. No global taxes, if they still think they can push this BS Id say dont hold ya breath.............................nooooooo no no actually, HOLD YA BREATH dont want C02 everywhere do we now.
It always makes me happy whenever scams like this are being refuted and abandoned. Scams like this appear every few months, so it's always nice to have that "happy feeling" every few months. Of course it's followed by the "
"disgusted" feeling when it appears and the damage is already done by the political class, but it's nice to have this.
Racist!! Bush's Fault!!! Tea Bagger!!!! Birther!!!!!! How can anybody question the highly esteemed Nobel Prize Winner - Albert "the sex poodle" Gore? Now what am I going to do with my propeller hat?
these people are 24/7 liars and obviously some sort of corporate mercenaries. Intentional scam.
Rancourt was removed from all teaching duties in the fall of 2008 because the dean of the faculty of science did not agree with his high grades to 23 students in one course of the winter 2008 semester. In December, the Allan Rock administration of the University of Ottawa began dismissal proceedings against him and he was banned from campus.
I'm sorry, no offense, but this video is lame. There are no specifics whatsoever. And this Denis Rancourt guy looks a little disturbed based on his other YouTube videos. I really don't want to get too personal here, but if this is the best climate deniers can do, you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel.
samtparry 1 month ago
What does the world look like at 500ppm CO2 concentrations? Is it not warmer? If not, why not? If it's warmer, are we denying that there are likely to be some very substantial global changes? If the Arctic ice sheet, for instance, is already on a "death spiral" at 392ppm, what does that look like at 500+ppm?
I'll grant that no one can say for sure what the world will look like. But, we can also not say for sure that this isn't a gigantic experiment with very grave potential consequences.
samtparry 1 month ago
Its a bizarre issue in that there are special interests fighting on both sides. American capitalism has evolved to the state were financial interests will prevail over genuine scientific curiosity. Its the unfortunate iron law of oligarchy.
BWCmike 1 month ago in playlist global warming myth
The true is fighting its way back. Lets hope truth will win in the end. Thanks for posting this.
mtnmanrab 2 months ago
Google "Some big lies of science" for a great overview essay about all of this and more...
DenisRancourt 3 months ago
You should read this article :- Google Left-wing Env. Scientist Bails Out Of Global Warming Movement: Declares It A ‘corrupt Social Phenomenon…strictly An Imaginary Problem Of The 1st World Middleclass’
Posted July 27th, 2010 at 5:02AM
Marc Morano Climate Depot July 26, 2010
2wheels88 3 months ago
Who gives a f**** about CO2 anyway. Nobody can stop the people from multiplying and turning the world into a lifeless dump.
It's something like a 1000 maggots eating an apple.
If the population of the world were only 10% of what it is and everyone had a normal(comfortable) standard of living the world would be a peacful and healthy place. But hey, birth control is a sin! Economy rules! And we will spread to mars if needed so the economy can grow endlessly. Nothing can stop us, yay!
uros001 3 months ago
Comment removed
uros001 3 months ago
What's happening to the ice? Believe your eyes!
nellre 8 months ago
Good lord. What a bunch of dumb fucks. I love the responses... basically "no it's not." Like Doger481, who says there is "no" evidence when there is actually plenty and the only errors seem to be that the planet is now heating up faster than expected. But hey, just ask the corporations who are lining up to drill under the melting arctic... they certainly believe the planet is warming up. DoomHippie... just shut the fuck up, you don't know anything and only parrot other bullshit.
WideOfVision 9 months ago
@WideOfVision Post evidence the earth's climate in increasing faster than expected.
david52875 8 months ago
hey @Dodger... what do you do for a living? are you a physicist? or even an environmental scholar of any level? cuz im going to tend to believe someone who has actual education.. not someone who thinks they do cuz they are passionate about being a leftist follower... :)
jaxisbax 11 months ago
Brilliant. Yes why talk to the scientists when you can ask some kid off the streets.
mrfuzzer1 1 year ago
@Dodger: Really? That's odd because the actual records show a sharp increase that starts with the industrial revolution and 2010 tied for the warmest year on record which is 2005. And that's just in the past FIVE years. But that's okay, I've learned that now amount of facts or actual evidence will convince people like you. You have have a brain disorder.
WideOfVision 1 year ago
@WideOfVision
Actual records also lose many cold-weather research facilities after the collapse of the Soviet Union. With the cold weather data being lost, we see a sharp increase in temperature that coincides with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the shut-down of Soviet climate research facilities. In fact, compare Gore's "hockey stick" chart to a chart of the number of Soviet research centers and you see a trend.
Stop listening to rich, corporate special interests, do research.
DoomHippie 9 months ago
Facts aren't neutral. Anyone trying to say otherwise is lying to you or manipulating you. Max Weber has clearly demonstrated there are only interpreted facts not facts per se. Debates occur between a clash of two or more interpretations not between facts. Nature scientists are generally unaware of their own scientist ideology which make them believe they speak on behalf of the Truth. Nature scientists should start reading social scientists and philosophers.
isocrate27 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
" Global Climate is Changing NOT because of SU N OR CO2. MANY Iceshelves collapsed during WINTER. FOR more information Welcome to visit Sarva Kala Vallabhan Group in facebook & comment "
narayananraveen 1 year ago
Good lord. What a joke. It's like a watching a mildly retarded child continue to jam square pegs into round holes. Marc Moran is just a hack for oil and mine interests since his PR website it just a product of Exxonmobil funding. There is nothing to support the the idea that Rancourt is a left wing environmentalist. The essay, not a research paper, was written in 2007. It's now 2011 and the science between now and then only supports further warming.
WideOfVision 1 year ago
@WideOfVision
Except the evidence does not support any statistically signifigant warming for the past 15 years. Manmade Global warming is not happening and is not real
Dodger481 1 year ago
I hate it when people go on about anti-AGW media being secretly funded by Oil Companies. Do they really think oil companies are going to lose out in all this? If you own an oil reserve your not going to lose out on anything ever. I guarantee you every drop of that oil will be burned by someone global warming or no global warming.
1982CFD 1 year ago 5
@1982CFD science is science, global warming is just uncientific and taking atention away from the real enviormental problems we face. this scientific hoax is probably financed by oil owners who are also land owners. sure oil owners are desperate , but the evidence speaks for itself . co2 is you , when they say cut co2 down to cero , it means no more you , take a look at the georgia guidestones , maybe a new perspective will arrise , maybe not , this is just my opion (matanga69)
LaHistoriaOculta 3 months ago
So instead of listening to environmentalists why don't we listen to the scientists. There are skeptical scientists. If AGW is so easy to disprove than they should produce a paper or two that refutes it. Despite the big lie that people are "bailing out" on global warming the consensus and evidence for AGW gets stronger and stronger.
And if I shouldn't listen to environmentalists, as deniers keep telling me, why would I listen to this one.
rugbyguy59 1 year ago
Check out confirmation bias in wikipedia. If you begin by thinking that GW is a scam, you'll believe the evidence that supports this hypothesis and undermine the evidence that discredits it. Science doesn't work in this way, it analyses data objectively and posits the most likely explanation. In fact, most scientists in the 60s were skeptical of a possible anthropogenic rise in temperature, but evidence and sound models convinced them otherwise. It is, however, too late to solve the problem.
AlgeKalipso 1 year ago
@AlgeKalipso 30 years ago the science said we were heading for global cooling. Power hungry opportunists couldn't hold the general public financially responsible for that though, could they? With record-breaking freezing temperatures already this year, along with the recent evidence exposing many climate scientists as liars, who do you think should ultimately be "discredited"? I wouldn't trust Wikipedia as far as I could throw the bunch of toadies who control its content.
ProjectRedPill1 1 year ago
Morano and his so-called climatedepot lack credibility.
He chose not to point out "ex professor" Rancourt was sacked and therefor is not a professor... check it out.
Once you know this, Rancourt appears to be disingenuous.
This is biased reporting...
In news "the power is NOT in what you say but in what you DON'T say.
Thumbs down because it lacks credibility!
Moreover, this report is deliberately deceiving.
bernzeppi 1 year ago
Disgruntled ex-employee
In news, "the power is not in what you say, but in what you don't say"
bernzeppi 1 year ago
Watch out! This guy ia an ex- professor... That is quite a difficult title to get.
You never lose the title 'professor', it becomes professor 'emeritus' when you stop.
To become 'ex' professor you have to be sacked... That is a big deal.
This guy was sacked, he is a shocker. Check up on him.
Of course the interviewer doesn't tell you that.
In news, "the power is not in what you say, but in what you don't say"
BTW FOXnews says a lot, but it is entertainment not news...
bernzeppi 1 year ago
Carefully kiddies. This guy ia an ex- professor... That is quite a difficult title to get.
You never lose the title 'professor', it becomes professor 'emeritus' when you stop.
To become 'ex' professor you have to be sacked... That is a big deal.
This guy was sacked, he is a shocker. Check up on him.
Of course the interviewer doesn't tell you that.
In news, "the power is not in what you say, but in what you don't say"
BTW FOXnews says a lot, but it is entertainment not news...
bernzeppi 1 year ago
Right you ansewer MY questions mow.
1) Exxon and Koch are running a disinformation campaign - what are the 3 main pillars of their arguments
2) Why is there an energy imbalance at the top of the atmosphere where less is going out than coming in if it aint the CO2?
3) during the time of the dinosaurs the sun was COOLER yet temperatures on the planet were warmer WHY?
4) How did we get out of snowball Earth? A clue:
'2001 BBC Horizon Snowball Earth part 1 of 5 ' you tube
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity
5) Venus is FURTHER from the sun than Mercury, and yet is WARMER why is that exacly?
6) Most of the warming is at night and in winter what else can explain this fact?
7) Jim Hansen has said that the evidence is now so overwhelming 9If you aint a bigot of corse) that those who make a living denying the evidence should be put on trial for crimes against humanity - what should the sentence for killing BILLIONS be?
8) St Ronnie Reagan STOPPED ACTION FIRST on tackling the MAN Y
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity environmental/resource shortages we currently face shouldn't there be a national 'piss on Ronnies statue day' be introduced?
9) And FINALLY with PEER REVIEWED EVIDENCE - what is causing the warming?
I could OF COURSE ask many many more questions but we BOTH know you are going to be a bigot!
Oh and go read '/The Authoritarians' - free ebook on google - ring any bells?
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity Oh forgot to mention that Earth can recover from a mass extinction where more than 50% of lifeforms go extinct - BUT IT TAKES 10-100 MILLIONS YEARS to do this - literally TRILLIONS of people will live in a MASSIVELY impoverished world - we will be THE most vilified generation to EVER walk the planet if we let this happen. And YOU ARE DENYING ITS REALITY - HAVE YOU NO SHAME (oooh there's that psychopath suggestion again!)!
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
Look, Morano is an evil psychopath. And Rancourt is obviously insane. If either has SCIENTIFIC PROOF then publish in a PEER REVIEWED journal and collect their Nobel prize and save us all a fortune. If they don't then they should shut their ignorant bigoted mouths and STOP KILLING 300,000 a year through inaction. Oh, and BILLIONS oven the next century! These people are scum and a curse on the poster of this video - have you no shame? BTW you might want to look up 'theory' and 'hypothesis'...
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity The panic of climate change alarmists is evident in your tone.
Perhaps you can provide us with the scientific proof, published in a peer-reviewed journal, that supports the following claims in your hysterical monologue:
1) Morano is a psychopath.
2) Rancourt is insane.
3) They are killing 300,000 people a year through their inaction.
4) They will kill billions of people over the next century.
Despite alarmist manipulation of the peer-review process, none of that is fact.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk Do fuck off smart ass, I'll provide evidence for my assertions the YOU you pig ignorant anti human right winger will provide evidence for MY questions.
1) The behaviors of Morano SHOUTS and I mean screams psychopathic tendencies. Now, smart ass, they haven't as fact as I know sat him in a room (yet). But he is representing corporations and here is the worlds leader on psychopaths Robert Hare analyzing the traits of those institutions:
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity
':: Corporation : Clinical Diagnosis (PCLR) :: ' On youtube
You can get TONS of other info with the following:
'I Psychopath' on you tube
'Political Ponerology' - book free on the internet.
'The Sociopath next door'
'Snakes In Suits'
One of THE defining features (though Morano has a selection) is the lack of a conscience - they are inhuman lizard people who bask in egoism, bullying and chaos. Also goto 'psychopathy' on wiki and go to 'characteristics'.
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity
2) one of the definitions of insanity is a failure to confront reality. Now he is a scientist and will know that the problem has been know for AT LEAST 50 years:
'1958 global warming' on you tube
All and I mean EVERY SINGLE one of the worlds TOP scientific institutions agree its man. 97-98% of the worlds CLIMATOLOGISTS and just about ALL the peer reviewed science. EVERY large report from the mid 70's onwards has agreed:
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity
'Earth The Climate Wars - Episode 1' on google video
The ice caps are melting, bird migrations changing, insects are laying at earlier times, fish are changing their migration, animals going extinct, Hadley cells expanding, extreme weather increasing, the sun is cooling - NOTHING else explains the warming yet Rancourt (and you) think NONE of this matters and EVERYONE else is wrong. Just like the person who shout that they are Napoleon.
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity Oh and let us not forget THE biggest collection of scientific papers on a subject - the IPCC reports - are just cast aside by these arrogant men - and you I'll bet.
3) 300,000 a year are being killed a year through inaction:
'Global warming causes 300,000 deaths a year, says Kofi Annan thinktank' on google
As soon as 2060 we could be at 4oC higher in temperatures. Here are some analysis of papers:
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity
''M.I.T. doubles its 2095 warming projection to 10°F — with 866 ppm and Arctic warming of 20°F''
and
'Hadley Center: “Catastrophic” 5-7°C warming by 2100 on current emissions path'
Now to get to an ice age you need to cool the planet by around 5oC if you warm it from here by a further 4oC (the most likely at present under current emissions) you leave around 1/3 of the planet as DESERT 40-70% of ALL species extinct and 90% of humanity! Here is a map from New Scientist:
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity
'Bill Rees: The Vulnerability and Resilience of Cities' on google. Then scroll down to the little box with1/37 in it and replace the 1 with a 29 giving 29/37. Now, smart ass those brown and orange areas ARE UNINHABITABLE - that's BILLIONS killed or displaced. 90% off HUMANITY DEAD!
Now going back to question 1) tell me who could spend his day being paid by psychopathic institutions to destroy the biosphere - way way way way way way worse than any war man could create?
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity Just to hammer home the point. In a war how many out of every hundred troops up to Vietnam (new techniques have been developed since to overcome this 'problem') would actually point their weapons at the enemy to shoot? Yeah we've all seen the movies with the 'hero' mowing down bad guys like they were blades of grass. Well its only about 15-20% of soldiers that can even point their gun and shoot at the enemy! This is a stunning stat. Oh and you know the 'hero' well there are
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity only about 2% that behave like they do in the movies - oh, and they are PSYCHOPATHS!
'The Truth About Killing - Episode 1 Part 1 ' on you tube - watch all parts of both episodes. Now the only people that can kill others without suffering traumatic psychological impacts are psychopaths and Moran makes a living working towards killing BILLIONS - way way way way worse than any mass murders - and YOU think he ISN'T a psychopath?
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity Oh and you are no doubt aware there is a range of how bad the next century will be (and beyond). Those who know fuck all about the science (that would include you) think that the range is from little or no effects to IPCC/Al Gore's inconvenient truth. Well these are all to the LEFT of the bell curve of probabilities - contrary to the nonsense going on in your right wing mind.
The majority of climate scientists think wankers like Morano have so confused the people that
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity we will not stay below the critical 2oC rise in temperature - t6he point at which +ve feedbacks kick in and leave future action out of out control. This means we will lose massive amounts of ice at the poles. The Amazon will dry out and burn -destroying the largest concentration of life forms on the planet. Just about all the coral reefs. Massive food shortages and disease forcing mass migrations, dictatorial governments,cannibalism,armed gangs and wars on scales unheard of.
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity And then things will get VERY VERY VERY bad indeed (just as the scum bag Morano hopes).
;The real global warming numbers 1 ' on you tube - 7oC rise is a world killer - just about nothing will survive that!
Then there is this:
'Peter Ward: Earth's mass extinctions ' see MOST extinction events is caused bu the rise in CO2. Warming the planet and killing life. But it happens in a stunningly bad way. The warmth stops the oceans from overturning stopping oxygen from getting
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity down into it this kills all oxygen breathers in it. It also STOPS KILLING these really nasty microbes (who are usually killed by oxygen) that produce hydrogen sulphide. This spreads into the ocean and kills all the life in it. Then leaks out. It rise and DESTROYS THE OZONE LAYER, turning the sky green and finally leaks out over land killing the lifeforms on the land! VERY VERY VERY nasty indeed. And this aint science fiction it has happened numerous time before!
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity Forgot to mention
'Peter Ward: Earth's mass extinctions ' is a TED lecture on you tube. He goes into more details in his books 'The Medea hypothesis' and 'Under a green sky'. But that still aint all. See rise the temperature by CO2 and you get to a point that MASSIVE amounts of methane is rel;eased. The last time this happened was 55 million years ago in the 'Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximun' - google it or watch an old documentary here:
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity
'The Day The Oceans Boiled (VARIOUS SEGMENTS) Part 1 ' on you tube
This also caused the mother of all extinctions the 'End Permian' here:
'2002 BBC Horizon : The Day the Earth Nearly Died part 1 of 5 ' on you tube
And finally and unbelievably there is the little matter of the fact that the methane can catch fire. Go here:
'clathrate gun hypothesis' on wikipedia scroll down to the indented paragraph under 'Possible outcomes' and read this PEER REVIEWED statement! Now,
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity IF NOTHING ELSE - if as I am almost certain you dismiss everything else (after all you ARE a right wing fruit cake) GO WATCH THIS SHORT VIDEO:
'History Channel Mega Disasters - Methane Explosion ' on you tube.
Yes it can explode with a combined explosive potential of 10,000 TIMES ALL THE WORLDS NUCLEAR ARSENAL! YOU FUCKING UNDERSTAND WHY SOME PEOPLE WITH A HEART MIGHT BE A LITTLE UPSET ABOUT WHAT WE ARE *******NEEDLESSLY********* DOING NOW?
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity Of course, atmospheric CO2 was at least 10 times higher than what it is now during the Paleolithic era, and the world did NOT explode like a bomb. So the likelihood of it happening now is... shall we say, slight?
I'd say "calm down," but it's pretty evident that whatever it is that's driving you, it isn't facts about the climate.
BTW, explain how you infer "You're a right-wing fruitcake" from my merely having asked you to support your vicious personal attacks. Interesting.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk Ok, I watched your Methane Explosion film. Explain to me what collections of subterranean methane in undersea pockets has to do with human contributions to CO2 on the surface (hint: "Nothing"). And did you notice how his theory is described as "controversial?" And how his support even for the POSSIBILITY of a CH4 explosion is a relatively small eruption of a different gas from a lake? This is fringe science, and human industry doesn't affect it in any way. Calm down.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk And you mhave read NOTHING on the subject have you? See 'methane clathrates' sit under the oceans and will happily sit undisturbed for millions of years. But if you lower the pressure OR RAISE THE TEMPERATURE there is massive out gassing! Are you too lazy to follow my effin links?
Yes its controversial but that is WAY MORE SCIENTIFIC than anything the deniers have to offer - I am SURE I made that explicit - something causes MASS EXTINCTIONS - and this is a candidate! UNDERSTAND!
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity The methane issue in that video had to do with releases from subterranean pockets, which -- listen carefully now -- is NOT the same as "outgassing." Outgassing is the release of gas suspended IN THE WATER, and is affected by temperature and pressure changes on the surface. Also, subterranean rock formations are constantly subject to tectonic shifts, so, no they're not "happily undisturbed" for millions of years. You're talking voodoo, not science.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk And during the Paleolithic CO2 concentrations were 10 times higher? REALLY? You one of these idiotic morons that just pulls shit from their bigoted ass aren't you? For the last 850,000 years CO2 concentrations have been between 180and280 ppm they are now at 392. And who the fuck thinks the world will explode like a bomb from CO2? Look I am obviously arguing with a very low IQ individual and am probably wasting my time!
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity But the climate has been in operation more than 850K years, hasn't it? PaleoClimatic concentrations of CO2, based on peer-reviewed papers by Pagani (2005) and Berner and Royer (2008), went as high as 1800 ppm as recently as 35 million years ago, and may have been as high as 7000 ppm 500 million years ago. Oh, and there were plenty of living things back then, and no climate disasters or sea explosions caused by excessive CO2.
YOU are the one touting a methane explosion, son.
philWynk 1 year ago
Your claim, repeated now several times, is that I'm potentially causing the death of BILLIONS of people by permitting the continued emission of CO2, which is possibly going to trigger the release of methane from subterranean sources via out-gassing (your words, not mine) which will then explode as in the video you referenced. Ergo, it is you who is thinking CO2 will be the cause of the world exploding like a bomb. I'm just repeating what you said.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk No I think you will aid in the death of BILLIONs because the most likely scenario IN THE SCIENCE is that we will hit 4oC by the end of the century AND THIS ALONE will kill billions and 40-70% of all species on the planet
You are shouting that you are a hair splitting bigot - and on that we can both be agreed. You are A VERY arrogant human being - and are just about totally unable to argue in a fair and sophisticated manor. YOU came in on the side with your smart assed comments.
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity You wrote: "Those who know [nothing] about the science ... think that the range is from little or no effects to IPCC/Al Gore's inconvenient truth. Well these are all to the LEFT of the bell curve of probabilities"
Even the partisans at RealClimate org would dispute this laugher. The IPCC's disaster probability curve is far to the left of Gore's (proved in court, BTW), and we now know how little peer-reviewed science supports the IPCC position. Fail, son. Sorry.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk And this is just stupid - tell you what why not go the whole hog and say ga ga goo goo to everything I have posted - you are a MORON!
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity Well, since Patchuri, the Chair of the IPCC, was caught falsifying Himalayan glacier melt statistics to increase contributions to his own activist organization, I'd say we have reason to question the IPCC's veracity, wouldn't you?
Not to mention the dozen or more supporting "peer-reviewed" items that turned out to be speculation from the World Wildlife Federation...
Real scientists (you're not one) take these falsifications seriously, and question the IPCC.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk There was 1 mistake in 3000 fucking pages and the bigoted wanker thinks this discredits EVERYTHING! Oh and guess tho spotted the mistake - THE IPCC!
Working group one (completely independent to the other 2) is where the facts of the science are and there is NO MISTAKES BIGOT! And a dozen wrong? Well lets see your evidence eh?
Now moron WITH PEER REVIEWED EVIDENCE what has caused the warming over the last 30 years-Boy your arrogance has got my back up -I have wasted my time on a BIGOT!
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity There were far, far more than merely 1 mistake -- and the summary of effects was not 3000 pages. For a pretty good summary of the growing consensus that the IPCC's process is badly flawed, visit plumbbobblog com and follow the URL with a slash and ?p=6502.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk The reports are 3000 pages and you offer no proof for errors (the only other is sea level rise in the Netherlands - which was the Dutch governments fault NOT the IPCCS). The African thing you head has been retracted by the liers as has the Amazon thing!
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity A fair summary of the errors is at the link I posted: plumbbobblog com slash ?p=6502, and associated links. The SUMMARY FOR POLICY MAKERS, which is 22 pages long, purports to be based solely on peer-reviewed science, but bases more than a dozen claims on quotes borrowed from World Wildlife Fund brochures and other, apocryphal and unfounded sources. Pachauri's conflict of interest is just the tip of the iceberg.
philWynk 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity And by the way, your continued use of epithets, uppercase, and the rage you display, continually confirms my assessment that I'm arguing with a person driven by something far more serious than facts about the climate. While nobody sane would attempt diagnosis on the basis of sketchy internet contact (like you tried with Morano,) I feel confident in ignoring you as a crank.
Oh, and I've got more sound science stuck under my fingernails than you have in your head.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk Yews dear PEOPLE ARE DYING and the only rational response is the psychopathic calm dismissal - ONE of us is showing its true colors here and I'll give you a clue it aint me.
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity I do love it when the unstable get rolling. It's pretty obvious who's unstable here, isn't it?
@Stunned writes: "All and I mean EVERY SINGLE one of the worlds TOP scientific institutions agree its man."
I'm betting you can't name 5 off the top of your head, and I'm absolutely certain you did not acquire this "fact" by way of polling them yourself. It's simply not true, as those who HAVE polled them know perfectly well. Go read Larry Solomon's "The Deniers" if you doubt.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk I bet I can and I take it when I do you will then give up trying to destroy the planet? I bet a BILLION you are a right wing bigot and it wont make a bit of difference to you. So, you ready...
'scientific consensus on global warming' on google scroll down to:
'With the release of the revised statement[93] by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no scientific body of national or international standing rejects the findings of human-induced effects on global warming'
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity "I bet I can and I take it when I do you will then give up trying to destroy the planet?"
My point is that your claim that "not one major org disputes" is not based on your reading of peer-reviewed science, but on 3rd and 4th hand reports from partisan sources.
Your counter is from a Wikipedia article. Aside from Wiki's known lack of rigor, it's edited by climate alarmists who immediately alter anything from the opposing view. Not very impressive, son. Try again.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk Oh FUCKOFF you idiotic moron. If anyone was miss leading people with lying quotes the constitutions would go ape shit. 3rd and 4th hand? REALLY and your evidence? OF COARSE NOT because when you ly your tits off thats just fine its only the otherside that needs to be perfect. NOW YOU LIST OF SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTIONS...
And wiki is NOT lacking in rigor ass wipe:
'Wikipedia survives research test ' on google
OR JUST CHECK SOME OF THE QUOTES MORON - it aint rocket science!
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity You might want to peruse Wiki's list under "List of Scientists Opposing the Mainstream Scientific Assessment" (which is itself is a laughably biased title) for a little balance. Or, from your recommended Google search, Richard Lindzen's article entitled "Global Warming: The Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus" discusses the flimsiness of the "consensus" from the view of a scientist -- which you, clearly, are not.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk And now suddenly wiki IS reliable cos now they apparently support you - you are stunningly, jaw droopingly disingenuous. So which of those scientists (and remember there is roughly ONE ORGANIZATION that agrees to each of those scientists that deny) do you think is right and why? Lindzen is a NOTORIOUS bullshit merchant - when even the deniers were discrediting his last abortion, he should be throwing in the towel. But thats 1 fucking scientist vs 100,000s? YOU ARE INSANE!
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity Tell you what having lost those STUPID points try changing the ARGUMENT AGAIN and hope I don't notice.
Look as I have pointed out BILLIONS are going to die and you seem a psychopathic as Morano!
CAN YOU EXPERIENCE SHAME?
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity BTW, what's with your obsession with organizations? It's the science that matters, not which org puts pithy alarmist language in its public statement. The recent flap over the public position statements of the American Physical Society and the British Royal Society, both of which make claims that cannot be supported from any peer-reviewed science, illustrate the problem. It's why some highly-regarded scientists are resigning from these organizations.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk Oh and I am obsessed with organizations am I? What a stupid comment. Yes its the science that matters but you you childish scum bag wont play fair intellectually and as I have said I'd bet a billion that the organizations would matter if they agreed with the bigot! And MORON they might be alarmist because there is something to be alarmed about your VERY VERY VERY stupid human.
And you keep claiming peer reviewed references you are beyond contempt for dis-ingenuousness.
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity The point, again, is that your claims suggesting that 100,000s of scientists all hold the same position, is not based on your reading of those scientists, but is merely partisan ranting. Anybody who ACTUALLY READS peer-reviewed literature, knows how much variety there is in scientists' positions, and how utterly false it is for partisans like yourself to claim a unified agreement where none exists.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk And you are claim a mass exodus from the societies? Yeah right your evidence? Tell you what why not STUPIDLY assert that the peer reviewed evidence say they are leaving and offer NO - absolutely fuck all - proof of that assertion - just to stay true to your bigoted form.
And when a INSTITUTION puts out a report that is obviously unrepresentative of its members - of course it it - are you fucking retarded? Look I know you are lying to me - just stop lying to your bigoted self!
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@StunnedByStupidity Now Mr king of the peer reviewed science you want to man up play intellectually fair and answer my questions? Cos we both know you have FUCK ALL just sophistry and calling just about all the scientific community liars!
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
Rancourt was removed from all teaching duties in the fall of 2008 because the dean of the faculty of science did not agree with his high grades to 23 students in one course of the winter 2008 semester.[1] In December, the Allan Rock administration of the University of Ottawa began dismissal proceedings against him and he was banned from campus
bernzeppi 1 year ago
@bernzeppi And, of course, this means that whatever he says about climate change and the environmental movement has no meaning. Right? Explain how that follows.
It's pretty frightening how quickly the left eats its own as soon as they stop reciting the party line. It would be hilariously funny if it weren't so vicious and destructive.
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk Ah so change the argument. Heave the goal posts on your back and head on down the field and I GUARANTEE when I score a goal through those the bigot will then just heave them up again and move further down the field - NEVER QUESTIONING A THING!
It means that he can say and do anything and NEVER be burdened by guilt or remorse - and the ONLY people who can still do this with the MASSIVE consensus are PSYCHOPATHS!
The left are right on juts about everything just for the record!
StunnedByStupidity 1 year ago
@philWynk No of course you are putting words in my mouth... Typical.
It means the man has been disgraced and you should take what he says cautiously.
Of course to someone like you it means he's a whistleblower and utters inerrant truth.
You are an idiot!
bernzeppi 1 year ago
@bernzeppi I take what everybody says cautiously. And by accusing me of believing that his words are "inerrant truth," you perform precisely the act that you accuse me (falsely) of performing -- putting words in my mouth. So you may now apply your conclusions to yourself.
You're also playing one of the left's favorite control games: you posit an accusation with an obvious implication, but when someone echoes the implication explicitly, you plead innocence. COMPLETELY dishonest!
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk Correct on all counts Phil... You're almost awake,
But you continue on the same path unabated...
What a jerk.
bernzeppi 1 year ago
@bernzeppi Besides, according to you, he was disgraced for AWARDING TOO MANY A's. I object to awarding too many A's, myself, and I'm glad he's not teaching anymore, but I don't see how that affects the veracity of his observations about how the left is playing climate change politics. Can you enlighten me? Is your claim that anyone who awards undeserved A's is a liar, and liars cannot be believed? Are you sure he doesn't just disapprove of grading altogether? I'm just asking...
philWynk 1 year ago
@philWynk Unabated....
I'm just saying...
bernzeppi 1 year ago
@bernzeppi Yeah, yeah. You keep calling me names, and all I've done is ask pertinent questions. You call me names and refuse to answer, because you can't answer without examining your own, shoddy logic, or perhaps you already know how shoddy it is and you're just playing politics. Pitiful -- and frightening, because if you continue on this path you'll end up a body without a soul, incapable of either reason or life. Beware.
philWynk 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"If you tell a DENIER: Stick to the data, they get very upset..." , "Someone's gonna make a lot of money from this DENIAL-schemes"... so easy to turn the words in his mouth, because essentially he's just babbling empty phrases. I mean: What you have a PHYSICIST for if he only comes up with phoney POLITICAL arguments?
bueschu 1 year ago
Comment removed
bueschu 1 year ago
Comment removed
bueschu 1 year ago
Comment removed
bueschu 1 year ago
Not sure what's worse about Rancourt: his scientific illiteracy outside of his speciality, or his paranoid conspiracy theorizing.
ginckgo 1 year ago
I think we won't be seeing this on CNN anytime soon. ;-)
KQ6WQ 1 year ago 2
I never thought I'd ever see anyone vaguely left wing speaking with any level of sanity on the climate issue...........
BillyBlofeld 1 year ago 18
@BillyBlofeld I'm very left wing, and I think the idea that humans are causing Global Warming or climate change or whatever we're supposed to call it is ridiculous, and just another excuse to tax us to the hilt.
spackhollogay 7 months ago
@spackhollogay Yeah same I am a Libertarian Socialist and against the idea of global warming. It is simple a loud of rubbish with scientists getting far to close to politicians with agendas. It annoys me that the left wing is getting into the climate change farce as much as they are. I want to seek the truth and I will continue to do so regardless of my political view.
23lFrench 7 months ago
Direct observations find that CO2 is rising sharply due to human activity. Satellite and surface measurements find less energy is escaping to space at CO2 absorption wavelengths. Ocean and surface temperature measurements find the planet continues to accumulate heat. This gives a line of empirical evidence that human CO2 emissions are causing global warming. There is no conspiracy.
ConservatoryTV 1 year ago
In the 70s, scientists said the US (including Florida) would be covered in ice by the mid 1990s. . . Climatologists were saying it, scientists on the nightly news were saying it, and they were showing us charts and graphs in biology class that "proved" it. . . . Back then, anyone who didn't believe that the US would be covered in ice by the 90s, was told that they "didn't understand science"
. . Sound familiar? . . . .
Dajuro 1 year ago
@Dajuro The fact is that around 1970 there were 6 times as many scientists predicting a warming rather than a cooling planet. Today, with 30+years more data to analyse, we've reached a clear scientific consensus: 97% of working climate scientists agree with the view that human beings are causing global warming.
ConservatoryTV 1 year ago
My comment is that volcanoes are causing the climate temperature to rise abnormally, and that no one should use this seemingly insurmountable problem to claim monies and the like to produce a solution. The time it would take to implement effect change is past. Noonesholdtake oil and gas money in order to heal the planet from something they had little or nothing to do with.
HouseOfMillennian 1 year ago
A reasonable leftist not using CAGW for political means. Interesting
I wish the clip was unbroken though. Some of those sound bites may have been contextualized.
Samsgarden 1 year ago
@Samsgarden
While actually not believing in AGS I too would like to see the whole thing. There's some more about his views in climate depot article on their site.
Peteruspl 1 year ago
He looks like that fag robot from Star Trak.
nonthere 1 year ago
I feel that there might be a misunderstanding, especially based on the comments I've read. If global warming isn't a "real" thing, that does not mean we -- human beings -- are not destroying the globe.
I really enjoy the critical analysis, though, especially the idea that the real problems are being masked by those who are benefiting from/causing them. I don't believe Rancourt is saying there isn't a problem, but that the problem (as far as he sees it) is coming from a different direction.
ohpkyle 1 year ago
@ohpkyle
Ignore people who say AGW is not real. There's some conjecture over feedbacks and sensitivity but that doesn't mean humans aren't contributing.
If people want to talk about the political agenda of the left such as the rampant misuse of environmentalism & humanitarian to spread socialism, that's a separate issue.
If they wish to discuss misinformation disseminated by the tabloids etc, then that's a separate thing. Discredit the hype but not the validity of AGW. There's much to learn.
Samsgarden 1 year ago
@Samsgarden
Ignore people with another view? We get blatantly faked test results and an inquisition-like purging in the academic community of all opinions not locksetep with AGW and you think that political agendas and misinformation are separate issues? They're the very heart of the issue. So to whom should we turn? Where is the real science, IYO? No, this whole thing is massive world power grab and I'm not inclined to 'ignore' opinions that seem to be proving that very fact.
nonthere 1 year ago 5
@Samsgarden -- Naw, you're just a stupid tool who is mad that he fell for it while most of us didn't.
rovibe 1 year ago
I have great disgust for Al Gore. .
74LesPaul 1 year ago 3
This guy is a shill. It isn't about what "activists" have to say on this issue. Activists normally aren't scientists of any note. This is all about Climatology, Meteorology, and their effect on biological systems. In fact the global warming debate has a lot in common with the "debate" about cigarettes causing cancer. Corporations know their bottom line will be affected and so they find shills to con people into accepting comfortable suicide rather than face the truth.
formless777 1 year ago
Morano is trying to spindoctor this into a newsworthy story by making it seem like Rancourt is someone who was completely accepting of the scientific reality of climate change and then just woke up one morning last week and decided to jump ship.----
June the average sea ice extent in the Arctic was the lowest on record. It´s tracked since 1979 (with sattelites) with a DRAMATIC DECLINE over the last 30 years. Thicker ice now only makes up 10%! That's down from 30% to 40% in the 1980s and 1990s.
aerobique 1 year ago
The real science is primarily represented in peer-reviewed science journals but these scientific journals are typically not accessible to the general public and can be highly mathematical. Global warming misinformation is primarily published on Web pages, blogs, television shows, radio, and other forms of mass media, all of which are much more accessible to the general public than scientific journals. The result is that the misinformation is reaching more people than the real science.
aerobique 1 year ago
"Thus, the notion that environmental skeptics are unbiased analysts exposing the myths and scare tactics employed by those they label as practitioners of ‘junk science’ lacks credibility. Similarly, the self-portrayal of skeptics as marginalized ‘Davids’ battling the powerful ‘Goliath’ of environmentalists and environmental scientists is a charade, as skeptics are supported by politically powerful CTTs funded by wealthy foundations and corporations."
tinyurl . com / oiltrolls
aerobique 1 year ago
"Consensus as strong as the one that has developed around global warming is rare in science."--- Donald Kennedy, editor of Science
"I think we understand the mechanisms of CO2 and climate better than we do of what causes lung cancer...In fact, it is fair to say that global warming may be the most carefully and fully studied scientific topic in human history."
--- Ralph Cicerone, President of the National Academy of Sciences
tinyurl . com / oiltrolls
aerobique 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Whether you believe in man made global warming OR NOT, why would you give politicians your MONEY (taxes) ? (Like that will make it go away , THINK about it people!!!)
RobinDropping 1 year ago 2
Cap & Trade another rip off to the people.
It will be like the derivatives Scam! The people running
our Country our lies scammers & Thieves!
Bail outs! It's like a 3 ring circus, By Curly, Moe,& Larry!
MrMrEinstein 1 year ago
Crime Inc. doesn't want you to see this video. Those that stand to make tons of money from the climate change scam don't want this information to be made public. I guess that is why they are starting to say there is just too much information available.
hillaryTex 1 year ago 10
I find it hard to believe its taking so long for people to wake up. GW is a scam. Our present US administration still wants to take our money with Cap $ Trade. They are scum!
mmac382 1 year ago 8
The world as we know it will be destroyed by a minor gas that accounts for 3/1000's of 1% of the atomosphere. CO2 has been historically much higher than it is today. Greenland was once green and is a frozen tundra right now. Data has been manipulated by activists charading as scientists. When will the public realize, CO2 is green. Without it, all life would cease. With its increase comes longer growing seasons and more food for all!!!
eaglecry1957 1 year ago
this is all about agenda 21
Avaindiana 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Regional climate change is real and is due to many factors and has always occurred. There is no evidence that present regional climate changes are driven by increases in atmospheric concentration in CO2. This is explained in great detail in Rancourt's on-line 2007 article "Global Warming: Truth or Dare?" Likewise, it is the nature of weather that there will always be extreme weather events never before seen.
DenisRancourt 1 year ago
Comment removed
DenisRancourt 1 year ago
umm. what about the climate refugees in India whose homes are sinking underwater? Or the droughts that are occurring in Thailand that have never happened before?
mrtyles 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrtyles --- Regional climate change is real and is due to many factors and has always occurred. There is no evidence that present regional climate changes are driven by increases in atmospheric concentration in CO2. This is explained in great detail in Rancourt's on-line 2007 article "Global Warming: Truth or Dare?" Likewise, it is the nature of weather that there will always be extreme weather events never before seen.
DenisRancourt 1 year ago
@mrtyles Never happen that we know of. What you are describing is an affect of enviromental change. Like all eco terrorist it states no facts or figures of just what is really happening. Oh my roof is leaking we must have too much rain! It certainly would be because its old and just needs replaced.
mmac382 1 year ago 3
Some people (on the Titanic) need to have their nose crashed on the iceberg to believe it's really a threat. Hummmm, they won't even have this "chance" since icebergs are melting too...
BobbyTubenevsky 1 year ago
For all you who "still" believe "global warming" to be real, why did these state sponsored scientists screw with the actual data to hide the decline of temperatures? If global warming was real, then why change the term into "climate change" instead of keeping it as "global warming?'
I mean global warming was a good name, there is no reason to change it, but since global warming is not real :/
Sorry, you folks don't want to believe that you're being lied to. You're just in denial. Wake up.
subjer0 1 year ago 2
Morano = t-o-t-al c-r-a-p !!!
remcovanek2 1 year ago
Sure global warming has been hijacked by the evil corporations, didn't the left say the same thing about the Soviet Union?
croscream 1 year ago
Junk science
threatcore 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Refreshing to see a «Liberal Environmentalist» waking up to this fact. There are so many better environmental problems to take action with, ACTUAL air pollution (particulates, soot, etc--- USA has cleaned up its act a lot, China needs help here), water pollution, and deforestation due to people's lack of cheap fuels (look at Haiti).
nyer82 1 year ago
Refreshing to see a «Liberal Environmentalist» waking up to this fact. There are so many better environmental problems to take action with, ACTUAL air pollution (particulates, soot, etc--- USA has cleaned up its act a lot, China needs help here), water pollution, and deforestation due to people's lack of cheap fuels (look at Haiti).
nyer82 1 year ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
All talk - no evidence. The planet still gets warmer, polar caps are melting, glaciers melting.
Piddy555 1 year ago
Comment removed
ariesvids 1 year ago
@Piddy555 So YOU say. You must also get ALL your scientific facts from Youtube and believe lying politicians . Good for you.
RobinDropping 1 year ago
It all started in 1958 - read the History of the Global Warming Scam written by John Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel.
The story begins with an Oceanographer named Roger Revelle....
999charliea 1 year ago
Comment removed
999charliea 1 year ago
ALEX JONES WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG!
murrayftw 1 year ago
Comment removed
murrayftw 1 year ago
I would like to watch this video in its entirety. Does anyone know the link for it?
djfee 1 year ago
Fantastic! I'm not a liberal, I lean towards fiscal conservatism and I agree w/the doctor 110%. Let's address the REAL issues of deforestation, pushing indigenous people off their land, REAL pollutants like mercury, sulfur dioxide, over development, wasteful use of limited resources, hemp oil as a REAL alternative fuel source. Kudos to him for exposing the corporate lie that makes douche bags like Al "sex poodle" Gore rich while he tells us WE need reduce our consumption.
tinfoilcap 1 year ago 4
For a great-read background article and relevant links please google "some big lies of science" (with quotation marks included in the google search box).
The article "Some big lies of science" is posted on GlobalResearch, on ActivistTeacher and on several other sites including a Spanish translation. It will be in the next print issue of the international magazine Nexus.
DenisRancourt 1 year ago
Good for Dr. Rancourt.
Refreshing to see an academic show an understanding of the psychological aspect driving the motivations of virtually all of these AGW alarmists.
ignostic1 1 year ago 3
enviro-MENTAL...makes sense to me...
dxrinc 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you don't believe in global warming or manbearpig you must be a racist.
gigisandiego96 1 year ago
Global warming scam. Dead in the water. No global taxes, if they still think they can push this BS Id say dont hold ya breath.............................nooooooo no no actually, HOLD YA BREATH dont want C02 everywhere do we now.
sallyos06460 1 year ago
It's not that Global Warming isn't occurring...it is!
The question is; is global warming going to be that harmful to the planet?
Global warming, in reality, has been a recurring phenom for thousands of millenia and will continue for thousands more until the earth is no longer.
The sun plays the major role in the chemical reactions that create warming in the atmosphere,oceans the other.
Man plays such a minor role that it is almost negligible.
I would love to see more forests planted.
mikaylaboo1 1 year ago
Yet another opinion with no scientific content.
dpackman11 1 year ago
@dpackman11 not that kind of interview. just telling why he is moving on from a dying cult.
laurelbush 1 year ago 2
@dpackman11 So Youtube is where you get ALL your 'scientific facts' then ?
RobinDropping 1 year ago
so this is a reprise of kipling's 'pick up the white man's burden"... lol
good call!
BrainWeather 1 year ago
"Someone's gonna make a lot of money from these schemes." Al Gore, anyone?
GuffyConservative 1 year ago 30
@GuffyConservative
It always makes me happy whenever scams like this are being refuted and abandoned. Scams like this appear every few months, so it's always nice to have that "happy feeling" every few months. Of course it's followed by the "
"disgusted" feeling when it appears and the damage is already done by the political class, but it's nice to have this.
Chainedorlo 1 year ago 3
Some people say that manbearpig isn't real. Well I'm here to tell you now manbearpig is very real. And he most certainly exists… I'm super cereal.
eyeplugin 1 year ago 5
Racist!! Bush's Fault!!! Tea Bagger!!!! Birther!!!!!! How can anybody question the highly esteemed Nobel Prize Winner - Albert "the sex poodle" Gore? Now what am I going to do with my propeller hat?
rwoodward61 1 year ago 5
@rwoodward61 I WILL TAKE YOU PROPPELLER HAT SIR AND I WILL FLY TO THE LAND OF BALTI.
Pandagat9 1 year ago
Everyones waking up to this scam!! Their lies are collapsing!!
jason591 1 year ago 32
@jason591
these people are 24/7 liars and obviously some sort of corporate mercenaries. Intentional scam.
Rancourt was removed from all teaching duties in the fall of 2008 because the dean of the faculty of science did not agree with his high grades to 23 students in one course of the winter 2008 semester. In December, the Allan Rock administration of the University of Ottawa began dismissal proceedings against him and he was banned from campus.
by the way:
climate . nasa . gov/ evidence/
aerobique 1 year ago
Hard to tell Gaia cultists their religion is all a Big Lie
classic7890 1 year ago 3
Good stuff!
alkatifa04 1 year ago 3