What Inglis calls 98% consensus actually an example of the Big Lie. Two polls of professional meteorologists (one reported in the Bulletin of the AMS, another from George Mason University) both found that majorities distrust the IPCC and it's climate alarmism. The Climate Movement scammers routinely take polls about irrelevant questions that everyone, sceptic and alarmist alike, agrees on, and misrepresent them as evidence for a consensus on contentious questions. See
There’s a reason that Inglis lost by 42 percentage points. Siding with the anti-science Climate Movement religion over sound science doesn’t resonate well with level-headed Republicans.
Okay, so why is he not running for Republican nomination?!?! He seems like he has something that the other candidates don't and what many people call a b..r...a..i...n.
There is a quick simple solution to global warming and climate change. It is called Muon Catalysed Fusion. As worked on Star Scientific. NO CO2. NO Greenhouse Gases. NO Carbon Tax. NO Toxic Waste. The source is dueterium from the World's Oceans - virtually limitless. It is cheap to produce. WE NEED IT NOW. See the website "Star Scientific Limited", Blog "The Big Picture by Andrew Horvath", Youtube video - "In the Footsteps of Fusion"
I would take it even further- "you (deniers) are a security threat to me and mine, and that willful knowledge of misinformation to fuzz up those who write policy should be subjected and watched by the FBI or regular earth beings to be considered as future "Planetary Terrorists" my enemies enemy is now my friend
@weatheringheights : Yes off course... which country will in 50 to 100 years be the most hated by most of the planet due to a historic responsability for having stood in the way of what all saw as necessary??? I wouldn't want to be that country.
If Inglis gets his way, his kids and grand kids be be surfs or slaves on a land once called America by people whose names they cant pronounce or spell in countries they can't locate on a map. Just say no to Crap & Tax .
Wow -- a Republican who seems to have his head on straight regarding climate change. It's almost like a zebra without stripes! I applaud Mr. Inglis for not just towing the party line on environmental issues like 99% of conservatives who care about nothing but the maximization of corporate profits. Mr. McCain could learn a thing or two from him about being a "maverick." Unfortunately, Johnny's too busy selling his soul to the far-right and putting up "the dang fence."
the entire hearing is worth watching at: (don't forget to remove the space around the slashes and periods)
w w w . cspan . org / Watch / Media / 2010 / 11 / 17 / HP / A / 40918 / House+Science+Technology+Subcommittee+Hearing+on+Climate+Change+Science . aspx
Inglis is the first Republican I've heard speak on this that shows any brains. I've heard so much ignorance and stupidity coming out of Republican mouths on climate change, it's ridiculous. Calling Monckton to testify instead of real scientists was classic. The Wegman report was another joke. Actually trying to use snowstorms and "CO2 is plantfood" as arguments demonstrates that they don't even bother to understand what they don't believe. The patients are running the asylum.
@USAon3 I need list ONLY ONE --the ONLY one that HAD ENSURED that you are FREE: 2006, President Bush --in fact --SUSPENDED the right of habeas corpus to persons whom HE 'deemed' to be "enemy combatants" I am quite sure that had we an HONEST SCOTUS, almost every provision of the Orwellian 'Patriot Act' is unconstitutional on its face. Look up some case law before you make a fool of yourself.
It's not so much that two doctors are suggesting an alternative treatment -- they're saying, "There's nothing wrong with her, she isn't being poisoned by our company's wastes, she's just faking -- give her a spanking!"
Inglis makes a good point that whether or not you believe in climate change as an American, the vast majority of the rest of the world DOES believe in it. And with Tea Party-affiliated newly-elected members of Congress threatening to cut funding for development of green technologies, the U.S. is basically ceding world leadership of renewable energy tech to China, with demand for it on the rise around the world.
The analogy could be made even better... 98 doctors say do this thing. Two say to do something else. But those two odd-ball doctors happen to have some type of vested interest in that something else, either financially, politically, or both. Of the 98 doctors who say to do that thing, a large portion have nothing to win or lose from their advice.
@dookdawg214 You have it totally backwards! The 98 "doctors" get their funding through grants, academia, the UN, NOA, etc etc... You need to do more research on where the funding comes from. Look at how Climategate came about, they were beholding to the Global Change kooks!
Inglis is a BOOB... A complete intellectual lightweight...
Fact: The majority of physicists denounced Einstein's theory of relativity for years... One man against hundreds!
@Slave2Reason nice job, you can search wikipedia. your ad hominen attack on Inglis neglects to address the substance of his statement- climate change and free marketeers.
so who's the vacuous twit? the guy saying something about climate change vis a vis free markets/china, or the guy making a vague personal attack, quoting wikipedia? I think you speak of yourself.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
This man is obviously deluded and needs to get his head out of the sand. He also needs to be drummed out of the GOP.
HEY BOB. THE HOAX HAS BEEN EXPOSED. YOU CAN STOP EATING TOFU NOW.
A single major volcanic eruption spews more hydrocarbons into the atmosphere than the entire Industrial Age. Guess Algore and the envirowhack LIEberals should be waging war on Mother Nature for her polluting ways!
Global Warming deniers would rather listen to a radio jock who spent his whole life sucking on a microphone all the while popping viagra and hillbilly heroin. These same Global Warming deniers will stick their fingers in their ears when a real scientist speaks. This is the real esscence of the debate.
You idiots claiming that climate change is hoax have been watching Jesse Ventura too much. It is not a matter of denial on the part of conservatives but of pure stupidity and paranoia. And the whole conspiracy theory tying this to Maurice Strong or the Bilderburg Group is about as ridiculous as the idiot liberals who think 9/11 was an inside job.
The ultimate reality is that we live in an unsustainable manner. The US is about five percent of the population yet it uses 35 percent of the r
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@ChadmannPHEA2 There is no evidence to support human activity has any effect on global temperatures no matter which way they are going. A naturally occurring CO2 molecule cannot differentiated from one produced by human activity, so the most that can be hoped for is correlation, not causation. That fact alone by definition means that the idea of man made climate change cannot be proven. Also the idea that Scientists are immune to corruption is laughable.
I'm sorry, but you're just wrong. No argument to be had- you're just wrong.
And yes, scientists can be wrong, they are not immune to corruption. But if you're insinuating that climate change is a fabrication of the scientific community, because of some giant, corrupt conspiracy- no amount of evidence would ever change your mind. You are too far gone.
@Huboons Actually CO2 from human activity is different from CO2 found in a contemporary natural carbon cycle. The CO2 produced by burning fossil fuels contains a different proportion of C-12 and C-13 isotopes. This is one of many pieces of corroborating evidence all pointing to higher CO2 levels and higher temperatures today.
Please take time to read some basic scientific information written by actual qualified scientists. I'd suggest "Keeping our cool" by Nobel winner Andrew Weaver.
@katakanadian You mean liberal political activist "Andrew Weaver" whose livelihood is dependent on providing data to governments around the world? Governments whose motivation is to control as much of the worlds economic activity as possible. You can't make money creating regulations on a problem that doesn't exist now can you. I doubt he has a stake in "clean energy" technology being economically successful does he?
Every big issue throughout history has been used by hucksters of all ideological stripes to make money. That doesn't have any bearing on whether or not the issue is real.
Those who make windmills, solar panels, nuke plants and so on stand to gain from this. But Shell, BP, automakers, OPEC, basically a much larger contingent of much wealthier people stand to gain from convincing the world climate change isn't real. And they have well known, intimate ties with conservative politicians.
@Zamboro "That doesn't have any bearing on whether or not the issue is real" yes it does. Two of the most prominent proponents of man as the causal factor in global warming (now re-branded climate change for obvious reasons) were exposed committing fraud with their data. So it has everything to do with it. You don't understand the science behind this any better than I do, you simply believe it because you believe anything a scientist tells you, while I do not.
@Huboons I'd guess that you choose not to believe what scientists would tell you because they would tell you that you are a buffoon. What possible motivation could those "prominent proponents" (which are so prominent that I have no idea who you are talking about) have for falsifying their data (not fraud)?
@dustinsandwich What possible motivations? Avoid having their theories invalidated, losing government funding, failure to create an industry that will make them wealthy through government regulation. You just believe what the fuck anyone tells you don't you? I'm referring to the revelation that Phil Jones, director of the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit, ordered his subordinates to delete emails related to methods used to falsify climate data to support their theories.
It was rebranded climate change because ignorant yokels couldn't grasp the fact that local cold weather did not disprove an overall shift in temperature.
No, facts are great. Distortion of facts sucks. Like presenting an 8 year stretch when temperature goes down as a disproof of climate change, when the overall trend over many decades is upward.
That's exactly what we should expect to see if there's a natural temperature cycle, with human influence driving the average upward. An up/down oscillation, but with a longterm upward trend.
@Zamboro Arguing with climate cultists is like arguing with Christians. You just can't teach them anything because their beliefs are based on emotions not facts, correlation not causation. There is zero proof human activity has any effect on global temperatures. Zero. Your opinions are religious in nature not based on any real science. You don't even understand that the people pulling your strings are doing so for economic reasons that have nothing to do with the environment.
Except most AGW deniers *are* Christians, and creationists as well. They go together, as both require dismissal of mainstream science. You're basically a neo-creationist and you don't even realize it.
The bottom line is that post-oil technologies like electric vehicles, new gen nuclear power plants and renewable energy are crucial if we're to have a bright future. You don't want that. You're anti-future, anti-science, and anti-human.
@Huboons: "There is zero proof human activity has any effect on global temperatures."
=> Too bad you're not interested in actual science which has demonstrated an increase in radiative forcing at specific wavelength of man-made greenhouse gases. Also too bad for you the stratosphere has cooled while troposhere has warmed... too bad the warming has been strong at high latitudes - as predicted.
@Huboons : I am an engineering consultant - not a scientist - although I have a scientific background which makes it possible for me to understand the publications of real scientists (which I am not as I am not a researcher).
@nigelelsass Well I don't understand the science. I am a software engineer. So how could I possibly believe one set of analysis over another? I don't have the background to do so. I can only base my opinion on what I do know. And what I do know is that if there is no threat of man made global warming, a lot of scientists loose their livelihood, and some of the most influential have already been caught lying to about their data. I'm not just going to take your word for it.
@Huboons : First, let me state that expert opinion matters and that I would TRUST YOU as computer expert, based on your field of expertise, your track record, rather than some guy posting 2 videos telling (without basis) the contrary than you !!! I would do the same for my health with my MD.... (rather than rely on random comments).
@nigelelsass "I would TRUST YOU as computer expert" Well you shouldn't. You have nothing more than an anonymous post telling you that I am a software engineer.
@Huboons : Well if creditials shown from a reputable institution I can trust, I would... ! Sad for people coming from unknown universities... but that is what quality labels are from!
@Huboons : Ask VERY MUCH IN DETAIL ! The scientists have lost their credibility for "manipulating data": adding after the 60's real temperature measurement (thermometers) to a serie of proxy-based temperatures (derived from the size of tree rings). This procedure is well known as it is well documented that since the 70's tree rings and temperatures correlate extremely well...after that not anymore (what is the reason? we do not know)...
@Huboons : So to take the exact wording, the "manupation" about the data found in stolen emails reads:
"I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years".
=> Indeed this procedure of adding instrumental data and tree-ring proxies was well known and published (openly available). I am not sure how this is a lie or something which would have been hidden as it was published... if you read the quote alone however - you would think otherwise.
@nigelelsass Sorry, I am convinced that data was manipulated because it didn't support their conclusion. That opinion is based on more than just that quote. You aren't going to change my mind on that.
@nigelelsass I'm not arguing that point. You are not listening to what I am saying, you are just tossing up a straw man argument that you have practiced a reply to. I've based my opinion on more than just that or even the emails themselves.
@Huboons: I worked directly from one IPCCC scientist... he works for $300 per day for the IPCC (while he could make €1,500+/day in the private sector) - he is a post-doc PhD in physics from MIT "cum laude" - and knows much about economics - and has 15h+ working days!!!. Do not worry for them losing their "livelihood" - most would just do much better without the threat of GW - you know, they also happen to have wives/kids and wish for a quiter life.
@nigelelsass Almost all research that supports man as the causal factor receives its funding from government. As an anarcho-capitalist I do not trust government, ever. Too many collectivists seeking to enforce their morality on others. I have also worked in academia doing IT, have friends with scientific backgrounds who lost their positions for questioning prevailing theories. Private industry demands results, academia does not.
@Huboons : It would be nice to have instutions which reasearch the causes besides government... unfortunately research is expensive but... wait wait !!! There is ! You did not imagine that the Lloyd, MunichRe and other hundred-billion heavy reinsurance companies would not assess it as most of the potential climate related damages money is their money? Well they have assessed it and come to the same conclusions... reasons why MunichRe pushes so hard for climate action !!!
@Huboons : What does it tell you if the two most prominent conservative ladies worldwide (Angela Merkel, Margareth Thatcher) are the ones pushing hard for climate action? Did you know one common point to both??? They both have a PhD in physics.... which is extremely rare among top-elected officials.
@nigelelsass it tells me you think I am "conservative", are desperate for me to believe as you do and do not understand where I am coming from at all. Me taking their opinion on something that I myself do not fully understand is no different than your priest telling me about god. It would be an act of faith to simply accept it because they said it is so.
@Huboons : There has even been Climate-research funded by Koch industries (leading climate denial funder) and supervised by A.Muller. - a project known as BEST (Berkeley Earth Surface Temp)
Lleading climate denier website (WUWT) stated that it will (off course) accept the conclusion of this effort which wants to be a 4th independant analysis (besides NASA, NOAA and METoffice). It included very strong scientists. The result???
Even with funding from fossil lobbies.... same conclusion !!! AGW !!
@nigelelsass I would have to spend a lot of time looking at the funding sources behind that website, the study, etc. Time, that is more likely to be spent being productive. I don't get paid to butt smooch PhD's who can't even install their own software any more. You really are wasting time on me, rookie mistake for someone who appears to be an at least somewhat experienced member of the intellectual class. You should know you could have indoctrinated 3 young co-eds by now and I don't vote.
@Huboons : I do not need to indoctrinate. I hope ideally for everybody to have at least a basis in spectral absorption physics - from highschool - which is the case where I am from (yes even some high schools did afford spectrophotometers).
Here's a sampler: /watch?v=kGaV3PiobYk
There are people who are lost - just like people who believe in this or that conspiracy and you won't change them. I accept that - if they incurr cost to me, I will at some point take revenge.
@nigelelsass ""I do not need to indoctrinate" yes, you do. "if they incurr cost to me, I will at some point take revenge." I am quite familiar with how the religious treat non-believers.
@Huboons : You're country is full of conspiracy theorists because you live out of fears and no longer have the rationality to distinguish between fact and fiction. This is why it is much nicer to talk to science educated asians.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
on the record anyone? condescend much? google climategate. this climate alarmism will be a tool to extract the money from the middle class and put it into the hands of the IMF and World Bank for global governance. All of the important heads of state in Europe are drooling at the mic about global governance, and climate change is their vehicle
I see a lot of people here citing conventional wisdom over science that is inconvient. There is truth in science and that science should lead our direction without political input (that means that it doesn't matter if you are right or left, and it doesn't matter what you believe, including me). It is healthy to doubt scientific fact, but that healthy doubt turns sour when it is found that the doubt has no basis in fact. "Wisdom" is not enough to win an argument we shouldn't be having.
@hempec "There is truth in science" - this is patently false. Science never ends, proclaiming "here is the truth." Everything is continually questioned and tested. Multiple "leading" scientists having been revealed to be committing fraud by falsifying their data to hide facts that do not support man as the causal factor of climate change. That in itself means that doubt has plenty of basis in fact. You just don't want to deal with it.
@Huboons I can deal with multiple leading scientists fudging some data and I can deal with the fact that the true cause of global climate change is largely an unknown, but the scientific community has a proper consensus. Even if I couldn't, I would never trust an answer to a scientific question to the likes of a politician. If our politicians are largely untrustworthy (and I believe that is also a consensus), why trust them with something this serious?
@hempec "the scientific community has a proper consensus" - First of all, this is false. Secondly, even if it were true, the consensus is not fact. Correlation is not causation. And who said anything about trusting politicians? Certainly not me, I don't vote. I would never waste my time voting between two flavors of collectivism. I have more respect for a crack whore than ANY politician in history. Crack whores provide a quantifiable service. Politicians are simply thieves.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
this argument would make sense, except for the fact that those 98 doctors, in the real life analogy, are threatened with political and public exile, and who knows, probably even the threat of murder. i also love how they called it global warming for YEARS, and then the years passed, no warming occured, infact it has cooled. and then they got together and decided to play word game and call it "climate change", this guy is one of the biggest double-talk tools.
I love the part from 2:51 on. This is his best point, namely that the republican kangaroo court "hearings" on climate science will be a fantastic opportunity to teach.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Alejandroenfuego I heard this crazy story that Al Gore is going to descend upon all of us with his magical private jet and save us from global warming (oops I meant "climate change") and tax us all to death.
I have some sad news for you, climate change has been around ever since the Earth was created 5 billion years ago.
@Alejandroenfuego denial kooks? are we talking about the haulocaust or some fantasy maurice strong and al gore helped to cook up? fake climate change is not comparable to the extermination of millions, eco fascist.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@coldwynn Ah the dna evidence and genome back up and prove the entire fossil collection of the world. Everything has a single place on the tree and only fits in one place. You should do a little real research on the connection between fossil and dna records. Or are they not real? The fossil, are just here as a sick joke from a sick violent god.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You would think that the experiments that "prove" CO2 causes warming would be all over the net as videos showing the temp rise when co2 is added to a closed system.....But...you just can't find it. You can find videos of people saying so but no real videos showing co2 trapping heat.
Paving black roads creates more radient heat in the system. More roads=more heat. Paint the whole planet black and it would fry. we get warmer as we build more roads and put thermometers beside them for data.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Ravid394 Sorry, I did find one very poorly done experiment that has no control of variables and proves nothing to somebody that has ever done a proper experiment in a grade 11 science class..
@METROGNOME57 He's obviously a believer in global warming/climate change. You can tell from his analogy with the 98 doctors who said one thing vs 2 who said another thing. 98% of the scientists are saying climate change IS happening, and 2% are saying it isn't.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Storel79 The thing is that the doctors have done proper research and haven't cooked the books to back up lies.
This guy believe that facts are not important. Just majority believing something makes it correct. This is as dangerous as religions.
9 out of 10 dentists use Colgate while 9 of of 10 of dentist use Crest.
Plato,Copernicus,Gallileo held the least popular view and turned out to be very correct. This is a tactic to make the fringe look stupid. I read too many CG Emails to believe him.
Re Inglis' end. Scientific methodology has matured enormously since the days of blood-letting. We can now measure our confidence and margin of error. While always holding all confident assertions provisionally, we can be reasonably certain that the earth is warming, we know the factors causing this warming, and we know this warming will increase at increasing rates.
Richard Lindzen is one of the two denialists out of 98 who concede the science (he spoke at this hearing and is shown at 3:49) . Lindzen first became infamous as an expert denialist that cigarette smoking causes cancer. He was paid to testify in Congressional Committee hearings to that effect by the tobacco companies. Now he gets paid to deny the science of climate change. James Hansen exposes this fraud in his book, Storms of My Grandchildren.
This man speaking is a Republican. My favorite line is about the Talk Show hosts and pundits who make millions and millions off of proclaiming their opinion when these people are not experts at all (take for example the homely Glenn Beck, recovering alcoholic whom dropped out of college after taking just 1 theology class) vs. the scientists who spend their life's work on these specialized fields.
I did not sleep at the Holiday Inn express. I am no expert on the science of climate. I have no doubt, however, that the rest of the world is moving away from fossil fuels. And if we do not take this opportunity to lead. We will be severely, economically handicapping our nation for a long, long time.
Inglis should've specifically mentioned Senator Inhofe by name. It's too bad Inglis isn't a Senator or on Inhofe's committee. THEN he could've ripped that denier asshole to shreds.
Have you seen the "report" on Inhofe's commitee's website that attempts to "debunk man-made GW"?? It's such a crock of shit! They use the worst sources, many of which are publications that HARDLY ANYONE even reads or probably knows about. And a lot of the citations don't mention what they say they do.
Btw, LOVED the stupid look on Richard Lindzen's face. He's one of those denier fucks who's trying to mislead people or just wants to ignore the reality to further whatever agenda he has in mind. OR he just doesn't wanna face reality and admit the warmists are right. Probably because he's a conservative.
Yeah, that Algore is a real environment protector, isn't he? That's why he goes everywhere by private jet and monstrous convoy of gas-guzzling SUVs and limousines which sit outside and idle the whole time he's speaking to the sheep.
That's why Algore's electric bill in his opulent mansion is more than some city budgets.
Yeah, we should all emulate that and save the planet!
Enviroturds.
A single volcanic eruption puts more hydrocarbons in the atmosphere than the entire Industrial Age.
Flawed strawman. Those "98 doctors" are all chasing grant money to remain employed, so they must continually announce more sensational and spectacular "data" and keep us in a state of fear in order to justify their own existence. Yes, I'll believe the two who have NOTHING to gain. It's important to note that the same "experts" who are crowing about global warming today are the very same "experts" who were warning us in the 1970's that we were on the verge of another ice age.
@dcs0582: incorrect. The National Academy of Sciences staff are on salary: they get paid to analyze scientific research, & to advise the government. Their salaries remain constant, whatever their recommendations might be. And the National Academy of Sciences of EVERY developed country ALL conclusively attest that the science of climate change is solid.
Re. 1970s - incorrect again. There was a concern amongst some US scientists - experiments conducted --> conclusion cooling was not a problem
@dcs0582 How do you know those two have nothing to gain? I will make you any wager that those two are financed by Exxon/Mobil or one of their front groups and have everything to gain to maintain their incorrect positions.
@dcs0582 In the 70ties the vast majority of papers on climate change came to the conclusion that the climate was changing. Only a tiny fraction of all papers came to the conclusion the world was cooling, yet these where picked up by the media. Hence the misunderstanding. These days no papers are released that come to the conclusion that the world is cooling.
I agree. On the record I want those warmists to quantify the amount of warning that is mans fault. Global warming is real. It's the man-made portion of it I have a problem with.
Quantify the the amount of warming that is from natural causes and the amount of the warming that is mans fault. I think you will find the warming was 99.99% natural.
The 3 year old solar minimum is now causing global cooling. We should be preparing for colder winters and increase the budget for snow removal.
@Michaelwiseguy If CO2 means higher temperatures, and according to measurements and reconstructed records CO2 has increased at a breakneck pace since the industrial revolution, and temperature with it. If that increase of CO2 is almost exactly the same with the estimated CO2 that man has released in the atmosphere. What conclusion is there to make? We don't have two earths, we can't compare the earth now to one without the industrial revolution. This is the best guess science can make.
@TheLogicalError Except for that tricky little fact that co2 rise lags behind temp rise. And the whole cooked books of the Mann group.(who by the way lost his job).
@catwheel69 you green turds like to throw the denial word around a lot. this isnt the haulocaust. the fake climate change agenda is a vehicle for global governance. the European heads of state can't stop talking about how they are going to use the climate change horse shit as a vehicle to achieve global governance. the only denial is that the eco-fascist wont believe their lying eyes when their climate gods commit FRAUD
@snappa52 Yeah, Anyone can spout conspiracy theories. The thing about them is, you can't prove them. But even if you could, they wouldn't disprove AGW because they are POLITICAL in nature, not SCIENTIFIC.
Accusing scientist of being eco-facist with an agenda for world domination is simply not an argument that their SCIENCE is wrong; let alone the theory of AGW!
@catwheel69 conspiracy theories? lol people have been fired and censured over climategate. J. Edgar Hoover coined the phrase conspiracy theory when he said there was no such things as the mafia, you're in good company denier. IPCC is not a panel strictly of scientists, its a political group within a political organization to promote manmade global warming. They've joined with the corporations, so they've become fascista
@buddcinder That's not entirely true. There are situations when co2 lags behind temperature, when temperature is influenced by things beyond co2 such as changes to the earths' orbit. If you remove those factors, temperature changes after co2 changes. Right now solar activity has been decreasing since the 1980s, yet temperature is increasing. As for the whole climategate thing, they've been exonerated despite what the propaganda chiefs of fox say.
@TheLogicalError So you are saying that temp is controlled more by other factors than co2? Show me some evidence to back little statement. Taking the orbit changes out as a factor. Are you using climategate computer models for your data? They were proven to be incorrect and lacking important factors...like any tree rings that went against their theory.
Are trying to tell me that the hockey stick graph was correct?
@buddcinder Temperature is controlled by many factors and CO2 is only one of them, it's also the one factor we're having a huge influence over. 'climategate' computer models? proven to be incorrect? what are you smoking? sounds like you heard the propaganda and didn't bother to read the rectifications etc. the tree ring data turned out to be inaccurate AND WAS TAKEN OUT OF THE MODELS YEARS AGO. as for the hockey graph, the same shape can be found in a multitude of independent data sources
@TheLogicalError LMFAO liberals. so funny, history to them only goes back 10-20 years, ok, so, midevil europe had a heat wave for 100 years where temperatures reached jungle temps. no industrial revolution then. wonder what it was, oh yeah, the only thing that affects the climate, the sun.
@Wyndstarthedruid LMFAO braindead idiots who attack people by calling them liberals and whatnot when they don't agree with them, instead of sticking to, oh i don't know, facts. The medieval 'warm' period was a lot less warm compared to today. The sun does affect climate, but right now the planet is warming when solar output has been dropping for decades.
@USAon3 Haven't you heard? Bush declared that the Constitution --and by extension all of the amendments to it --was JUST A WORTHLESS PIECE OF PAPER! If that's true --neither you nor anyone else has a SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT to any damn thing. Get a clue, you hypocrite!
Chinese innovation and a real authentic concern for their environment [Chinese investment in alternative energy 20 % - US 2%] !
US being deceived by corporate concern, who only want to maintain their monopoly positions. Lying about climate change, cap and multiple [diverse] trade initiatives.
What Inglis calls 98% consensus actually an example of the Big Lie. Two polls of professional meteorologists (one reported in the Bulletin of the AMS, another from George Mason University) both found that majorities distrust the IPCC and it's climate alarmism. The Climate Movement scammers routinely take polls about irrelevant questions that everyone, sceptic and alarmist alike, agrees on, and misrepresent them as evidence for a consensus on contentious questions. See
tinyurl*com/Clim97pct
ncdave4life 1 day ago
There’s a reason that Inglis lost by 42 percentage points. Siding with the anti-science Climate Movement religion over sound science doesn’t resonate well with level-headed Republicans.
ncdave4life 2 days ago
Okay, so why is he not running for Republican nomination?!?! He seems like he has something that the other candidates don't and what many people call a b..r...a..i...n.
mattt1994 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is a quick simple solution to global warming and climate change. It is called Muon Catalysed Fusion. As worked on Star Scientific. NO CO2. NO Greenhouse Gases. NO Carbon Tax. NO Toxic Waste. The source is dueterium from the World's Oceans - virtually limitless. It is cheap to produce. WE NEED IT NOW. See the website "Star Scientific Limited", Blog "The Big Picture by Andrew Horvath", Youtube video - "In the Footsteps of Fusion"
2110kop 7 months ago
I would take it even further- "you (deniers) are a security threat to me and mine, and that willful knowledge of misinformation to fuzz up those who write policy should be subjected and watched by the FBI or regular earth beings to be considered as future "Planetary Terrorists" my enemies enemy is now my friend
weatheringheights 11 months ago
@weatheringheights : Yes off course... which country will in 50 to 100 years be the most hated by most of the planet due to a historic responsability for having stood in the way of what all saw as necessary??? I wouldn't want to be that country.
nigelelsass 9 months ago
If Inglis gets his way, his kids and grand kids be be surfs or slaves on a land once called America by people whose names they cant pronounce or spell in countries they can't locate on a map. Just say no to Crap & Tax .
LovingPoontang69 1 year ago
Wow -- a Republican who seems to have his head on straight regarding climate change. It's almost like a zebra without stripes! I applaud Mr. Inglis for not just towing the party line on environmental issues like 99% of conservatives who care about nothing but the maximization of corporate profits. Mr. McCain could learn a thing or two from him about being a "maverick." Unfortunately, Johnny's too busy selling his soul to the far-right and putting up "the dang fence."
jdhillyard 1 year ago
@jdhillyard he was defeated two weeks before this hearing. on his way out, it seems he's talking sense, not politics.
onojmai 1 year ago
the entire hearing is worth watching at: (don't forget to remove the space around the slashes and periods)
w w w . cspan . org / Watch / Media / 2010 / 11 / 17 / HP / A / 40918 / House+Science+Technology+Subcommittee+Hearing+on+Climate+Change+Science . aspx
fusedchromosome 1 year ago
Inglis is the first Republican I've heard speak on this that shows any brains. I've heard so much ignorance and stupidity coming out of Republican mouths on climate change, it's ridiculous. Calling Monckton to testify instead of real scientists was classic. The Wegman report was another joke. Actually trying to use snowstorms and "CO2 is plantfood" as arguments demonstrates that they don't even bother to understand what they don't believe. The patients are running the asylum.
fusedchromosome 1 year ago
I wouldn't really call this an 'attack'.
temporaldisplacement 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@USAon3 I need list ONLY ONE --the ONLY one that HAD ENSURED that you are FREE: 2006, President Bush --in fact --SUSPENDED the right of habeas corpus to persons whom HE 'deemed' to be "enemy combatants" I am quite sure that had we an HONEST SCOTUS, almost every provision of the Orwellian 'Patriot Act' is unconstitutional on its face. Look up some case law before you make a fool of yourself.
lennhart 1 year ago
Inglis is, if anything, understating the case.
It's not so much that two doctors are suggesting an alternative treatment -- they're saying, "There's nothing wrong with her, she isn't being poisoned by our company's wastes, she's just faking -- give her a spanking!"
doctorpsycho1960 1 year ago 3
He's right. Damn right.
TerryYaki2 1 year ago 3
Inglis makes a good point that whether or not you believe in climate change as an American, the vast majority of the rest of the world DOES believe in it. And with Tea Party-affiliated newly-elected members of Congress threatening to cut funding for development of green technologies, the U.S. is basically ceding world leadership of renewable energy tech to China, with demand for it on the rise around the world.
jerseydevs2000 1 year ago
I can see a primary challenge in his future from the tea-bagger-crazies
USASalim 1 year ago
The analogy could be made even better... 98 doctors say do this thing. Two say to do something else. But those two odd-ball doctors happen to have some type of vested interest in that something else, either financially, politically, or both. Of the 98 doctors who say to do that thing, a large portion have nothing to win or lose from their advice.
dookdawg214 1 year ago 21
@dookdawg214 You have it totally backwards! The 98 "doctors" get their funding through grants, academia, the UN, NOA, etc etc... You need to do more research on where the funding comes from. Look at how Climategate came about, they were beholding to the Global Change kooks!
Inglis is a BOOB... A complete intellectual lightweight...
Fact: The majority of physicists denounced Einstein's theory of relativity for years... One man against hundreds!
Slave2Reason 1 year ago
Inglis is so out-of-touch that hist constituents had the good sense to kick his ass out!
"In the runoff, Gowdy defeated Inglis in a massive landslide, receiving 71 percent of the vote to Inglis' 29 percent in the Republican primary."
Don't let the door hit you on the ass as you leave Inglis... What a vacuous twit!
Slave2Reason 1 year ago
Comment removed
onojmai 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Slave2Reason nice job, you can search wikipedia. your ad hominen attack on Inglis neglects to address the substance of his statement- climate change and free marketeers.
so who's the vacuous twit? the guy saying something about climate change vis a vis free markets/china, or the guy making a vague personal attack, quoting wikipedia? I think you speak of yourself.
go back to your hole.
onojmai 1 year ago
@dookdawg214 or visa versa.
temporaldisplacement 1 year ago
A good republican run over by the GOP machine
BeondaPale 1 year ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This man is obviously deluded and needs to get his head out of the sand. He also needs to be drummed out of the GOP.
HEY BOB. THE HOAX HAS BEEN EXPOSED. YOU CAN STOP EATING TOFU NOW.
A single major volcanic eruption spews more hydrocarbons into the atmosphere than the entire Industrial Age. Guess Algore and the envirowhack LIEberals should be waging war on Mother Nature for her polluting ways!
/sarcasm.
USAon3 1 year ago
@USAon3
"A single major volcanic eruption spews more hydrocarbons into the atmosphere than the entire Industrial Age."
No it doesn't. Humans emit as much CO2 as 6000 ADDITIONAL volcanoes
SOURCE - US Geological Survey - look it up
BeondaPale 1 year ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@BeondaPale You mean take the word of a government agency whose funding is dependent on the motivations of politicians? How can you go wrong?
Huboons 1 year ago
Global Warming deniers would rather listen to a radio jock who spent his whole life sucking on a microphone all the while popping viagra and hillbilly heroin. These same Global Warming deniers will stick their fingers in their ears when a real scientist speaks. This is the real esscence of the debate.
666brainiac 1 year ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@666brainiac Can a scientist be wrong?
Huboons 1 year ago
You idiots claiming that climate change is hoax have been watching Jesse Ventura too much. It is not a matter of denial on the part of conservatives but of pure stupidity and paranoia. And the whole conspiracy theory tying this to Maurice Strong or the Bilderburg Group is about as ridiculous as the idiot liberals who think 9/11 was an inside job.
The ultimate reality is that we live in an unsustainable manner. The US is about five percent of the population yet it uses 35 percent of the r
ChadmannPHEA2 1 year ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@ChadmannPHEA2 There is no evidence to support human activity has any effect on global temperatures no matter which way they are going. A naturally occurring CO2 molecule cannot differentiated from one produced by human activity, so the most that can be hoped for is correlation, not causation. That fact alone by definition means that the idea of man made climate change cannot be proven. Also the idea that Scientists are immune to corruption is laughable.
Huboons 1 year ago
@Huboons
I'm sorry, but you're just wrong. No argument to be had- you're just wrong.
And yes, scientists can be wrong, they are not immune to corruption. But if you're insinuating that climate change is a fabrication of the scientific community, because of some giant, corrupt conspiracy- no amount of evidence would ever change your mind. You are too far gone.
TheAxisEngine 1 year ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@TheAxisEngine Well then explain how to tell the difference between a naturally occurring CO2 molecule and one created by human activity.
Huboons 1 year ago
@Huboons Actually CO2 from human activity is different from CO2 found in a contemporary natural carbon cycle. The CO2 produced by burning fossil fuels contains a different proportion of C-12 and C-13 isotopes. This is one of many pieces of corroborating evidence all pointing to higher CO2 levels and higher temperatures today.
Please take time to read some basic scientific information written by actual qualified scientists. I'd suggest "Keeping our cool" by Nobel winner Andrew Weaver.
katakanadian 1 year ago
@katakanadian You mean liberal political activist "Andrew Weaver" whose livelihood is dependent on providing data to governments around the world? Governments whose motivation is to control as much of the worlds economic activity as possible. You can't make money creating regulations on a problem that doesn't exist now can you. I doubt he has a stake in "clean energy" technology being economically successful does he?
Huboons 1 year ago
@Huboons
Every big issue throughout history has been used by hucksters of all ideological stripes to make money. That doesn't have any bearing on whether or not the issue is real.
Those who make windmills, solar panels, nuke plants and so on stand to gain from this. But Shell, BP, automakers, OPEC, basically a much larger contingent of much wealthier people stand to gain from convincing the world climate change isn't real. And they have well known, intimate ties with conservative politicians.
Zamboro 1 year ago
@Zamboro "That doesn't have any bearing on whether or not the issue is real" yes it does. Two of the most prominent proponents of man as the causal factor in global warming (now re-branded climate change for obvious reasons) were exposed committing fraud with their data. So it has everything to do with it. You don't understand the science behind this any better than I do, you simply believe it because you believe anything a scientist tells you, while I do not.
Huboons 1 year ago
@Huboons I'd guess that you choose not to believe what scientists would tell you because they would tell you that you are a buffoon. What possible motivation could those "prominent proponents" (which are so prominent that I have no idea who you are talking about) have for falsifying their data (not fraud)?
dustinsandwich 1 year ago
@dustinsandwich What possible motivations? Avoid having their theories invalidated, losing government funding, failure to create an industry that will make them wealthy through government regulation. You just believe what the fuck anyone tells you don't you? I'm referring to the revelation that Phil Jones, director of the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit, ordered his subordinates to delete emails related to methods used to falsify climate data to support their theories.
Huboons 1 year ago
@Huboons
It was rebranded climate change because ignorant yokels couldn't grasp the fact that local cold weather did not disprove an overall shift in temperature.
Zamboro 1 year ago
@Zamboro No it was re-branded because average world temperature has gone down the last 7-8 years, not up. Facts suck don't they?
Huboons 1 year ago
@Huboons
No, facts are great. Distortion of facts sucks. Like presenting an 8 year stretch when temperature goes down as a disproof of climate change, when the overall trend over many decades is upward.
That's exactly what we should expect to see if there's a natural temperature cycle, with human influence driving the average upward. An up/down oscillation, but with a longterm upward trend.
You didn't know something that basic?
Zamboro 1 year ago
@Zamboro Arguing with climate cultists is like arguing with Christians. You just can't teach them anything because their beliefs are based on emotions not facts, correlation not causation. There is zero proof human activity has any effect on global temperatures. Zero. Your opinions are religious in nature not based on any real science. You don't even understand that the people pulling your strings are doing so for economic reasons that have nothing to do with the environment.
Huboons 1 year ago
@Huboons
Except most AGW deniers *are* Christians, and creationists as well. They go together, as both require dismissal of mainstream science. You're basically a neo-creationist and you don't even realize it.
The bottom line is that post-oil technologies like electric vehicles, new gen nuclear power plants and renewable energy are crucial if we're to have a bright future. You don't want that. You're anti-future, anti-science, and anti-human.
Zamboro 1 year ago
@Huboons: "There is zero proof human activity has any effect on global temperatures."
=> Too bad you're not interested in actual science which has demonstrated an increase in radiative forcing at specific wavelength of man-made greenhouse gases. Also too bad for you the stratosphere has cooled while troposhere has warmed... too bad the warming has been strong at high latitudes - as predicted.
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@nigelelsass what do you do for a living?
Huboons 9 months ago
@Huboons : I read, organize and make calculations.... I review a lot of PhD works.
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@nigelelsass So you work in this field? You're a scientist?
Huboons 9 months ago
@Huboons : I am an engineering consultant - not a scientist - although I have a scientific background which makes it possible for me to understand the publications of real scientists (which I am not as I am not a researcher).
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@nigelelsass Well I don't understand the science. I am a software engineer. So how could I possibly believe one set of analysis over another? I don't have the background to do so. I can only base my opinion on what I do know. And what I do know is that if there is no threat of man made global warming, a lot of scientists loose their livelihood, and some of the most influential have already been caught lying to about their data. I'm not just going to take your word for it.
Huboons 9 months ago
@Huboons : First, let me state that expert opinion matters and that I would TRUST YOU as computer expert, based on your field of expertise, your track record, rather than some guy posting 2 videos telling (without basis) the contrary than you !!! I would do the same for my health with my MD.... (rather than rely on random comments).
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@nigelelsass "I would TRUST YOU as computer expert" Well you shouldn't. You have nothing more than an anonymous post telling you that I am a software engineer.
Huboons 9 months ago
@Huboons : Well if creditials shown from a reputable institution I can trust, I would... ! Sad for people coming from unknown universities... but that is what quality labels are from!
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@Huboons : Ask VERY MUCH IN DETAIL ! The scientists have lost their credibility for "manipulating data": adding after the 60's real temperature measurement (thermometers) to a serie of proxy-based temperatures (derived from the size of tree rings). This procedure is well known as it is well documented that since the 70's tree rings and temperatures correlate extremely well...after that not anymore (what is the reason? we do not know)...
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@Huboons : So to take the exact wording, the "manupation" about the data found in stolen emails reads:
"I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years".
=> Indeed this procedure of adding instrumental data and tree-ring proxies was well known and published (openly available). I am not sure how this is a lie or something which would have been hidden as it was published... if you read the quote alone however - you would think otherwise.
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@nigelelsass Sorry, I am convinced that data was manipulated because it didn't support their conclusion. That opinion is based on more than just that quote. You aren't going to change my mind on that.
Huboons 9 months ago
@Huboons : Off course the data has been manipulated! As I explained, for unknown reasons, tree rings do no longer correlate to temperatures!
The procedure HAS NEVER been a secret... learning something new does not make the fact that is new to me automatically a "lie".
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@nigelelsass I'm not arguing that point. You are not listening to what I am saying, you are just tossing up a straw man argument that you have practiced a reply to. I've based my opinion on more than just that or even the emails themselves.
Huboons 9 months ago
@Huboons: I worked directly from one IPCCC scientist... he works for $300 per day for the IPCC (while he could make €1,500+/day in the private sector) - he is a post-doc PhD in physics from MIT "cum laude" - and knows much about economics - and has 15h+ working days!!!. Do not worry for them losing their "livelihood" - most would just do much better without the threat of GW - you know, they also happen to have wives/kids and wish for a quiter life.
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@nigelelsass Almost all research that supports man as the causal factor receives its funding from government. As an anarcho-capitalist I do not trust government, ever. Too many collectivists seeking to enforce their morality on others. I have also worked in academia doing IT, have friends with scientific backgrounds who lost their positions for questioning prevailing theories. Private industry demands results, academia does not.
Huboons 9 months ago
@Huboons : It would be nice to have instutions which reasearch the causes besides government... unfortunately research is expensive but... wait wait !!! There is ! You did not imagine that the Lloyd, MunichRe and other hundred-billion heavy reinsurance companies would not assess it as most of the potential climate related damages money is their money? Well they have assessed it and come to the same conclusions... reasons why MunichRe pushes so hard for climate action !!!
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@Huboons : What does it tell you if the two most prominent conservative ladies worldwide (Angela Merkel, Margareth Thatcher) are the ones pushing hard for climate action? Did you know one common point to both??? They both have a PhD in physics.... which is extremely rare among top-elected officials.
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@nigelelsass it tells me you think I am "conservative", are desperate for me to believe as you do and do not understand where I am coming from at all. Me taking their opinion on something that I myself do not fully understand is no different than your priest telling me about god. It would be an act of faith to simply accept it because they said it is so.
Huboons 9 months ago
@Huboons : Well I do an act of faith everytime I go to my MD as I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT MEDICINE.
I am not arrogant and accept that he has a speciality and knows better than me. Expert judgement works and has greatly advanced the whole society.
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@Huboons : There has even been Climate-research funded by Koch industries (leading climate denial funder) and supervised by A.Muller. - a project known as BEST (Berkeley Earth Surface Temp)
Lleading climate denier website (WUWT) stated that it will (off course) accept the conclusion of this effort which wants to be a 4th independant analysis (besides NASA, NOAA and METoffice). It included very strong scientists. The result???
Even with funding from fossil lobbies.... same conclusion !!! AGW !!
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@nigelelsass I would have to spend a lot of time looking at the funding sources behind that website, the study, etc. Time, that is more likely to be spent being productive. I don't get paid to butt smooch PhD's who can't even install their own software any more. You really are wasting time on me, rookie mistake for someone who appears to be an at least somewhat experienced member of the intellectual class. You should know you could have indoctrinated 3 young co-eds by now and I don't vote.
Huboons 9 months ago
@Huboons : I do not need to indoctrinate. I hope ideally for everybody to have at least a basis in spectral absorption physics - from highschool - which is the case where I am from (yes even some high schools did afford spectrophotometers).
Here's a sampler: /watch?v=kGaV3PiobYk
There are people who are lost - just like people who believe in this or that conspiracy and you won't change them. I accept that - if they incurr cost to me, I will at some point take revenge.
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@nigelelsass ""I do not need to indoctrinate" yes, you do. "if they incurr cost to me, I will at some point take revenge." I am quite familiar with how the religious treat non-believers.
Huboons 9 months ago
@Huboons : This is NOT BASED ON FAITH
This would be on ex-post further measured temperature increase of 2,5°C or more... how are measured facts religion? Maybe in the US...
You did not expect a free ride, did you? Just inflict damage and not pay for it? Don't tell me you're so naive !
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@Huboons : You're country is full of conspiracy theorists because you live out of fears and no longer have the rationality to distinguish between fact and fiction. This is why it is much nicer to talk to science educated asians.
nigelelsass 9 months ago
@nigelelsass It's Your. You're is the contracted form or you are. And yes, the religious prefer to the company of those who follow their religion.
Huboons 9 months ago
@Huboons : That will not change anything... history will prove you and your country wrong. All we have to do is wait and you know it.
nigelelsass 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Huboons
Has it now -- by how much has average world temperature has gone down the last 7-8 years?
BeondaPale 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
on the record anyone? condescend much? google climategate. this climate alarmism will be a tool to extract the money from the middle class and put it into the hands of the IMF and World Bank for global governance. All of the important heads of state in Europe are drooling at the mic about global governance, and climate change is their vehicle
snappa52 1 year ago
I see a lot of people here citing conventional wisdom over science that is inconvient. There is truth in science and that science should lead our direction without political input (that means that it doesn't matter if you are right or left, and it doesn't matter what you believe, including me). It is healthy to doubt scientific fact, but that healthy doubt turns sour when it is found that the doubt has no basis in fact. "Wisdom" is not enough to win an argument we shouldn't be having.
hempec 1 year ago 12
@hempec "There is truth in science" - this is patently false. Science never ends, proclaiming "here is the truth." Everything is continually questioned and tested. Multiple "leading" scientists having been revealed to be committing fraud by falsifying their data to hide facts that do not support man as the causal factor of climate change. That in itself means that doubt has plenty of basis in fact. You just don't want to deal with it.
Huboons 1 year ago
@Huboons I can deal with multiple leading scientists fudging some data and I can deal with the fact that the true cause of global climate change is largely an unknown, but the scientific community has a proper consensus. Even if I couldn't, I would never trust an answer to a scientific question to the likes of a politician. If our politicians are largely untrustworthy (and I believe that is also a consensus), why trust them with something this serious?
hempec 1 year ago
@hempec "the scientific community has a proper consensus" - First of all, this is false. Secondly, even if it were true, the consensus is not fact. Correlation is not causation. And who said anything about trusting politicians? Certainly not me, I don't vote. I would never waste my time voting between two flavors of collectivism. I have more respect for a crack whore than ANY politician in history. Crack whores provide a quantifiable service. Politicians are simply thieves.
Huboons 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Its time to get make the EPA (Enviromental Protection Agency )go away. Its time to cut their bugets by 75% + plus percent.
maximouni 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this argument would make sense, except for the fact that those 98 doctors, in the real life analogy, are threatened with political and public exile, and who knows, probably even the threat of murder. i also love how they called it global warming for YEARS, and then the years passed, no warming occured, infact it has cooled. and then they got together and decided to play word game and call it "climate change", this guy is one of the biggest double-talk tools.
Wyndstarthedruid 1 year ago
I love the part from 2:51 on. This is his best point, namely that the republican kangaroo court "hearings" on climate science will be a fantastic opportunity to teach.
fiandrhi 1 year ago 2
A ray of light within the Republican party, amazing. Nutjob denial kooks, you need to speak into the mic.
Alejandroenfuego 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Alejandroenfuego I heard this crazy story that Al Gore is going to descend upon all of us with his magical private jet and save us from global warming (oops I meant "climate change") and tax us all to death.
I have some sad news for you, climate change has been around ever since the Earth was created 5 billion years ago.
DarthKap 1 year ago
@Alejandroenfuego denial kooks? are we talking about the haulocaust or some fantasy maurice strong and al gore helped to cook up? fake climate change is not comparable to the extermination of millions, eco fascist.
snappa52 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The scientific method and peer review work great, except for Global Warming, Big Bang Theory, and Evolution. I'm not sure why.
coldwynn 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@coldwynn Ah the dna evidence and genome back up and prove the entire fossil collection of the world. Everything has a single place on the tree and only fits in one place. You should do a little real research on the connection between fossil and dna records. Or are they not real? The fossil, are just here as a sick joke from a sick violent god.
buddcinder 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You would think that the experiments that "prove" CO2 causes warming would be all over the net as videos showing the temp rise when co2 is added to a closed system.....But...you just can't find it. You can find videos of people saying so but no real videos showing co2 trapping heat.
Paving black roads creates more radient heat in the system. More roads=more heat. Paint the whole planet black and it would fry. we get warmer as we build more roads and put thermometers beside them for data.
buddcinder 1 year ago
@buddcinder
do a search for CO2 in a bottle, here on youtube, very simple science.
Ravid394 1 year ago
@Ravid394 I did your seach and found nothing but explosions.
buddcinder 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Ravid394 Sorry, I did find one very poorly done experiment that has no control of variables and proves nothing to somebody that has ever done a proper experiment in a grade 11 science class..
buddcinder 1 year ago
So is he for or against? Man, I'm creeped out now!
METROGNOME57 1 year ago
@METROGNOME57 He's obviously a believer in global warming/climate change. You can tell from his analogy with the 98 doctors who said one thing vs 2 who said another thing. 98% of the scientists are saying climate change IS happening, and 2% are saying it isn't.
Storel79 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Storel79 The thing is that the doctors have done proper research and haven't cooked the books to back up lies.
This guy believe that facts are not important. Just majority believing something makes it correct. This is as dangerous as religions.
9 out of 10 dentists use Colgate while 9 of of 10 of dentist use Crest.
Plato,Copernicus,Gallileo held the least popular view and turned out to be very correct. This is a tactic to make the fringe look stupid. I read too many CG Emails to believe him.
buddcinder 1 year ago
Methinks this man be slimy.
METROGNOME57 1 year ago
Re Inglis' end. Scientific methodology has matured enormously since the days of blood-letting. We can now measure our confidence and margin of error. While always holding all confident assertions provisionally, we can be reasonably certain that the earth is warming, we know the factors causing this warming, and we know this warming will increase at increasing rates.
MikeHeath1 1 year ago
Richard Lindzen is one of the two denialists out of 98 who concede the science (he spoke at this hearing and is shown at 3:49) . Lindzen first became infamous as an expert denialist that cigarette smoking causes cancer. He was paid to testify in Congressional Committee hearings to that effect by the tobacco companies. Now he gets paid to deny the science of climate change. James Hansen exposes this fraud in his book, Storms of My Grandchildren.
MikeHeath1 1 year ago
This man speaking is a Republican. My favorite line is about the Talk Show hosts and pundits who make millions and millions off of proclaiming their opinion when these people are not experts at all (take for example the homely Glenn Beck, recovering alcoholic whom dropped out of college after taking just 1 theology class) vs. the scientists who spend their life's work on these specialized fields.
sesamestreetgang 1 year ago
wow. that was pretty spectacular.
thewalrus45 1 year ago
I did not sleep at the Holiday Inn express. I am no expert on the science of climate. I have no doubt, however, that the rest of the world is moving away from fossil fuels. And if we do not take this opportunity to lead. We will be severely, economically handicapping our nation for a long, long time.
cardcreekdesign 1 year ago
Oh a politician talking sense!
distiler 1 year ago
Inglis should've specifically mentioned Senator Inhofe by name. It's too bad Inglis isn't a Senator or on Inhofe's committee. THEN he could've ripped that denier asshole to shreds.
Have you seen the "report" on Inhofe's commitee's website that attempts to "debunk man-made GW"?? It's such a crock of shit! They use the worst sources, many of which are publications that HARDLY ANYONE even reads or probably knows about. And a lot of the citations don't mention what they say they do.
whoo689 1 year ago 2
Btw, LOVED the stupid look on Richard Lindzen's face. He's one of those denier fucks who's trying to mislead people or just wants to ignore the reality to further whatever agenda he has in mind. OR he just doesn't wanna face reality and admit the warmists are right. Probably because he's a conservative.
whoo689 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@whoo689
Yeah, that Algore is a real environment protector, isn't he? That's why he goes everywhere by private jet and monstrous convoy of gas-guzzling SUVs and limousines which sit outside and idle the whole time he's speaking to the sheep.
That's why Algore's electric bill in his opulent mansion is more than some city budgets.
Yeah, we should all emulate that and save the planet!
Enviroturds.
A single volcanic eruption puts more hydrocarbons in the atmosphere than the entire Industrial Age.
USAon3 1 year ago
Flawed strawman. Those "98 doctors" are all chasing grant money to remain employed, so they must continually announce more sensational and spectacular "data" and keep us in a state of fear in order to justify their own existence. Yes, I'll believe the two who have NOTHING to gain. It's important to note that the same "experts" who are crowing about global warming today are the very same "experts" who were warning us in the 1970's that we were on the verge of another ice age.
dcs0582 1 year ago
@dcs0582 incorrect.
trsidn 1 year ago
@dcs0582: incorrect. The National Academy of Sciences staff are on salary: they get paid to analyze scientific research, & to advise the government. Their salaries remain constant, whatever their recommendations might be. And the National Academy of Sciences of EVERY developed country ALL conclusively attest that the science of climate change is solid.
Re. 1970s - incorrect again. There was a concern amongst some US scientists - experiments conducted --> conclusion cooling was not a problem
DMFmonster 1 year ago
@dcs0582 How do you know those two have nothing to gain? I will make you any wager that those two are financed by Exxon/Mobil or one of their front groups and have everything to gain to maintain their incorrect positions.
shardanette1 1 year ago
@dcs0582 In the 70ties the vast majority of papers on climate change came to the conclusion that the climate was changing. Only a tiny fraction of all papers came to the conclusion the world was cooling, yet these where picked up by the media. Hence the misunderstanding. These days no papers are released that come to the conclusion that the world is cooling.
TheLogicalError 1 year ago
Way To Go
Got It Right
wiselionman 1 year ago
I agree. On the record I want those warmists to quantify the amount of warning that is mans fault. Global warming is real. It's the man-made portion of it I have a problem with.
Quantify the the amount of warming that is from natural causes and the amount of the warming that is mans fault. I think you will find the warming was 99.99% natural.
The 3 year old solar minimum is now causing global cooling. We should be preparing for colder winters and increase the budget for snow removal.
Michaelwiseguy 1 year ago
@Michaelwiseguy If CO2 means higher temperatures, and according to measurements and reconstructed records CO2 has increased at a breakneck pace since the industrial revolution, and temperature with it. If that increase of CO2 is almost exactly the same with the estimated CO2 that man has released in the atmosphere. What conclusion is there to make? We don't have two earths, we can't compare the earth now to one without the industrial revolution. This is the best guess science can make.
TheLogicalError 1 year ago
@TheLogicalError Except for that tricky little fact that co2 rise lags behind temp rise. And the whole cooked books of the Mann group.(who by the way lost his job).
buddcinder 1 year ago
@buddcinder See greenman 3610's channel on You Tube for all of your climate change denial crocks.
catwheel69 1 year ago
@catwheel69 you green turds like to throw the denial word around a lot. this isnt the haulocaust. the fake climate change agenda is a vehicle for global governance. the European heads of state can't stop talking about how they are going to use the climate change horse shit as a vehicle to achieve global governance. the only denial is that the eco-fascist wont believe their lying eyes when their climate gods commit FRAUD
snappa52 1 year ago
@snappa52 Yeah, Anyone can spout conspiracy theories. The thing about them is, you can't prove them. But even if you could, they wouldn't disprove AGW because they are POLITICAL in nature, not SCIENTIFIC.
Accusing scientist of being eco-facist with an agenda for world domination is simply not an argument that their SCIENCE is wrong; let alone the theory of AGW!
catwheel69 1 year ago 2
@catwheel69 conspiracy theories? lol people have been fired and censured over climategate. J. Edgar Hoover coined the phrase conspiracy theory when he said there was no such things as the mafia, you're in good company denier. IPCC is not a panel strictly of scientists, its a political group within a political organization to promote manmade global warming. They've joined with the corporations, so they've become fascista
snappa52 1 year ago
@buddcinder That's not entirely true. There are situations when co2 lags behind temperature, when temperature is influenced by things beyond co2 such as changes to the earths' orbit. If you remove those factors, temperature changes after co2 changes. Right now solar activity has been decreasing since the 1980s, yet temperature is increasing. As for the whole climategate thing, they've been exonerated despite what the propaganda chiefs of fox say.
TheLogicalError 1 year ago
@TheLogicalError So you are saying that temp is controlled more by other factors than co2? Show me some evidence to back little statement. Taking the orbit changes out as a factor. Are you using climategate computer models for your data? They were proven to be incorrect and lacking important factors...like any tree rings that went against their theory.
Are trying to tell me that the hockey stick graph was correct?
buddcinder 1 year ago
@buddcinder Temperature is controlled by many factors and CO2 is only one of them, it's also the one factor we're having a huge influence over. 'climategate' computer models? proven to be incorrect? what are you smoking? sounds like you heard the propaganda and didn't bother to read the rectifications etc. the tree ring data turned out to be inaccurate AND WAS TAKEN OUT OF THE MODELS YEARS AGO. as for the hockey graph, the same shape can be found in a multitude of independent data sources
TheLogicalError 1 year ago
@TheLogicalError LMFAO liberals. so funny, history to them only goes back 10-20 years, ok, so, midevil europe had a heat wave for 100 years where temperatures reached jungle temps. no industrial revolution then. wonder what it was, oh yeah, the only thing that affects the climate, the sun.
Wyndstarthedruid 1 year ago
@Wyndstarthedruid LMFAO braindead idiots who attack people by calling them liberals and whatnot when they don't agree with them, instead of sticking to, oh i don't know, facts. The medieval 'warm' period was a lot less warm compared to today. The sun does affect climate, but right now the planet is warming when solar output has been dropping for decades.
TheLogicalError 1 year ago 2
@TheLogicalError really? because all other evidence suggest otherwise.
Wyndstarthedruid 1 year ago
Bravo!!!!!
On the record!
That was absolutely stunning.
Thank you so much Mr. Inglis.
arneperschel 1 year ago
A republigun with some sense...wow. But carry on GOP...keep denying reality.
droxland 1 year ago
@droxland
"Republigun"?
Something against an American exercising their Second Amendment rights?
USAon3 1 year ago
@USAon3 Haven't you heard? Bush declared that the Constitution --and by extension all of the amendments to it --was JUST A WORTHLESS PIECE OF PAPER! If that's true --neither you nor anyone else has a SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT to any damn thing. Get a clue, you hypocrite!
lennhart 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@lennhart
Please list the rights you "lost" under Bush. I'll wait.
And my Second Amendment right is quite secure, thank you. It's something that protects people like me from people like you.
USAon3 1 year ago
Comment removed
lennhart 1 year ago 3
Please.... someone clone 535 copies of this guy!
henleythecat 1 year ago
@henleythecat
535?
bjphysics 1 year ago
Wow. Not all Republicans are assholes.
And wow. Not all Republicans from South Carolina are assholes.
At least, not this time. Rock on Bob.
725Mama 1 year ago
@725Mama
The only reason he's saying it is because he was voted out (lost to a tea partier) and can now afford to be honest
BeondaPale 1 year ago
Waaaaaa waaaaaaa , he belongs to a party that denies facts.
Did this moron just figure that out?
RepubliCorp has been at that game for 40 years.
cmfluteguy 1 year ago
Chinese innovation and a real authentic concern for their environment [Chinese investment in alternative energy 20 % - US 2%] !
US being deceived by corporate concern, who only want to maintain their monopoly positions. Lying about climate change, cap and multiple [diverse] trade initiatives.
hackit12 1 year ago 6